Group items tagged

Poverty and biodiversity loss are two of the world's dire challenges. Claims of conservation's contribution to poverty alleviation, however, remain controversial. Here, we assess the flows of ecosystem services provided to people by priority habitats for terrestrial conservation, considering the global distributions of biodiversity, physical factors, and socioeconomic context. We estimate the value of these habitats to the poor, both through direct benefits and through payments for ecosystem services to those stewarding natural habitats. The global potential for biodiversity conservation to support poor communities is high: The top 25% of conservation priority areas could provide 56%-57% of benefits. The aggregate benefits are valued at three times the estimated opportunity costs and exceed $1 per person per day for 331 million of the world's poorest people. Although trade-offs remain, these results show win-win synergies between conservation and poverty alleviation, indicate that effective financial mecha- nisms can enhance these synergies, and suggest biodiversity conservation as a fundamental component of sustainable economic development.

Not related directly to any of the cases we are currently working on. But none the less I thought this was an interesting look at biodiversity from an economic angle.

Relating natural disasters to climate change, and a prescription for responding (which doesn't hinge on accepting climate change, if the Case knowledge claim is correct). This prescription includes national- and state-level assessments and planning, additional funding, and energy infrastructure improvements.

Winikoff et al explore key issues related to the adjudication of the disagreement between that the US, Canada and Argentina have with the European Communities over GMOs. The primary focus is on the WTO SPS Agreement and the way in which the agreement can be used to respect cultural differences regarding risk assessment, acknowledge that science policies are value laden, and that public input and participation is even more important than scientific expertise especially in instances of low consensus and low expertise.

This piece talks about activism that hampers scientific research, innovation and industries that are related to things suc as "pesticides, food additives, chemicals in general, pharmaceuticals, nuclear power, and biotechnology." The article states that the scientific illiteracy of the general public makes it easy for activists to generate support for increased regulation and dampening of efforts in these areas. How do you help communities assess scientific information? How do you help them look at not only the research, but the context of the research? How should informed decisions about potentially harmful technologies and processes be handled? How do you support and engage in honest and open dialogue and debate about complex and unknown outcomes?

"Cultural Theory is used as a theoretical lens for understanding the different interpretations of the risk associated with BSE/nvCJD, the subsequent risk amplification by the media, and the effect of trust and reliance in science and government in their construction."

Published by the Council of Canadian Academies, this paper reviews a bit of the history of the relationship between policy and science, as well as policy and scientists. The author, Executive VP of the Council, starts from a broad view, describing an "is (fact)/ought (value)" dichotomy between science and policy, moves closer to characterize the range of relationships between scientists and policymakers and their attitudes toward each other, describes their spheres of influence (world of progress v. world of power), and finally makes the case for government as a place for collaboration and progress employing both. Saner offers some "take-home messages" and some questions for further exploration, including how to meet the needs of each while facilitating communication; managing the divergent cultures to reach successful ends; creating incentives for both players to join the effort; and adapting to the multitude of ways the differences between these two groups manifest themselves around policy issues.

The documentation from this 2005 Congressional hearing may help insert some of the science Peter was prompting us to incorporate into our case investigations -- GIS, communications science, demographics, and others are brought to bear; the Q&A toward the end give some sense as to what the decisionmakers (Members of the House) took away from the expert scientists' presentations.

Scientific research plays a very important role in the development of the areas discussed; for example, information data collection and development and improvement of hazard and risk assessment models. These programs are critical since we live in a country with so many natural risks year round.

Indeed very comprehensive. I find interesting when they ask the effect of the local environment in shaping our perceptions of risk. It was interesting to see how people felt in Southesat Lousiana before and after hurrican Ivan.