Browsing by Subject "Environmental Policy"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Open Access A novel framework for analyzing conservation impacts: evaluation, theory, and marine protected areas.(Ann N Y Acad Sci, 2017-07) Mascia, Michael B; Fox, Helen E; Glew, Louise; Ahmadia, Gabby N; Agrawal, Arun; Barnes, Megan; Basurto, Xavier; Craigie, Ian; Darling, Emily; Geldmann, Jonas; Gill, David; Holst Rice, Susie; Jensen, Olaf P; Lester, Sarah E; McConney, Patrick; Mumby, Peter J; Nenadovic, Mateja; Parks, John E; Pomeroy, Robert S; White, Alan TEnvironmental conservation initiatives, including marine protected areas (MPAs), have proliferated in recent decades. Designed to conserve marine biodiversity, many MPAs also seek to foster sustainable development. As is the case for many other environmental policies and programs, the impacts of MPAs are poorly understood. Social-ecological systems, impact evaluation, and common-pool resource governance are three complementary scientific frameworks for documenting and explaining the ecological and social impacts of conservation interventions. We review key components of these three frameworks and their implications for the study of conservation policy, program, and project outcomes. Using MPAs as an illustrative example, we then draw upon these three frameworks to describe an integrated approach for rigorous empirical documentation and causal explanation of conservation impacts. This integrated three-framework approach for impact evaluation of governance in social-ecological systems (3FIGS) accounts for alternative explanations, builds upon and advances social theory, and provides novel policy insights in ways that no single approach affords. Despite the inherent complexity of social-ecological systems and the difficulty of causal inference, the 3FIGS approach can dramatically advance our understanding of, and the evidentiary basis for, effective MPAs and other conservation initiatives.Item Open Access A typology of time-scale mismatches and behavioral interventions to diagnose and solve conservation problems.(Conserv Biol, 2016-02) Wilson, Robyn S; Hardisty, David J; Epanchin-Niell, Rebecca S; Runge, Michael C; Cottingham, Kathryn L; Urban, Dean L; Maguire, Lynn A; Hastings, Alan; Mumby, Peter J; Peters, Debra PCEcological systems often operate on time scales significantly longer or shorter than the time scales typical of human decision making, which causes substantial difficulty for conservation and management in socioecological systems. For example, invasive species may move faster than humans can diagnose problems and initiate solutions, and climate systems may exhibit long-term inertia and short-term fluctuations that obscure learning about the efficacy of management efforts in many ecological systems. We adopted a management-decision framework that distinguishes decision makers within public institutions from individual actors within the social system, calls attention to the ways socioecological systems respond to decision makers' actions, and notes institutional learning that accrues from observing these responses. We used this framework, along with insights from bedeviling conservation problems, to create a typology that identifies problematic time-scale mismatches occurring between individual decision makers in public institutions and between individual actors in the social or ecological system. We also considered solutions that involve modifying human perception and behavior at the individual level as a means of resolving these problematic mismatches. The potential solutions are derived from the behavioral economics and psychology literature on temporal challenges in decision making, such as the human tendency to discount future outcomes at irrationally high rates. These solutions range from framing environmental decisions to enhance the salience of long-term consequences, to using structured decision processes that make time scales of actions and consequences more explicit, to structural solutions aimed at altering the consequences of short-sighted behavior to make it less appealing. Additional application of these tools and long-term evaluation measures that assess not just behavioral changes but also associated changes in ecological systems are needed.Item Open Access Temporal and spatial distribution of health, labor, and crop benefits of climate change mitigation in the United States.(Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021-11) Shindell, Drew; Ru, Muye; Zhang, Yuqiang; Seltzer, Karl; Faluvegi, Greg; Nazarenko, Larissa; Schmidt, Gavin A; Parsons, Luke; Challapalli, Ariyani; Yang, Longyi; Glick, AlexSocietal benefits from climate change mitigation accrue via multiple pathways. We examine the US impacts of emission changes on several factors that are affected by both climate and air quality responses. Nationwide benefits through midcentury stem primarily from air quality improvements, which are realized rapidly, and include human health, labor productivity, and crop yield benefits. Benefits from reduced heat exposure become large around 2060, thereafter often dominating over those from improved air quality. Monetized benefits are in the tens of trillions of dollars for avoided deaths and tens of billions for labor productivity and crop yield increases and reduced hospital expenditures. Total monetized benefits this century are dominated by health and are much larger than in previous analyses due to improved understanding of the human health impacts of exposure to both heat and air pollution. Benefit-cost ratios are therefore much larger than in prior studies, especially those that neglected clean air benefits. Specifically, benefits from clean air exceed costs in the first decade, whereas benefits from climate alone exceed costs in the latter half of the century. Furthermore, monetized US benefits largely stem from US emissions reductions. Increased emphasis on the localized, near-term air quality-related impacts would better align policies with societal benefits and, by reducing the mismatch between perception of climate as a risk distant in space and time and the need for rapid action to mitigate long-term climate change, might help increase acceptance of mitigation policies.