midterm 2 Flashcards
(187 cards)
1
Q
what is governance
A
process thru which decisions are made
2
Q
who involved in governance
A
state and non-state
not all government
3
Q
CPR
A
common-pool resources
4
Q
difficult excludibility
A
controlling access by potential users is very costly, difficult or impossible
5
Q
substractibility
A
explotation by one user reduces the quantity or quality for others
6
Q
what is the tragedy of commons
A
when individuals, acting independently and rationally, will deplete shared resourse even if this isnt longterm goal
7
Q
benefits=
cost=
A
indivual
collective
8
Q
what is free riding
A
user over uses without concerns about negative effects to others
little or no contrib for maintaining or improing commons
9
Q
hardin solutions for trag of commons
A
centrilized govt (state property) privitization (privte property)
10
Q
hardin assumps and over simplifications
A
absence of organiztion and cooperation btw users
no rules or norms to regulate
all indivs are selfish, norm-free, max short term
open access
11
Q
hardins impacts
A
rationalized privitization of land/resource
ration entral govt control
transfer land from local to state or idivs
painted disempowering ppl view
users are trapped so solutions are ecternal
12
Q
Was hardin right regarding property rights?
A
open acess (doesn't work, was wrong?) indiv prop (depends) Govt prop (depends, many treated as open bad) Communal prop (depends)
13
Q
Ostroms rebuttal to hardin
A
assumps are valid but not generalized
open acess regime bad and lead to commons
humans are norm using and learn from mistakes
rules change commons dilemma
14
Q
empirical evidence against the tragedy
A
hundred of cases: water irrigation; forests;fisheries
local resources creat norms for managaing
greater autonomy in rule-making at local level is tied with better management/ livlihood bens
15
Q
key characteristics for users to organize
A
dependance on the resource
autonmy to make rules
cooperation should outweigh costs
TRUST - smaller groups likely to draw on trust, lowers monitering costs
accurate knowledge of bounds and resource conds
16
Q
challanges governing global commons
A
no one owns, everyone shares
17
Q
global vs local commons
number users
actors awareness of degredation
distribution of costs/ bens
A
huge numbers, hard to manage vs small
local is more aware of degredation
benifits are more directed at local but so are costs, but global costs spread but unevenly
18
Q
global vs local commons
cultural and institutional homogeneity
feasibility to learn
regeneration of degraded resource
A
very difficult in global
learn more in local because living there and livlihod depending, global might not know causing degrade
take centuries to recover locally, but may impossible in global
19
Q
global vs. local commons
ease of understanding resource dynamics
ability to learn across places
A
much more confusing and unknown in global
locals move across places and maybe learn throughout, global have no places to move
20
Q
property solutions suggested by hardin
A
open access
provate property
state property
communal property
21
Q
Open-access
A
absence of well-defined property rights
unregulated and open to all
22
Q
Private property
A
right to exclude others from using proptery
regulation of resource use is vested on an indiv or firm
23
Q
state property
A
rights exclusively vested in govt
govt makes decision on access to resource and level of explotation
24
Q
forest ownership in cda
A
pie chart
90% public forest by provinces and territories
4% pulic forest owned by govt
6% privatly owned
25
Communal property
resources held by identifiable community of independent users
users exclude outsiders
use by community members regulated
26
what percent of land owned by aborigonal people?
28%
27
what type of land is land that abos own
67% natural (less intense use)
28
how much carbon stored in abos owned ladn
17% of carbon stored in all forests on planet is on abos land
29
what % of abos land is protected
20% is overlapped with protected areas
| 40% of global protected areas overlapp with abos land
30
do protected areas respect rights of abos always?
not always
depends where and who and what
africa= illigal for hunting some times
31
imp of idegnious for cons
effectivee at slowing agri expansion
| lower deforestation rates than other forestlands in brazilian amazon
32
community-based conservation
YOU KnOW
| existed for long time
33
re-emergance of community based cons
recognition that strict protectionism has failed
decentrilization trend increased
more pwer granted to locals and communites
34
2 examples of community based cons
guatemala
| The Gambia
35
Mayan Bioshphere Reserve
largest protected area in gaut
established in 90s
forest concessions take plave in multiple-use zones
36
multiple-use forest management
| examples
community forests looking after land (guat)
timber
non-timber forest prod (NTFP) = gum, honey, allspice, crafts
tourism (big one!!) and research
37
social impacts of multiple use
```
employment and income
profits investment in community infastructure
human capital (training etc.)
empower locals to defend land rights
```
38
Environment impact of comm based
lower deforest rates
39
Gambia- community based
pioneer in africa
more than 200 communities
long term process
40
positive community based cons outcomes
```
accountability and empowerment
gens local employment, participation, infrastructure
supplementary income (extra not huge)
decrease deforestation, increase multiple use
```
41
negative community bases cons outcomes
leakages
| inequality (Local elite capture)
42
Is community based means or end?
| effective?
means
| could be effective depending on senario
43
IUCN
International Union for the Conservation of Nature
| one of largest bodies for environ (end of 1940s)
44
IUCN red list of threatened species
used globally, scale: global assessment
assess conservation status of species
catagorizes and ranks
informs govt so they can make policy
45
Categories and considerations of red lsit
extinct, extinct in wild, threatened(=criticallly endagered, endangered, vulnerable), near threatened, least concern
46
few problems with IUCN red list
```
data deficient (killer whales)
many species not evaluated
not regulated (govt don't HAVE to act)
local vs. global
```
47
Global species status
1.7 million species are described
96500 species are assessed
26500 classified as threatened (27%)
48
Example of speices that is critically endangered
Orangotangs in Bourno
49
Example of species doing well but not great
Gient Panda, used to be critically endagaerd but numbers going up
50
Global agreements related to threatened species
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
binding by govts have to make reports but not action binding
encourages policies and things
Convention on Internaional Trade and Endangered Species of WIld Fauna/Flora (CITES)
controls international trade
binding, so govts signed have to follow rules (can be sanctioned if not)
51
Federal legislation for endangered species
SARA
52
SARA assesment process
committe on the status of Endangered wildlife in Cnanada (COSEWIC)
selection of species fo r assesmment
data compile and generation of report
status assessment goes to cabinet (ministry of environ and CC)
53
Two parts of SARA process
Scientific process
| Political Process
54
three results from SARA list report to govt
officials list of species at risk (recieves protection)
Some species are referred back (more reasearch)
Others are not listed (Pacific Coho)
55
Threatened vs listed SARA list
```
#712 species have been listed
26% species not listed because socio-economic aspects
```
56
What does it mean for a species to be listed?
no take: cant be killed, harmed, traded
Protection: critical habitat not damages or destroyed
Recovery: obligation to prepare recovery strat within 1 yea for big risk, 2 years if not as big risk
57
Who produced list for canada? international?
COSEWIC
| IUCN
58
What legislation declare species at risk in canada? international?
SARA
| CITES and CBD
59
Protected areas (define and main goal)
Defiend geographical space
| dedicatio to acheive long term cons of nature and resources
60
How much land globally is protected?
| ocean %?
15%
| 7%
61
of protected areas globally
~2000
62
Canada how much land protected?
goal?
ocean (coastal land)?
11%
INCREASE
5%
63
BC % protected land?
14%
64
average size of proteced areas?
~50% is around 1km^2
| few are very big
65
IUCN management cats
from cat 6 to 1 is increased protection
| and from 1 to 6 is increased human use
66
example of IUCN cat 1
Strict nature reserve
protect biodiveristy and also geological feature
human visits are restricted or not existent
reference for scientific research and monitoring
67
Example of IUCN cat 2
National Parks (Yellowstone)
large areas
spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational, and visitor opportunities
68
example of IUCN cat 6
```
protected area with sustainable use of Natural Resources
sustain use (by locals) is seen as means to bio cons
some restrictions but not a lot
```
69
Application of IUCN categories
each country values each cats differently
| some countries have diff valuesor ideas about them (Not Reported Cat)
70
Are protected areas effective
```
reducing clearing (areas far from roads/cities better cons)
many underfunded and don't meet goal (20-50%)
marine: 71% positive fish pop help, many face underfunding and bad monitoring
```
71
Socio-ecological outcomes
fortress cons: restriction on access and use
| causes local pops costs to be high
72
Evolution of portected areas
isalnd (in isolation)
network approach
landscape approach
social-ecological approach
73
new approaches to cons
more explicit recognition of local rights
moving from topdown towards bottomup
increasing understand of FINISH
74
bottom up approach
ideas come from local communities
75
Why care about Great Bear Rainforest?
coastal temp rainforest is rare (1%, 25% of this in BC)
different languages and cultures
temperate climate and rich marine and terrestial life
climate change (C sequestration)10x more than tropical
76
population post and pre contact in GBR
Post (fewer than 30,000)
| Pre (sooo many have aroud 90% decline)
77
War in the Woods
```
1990-2000
Environ groups and First Ntions protests/blockades
court injunctions
public relations
mktplace mobilizations
contract cancellations
```
78
two main sides of GBF
first nations legal cases
| market campaignes stemmed from calcout sound and evoloved
79
Coast Forest Conservation Initiative
grouping of Forest companies for GBF
completely different and radical
always had competed for timber
80
Rainforest Solutions Proects
Grouping of environmentalists
| also different usually compete
81
Ecosystem based management
```
Goal: high levels of human well being
empower 1st nattions
build cons economy
Goal: ecological integruity
acheive low risk to ecos, maintain ecos (species)
```
82
How GBF protect start
collect info
define EBM
pilot potential solutions (to convince foresters to try)
83
Strategic Land Use Agreements Ratified
```
2006
govt to govt negotiations
33% protected aresa
120 Mill cons finance
First Nations detailed land use planning
```
84
EBM 1.0 Agreements
Ecosystem based management= conservation tht allows people to live there
85
2016 GBF
announcement of GBF framework signed
UBC muesuem of anthropology
procesion of 1st nations
86
Key outcomes of GBF
```
eco based management principles
Governance (reconcil and joint decision)
New institutions
New legal framework
ecological ( low risk targets over time)
New cons econ
global model for collaboration planning
```
87
Reconciliation Protocal & Joint decision making
IDK
88
iterative agreements
Strategic Land Use Agreements Ratified
| EBM 1.0 Agreements
89
November 2017 GBF
complete ban of grizzly bear hunting
90
Galapogoss
marine and terrestial reserve
| human habitation is recent
91
Galapogos marine reserve
artisanal fishing allowed, along with tourism and science
92
Finches
darwin new natural selection
beaks all very different
now have arond 15, still discovering
93
High endemism
one species found in only one place
| what galapogos valued for mostly
94
example for galap endemism
marine iguanas
flightless comorand
pengiuns (N of equator)
giant tortuses
95
threats to galapogos
invasive species
- quick reproduce, no native preds
- ex. goats
96
how kill goats in galap
killed
used female to attract male
250,000 goats killed
97
How CC impact galapogos
unknown but important
| freq and intensity of el Nino events will increase
98
el Nino
average temp of place, or water
| lots in 80's, 1997-98
99
threat of el NiNo
population decrease and very hard to recover and come back
100
coral reefs in galapogos
bleaching
lots there and imp for preserve bio diversity in marine
many cant recover from bleaching
also caused by el Nino (warm waters)
101
Conservation in Galapogos
establish protected areas (national park and marine reserve)
remove invasive species (goats)
ecological restoration/re-intro projects (tortoises)
Special law in Galapogos 1998 (not to all of ecudor)
-rights of residents, prop, immigrant restriction
research
102
what is a cons mechanism and ex
means
| PES, protected areas, communitybased, international treaties
103
FOrest area change 1990-2015
relatively net unchange
104
globally more forest or agriculture land?
more agricculture land (37.7%)
| forest (30.7%)
105
how much % of deforestation by agriculture
80% (largest drvier globally)
106
is logging a major driver of deforestation
not directly, but huge in forest DEGRADATION
107
primary and secondary causes of deforestation in congo basin
prim: small scal eagri and firewood
sec: large scale agri, logging, large scale mining, infsastructure
108
deforestation pressure in BOrneo
primary: oilpalm (large scale agri)
secondary: fires, mining, dams and hydro power, pulp and paper, logging, small scale conservation
109
deforestation in sumatra
primary: small scale agri, roads
Secondary: logging, pulp and paper, fires
110
deforestation in amazon
Primary: large-scale agri, pasture and cattle, small scale agri, dams, road
Seconday: mining
111
Deforestation pressures globally
vary a lot
| similary but have different mains in different areas
112
small-scale agri
bunch of small groups or people/farmers
113
large-scale agri
main big companies
114
amazon
largest tract of tropical forest in world (~5 millionkm^2)
20% global biodiversity
many places very in tact (no roads ect)
115
deforestation in brazilian amazon 1996-2005 increase or decrease?
Decrease!!
| 70%
116
what has brazil done to decrease deforestation
```
better monitoring and enforcement
govt policy
local and international pressure
soy and beef
Indigenous land and PA
international compensation
```
117
Government policies in brazil amazon
| 6 main things
action plant for deforestaiotn preventiona nd control in the amazon (PPCDAM, 2004) give legal titlesfor motivation to conserve
Forest code- legal reserve of 80% pf property cons
Rural Environmental Registry (2009)
-online registration, land use description
118
Local and international pressure
```
natives and citezens
greenpeace report (international, about soil)
slaughtering the amazon (international, about beef)
```
119
Morotorium on soy and beef
| KEY ROLE
2006 soy, processors and exporters committed to not buying soy from deforestation plots
must demonstrate no deforestation
2009, beef, wont buy if from deforestation
know through registration
120
Better monitoring and enforcement
satellite imagry
| better monitoring and checking
121
indigenous land and protected areas
50% is under protection (50% indig, 20% strict protection, 25% for sustainable use)
increase after 2004, big part
122
international compensation
norway contribute to REDD+
pay for preformance
brazil has received 670mill (as of 2014)
123
Multilateral environmental agreements (MEA)
conventions, charter, statues btw 3 or more govts, relating to environment or sustain development
often govt by international law
>1000, huge range (biodiv, seas, pollution...)
124
Examples of MEA
-CBD -CITES -United Nations on CC -UNCCD
125
UNFCCC
United nations framework convention on Climate Change
126
UNCCD
United Nations convention to combat desertification
127
Why MEA's needed?
Species don't care about human borders
| FINISH
128
MEA's in conservation
CITES, CBD, Ramsar Convention on Wetlands
129
Implementainon of CBD
```
establish umbrella legal framework
set clear goals
improved access to shared knowledge
monitor progress and performance
mobilizing financial resources
```
130
Aichi Biodiveristy Targets
2010-2020 (20 goals)
131
Strategic goal A:
address underlying cause of bio loss by mainstreaming it across govt and society
132
Strategic goal B
reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use
133
strategy goal C
improve status of biodiveristy by safegaurding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity
134
target 11
17% of terrestial and inland water areas should be protected
10% coastal and marine areas
related to Strategic goal C
135
strategy goal D
enhance benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services
136
Strategic goal E
enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building
137
target 17
countries build own targets and things (E)
138
target 18
Indigenous right and traditional ecological knowledge to manage conservation
139
Progress towards targets
5(1/2 degradation): moving towards but not on (yellow arrow)
| 11(protected areas): doing well! hitting target in land, on way for marine
140
Global Biodiversity outlook
book to assess how we doing with target
| every 4-5 years
141
Problems with CBD implementation
not sufficient to achieve Aichi targets
CBD legal binding, but more aspirational (required to make report that's it)
set global target, implementation is national
142
MEA's challenge of implementation
inadequate compliance and enforcement
lack of political will & political instability in some cases
limited human and financial capabilities
fragmented decision making (lack of synergies)
143
Right to a healthy environment
1. respect: refrain from taking actions that acitvily violate
2. protect from 3rd party
3. Fullfill through positive actions
144
types of environ provisions
govts resp to prtect environ
substantive rights
procedural rights
indiv resp to proctect environ
145
Norway environ rights examples
great work! protect citizens rights
| broad statement is stronger
146
Rights with Benefits
book: stronger environ laws, better enforcement, enhance govt and coop, improve assec to envrion info, higher levels of public participatoin
147
limits of environ rights
Private property rights balanced agaisnt
| generic limits, restrictions during emergencies, progressive implementation (capacity)
148
Common critics of environ rights
open gates for litigation
shut down economy
how would we enforce this?
149
why called blue dot
what austronuts described earth from space
| finte, vulnerable and up to ours to protect
150
PEB's
Pro-environmental behaviours
| actions taken with intention to reduce negative human impact on natural environment
151
3 types of PEB
Environmentalis actions
non-activist behaviours
private sphere behaviours
152
assumptions of PEB
absence of pro-environmental ideas has led to contemporary environ problems
values influence indiv/collective decisions
more pro-enviorn values would help environ
153
Influencers of PEB
indiv attirudinal factors (most imp)
indiv capabilities
external contextual factors
154
indiv attitudinal factors
cognitive heirarcy model from sit specific, change readily, numerous to transcend sits, slow change, small numbers
behaviours, behavioural intentions, attittudes and normsbeliefs, values
155
Indiv attitudinal factors VBN theory
Values Beliefs, Norms
156
Values define
standards on how we value situations in life
standards of actions
deeply held, stable throughout life
157
General value in VBN
Biosphereic, Altruistic, self-transcendence, conservation, self-enhancement, openness to change
158
values related to environ conern
bioshpereic altruism, humanic altruism, self-interest
159
beliefs
facts as indivs percieve them
| understanding of world state
160
worldviews
generalized beliefs about world
shape our perceptions
often unconscious to our own worldviews
161
Norms
lead to behavioural intentions andthen behaviour
| "ought tos"
162
do indiv attitudinal factors predict PEBS ?
yes
values influence environ conern
altruistic values are positviley related with PEB
people with storng cons values have less PEB
however, association is weak
163
Low impact behav
refusing plastic bags
recycling
swithcing off lights
164
High impact behav
```
overall consumption of energy and resources
life style (transportation, house type, diet, travel)
```
165
Behav intent vs action
want to and believe vs actually doing it
166
Individual capabilities
time (time crunch=car,takeout food)
sociodemographic factors (gender, age, income)
habit and routine (personal cars)
self-efficacy and perceived control(what u think u can do to change the world, have impact)
knowedge and skills
167
How information impacts behav
info deficit theory: model assumes a causal progression btw knowledge, concern and behav
HAS BEEN DISCREDITED
imp but not enough to change behav
168
External contextual factors
interpersonal influences
structural determinants
social context
169
Interpersonal influences
Social norm: whats acceptable, informal agreement (consumerism, assess status/welth compare to others)
Social expectations: family, society? are they sustain?
advertisment: persuasion to buy/consume
170
structural determinants
physical infastructure: car driven, suburbs, bus in city ok but not farther
Geo-physical factors: need heat/aircon,
171
social context
laws, regulations and policies
oriented to sustain?
:sweden stickers on gas for cc (change social norm)
incentives and subsidies:natural gas and fossil fuel
econ incentives: externalities, energy tax, monetary penalties
172
Individual action
private sphere environmentalism
individual buying choices
Have direct environ consequences
173
political action
environ activism (rallies, boycoot, protest)
non-acticist behav in public sphere (voting)
Have indirect environ consequence
174
consumerism drivne by?
indiv consumers
govt policies
corporations profit driven
manufactured needs
175
criticisms to personal indiv action
consists mostly of harm reduction
shifts blame from govern and powerful producer groups to indivs
diffusion of responsibility
176
problems with indiv of responsibility
serious problems cannot be resolved by uncoordinated consumer choice
environmentalism increasingly indiv and apolitical
less room for collective action
removes resp from govt and corps
177
citizens verus consumers
consumer first then citizen
cits moral agents, collective long term goals
cons no moral, short term self interest
178
why do we care about pro-environ behavs in cons
many CC things are human related
179
cons mechanism
any means to achieve end goal
180
Challenges with CC
Global impacts
effects across diverse taxa
effects on species ranges (40% already moved)
181
Radical Conservation interventions
| Less contro to most controversial
```
expand global networks of PA's
Conservation corridors
Species translocations
Assisted Migration
De-extinction/proxy species
```
182
Expand global networks of PA's
Half-Earth (50% only for wildlife-no people)
183
Climate Smart conservation corridors
connecting Pa's so species can move
| ex. bridge over highways so they can cross (small scale)
184
Species translocations
deliberate movements of indivs or pops from one part of range to another
ex. polar bears
other option is diversionary feeding (feed where far from humans)
185
Assisted Migration
translocation of organisms to outside range limits
186
Other suggestions for species translocation
divergenary feeding
| supplementary feeding
187
de-extincitons
Reviving species tat have been extinct using molecular genetic techniques
GMO animals
more of hybrid btw species we have today and one that is extinct
