Heat wave vulnerability and exposure mapping for Osaka City,Japan

Heat waves and heat-related stresses are increasing environmental concerns in urban areas. The impact of heat waves is dependent on the intensity and duration of each event and on underlying environmental and socio-demographic factors which influence population vulnerability. In order to develop effective adaptation strategies, it is important to develop a method to clearly identify the most vulnerable areas based on these factors. The purpose of this study is to develop and map a heat wave vulnerability index combined with heat exposure analysis to identify areas where interventions can be targeted. The vulnerability index was derived from a principle component analysis of eight key variables that influence heat wave vulnerability. Eight proxy measures of vulnerability were obtained from 2010 census and land-use data for the 1904 census districts of Osaka City. Three principle components explained >77 % of the variance (age, employment and education; social isolation; density and lack of green space). The components were combined and weighted to produce a vulnerability score for each census district. The vulnerability scores ranged from 0 to 106, were categorised into eight vulnerability levels and were overlaid with fine-scale air temperature observations. The resulting output identified the distribution of population vulnerability and exposure. This assessment of vulnerability, combining exposure and sensitivity components, can provide precedent for efficient, targeted action to be taken to reduce the impact of heat waves at present and under climate change.     

Clarifying relationships between participatory approaches,issues, processes,and results,through crosscutting case analysis in Japan’s environmental,energy, and food policy areas

Participatory public engagement approaches such as Consensus Conferences, Deliberative Polling^®, and Planning Cells have been used to try and resolve environmental disputes in Japan; however, the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches have not been analyzed adequately or comprehensively. This paper evaluates practical applications of each of the above participatory approaches and conducts a crosscutting analysis of these applications to evaluate how effectively each approach provides scientific information to participants and to consider how the quality of deliberations that occur during these processes affect their outputs. Based on existing classification of participatory processes, and methodology for public involvement in US environmental decision-making, this study compares and contrasts the processes and outcomes of 25 participatory planning case studies in Japan. After compiling a case inventory of participatory approaches, the features of one approach are documented using qualitative analysis, and the aspects of four other approaches are confirmed using crosscutting analysis. In so doing, the likely strengths and weaknesses of each approach are suggested as follows. When discussions require an understanding of scientific knowledge, the Consensus Conference tends to be more suitable than the DP approach. If the consensus of participants is expected, the Consensus Conference is also thought to be suitable. But through a DP process or Simplified Planning Cells approach, we can know the quantitative portion of each opinion through results of ballots. In sum, new participatory approach that incorporates strengths of the Consensus Conference and the Simplified Planning Cells into Local Environmental Planning is needed. Thus, the quality of consensus building could be improved.     

Responding to a policy mandate to collaborate: structuring collaboration in the collaborative forest landscape restoration program

The Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program (CFLRP) aims to expand the pace and scale of forest restoration on national forests in the United States. The program requires candidate projects to develop landscape-scale forest restoration proposals through a collaborative process and continue to collaborate throughout planning, implementation, and monitoring. Our comparative case analysis of the initial selected projects examines how existing collaborative groups draw on past experience of collaboration and the requirements of a new mandate to shape collaborative structures as they undertake CFLRP work. While mandating collaboration appears contrary to what is often defined as an informal and emergent process, mandates can encourage stakeholder engagement and renew commitment to overcome past conflict. Our findings also suggest that a collaborative mandate can lead to increased attention and scrutiny, prompting adjustments to collaborative process and structure. As such, mandating collaboration creates dynamic tensions between past experience and new requirements for collaborative practice.     

Benchmarking Optical/Thermal Satellite Imagery for Estimating Evapotranspiration and Soil Moisture in Decision Support Tools

Generally, one expects evapotranspiration (ET) maps derived from optical/thermal Landsat and MODIS satellite imagery to improve decision support tools and lead to superior decisions regarding water resources management. However, there is lack of supportive evidence to accept or reject this expectation. We “benchmark” three existing hydrologic decision support tools with the following benchmarks: annual ET for the ET Toolbox developed by the United States Bureau of Reclamation, predicted rainfall‐runoff hydrographs for the Gridded Surface/Subsurface Hydrologic Analysis model developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the average annual groundwater recharge for the Distributed Parameter Watershed Model used by Daniel B. Stephens & Associates. The conclusion of this benchmark study is that the use of NASA/USGS optical/thermal satellite imagery can considerably improve hydrologic decision support tools compared to their traditional implementations. The benefits of improved decision making, resulting from more accurate results of hydrologic support systems using optical/thermal satellite imagery, should substantially exceed the costs for acquiring such imagery and implementing the remote sensing algorithms. In fact, the value of reduced error in estimating average annual groundwater recharge in the San Gabriel Mountains, California alone, in terms of value of water, may be as large as $1 billion, more than sufficient to pay for one new Landsat satellite.     

Food: From Commodity to Commons

Our food and farming system is not socially, economically or ecologically sustainable. Many of the ills are a result of market competition driving specialization and linear production models, externalizing costs for environmental, social and cultural degradation. Some propose that market mechanisms should be used to correct this; improved consumer choice, internalization of costs and compensation to farmers for public goods. What we eat is determined by the path taken by our ancestors, by commercialization and fierce competition, fossil fuels and demographic development. Based on those, governments and the food industry are the choice architects who determine what we eat; consumer choice plays a marginal role. Using market mechanisms to internalize cost and compensate farmers for public goods has been proposed for decades but little progress has been made. There are also many practical, ethical and theoretical objections to such a system. The market is not a good master for a sustainable food system. Instead we need to find new ways of managing the food system based on food as a right and farming as a management system of the planet Earth. The solutions should be based on relocalization of food production and de-commodification of food and our symbionts, the plants and animals we eat.     

The Normative Limits of Consumer Citizenship

In political philosophy, citizenship is a key concept. Citizenship is tied to rights and duties, as well as to concepts of social justice. Recently, the debate on citizenship has developed a new direction in focusing on qualified notions of citizenship. In this contribution, I shall defend three claims. Firstly, consumer citizenship fits into the discussion of qualified notions of citizenship. Secondly, the debate on qualified notions of citizenship cannot be detached from the normative claims in the philosophy of citizenship more generally. In particular, duties and rights receive a distinct shape when debated in terms of “consumer citizenship”. Thirdly, I shall argue that further normative limits can be established by discussing qualified notions of citizenship as items of a list that need to cohere in normative terms. I shall pay particular attention to environmental citizenship.     

The IPBES Conceptual Framework: An Unhelpful Start

The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) have recently launched themselves as the UN-sanctioned instrument for conserving nature. They seek to establish themselves as the authority in this field alongside the well-known Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in climate science. Quickly following or even before recent publication of their conceptual framework in two biology journals, they were already underway building upon it. This headlong push, we believe, is ill advised. We show how the framework is unsound as a foundation for further work—in a number of ways and perhaps even by its authors’ own lights. It is therefore urgent that the IPBES thoroughly and thoughtfully reconsider their framework before too much effort is wasted.     

Consuming for the Sake of Others: Whose Interests Count on a Market for Animal-Friendly Products?

Many Europeans are concerned about the living conditions of farm animals because they view animals as beings that possess interests of their own. Against this background the introduction of an animal welfare label is being intensively discussed in Europe. In choosing a market-based instrument to take these concerns into account, normative judgments are made about the formation of preferences, the value system that is implicitly assumed, and the distribution of property rights. From the perspective of classical institutional economics it can be shown that the introduction of a label as an institutional change does not redefine institutions in a way that allows them to consider the interests of animals for their own sake. Rather, the label only redefines the property rights that humans have over animals. The market segregation into privileged and normal animals conflicts with the idea of equality between sentient animals. Within the group of humans only the interests of those who act on markets count. The commodification of their moral concerns assumes that people always decide based on their own interests, which can be traded off. The lexicographical ordering of preferences, which occurs when humans view animals as entities with rights, is not compatible with the normative assumptions of markets. Furthermore, interpreting animal suffering as market failure that can be corrected by labeling impedes a reasoned dialog within the society about the values and beliefs that serve as a basis for preference formation. Thus, an animal welfare label cannot replace a fundamental societal debate about legal standards on animal well-being.