Category Archives: Peer Reviewed Article Review

land economics

Leave a reply

Here’s a long open article from Ecological Economics about studying the competition for land. Land exists at the intersection of economics and ecology, and it is conspicuously absent from a lot of economic thinking. It can be thought of as capital, in a sense, but obviously it is not manufactured capital. We can’t make more of it, but we can intensify our activities on a given piece of it (for example, more intense agriculture or taller buildings). Land is the obvious source of a lot of ecosystem services, but the value of those services tends to accrue regionally or globally rather than to the landowner. These are my own thoughts, but anyway here is the abstract:

Possible negative effects of increased competition for land include pressures on biodiversity, rising food prices and GHG emissions. However, neoclassical economists often highlight positive aspects of competition, e.g. increased efficiency and innovation. Competition for land occurs when several agents demand the same good or service produced from a limited area. It implies that when one agent acquires scarce resources from land, less resource is available for competing agents. The resource competed for is often not land but rather its function for biomass production, which may be supplanted by other inputs that raise yields. Increased competition may stimulate efficiency but negative environmental effects are likely in the absence of appropriate regulations. Competition between affluent countries with poor people in subsistence economies likely results in adverse social and development outcomes if not mitigated through effective policies. The socioecological metabolism approach is a framework to analyze land-related limits and functions in particular with respect to production and consumption of biomass and carbon sequestration. It can generate databases that consistently link land used with biomass flows which are useful in understanding interlinkages between different products and services and thereby help to analyze systemic feedbacks in the global land system.

more trees!

Leave a reply

This article in Landscape and Urban Planning is all about street trees. You would think this topic would have been exhausted, that is the technology would have been perfected, by now. And it has, in a few places. I am convinced it is not that leading edge knowledge about trees needs to be advanced all that much, but most cities are completely ignorant of what the best practices are. People in charge don’t know what they don’t know and have zero interest in finding out.

Street trees are an integral element of urban life. They provide a vast range of benefits in residential and commercial precincts, and they support healthy communities by providing environmental, economic and social benefits. However, increasing areas of impermeable surface can increase the stresses placed upon urban ecosystems and urban forests. These stresses often lead tree roots to proliferate in sites that provide more-favourable conditions for growth, but where they cause infrastructure damage and pavement uplift. This damage is costly and a variety of preventative measures has been tested to sustain tree health and reduce pavement damage. This review explores a wide range of literature spanning 30 years that demonstrates the benefits provided by street trees, the perceptions of street trees conveyed by urban residents, the costs of pavement damage by tree roots, and some tried and tested measures for preventing pavement damage and improving tree growth.

walkability matters – duh

Leave a reply

For people still looking for an answer to the question “does walkability matter?”, here is some more solid evidence from Cities to add to the mountain.

In this study, researchers examined 170 neighborhoods in a medium-sized city to see whether walkability influences neighborhood sustainability. Until 2008, there had not been a reliable measure of the social, health, and economic impact of walkable neighborhoods. This dramatically changed when scholars were able to quantify walkability with tools such as Walkscore™; which measures how accessible daily living activities are by foot. The researchers investigated how walkability impacts the quality and sustainability of a neighborhood. They developed models that evaluated the correlation between an area’s Walkscore™ and four broad measures of urban sustainability: neighborhood housing valuation; foreclosures; and crime. Our analysis shows a positive impact not only on neighborhood housing valuation but also on neighborhood crime and foreclosure. These results provide policy opportunities for planners and citizen groups to pursue strategies to encourage the development of more walkable and sustainable neighborhoods.

I know I’m a broken record, but getting around under our own muscle power for most trips most of the time is the key to (in no particular order):

  • reducing carbon emissions
  • reducing air pollution from vehicle emissions, especially particulates which cause asthma and heart disease – this will add quality years to all our lives
  • solving drunk driving
  • saving lots and lots of money that we used to spend on cars
  • saving enormous amounts of space in cities that used to be used for car maneuvering and parking – space that can now be used for relaxing, recreating, habitat, housing, economic or commercial activity
  • creating space for people – yes, you can increase density and reduce crowding at the same time
  • increasing physical health through more physical activity, decreasing obesity, diabetes and heart disease, adding years to peoples’ lives
  • improving psychological health through physical activity
  • increasing social interaction
  • increasing business activity and profits
  • creating an ecosystem of innovative, creative people, businesses, nonprofit and government agencies

growth, sustainability, and employment

Leave a reply

This article in Ecological Economics looks at economic growth, sustainability, and employment together:

Two empirical correlations are studied: one between economic growth and environmental impacts, and the other between the lack of economic growth and unemployment. It is demonstrated that, at a global level, economic growth is strongly correlated with environmental impacts, and barriers to fast decoupling are large and numerous. On the other hand, low or negative growth is highly correlated with increasing unemployment in most market economies, and strategies to change this lead to difficult questions and tradeoffs. The coexistence of these two correlations – which have rarely been studied together in the literature on “green growth”, “degrowth” and “a-growth” – justifies ambivalence about growth. To make key environmental goals compatible with full employment, the decoupling of environmental impacts from economic output has to be accompanied by a reduction of dependence on growth. In particular, strategies to tackle unemployment without the need for growth, several of which are studied in this article, need much more attention in research and policy.

I get it – growth and employment are often looked at together in the mainstream economic literature, obviously. Employment is pretty important to living standards and social/political stability. Sustainability and growth are often looked at together in the sustainability literature (which is “mainstream” to some, but not really to most economists). There is an obvious tradeoff between the two as long as our economy devours large amounts of natural resources and produces enormous amounts of waste and pollution. The idea of “decoupling” is that each unit of growth gets slightly greener and cleaner over time. But unfortunately, that process does not seem to be nearly fast enough to prevent eventual collapse. Damage to natural ecosystems is increasing and will eventually threaten the ecosystem services that our human civilization depends on. That is the trend we are on. The only two ways out are to slow growth or to accelerate the decoupling process. This article seems to focus on the former. My opinion is that this path is politically impossible unless it is precipitated by some serious crisis, which we can’t just sit around and wait for because it could cause enormous pain and suffering. So the latter option is the only hope. It is hard but entirely possible if enough people understand the situation and dedicate their efforts to make it happen.

“blue carbon”

Leave a reply

This article in Ecological Economics is about carbon sequestration in “mangrove forests, seagrass meadows, and tidal salt marshes”, and policy and market mechanisms that can help make this happen. To me carbon sequestration is not the only or the primary reason to try to conserve these ecosystems, but I will certainly support it if it gets the job done. Plus if we can come up with hard-nosed market-based approaches that actually work, we can apply them to conservation and restoration of a whole range of ecosystems.

Blue carbon – the carbon stored and sequestered in mangrove forests, seagrass meadows, and tidal salt marshes – is considered a cost-effective means to achieve positive climate change mitigation and adaptation outcomes. Blue carbon is therefore of considerable interest to the scientific and policy communities, and is frequently discussed in relation to carbon markets and climate finance opportunities. This paper identifies peer-reviewed and ‘gray literature’ documents that discuss blue carbon in the context of finance and market mechanisms. The document set is analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively, and the principal scientific, economic, regulatory, social, and management issues that emerge are discussed. The study reveals that (1) the blue carbon literature is dominated by technical and policy commentary, with a dearth of research into practical social considerations and a stark absence of private sector perspectives; (2) there is confusion over the nature and role of important concepts including private and public sector finance and instruments; and (3) understanding of the important issues of investment priorities and risk considerations is also limited. This paper therefore identifies gaps in the blue carbon literature, clarifies critical concepts and issues, and proposes novel pathways for blue carbon research and project development.

Integrating the planetary boundaries and global catastrophic risk paradigms

Leave a reply

I think this article in Ecological Economics gets at a very important idea. There are planetary boundaries we are at risk of exceeding, most obviously the ability of the atmosphere and oceans to absorb and hold greenhouse gas emissions before reaching some catastrophic tipping point. Then there are catastrophic risks that come out of left field every once in a while, like war, plague, accidents, and asteroid strikes. Since our attention span and ability to respond seems to be severely limited, we really need to understand which of these risks are the most likely and the most consequential, so we know where to focus our efforts.

Planetary boundaries (PBs) and global catastrophic risk (GCR) have emerged in recent years as important paradigms for understanding and addressing global threats to humanity and the environment. This article compares the PBs and GCR paradigms and integrates them into a unified PBs-GCR conceptual framework, which we call Boundary Risk for Humanity and Nature (BRIHN). PBs emphasizes global environmental threats, whereas GCR emphasizes threats to human civilization. Both paradigms rate their global threats as top priorities for humanity but lack precision on key aspects of the impacts of the threats. Our integrated BRIHN framework combines elements from both paradigms’ treatments of uncertainty and impacts. The BRIHN framework offers PBs a means of handling human impacts and offers GCR a theoretically precise definition of global catastrophe. The BRIHN framework also offers a concise stage for telling a stylized version of the story of humanity and nature co-evolving from the distant past to the present to multiple possible futures. The BRIHN framework is illustrated using the case of disruptions to the global phosphorus biogeochemical cycle.

you know nothing, snow

Leave a reply

From Wired Science:

The western United States is undergoing a major shift in precipitation patterns. Large swaths of the West that have historically been dominated by snow in the winter months are starting to see a lot more rain instead. A new study that maps out the predominant form of precipitation shows that this trend could result in an average reduction in snow-dominated area of around 30 percent by the middle of this century.

The western US depends heavily on snowpack to sustain its water supply through the dry summertime, but the new research, published in Geophysical Research Letters in July, suggests this may have to change.

Hmm…here’s the abstract of the paper…not quite so sensational sounding although it still clearly says there is going to be a lot less snow:

This approach identifies areas most likely to undergo precipitation phase change over the next half century. At broad scales, these projections indicate an average 30% decrease in areal extent of winter wet-day temperatures conducive to snowfall over the western United States.

alternative energy

Leave a reply

This article (in the descriptively name journal Energy) describes how California could move to an all-renewable energy future, then tries to put an economic value on that. It is always the link between air pollution and health that surprises me. Why don’t people get more upset that power plants and vehicle exhaust are literally taking years off all our lives when there are other alternatives out there?

This study presents a roadmap for converting California’s all-purpose (electricity, transportation, heating/cooling, and industry) energy infrastructure to one derived entirely from wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) generating electricity and electrolytic hydrogen. California’s available WWS resources are first evaluated. A mix of WWS generators is then proposed to match projected 2050 electric power demand after all sectors have been electrified. The plan contemplates all new energy from WWS by 2020, 80–85% of existing energy converted by 2030, and 100% by 2050. Electrification plus modest efficiency measures may reduce California’s end-use power demand ∼44% and stabilize energy prices since WWS fuel costs are zero. Several methods discussed should help generation to match demand. A complete conversion in California by 2050 is estimated to create ∼220,000 more 40-year jobs than lost, eliminate ∼12,500 (3800–23,200) state air-pollution premature mortalities/yr, avoid $103 (31–232) billion/yr in health costs, representing 4.9 (1.5–11.2)% of California’s 2012 gross domestic product, and reduce California’s 2050 global climate cost contribution by $48 billion/yr. The California air-pollution health plus global climate cost benefits from eliminating California emissions could equal the $1.1 trillion installation cost of 603 GW of new power needed for a 100% all-purpose WWS system within ∼7 (4–14) years.

please remind me, what are patents for again?

Leave a reply

Okay, maybe so-called intellectual property rights encourage innovation in some industries sometimes. But the evidence shows that they sometimes do the exact opposite, especially if taken to the extreme. This is the abstract of a working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research:

Cumulative innovation is central to economic growth. Do patent rights facilitate or impede follow-on innovation? We study the causal effect of removing patent rights by court invalidation on subsequent research related to the focal patent, as measured by later citations. We exploit random allocation of judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to control for endogeneity of patent invalidation. Patent invalidation leads to a 50 percent increase in citations to the focal patent, on average, but the impact is heterogeneous and depends on characteristics of the bargaining environment. Patent rights block downstream innovation in computers, electronics and medical instruments, but not in drugs, chemicals or mechanical technologies. Moreover, the effect is entirely driven by invalidation of patents owned by large patentees that triggers more follow-on innovation by small firms.

microbial life on Mars

Leave a reply

Here is some more evidence from the journal Geology that microbial life may exist or once have existed on Mars.

Depletion of phosphorus, vesicular structure, and replacive gypsic horizons of these Martian paleosols are features of habitable microbial earth soils on Earth, and encourage further search for definitive evidence of early life on Mars.

I’m interested in the question of whether life on Earth is truly alone in the universe. If we find just one bacterial cell on another planet, and as long as we don’t think that cell came from Earth or is an ancestor of life on Earth, the question will have been answered. If we can find life just one other place, then it will be likely that there is life all over the place.