Search results

This chapter identifies and analyzes three systemic obstacles to American public policy addressing natural disasters: symbolic obstacles, cognitive obstacles, and structural obstacles. The way we talk about natural disaster, the way we think about the risks of building in hazardous places, and structural aspects of American political institutions all favor development over restraint. These forces have such strength that in the wake of most disasters society automatically and thoughtlessly responds by rebuilding what was damaged or destroyed, even if reconstruction perpetuates disaster vulnerability. Only by addressing each of the obstacles identified are reform efforts likely to succeed.

Provision of ecological goods and services at the local level is often related to benefits at higher governmental levels. On the one hand, sustainable watershed management and biodiversity conservation are strongly connected to local land-use decisions. On the other hand, related conservation activities and protected areas are frequently associated with regional, national or even global public goods. Therefore, spatial externalities or spillover effects exist that – if not adequately compensated – lead to an under-provision of the public goods and services concerned. This chapter investigates fiscal transfers as an innovative instrument for compensating local jurisdictions for the ecological goods and services they provide across local boundaries. From a public finance perspective, fiscal transfers are a suitable instrument for internalising spatial externalities. A case study is presented that investigates the present and potential use of fiscal transfers for ecological public functions in the German federal systems. Analysis of the German system of fiscal equalisation at the local level shows that, so far, mostly end-of-the-pipe activities are currently considered with resource protection and nature conservation being widely underrepresented.

Over the past three decades ecological economics has emerged as a coherent transdisciplinary approach to environmental problem solving. However, its evolution has been quite dissimilar in different parts of the world. In the US and UK, ecological economics evolved as a critique of and alternative to a comparatively strict application of economic theory to environmental decision making. In particular, the narrow application of benefit–cost analysis often reduced environmental decisions to one metric within a single value system (the market economy). The attractiveness of these traditional economic approaches to environmental policy has always been their “one size fits all” approach. No matter what the problem faced, the same methods were applied with a primary goal of cost effectiveness. But it has become increasingly clear that the ease of application of a strict economic approach is outweighed by its failure to capture the social and environmental contexts and realities of specific environmental problems. In contrast, ecological economics has been more problem-oriented, incorporating multiple stakeholder and disciplinary perspectives in specific contexts to shape the methods that define policy choices. Furthermore, ecological economic approaches involve multiple metrics, multiple points of view, and evolutionary and flexible policy recommendations.

The term sustainability has evolved rapidly over the past two decades beyond the general definition of the 1987 report Our Common Future (the Brundtland report) which defined “sustainable development” as that which “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Although the Brundtland definition provided a common rallying point for all those concerned with the environmental and social consequences of global economic development, it quickly became apparent that there were deep divisions among the advocates of sustainability.

This chapter presents projections of residential development in Wappinger Creek watershed of Dutchess County, New York in the Hudson River Valley. A spatial econometric model is developed based on data from a geographical information system (GIS) of county-level socio-economic trends, tax parcel attributes, town-level zoning restrictions, location variables, and bio-geophysical constraints including slope, soil type, riparian and agricultural zones. Monte Carlo simulation is employed to distribute spatially explicit projections of land-use change under various residential development scenarios. Scenario analysis indicates the likelihood of continued residential, decentralized development patterns in formerly agricultural and forested parcels. Policy scenarios demonstrate possible courses of action to direct development and protect watershed health.

In this chapter, the integrative methodological approach (IMA) of the research project GLOWA Elbe is introduced, which represents a scientific methodology to support water management under uncertainty regarding future paths of global change. The approach paves the way for integration of research work of many disciplines, of different assessment methods, of various policy fields, and the involvement of relevant stakeholders and decision makers. IMA can be roughly described by four research elements (scenario derivation, indicator and criteria identification, model-based impact analysis, and final scenario assessment based on combined benefit–cost and multi-criteria analysis), which lay the basis for the IMA activities of the global change research sequence. Its practical application is demonstrated by a case study on the Spree and Schwarze Elster river basins. Specific results of Chapter 4 (on scenario derivation) and Chapter 11 (on integrating economic evaluation into water management simulation) in this volume are picked up in order to focus on the illustration of the integrated assessment results for this German case study.

This chapter describes the scenario technique used for the integrative methodological approach (IMA) of the German global change project GLOWA Elbe. It is outlined how regional scenarios are systematically derived to analyze water use conflicts and their resolution in the context of global change for the German Elbe river basin. Through the combination of frameworks of development and policy strategies a consistent set of developmental scenarios can be generated that makes it possible to examine the regional impact of policy strategies under conditions of different future global change development paths. The scenario analysis of the framework of development starts on the global level with qualitative IPCC storylines, translates them to the regional level, and quantifies their regional effects by means of modeling and statistical estimation methods. The policy strategies are derived in close cooperation with regional stakeholders.

This chapter describes a method to analyse agricultural land use in terms of net value added and employment (working time requirement) in the agricultural sector as well as a corresponding ecological indicator: the nitrogen-leaching-rate. Watershed management demands a basic approach, which deals with common statistics and spatial information from digital maps. This causes a range of uncertainties, which are calculated in relation to the data input. A metamodel derived from a process model calculates the most probable value of the ecological indicator, whereas the economic indicators are estimated by the cumulative numbers of primary production. The uncertainties are expressed as the standard deviation of all impacts as percentages. The method described is applied to a rural district in the Elbe river basin.