Hello everyone,
I thought I would take this opportunity to introduce myself, since I'm
new to the list, and to chime in on Beth's question at the same time.
I'm currently a postdoc at the University of Southern California's
Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies. My degree (also from USC)
is in political economy and public policy. I'm interested in modeling
institutional change as an evolutionary process, especially in regards
to the ways in which decision makers modify their beliefs and policy
preferences as the costs of overexploitation manifest. In my work agents
are expected to satisfice, rather than maximize, as they bargain over
common pool resources. I strive to address the larger questions of
whether or not effective action will be taken in time to avert
irreversible events and how much retroactive attempts to deal with
global environmental problems will cost if/when they occur. To date,
the majority of my research has been focused on the origins of recent
innovations in international fisheries management, especially the
relatively new trade-based monitoring and enforcement mechanisms that
have been adopted in several of the largest multilateral fisheries
commissions. I've also done work in the areas of forest regulation,
perceptions of beach amenities, and the role of natural vs. human
resources in economic development.
Given all that, I certainly hope that Armin is right and global
fisheries depletion will receive more attention in the future, along
with most of the other issues that have already been mentioned,
particularly transparency, accountability, and measuring effectiveness.
Along those lines, I'm somewhat surprised that ocean mining or farming
have yet to be mentioned. As the land becomes exhausted, growing demand
and technological innovations are making each more profitable.
In addition, it seems like a major methodological issue that will become
increasingly important is the problem of dealing with complexity, both
in human and natural systems. This should entail the development of new
tools for exploring non-linearity in dynamic systems, such as agent
based models, as well as escalation of the trend toward
multi-disciplinary analysis.
Lastly, new work regarding cognition and information technologies is
highly pertinent to environmental studies, since both play a critical
role in policy-making, institution building, and the empowerment of
civil society. A better understanding of the way in which we find and
process information should shed light on old problems, like the
influence of activism, and growing concerns, such as our collective
ability to adapt to environmental changes that we have been unable to
prevent.
livwell,
DG Webster
PS Yes, I really do go by my innitials. It may seem strange at first,
but most people get used to it.
Beth DeSombre wrote:
For a committee I'm on (proposing directions for a university
environmental institute) I've been charged with determining what people in
my research community see as emerging environmental issues. These can be
based on topic/issue area (e.g. nanotechnology, nitrogen pollution),
approach (e.g. market mechanisms for environmental regulation, private
regulatory processes), or even thinking about other ways we might usefully
consider environmental issues (e.g. consumption, sufficiency).
So, if you're willing to weigh in, where do you see our field going in the
not-too-distant future? What are the things we as scholars should be
gearing up to try to consider?
Incidentally, this shouldn't be limited to an international focus -- all
scales, from very local, through national and international, are relevant.
Thanks in advance to those willing to conceptualize and speculate.
Beth
Elizabeth R. DeSombre
Wellesley College
