Subhrendu K. Pattanayak

Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments

The field of conservation policy must adopt state-of-the-art program evaluation methods to determine what works, and when, if we are to stem the global decline of biodiversity and improve the effectiveness of conservation investments.

Show me the money: do payments supply environmental services in developing countries?

Many of the services supplied by nature are externalities. Economic theory suggests that some form of subsidy or contracting between the beneficiaries and the providers could result in an optimal supply of environmental services. Moreover, if the poor own resources that give them a comparative advantage in the supply of environmental services, then payments for environmental services (PES) can improve environmental and poverty outcomes. While the theory is relatively straightforward, the practice is not, particularly in developing countries where institutions are weak. This article reviews the empirical literature on PES additionality by asking, “Do payments deliver environmental services, everything else being equal, or, at least, the land-use changes believed to generate environmental services?” We examine both qualitative case studies and rigorous econometric quasi-experimental analyses. We find that government-coordinated PES have caused modest or no reversal of deforestation. Case studies of smaller-scale, user-financed PES schemes claim more substantial impacts, but few of these studies eliminate rival explanations for the positive effects. We conclude by discussing how the dearth of evidence about PES impacts, and unanswered questions about institutional preconditions and motivational “crowding out,” limit the prospects for using international carbon payments to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation.

Safeguarding human health in the Anthropocene epoch: report of The Rockefeller Foundation-Lancet Commission on planetary health

Earths natural systems represent a growing threat to human health. And yet, global health has mainly improved as these changes have gathered pace. What is the explanation? As a Commission, we are deeply concerned that the explanation is straightforward and sobering: we have been mortgaging the health of future generations to realise economic and development gains in the present. By unsustainably exploiting natures resources, human civilisation has fl ourished but now risks substantial health eff ects from the degradation of natures life support systems in the future. Health eff ects from changes to the environment including climatic change, ocean acidifi cation, land degradation, water scarcity, overexploitation of fi sheries, and biodiversity loss pose serious challenges to the global health gains of the past several decades and are likely to become increasingly dominant during the second half of this century and beyond. These striking trends are driven by highly inequitable, ineffi cient, and unsustainable patterns of resource consumption and technological development, together with population growth. We identify three categories of challenges that have to be addressed to maintain and enhance human health in the face of increasingly harmful environmental trends. Firstly, conceptual and empathy failures (imagination challenges), such as an over-reliance on gross domestic product as a measure of human progress, the failure to account for future health and environmental harms over present day gains, and the disproportionate eff ect of those harms on the poor and those in developing nations. Secondly, knowledge failures (research and information challenges), such as failure to address social and environmental drivers of ill health, a historical scarcity of transdisciplinary research and funding, together with an unwillingness or inability to deal with uncertainty within decision making frameworks. Thirdly, implementation failures (governance challenges), such as how governments and institutions delay recognition and responses to threats, especially when faced with uncertainties, pooled common resources, and time lags between action and eff ect. Although better evidence is needed to underpin appropriate policies than is available at present, this should not be used as an excuse for inaction. Substantial potential exists to link action to reduce environmental damage with improved health outcomes for nations at all levels of economic development. This Commission identifi es opportunities for action by six key constituencies: health professionals, research funders and the academic community, the UN and Bretton Woods bodies, governments, investors and corporate reporting bodies, and civil society organisations. Depreciation of natural capital and natures subsidy should be accounted for so that economy and nature are not falsely separated. Policies should balance social progress, environmental sustainability, and the economy. To support a world population of 9-10 billion people or more, resilient food and agricultural systems are needed to address both undernutrition and overnutrition, reduce waste, diversify diets, and minimise environmental damage. Meeting the need for modern family planning can improve health in the short termeg, from reduced maternal mortality and reduced pressures on the environment and on infrastructure. Planetary health off ers an unprecedented opportunity for advocacy of global and national reforms of taxes and subsidies for many sectors of the economy, including energy, agriculture, water, fi sheries, and health. Regional trade treaties should act to further incorporate the protection of health in the near and long term. Several essential steps need to be taken to transform the economy to support planetary health. These steps include a reduction of waste through the creation of products that are more durable and require less energy and materials to manufacture than those often produced at present; the incentivisation of recycling, reuse, and repair; and the substitution of hazardous materials with safer alternatives. Despite present limitations, the Sustainable Development Goals provide a great opportunity to integrate health and sustainability through the judicious selection of relevant indicators relevant to human wellbeing, the enabling infrastructure for development, and the supporting natural systems, together with the need for strong governance. The landscape, ecosystems, and the biodiversity they contain can be managed to protect natural systems, and indirectly, reduce human disease risk. Intact and restored ecosystems can contribute to resilience (see panel 1 for glossary of terms used in this report), for example, through improved coastal protection (eg, through wave attenuation) and the ability of fl oodplains and greening of river catchments to protect from river fl ooding events by diverting and holding excess water. The growth in urban populations emphasises the importance of policies to improve health and the urban environment, such as through reduced air pollution, increased physical activity, provision of green space, and urban planning to prevent sprawl and decrease the magnitude of urban heat islands. Transdisciplinary research activities and capacity need substantial and urgent expansion. Present research limitations should not delay action. In situations where technology and knowledge can deliver win-win solutions and co-benefi ts, rapid scale-up can be achieved if researchers move ahead and assess the implementation of potential solutions. Recent scientifi c investments towards understanding non-linear state shifts in ecosystems are very important, but in the absence of improved understanding and predictability of such changes, eff orts to improve resilience for human health and adaptation strategies remain a priority. The creation of integrated surveillance systems that collect rigorous health, socioeconomic, and environmental data for defi ned populations over long time periods can provide early detection of emerging disease outbreaks or changes in nutrition and non-communicable disease burden. The improvement of risk communication to policy makers and the public and the support of policy makers to make evidence-informed decisions can be helped by an increased capacity to do systematic reviews and the provision of rigorous policy briefs. Health professionals have an essential role in the achievement of planetary health: working across sectors to integrate policies that advance health and environmental sustainability, tackling health inequities, reducing the environmental impacts of health systems, and increasing the resilience of health systems and populations to environmental change. Humanity can be stewarded successfully through the 21st century by addressing the unacceptable inequities in health and wealth within the environmental limits of the Earth, but this will require the generation of new knowledge, implementation of wise policies, decisive action, and inspirational leadership.

Taking stock of agroforestry adoption studies

In light of the large number of empirical studies of agroforestry adoption published during the last decade, we believe it is time to take stock and identify general determinants of agroforestry adoption. In reviewing 120 articles on adoption of agricultural and forestry technology by small holders, we find five categories of factors that explain technology adoption within an economic framework: preferences, resource endowments, market incentives, biophysical factors, and risk and uncertainty. By selecting only empirical analyses that focus on agroforestry and related investments, we narrow our list down to 32 studies primarily from tropical areas. We apply vote-counting based meta-analysis to these studies and evaluate the inclusion and significance of the five adoption factors. Our analysis shows that preferences and resource endowments are the factors most often included in studies. However, adoption behavior is most likely to be significantly influenced by risk, biophysical, and resource factors. In our conclusion, we discuss specific recommendations for the next generation of adoption studies and meta-analyses that include considering a fuller menu of variables, reporting key statistics and marginal probabilities, and conducting weighted meta-regressions.

Do Tropical Forests Provide Natural Insurance? The Microeconomics of Non-Timber Forest Product Collection in the Brazilian Amazon

Tropical forests may contribute to the well-being of local people by providing a form of “natural insurance.” We draw on microeconomic theory to conceptualize a model relating agricultural risks to collection of non-timber forest products. Forest collection trips are positively correlated with both agricultural shocks and expected agricultural risks in an event-count model of survey data from the Brazilian Amazon. This suggests that households rely on forests to mitigate agricultural risk. Forest product collection may be less important to households with other consumption-smoothing options, but its importance is not restricted to the poorest households. (JEL Q23)

The Lancet CommissionsSafeguarding human health in the Anthropocene epoch: report of The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on planetary health

Earths natural systems represent a growing threat to human health. And yet, global health has mainly improved as these changes have gathered pace. What is the explanation? As a Commission, we are deeply concerned that the explanation is straightforward and sobering: we have been mortgaging the health of future generations to realise economic and development gains in the present. By unsustainably exploiting natures resources, human civilisation has fl ourished but now risks substantial health eff ects from the degradation of natures life support systems in the future. Health eff ects from changes to the environment including climatic change, ocean acidifi cation, land degradation, water scarcity, overexploitation of fi sheries, and biodiversity loss pose serious challenges to the global health gains of the past several decades and are likely to become increasingly dominant during the second half of this century and beyond. These striking trends are driven by highly inequitable, ineffi cient, and unsustainable patterns of resource consumption and technological development, together with population growth. We identify three categories of challenges that have to be addressed to maintain and enhance human health in the face of increasingly harmful environmental trends. Firstly, conceptual and empathy failures (imagination challenges), such as an over-reliance on gross domestic product as a measure of human progress, the failure to account for future health and environmental harms over present day gains, and the disproportionate eff ect of those harms on the poor and those in developing nations. Secondly, knowledge failures (research and information challenges), such as failure to address social and environmental drivers of ill health, a historical scarcity of transdisciplinary research and funding, together with an unwillingness or inability to deal with uncertainty within decision making frameworks. Thirdly, implementation failures (governance challenges), such as how governments and institutions delay recognition and responses to threats, especially when faced with uncertainties, pooled common resources, and time lags between action and eff ect. Although better evidence is needed to underpin appropriate policies than is available at present, this should not be used as an excuse for inaction. Substantial potential exists to link action to reduce environmental damage with improved health outcomes for nations at all levels of economic development. This Commission identifi es opportunities for action by six key constituencies: health professionals, research funders and the academic community, the UN and Bretton Woods bodies, governments, investors and corporate reporting bodies, and civil society organisations. Depreciation of natural capital and natures subsidy should be accounted for so that economy and nature are not falsely separated. Policies should balance social progress, environmental sustainability, and the economy. To support a world population of 9-10 billion people or more, resilient food and agricultural systems are needed to address both undernutrition and overnutrition, reduce waste, diversify diets, and minimise environmental damage. Meeting the need for modern family planning can improve health in the short termeg, from reduced maternal mortality and reduced pressures on the environment and on infrastructure. Planetary health off ers an unprecedented opportunity for advocacy of global and national reforms of taxes and subsidies for many sectors of the economy, including energy, agriculture, water, fi sheries, and health. Regional trade treaties should act to further incorporate the protection of health in the near and long term. Several essential steps need to be taken to transform the economy to support planetary health. These steps include a reduction of waste through the creation of products that are more durable and require less energy and materials to manufacture than those often produced at present; the incentivisation of recycling, reuse, and repair; and the substitution of hazardous materials with safer alternatives. Despite present limitations, the Sustainable Development Goals provide a great opportunity to integrate health and sustainability through the judicious selection of relevant indicators relevant to human wellbeing, the enabling infrastructure for development, and the supporting natural systems, together with the need for strong governance. The landscape, ecosystems, and the biodiversity they contain can be managed to protect natural systems, and indirectly, reduce human disease risk. Intact and restored ecosystems can contribute to resilience (see panel 1 for glossary of terms used in this report), for example, through improved coastal protection (eg, through wave attenuation) and the ability of fl oodplains and greening of river catchments to protect from river fl ooding events by diverting and holding excess water. The growth in urban populations emphasises the importance of policies to improve health and the urban environment, such as through reduced air pollution, increased physical activity, provision of green space, and urban planning to prevent sprawl and decrease the magnitude of urban heat islands. Transdisciplinary research activities and capacity need substantial and urgent expansion. Present research limitations should not delay action. In situations where technology and knowledge can deliver win-win solutions and co-benefi ts, rapid scale-up can be achieved if researchers move ahead and assess the implementation of potential solutions. Recent scientifi c investments towards understanding non-linear state shifts in ecosystems are very important, but in the absence of improved understanding and predictability of such changes, eff orts to improve resilience for human health and adaptation strategies remain a priority. The creation of integrated surveillance systems that collect rigorous health, socioeconomic, and environmental data for defi ned populations over long time periods can provide early detection of emerging disease outbreaks or changes in nutrition and non-communicable disease burden. The improvement of risk communication to policy makers and the public and the support of policy makers to make evidence-informed decisions can be helped by an increased capacity to do systematic reviews and the provision of rigorous policy briefs. Health professionals have an essential role in the achievement of planetary health: working across sectors to integrate policies that advance health and environmental sustainability, tackling health inequities, reducing the environmental impacts of health systems, and increasing the resilience of health systems and populations to environmental change. Humanity can be stewarded successfully through the 21st century by addressing the unacceptable inequities in health and wealth within the environmental limits of the Earth, but this will require the generation of new knowledge, implementation of wise policies, decisive action, and inspirational leadership.

Who adopts improved fuels and cookstoves? A systematic review.

Background: The global focus on improved cookstoves (ICSs) and clean fuels has increased because of their potential for delivering triple dividends: household health, local environmental quality, and regional climate benefits. However, ICS and clean fuel dissemination programs have met with low rates of adoption. Objectives: We reviewed empirical studies on ICSs and fuel choice to describe the literature, examine determinants of fuel and stove choice, and identify knowledge gaps. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature on the adoption of ICSs or cleaner fuels by households in developing countries. Results are synthesized through a simple vote-counting meta-analysis. Results: We identified 32 research studies that reported 146 separate regression analyses of ICS adoption (11 analyses) or fuel choice (135 analyses) from Asia (60%), Africa (27%), and Latin America (19%). Most studies apply multivariate regression methods to consider 7–13 determinants of choice. Income, education, and urban location were positively associated with adoption in most but not all studies. However, the influence of fuel availability and prices, household size and composition, and sex is unclear. Potentially important drivers such as credit, supply-chain strengthening, and social marketing have been ignored. Conclusions: Adoption studies of ICSs or clean energy are scarce, scattered, and of differential quality, even though global distribution programs are quickly expanding. Future research should examine an expanded set of contextual variables to improve implementation of stove programs that can realize the “win-win-win” of health, local environmental quality, and climate associated with these technologies.

Econometric studies of non-industrial private forest management: a review and synthesis

Abstract Forest policies and management increasingly rely on economic models to explain behaviors of landowners and to project forest outputs, inventories and land use. However, it is unclear whether the existing econometric models offer general conclusions concerning non-industrial private forest (NIPF) management or whether the existing results are case-specific. In this paper, we systematically review the empirical economics literature on NIPF timber harvesting, reforestation, and timber stand improvements (TSI). We confirm four primary categories of management determinants: market drivers, policy variables, owner characteristics and plot/resource conditions. We rely on the most basic form of meta-analysis, vote counting, to combine information from many studies to produce more general knowledge concerning the key determinants of harvesting, reforestation and TSI within these four categories. Despite substantial differences in the variables used across models, the use of meta-analysis enables the systematic identification of the factors that are most important in explaining NIPF management. We conclude with some methodological and policy suggestions.

Is Meta-Analysis a Noah's Ark for Non-Market Valuation?

This paper describes meta-analytical methods as they have been appliedto non-market valuation research. These studies have been used to reviewand synthesize literature and, more recently, in benefit transfer. Thissecond use imposes a higher standard on the consistency in economicconcepts being summarized and in the resources included in ameta-analysis. To meet this need, the paper proposes and illustrates astructural framework using a generalized method of moments estimator toestimate the parameters of a preference function with the benefitsestimates usually encountered in meta-analytic summaries.

Coping with unreliable public water supplies: Averting expenditures by households in Kathmandu, Nepal

This paper investigates two complementary pieces of data on households’ demand forimproved water services, coping costs and willingness to pay (WTP), from a survey of1500 randomly sampled households in Kathmandu, Nepal. We evaluate how coping costsand WTP vary across types of water users and income. We find that households inKathmandu Valley engage in five main types of coping behaviors: collecting, pumping,treating, storing, and purchasing. These activities impose coping costs on an averagehousehold of as much as 3 U.S. dollars per month or about 1% of current incomes,representing hidden but real costs of poor infrastructure service. We find that thesecoping costs are almost twice as much as the current monthly bills paid to the water utilitybut are significantly lower than estimates of WTP for improved services. We findthat coping costs are statistically correlated with WTP and several householdcharacteristics.