for helpful comments. We appreciate comments and feedback from participants at seminars at Cornell, Columbia, Rutgers, Case Western, Portland State, and conference participants at IHEA, NTA, WEAI, and the IIOC meetings, as well as industry participants and Cannabis Science and Policy Summit attendees. Kendall Houghton provided exemplary research assistance. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.
The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change drew fierce opposition, skepticism and advocacy from many nations and advocacy groups during its negotiation in 1997. Since then, passion for this protocol as well as international environmental agreements (IEAs) in general has only grown, but despite sustained political attention, the research community has not reached a consensus on the true impact of these agreements. Researchers from a range of academic fields have chosen to evaluate the effectiveness and design of IEAs. In doing so, a variety of quantitative analysis methods have been employed, often in competition. The following research summarizes and evaluates the current empirical literature in order to identify trends and facilitate further development. Despite a significant selection of theoretical papers, the empirical literature evaluating the effectiveness of implemented IEAs is sparse. Furthermore, most completed case studies focus on Helsinki and Sofia Protocols and are limited to IEA impact in European countries. Our review details the models these studies use-methodology and data selection-in order to clarify the process and encourage new research. The tables and analysis enclosed should be particularly helpful for researchers aiming to empirically evaluate IEAs in the future.
As public land managers seek to adopt and implement conservation measures aimed at reversing or slowing the negative effects of climate change, they are looking to understand public opinion regarding different management strategies. This study explores drivers of attitudes towards different management strategies (i.e. no management, protection and restoration) for a low‐profile but keystone tree species, the whitebark pine Pinus albicaulis, in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Since the whitebark pine species has a range that traverses different federal land designations, we examine whether attitudes towards management strategies differ by jurisdiction (i.e. wilderness or federal lands more generally). We conducted a web and mail survey of residents from Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, with 1,617 valid responses and a response rate of 16%. We find that active management strategies have substantially higher levels of support than does no management, with relatively little differentiation across protection and restoration activities or across different land designations. We also find that support for management strategies is not influenced by values (political ideology) but is influenced by beliefs (about material vs. post‐material environmental orientation, global climate change and federal spending for public lands) and some measures of experience (e.g. knowledge of threats). This study helps land managers understand that support for active management of the whitebark pine species is considerable and non‐partisan and that beliefs and experience with whitebark pine trees are important for support. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.
The whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis Engelm.) tree species faces precipitously declining populations in many locations. It is a keystone species found primarily in high-elevation forests across the Western US. The species is an early responder to climate change and qualifies for endangered species protection. We use contingent valuation to estimate the public's willingness to pay for management of the whitebark pine species. In contrast, previous work centres on valuing broader aspects of forest ecosystems or threats to multiple tree species. While only approximately half of the survey respondents have seen whitebark pine, the mean willingness to pay for whitebark pine management is $135 per household. When aggregated across all households from the three sampled states, willingness to pay totals $163 million. This information is valuable to forest managers who must make difficult decisions in times of resource constraints and climate change.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.