Precaution and proportionality in the management of global environmental change

Iverson, Terrence; Perrings, Charles

doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.009

Cited by 36 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Combining information about the value of services along with the production possibility frontier can show what alternative management approach yields the greatest net benefits. However, there may be a great deal of uncertainty underlying understanding of both the production frontier and the values, so that a robust or resilient alternative may be preferable to one that maximizes a particular realization of the frontier and values (e.g., Lempert 2006, Iverson and Perrings 2012.…”

Section: Conceptual Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A sustainability framework for assessing trade-offs in ecosystem services

Cavender‐Bares¹,

Polasky²,

King³

et al. 2015

E&S

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Achieving sustainability, i.e., meeting the needs of current populations without compromising the needs of future generations, is the major challenge facing global society in the 21st century. Navigating the inherent trade-offs between provisioning, regulating, cultural, and supporting ecosystem services, and doing so in a way that does not compromise natural capital needed to provide services in the future, is critical for sustainable resource management. Here we build upon existing literature, primarily from economics and ecology, to present an analytical framework that integrates (1) the ecological mechanisms that underpin ecosystem services, (2) biophysical trade-offs and inherent limits that constrain management options, (3) preferences and values of stakeholders, and (4) explicit analysis of how systems evolve through time to ensure the goal of meeting the needs of future generations. Well-known ecological models define the relationships and trade-offs among services that represents an "efficiency frontier." Well-known methods in economics that combine preferences that define the willingness of stakeholders to trade off ecosystem services on the efficiency frontiers illuminate desirable outcomes that meet human needs. System dynamics show how the system will evolve with consequent impacts on ecosystem services and human well-being and the effects this has on achieving sustainability. Heterogeneity in biophysical constraints, uncertainty, technological advances, and obstacles imposed by societal factors and governance regimes influence potential and realized ecosystem services. Using a set of contrasting scenarios, we illustrate how progress can be made toward sustainability and the important obstacles that must be addressed in doing so. Our framework for analyzing sustainability drawn from economics and ecology is intended to make an integration of concepts from both disciplines accessible to a wider audience.

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A sustainability framework for assessing trade-offs in ecosystem services

Cavender‐Bares¹,

Polasky²,

King³

et al. 2015

E&S

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…66º, nº 1) (Gomes, 2013). O princípio da precaução 2 Muitos estudos, de natureza conceptual ou empírica, têm sido dedicados ao princípio da precaução e questões relacionadas, em diversos domínios científicos, como o direito internacional, a ciência política, a economia ecológica e a governação ambiental (Myers e Raffensperger, 2005;De Sadeleer, 2006;Stirling, 2017;Renn et al, 2009;Zander, 2010;Iverson e Perrings, 2012).…”

Section: Conceito E Principais Elementosunclassified

Avaliação e gestão dos riscos não comprovados: estudo de casos da aplicação do princípio da precaução em Portugal

Gonçalves¹

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…the lowest "regret" when a state of nature comes to pass which would have favoured a different strategy (Perman et al 2003: 461). Decision rules can be used as an input for decision making, to present to policy makers trade-offs between what Iverson (2012) and Iverson and Perrings (2012) call "environmental mistakes" (in hindsight, environmental damages are higher than optimal) and "growth mistakes" (too much environment has been protected at the cost of economic development) across a range of plausible outcomes. However, none of the rules can guarantee that the strategy with the highest welfare outcome is chosen: depending on the decision rule adopted, different strategies would be recommended, and which rule would be considered adequate under specific circumstances requires a value judgement from decision makers (Perman et al 2003: 461).…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

Implications of Economic Theory for Bioenergy Policy Design

Purkus

2016

Concepts and Instruments for a Rational Bioenergy Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the allocative and regulative challenges of bioenergy use outlined (see Chap. 2), this chapter's task is to develop the theoretical basis for a rational bioenergy policy. As discussed in Sect. 2.1.3, the defining characteristic of such a rational bioenergy policy is that it strives for efficiency and sustainability under the constraints imposed by multiple interacting market failures and various sources of government failures (cf. Fig. 2.2), while acknowledging the likely non-optimality of outcomes.Given the various allocative and regulative problems involved in bioenergy policy making, there is no single theoretical approach which covers all relevant aspects. Rather, a number of theories promise important insights. The following economic theories have been identified as especially relevant to the problems of bioenergy policy making:1. The neoclassical economics approach to target setting and instrument choice under perfect information as well as under uncertainty (Sect. 3.1); 2. The theory of second-best, which focuses on the handling of multiple market failures and other constraints on optimal policy design (Sect. 3.2); 3. Information economics contributions which examine the implications of incomplete knowledge for policy decision making (Sect. 3.3); 4. The economic theory of order, which examines more closely the constitutive lack of knowledge that policy makers face, drawing implications for the adequacy of structural or process policy measures (Sect. 3.4); 5. New institutional economics, which explores the consequences of imperfect information, positive transaction costs and self-interested policy makerswithin this theory family, the approaches of transaction cost economics, principal-agent theory, the theory of institutional change, and public choice theory appear particularly relevant (Sect. 3.5); 6. Ecological economics, which focuses on the design of sustainable economics systems while taking potential sources of government failure into account (Sect. 3.6).

show abstract

Precaution and proportionality in the management of global environmental change

Cited by 36 publications

References 34 publications

A sustainability framework for assessing trade-offs in ecosystem services

A sustainability framework for assessing trade-offs in ecosystem services

Avaliação e gestão dos riscos não comprovados: estudo de casos da aplicação do princípio da precaução em Portugal

Implications of Economic Theory for Bioenergy Policy Design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About