• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Ecological Economics >Challenges in Attributing Avoided Deforestation to Policies and Actors: Lessons From Provincial Forest Zoning in the Argentine Dry Chaco
【24h】

Challenges in Attributing Avoided Deforestation to Policies and Actors: Lessons From Provincial Forest Zoning in the Argentine Dry Chaco

机译：将避免砍伐森林归因于政策和参与者的挑战：阿根廷干旱地区查科省森林区划的教训

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Rigorous impact assessments test for causal effects of interventions on outcomes of interest. When findings of such assessments become part of political and scholarly controversies, they can be interpreted in unintended ways. The value of the ensuing debate is enhanced by a shared understanding of key concepts, methodological approaches, and evaluative criteria. Here we illustrate the importance of such shared understanding by example of a recent controversy surrounding the estimated impacts of decentralized zoning on deforestation in a major agricultural frontier, the Argentine Dry Chaco. In a recent analysis, we concluded that provincial zoning plans had significantly reduced deforestation in three provinces; critics suggest it had not. In attempting to resolve this debate, we identify six areas in which shared understanding can support more productive interaction. These include: (1) the distinction between impact and other measures of effectiveness, (2) an appreciation of recent advances in methods for causal inference, (3) the distinction between effective and perfect enforcement, (4) the challenge of attributing impacts to mechanisms and actors, (5) transparency in standards used to judge the desirability of observed outcomes, as well as (6) caution in the generalization of findings to other geographies.
机译：严格的影响评估测试干预措施对目标结果的因果关系。当这些评估的结果成为政治和学术争议的一部分时，它们可能会以意想不到的方式进行解释。通过对关键概念，方法论方法和评估标准的共同理解，可以提高随后辩论的价值。在这里，我们以最近争议的例子为例，说明这种共同理解的重要性，该争议围绕一个主要农业边界阿根廷干燥查科地区的分散分区对毁林的估计影响。在最近的分析中，我们得出的结论是，省级分区计划显着减少了三个省的森林砍伐；评论家认为它没有。在试图解决这场辩论时，我们确定了六个领域，在这些领域中，共同的理解可以支持更富有成效的互动。其中包括：（1）影响与其他有效性度量之间的区别；（2）因果推理方法的最新进展；（3）有效与完美执行之间的区别；（4）将影响归因于挑战机制和参与者，（5）用于判断观察到的结果是否可取的标准的透明度，以及（6）在将调查结果推广到其他地区时要谨慎。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Ecological Economics》 |2018年第8期|346-352|共7页
  • 作者

    Christoph Nolte; Beatriz Gobbi; Yann le Polain de Waroux; María Piquer-Rodríguez; Van Butsic; Eric F. Lambin;

  • 作者单位

    Department of Earth & Environment, Boston University;

    Georges Lemaître Centre for Earth and Climate Research, Earth and Life Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain,Division of Geography and Tourism, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, KU Leuven;

    Institute for the Study of International Development & Department of Geography, McGill University;

    Department of Geography, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin,Institute of Regional Ecology, National University Tucuman;

    Department of Environmental Science, Policy & Management, University of California – Berkeley;

    Georges Lemaître Centre for Earth and Climate Research, Earth and Life Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain,School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University,Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号