OPTIMAL PROFITS UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS: IMPLICATIONS OF NUTRIENT AND SEDIMENT STANDARDS1

To reduce nonpoint source pollution from nutrient, chemical, and sediment runoff, a number of environmental policy standards have been proposed. Such standards could be used to reduce nonpoint source pollution from nutrient, chemical, and sediment runoff to impaired water bodies. State governments can use voluntary approaches to meet nonpoint source pollution reduction goals. However, the practices that lower net returns will not be voluntarily adopted by farmers. Crop rotations and tillage practices may help producers to comply with the environmental standards while minimizing losses in farm profits. This study compares runoff from crop rotation practices and conventional continuous row cropping systems in Mississippi. The results are compared for different tillage systems in order to examine robustness of results. Nutrient runoff and sediment runoff are simulated using the Erosion Productivity Impact Calculator (EPIC). Sensitivity analysis of the sediment and nitrate reductions at 15 percent, 25 percent, and 35 percent are conducted. Under these scenarios, net returns are optimized under environmental constraints, and the marginal cost of sediment reduction ranges from US$1.61 to US$9.63 per ton depending on soil conditions, while the corresponding nitrate and phosphorus reductions costs range from US$1.21 to US$7.08 per kg and from US$0.09 to US$31.91, respectively. The empirical results from this study indicate that a nitrate reduction policy is relatively less costly than a sediment reduction policy. The results also demonstrate the importance of geophysical conditions and policy costs, which vary across regions.     

Growth of the Decision Tree: Advances in Bottom‐Up Climate Change Risk Management

There has recently been a return in climate change risk management practice to bottom‐up, robustness‐based planning paradigms introduced 40 years ago. The World Bank's decision tree framework (DTF) for “confronting climate uncertainty” is one incarnation of those paradigms. In order to better represent the state of the art in climate change risk assessment and evaluation techniques, this paper proposes: (1) an update to the DTF, replacing its “climate change stress test” with a multidimensional stress test; and (2) the addition of a Bayesian network framework that represents joint probabilistic behavior of uncertain parameters as sensitivity factors to aid in the weighting of scenarios of concern (the combination of conditions under which a water system fails to meet its performance targets). Using the updated DTF, water system planners and project managers would be better able to understand the relative magnitudes of the varied risks they face, and target investments in adaptation measures to best reduce their vulnerabilities to change. Next steps for the DTF include enhancements in: modeling of extreme event risks; coupling of human‐hydrologic systems; integration of surface water and groundwater systems; the generation of tradeoffs between economic, social, and ecological factors; incorporation of water quality considerations; and interactive data visualization.     

北京能源消费排放CO2增量的影响因素分析——基于三层嵌套式的I-O SDA技术

通过构建一个扩展的竞争型经济-能源-碳排放投入产出表,运用三层嵌套结构式I-O SDA 技术,从整体情况、分产业、工业分行业3 个层面,对1997—2007 年北京的碳排放增量进行了分解。结果表明:消费、投资、调出和出口等经济规模增长要素,以272.46%的贡献率成为增排的主要因素,而能源消费强度变动效应,则以-237.13%的贡献率成为减排的决定性因素;在规模扩张各效应中,调出和消费超过投资和出口达8 403.38×10⁴ t,是增排的主要贡献者;2002—2007 年间以“高碳”为特征的新一轮工业化,使该期增排占到1997—2007年总增量的86.41%;服务业的贡献率是75.93%,为增排的第一大部门,但2002—2007 年工业超出服务业1 036.40×10⁴ t;重制造业的贡献率是1 030.76%,为增排的重点行业,而能源工业则以-992.81%的贡献率,成为减排的重点行业;各时段各效应在不同产业、工业不同行业发挥的作用大小不同且不够稳定。     

生态补偿理论研究进展

生态补偿是生态经济学领域的一个研究热点,研究者、决策者和实践者都将生态补偿视为应对生态系统退化的有效政策工具。围绕生态补偿的定义、补偿客体、生态补偿主体、补偿标准和方式,学术界进行了大量研究,形成了市场交易、生态经济、税收补贴和社会制度等多种生态补偿理论框架。但是,由于这些理论存在不同程度的缺陷,在实践中难以避免挤出效应、外溢效应、交易费用高等问题,也不利于协调效率、效益和公平之间的关系。构建具有普遍适用性和可操作性的生态补偿理论框架,需要研究如何将生态服务纳入经济学的总供给和总需求分析模型,提出简便易行的生态服务价值综合评估方法,统一生态服务价值与经济领域价值计量的基础,从生态、经济和社会的综合维度研究针对不同生态服务补偿机制的有效尺度。