From brianczech at juno.com Thu May 22 12:54:04 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 19:54:04 GMT Subject: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Message-ID: <20080522.155404.22136.0@webmail20.dca.untd.com> Alan, The WGEESS or other SCB units could decide to formally engage the process, as you suggest. But there is good reason not to, at this point in time, and good reason to let the organic support emanate through other venues (such as this one) first. Our experience is that a few people in pivotal positions on the Policy Committee and BOG would treat the initiative as if it were an "ideological statement" of "a few people." They clearly have to get some idea of the prominence of this issue in SCB prior to giving it due diligence. Also, when an initiative is defeated, a few people on the BOG treat the subject as a done deal forever. I can?t speak for all the units that support an SCB position on economic growth, but I think it behooves all of us to delay a formal proposal until a little more outreach is conducted. So please do not discourage the organic feedback of our international membership. If this particular venue is not to your liking, then perhaps you can provide alternative recommendations for outreach, such as other SCB listserves and communication networks. Brian Czech, Economics Representative Social Science Working Group -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: Hello All - This is not the appropriate venue to ask SCB to consider any kind of policy statement. If you wish to put something in front of the SCB Policy Committee or the Board of Governors, please follow the established protocols published on the SCB Policy website: http://www.conbio.org/activities/policy/ - you will find the guideline in the middle of the page in the blue box. Please end this discussion here. AT *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001- US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 AThornhill at ConBio.org http://www.conbio.org/ ***Note then new address and phone number above -- effective 28 April 2008 -----Original Message----- From: Eduardo Silva [mailto:eduardosilvar at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:06 PM To: McArd Mlotha Cc: Gerardo Ceballos Gonzalez; Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; brianczech at juno.com; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; drichards at ecoanalysts.com; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; jrobinson at wcs.org; Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; djohns at viclink.com; cmorley at doc.govt.nz; fffh at uaf.edu; a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; jbrennerg at gmail.com; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; athornhill at conbio.org; luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; Dpadilla at vt.edu; leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; paul.beier at nau.edu; cpeet at mbayaq.org; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; Patricia Zaradic; JAM at iucn.org; John Fitzgerald; mashauri_s at yahoo.com; lampnico at msu.edu Subject: Re: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Dear all, I am from Chile, and I agree with Brian that a position regarding economic growth is urgent. There is a lot of discussion and consensus regarding human population growth, but few in terms of per-capita levels of consumption. Unfortunately both problems are really important and are the ultimate cause of most of the traditional conservation problems that in a daily basis we try to address (Habitat fragmentation, invasions, overexploitation, etc.). The current economic system stimulates consumption without limits, which is reflected in the goals of economic growth especially in industrialized countries. My concern is that if we do not have an official opinion regarding this issue, then as SCB we are denying one of the major if not the major problem in conservation. Best, Eduardo A. Silva PhD Student University of Florida 2008/5/22, McArd Mlotha : > Dear Gerardo, > > I come from a developing country which depends on natural resources for > its economic development. This gives me a better understanding of the > relationship between conservation of biodiversity and economic growth. > There are many professional conservation organizations that have > considered economic growth as an important chapter and some have already > adopted the position on economic growth. > > The issue of economic growth is extremely important for sustainable > development and conservation of natural resources not only in developing > countries but also in highly industrialized nations. Sustainable > ecological conservation can not be successful if the active players > involved or linked to, are ignored. > > Therefore, I would like to encourage the SCB to adopt a position on > economic growth and seek clarification if something is not clear. > > Joseph > > SCB-WGEESS Africa Chair > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > McArd Joseph Mlotha > Program Manager > Center for Tropical Ecology & Conservation (CTEC) > Antioch University New England > 40 Avon Street > Keene, NH 03431 > Tel: 603 357 3122 Ext 2348 Cell: 508 373 3819 > Fax: 603 357-0718 Attention ES Dept. > Web page: http://www.centerfortropicalecology.org/students/mlotha.cfm > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > "Gerardo Ceballos Gonzalez" on > Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 12:46 AM -0500 wrote: >>Hi All, >> >>We have discussed in detail this issue in past years. The decision has >>beehn not to take >>any position for many reasons, One of the is that is basically an >>ideologitcal position >>of a few people. As presented this time is almost trivial. ANA section >>doeas not support >>adopting this position. >> >>Kind regards >> >>Gerardo >> >>Dr. Gerardo Ceballos >>Instituto de Ecologia, UNAM >>Apdo Postal 70-275 >>Mexico D.F. 04510 >>Mexico >>Tel y fax (52) 55-56229004 >>-- >>Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org) >> >> >>---------- Original Message ----------- >>From: "Patricia Zaradic" >>To: Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org, luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it, >>paul.beier at nau.edau, >>JAM at iucn.org, thomas.sisk at nau.edu, wildcatalyst at gmail.com, >>rnoss at mail.ucf.hedu, >>djohns at viclink.com, Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com, athornhill at conbio.org, >>deborah.jensen at zoo.org, cmorley at doc.govt.nz, mashauri_s at yahoo.com, >>Jfitzgerald at conbio.org, gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx, >>jrobinson at wcs.obrg, >>a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk, g.mace at imperial.ac.uk, mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu, >>brianczech at juno.com, Eess at list.conbio.org, larson.grapids at gmail.com, >>Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de, Chuckw at coastrange.org, >>Pzaradic at videophilia.orge, >>McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu, alugo at fs.fed.us, S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk, >>Dpadillla at vt.edu, >>jbrennerg at gmail.com, fffh at uaf.edu, mgrover at vt.edu, >>leandro_castello at hotmaifl.com, >>cpeet at mbayaq.org, jaukema at alumni.brown.edu, drichards at ecoanalysts.com, >>tippydog90 at hotmail.com, lampnico at msu.edu, tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug, "Oliver >>tPergams" >> >>Sent: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:55:40 -0400 >>Subject: Support for SCB Position on economic growth >> >>> Please accept my apologies for any duplicate emails and thank you for >>yoPur >>> attention. >>> >>> I'm writing to request that SCB seriously consider adopting a position >>o n >>> economic growth. >>> >>> An increasing number of professional organizations have taken a stand on >>> economic growth, addressing the consequences for climate change and >>costos in >>> biodiversity conservation. As the leading international professional >>> conservation organization, a statement from SCB supporting a sustainable >>> steady state economy would be a powerful tool in bringing greater global >>> awareness to the biodiversity costs of unfettered economic growth. >>> >>> More information on supporting professional organizations and basic >>> information on a steady state economy can be found at: >>> >>> http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html >>> >>> Thank you for your time and consideration, >>> Patty Zaradic >>> >>> Patricia Zaradic, PhD >>> Red Rock Institute >>> 116 Petrie Avenue >>> Bryn Mawr, PA 19010 >>> 610-526-9544 >>> >>> www.redrockinstitute.org >>> >>> www.videophilia.org >>------- End of Original Message ------- >> > > > > > -- Eduardo A. Silva, M?dico Veterinario Conservaci?n y Manejo de Vida Silvestre -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080522/967bc28b/attachment-0001.html From AlanDThornhill at conbio.org Thu May 22 13:05:18 2008 From: AlanDThornhill at conbio.org (Alan D Thornhill) Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 13:05:18 -0700 Subject: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth In-Reply-To: <20080522.155404.22136.0@webmail20.dca.untd.com> References: <20080522.155404.22136.0@webmail20.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: <569984C3FC629E4DB22AFA468621699A09973984B6@EXVMBX015-3.exch015.msoutlookonline.net> Brian - Your "initiative" has never been put in front of the policy committee. It was considered once in 2003 by the Board who deferred it to the North American Section. Since then, we have a Policy Director and a new Policy Committee. If you are going to only provide partial information, you mislead anyone who doesn't know the full story. If you wish to put something in front of the SCB Policy Committee or the Board of Governors, please follow the established protocols published on the SCB Policy website: http://www.conbio.org/activities/policy/ - you will find the guideline in the middle of the page in the blue box. We have procedures in place for a reason. I ask again, please end this discussion thread here. AT *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001- US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 AThornhill at ConBio.org http://www.conbio.org/ ***Note then new address and phone number above -- effective 28 April 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com [mailto:brianczech at juno.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 3:54 PM To: Alan D Thornhill Cc: eduardosilvar at gmail.com; McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu; gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx; Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; brianczech at juno.com; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; drichards at ecoanalysts.com; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; jrobinson at wcs.org; Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; djohns at viclink.com; cmorley at doc.govt.nz; fffh at uaf.edu; a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; jbrennerg at gmail.com; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; athornhill at conbio.org; luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; Dpadilla at vt.edu; leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; paul.beier at nau.edu; cpeet at mbayaq.org; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; patzaradic at gmail.com; JAM at iucn.org; John Fitzgerald; mashauri_s at yahoo.com; lampnico at msu.edu Subject: RE: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Alan, The WGEESS or other SCB units could decide to formally engage the process, as you suggest. But there is good reason not to, at this point in time, and good reason to let the organic support emanate through other venues (such as this one) first. Our experience is that a few people in pivotal positions on the Policy Committee and BOG would treat the initiative as if it were an "ideological statement" of "a few people." They clearly have to get some idea of the prominence of this issue in SCB prior to giving it due diligence. Also, when an initiative is defeated, a few people on the BOG treat the subject as a done deal forever. I can't speak for all the units that support an SCB position on economic growth, but I think it behooves all of us to delay a formal proposal until a little more outreach is conducted. So please do not discourage the organic feedback of our international membership. If this particular venue is not to your liking, then perhaps you can provide alternative recommendations for outreach, such as other SCB listserves and communication networks. Brian Czech, Economics Representative Social Science Working Group -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: Hello All - This is not the appropriate venue to ask SCB to consider any kind of policy statement. If you wish to put something in front of the SCB Policy Committee or the Board of Governors, please follow the established protocols published on the SCB Policy website: http://www.conbio.org/activities/policy/ - you will find the guideline in the middle of the page in the blue box. Please end this discussion here. AT *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001- US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 AThornhill at ConBio.org http://www.conbio.org/ ***Note then new address and phone number above -- effective 28 April 2008 -----Original Message----- From: Eduardo Silva [mailto:eduardosilvar at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:06 PM To: McArd Mlotha Cc: Gerardo Ceballos Gonzalez; Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; brianczech at juno.com; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; drichards at ecoanalysts.com; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; jrobinson at wcs.org; Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; djohns at viclink.com; cmorley at doc.govt.nz; fffh at uaf.edu; a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; jbrennerg at gmail.com; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; athornhill at conbio.org; luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; Dpadilla at vt.edu; leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; paul.beier at nau.edu; cpeet at mbayaq.org; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; Patricia Zaradic; JAM at iucn.org; John Fitzgerald; mashauri_s at yahoo.com; lampnico at msu.edu Subject: Re: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Dear all, I am from Chile, and I agree with Brian that a position regarding economic growth is urgent. There is a lot of discussion and consensus regarding human population growth, but few in terms of per-capita levels of consumption. Unfortunately both problems are really important and are the ultimate cause of most of the traditional conservation problems that in a daily basis we try to address (Habitat fragmentation, invasions, overexploitation, etc.). The current economic system stimulates consumption without limits, which is reflected in the goals of economic growth especially in industrialized countries. My concern is that if we do not have an official opinion regarding this issue, then as SCB we are denying one of the major if not the major problem in conservation. Best, Eduardo A. Silva PhD Student University of Florida 2008/5/22, McArd Mlotha : > Dear Gerardo, > > I come from a developing country which depends on natural resources for > its economic development. This gives me a better understanding of the > relationship between conservation of biodiversity and economic growth. > There are many professional conservation organizations that have > considered economic growth as an important chapter and some have already > adopted the position on economic growth. > > The issue of economic growth is extremely important for sustainable > development and conservation of natural resources not only in developing > countries but also in highly industrialized nations. Sustainable > ecological conservation can not be successful if the active players > involved or linked to, are ignored. > > Therefore, I would like to encourage the SCB to adopt a position on > economic growth and seek clarification if something is not clear. > > Joseph > > SCB-WGEESS Africa Chair > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > McArd Joseph Mlotha > Program Manager > Center for Tropical Ecology & Conservation (CTEC) > Antioch University New England > 40 Avon Street > Keene, NH 03431 > Tel: 603 357 3122 Ext 2348 Cell: 508 373 3819 > Fax: 603 357-0718 Attention ES Dept. > Web page: http://www.centerfortropicalecology.org/students/mlotha.cfm > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > "Gerardo Ceballos Gonzalez" on > Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 12:46 AM -0500 wrote: >>Hi All, >> >>We have discussed in detail this issue in past years. The decision has >>beehn not to take >>any position for many reasons, One of the is that is basically an >>ideologitcal position >>of a few people. As presented this time is almost trivial. ANA section >>doeas not support >>adopting this position. >> >>Kind regards >> >>Gerardo >> >>Dr. Gerardo Ceballos >>Instituto de Ecologia, UNAM >>Apdo Postal 70-275 >>Mexico D.F. 04510 >>Mexico >>Tel y fax (52) 55-56229004 >>-- >>Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org) >> >> >>---------- Original Message ----------- >>From: "Patricia Zaradic" >>To: Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org, luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it, >>paul.beier at nau.edau, >>JAM at iucn.org, thomas.sisk at nau.edu, wildcatalyst at gmail.com, >>rnoss at mail.ucf.hedu, >>djohns at viclink.com, Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com, athornhill at conbio.org, >>deborah.jensen at zoo.org, cmorley at doc.govt.nz, mashauri_s at yahoo.com, >>Jfitzgerald at conbio.org, gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx, >>jrobinson at wcs.obrg, >>a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk, g.mace at imperial.ac.uk, mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu, >>brianczech at juno.com, Eess at list.conbio.org, larson.grapids at gmail.com, >>Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de, Chuckw at coastrange.org, >>Pzaradic at videophilia.orge, >>McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu, alugo at fs.fed.us, S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk, >>Dpadillla at vt.edu, >>jbrennerg at gmail.com, fffh at uaf.edu, mgrover at vt.edu, >>leandro_castello at hotmaifl.com, >>cpeet at mbayaq.org, jaukema at alumni.brown.edu, drichards at ecoanalysts.com, >>tippydog90 at hotmail.com, lampnico at msu.edu, tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug, "Oliver >>tPergams" >> >>Sent: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:55:40 -0400 >>Subject: Support for SCB Position on economic growth >> >>> Please accept my apologies for any duplicate emails and thank you for >>yoPur >>> attention. >>> >>> I'm writing to request that SCB seriously consider adopting a position >>o n >>> economic growth. >>> >>> An increasing number of professional organizations have taken a stand on >>> economic growth, addressing the consequences for climate change and >>costos in >>> biodiversity conservation. As the leading international professional >>> conservation organization, a statement from SCB supporting a sustainable >>> steady state economy would be a powerful tool in bringing greater global >>> awareness to the biodiversity costs of unfettered economic growth. >>> >>> More information on supporting professional organizations and basic >>> information on a steady state economy can be found at: >>> >>> http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html >>> >>> Thank you for your time and consideration, >>> Patty Zaradic >>> >>> Patricia Zaradic, PhD >>> Red Rock Institute >>> 116 Petrie Avenue >>> Bryn Mawr, PA 19010 >>> 610-526-9544 >>> >>> www.redrockinstitute.org >>> >>> www.videophilia.org >>------- End of Original Message ------- >> > > > > > -- Eduardo A. Silva, M?dico Veterinario Conservaci?n y Manejo de Vida Silvestre -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080522/daee0cf8/attachment-0001.htm From nkdawe at shaw.ca Thu May 22 17:41:55 2008 From: nkdawe at shaw.ca (Neil K Dawe) Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 16:41:55 -0800 Subject: [EESS] Real-world economics review / post-autistic economics review - Issue no. 46] Message-ID: <483612D3.205@shaw.ca> EESS members may be interested in the article on climate change, by Goodwin. sanity, humanity and science *real-world **economics review * Formerly the /post-autistic economics review/ Issue no. *46*, 20 May 2008 */Subscribers: *9,838* from over 150 countries /* ISSN 1755-9472 *Subscriptions are free. To subscribe go **here * Back issues: 45 , 44 , 43 ,* *42 , 41 , 40 , _39 _, 38- 1 www.paecon.net *You can download the whole issue as a pdf document by clicking **_here_ *** *or download articles individually by clicking on their pdf link. * ** ** *In this issue: * */The Financial Crisis /* *The housing bubble and the financial crisis * **Dean Baker ............................... _download pdf _................................. 73 * Global finance in crisis *Jacques Sapir ....................... .. _download pdf _.................................. 82 ** ** *End-of-the-world trade* **Donald MacKenzie.................... **download pdf ............ ....................102 *An overview of climate change* Neva Goodwin .................................... _download pdf _.................................110 *The unhappy thing about happiness economics* Helen Johns and Paul Ormerod ....... download pdf .................................139 *Economics, conflict and war* Fanny Coulomb and J. Paul Dunne .. download pdf .................................147 ** _Opinion _ *Milton Friedman and Trofim Lysenko *David A. Bainbridge ................................. download pdf .................................158 *The IMF's historic transition: Is less better? *Mark Weisbrot ........................................ download pdf .................................160 *The great unravelling *Jayati Ghosh .......................................... download pdf .................................162 Submissions, etc. .........................................................................................164 __ *//* *New petition: read it and sign it * *New books by recent contributors to this journal* * */The //United States //since 1980 /Dean Baker ................... amazon.com ................. amazon.co.uk /Le nouveau XXIe si?cle : Du si?cle ? am?ricain ? au retour des nations / Jacques Sapir ............... amazon.fr ...................... amazon.ca /Why Most Things Fail: And How to Avoid It /// Paul Ormerod ?............. amazon.com ????? amazon.co.uk /Transnational Corporations and International Production: Concepts, Theories and Effects /// Grazia Ietto-Gillies ........... amazon.com ????? amazon.co.uk /The //Predator ////State //: //How Conservatives Abandoned the Free Market and Why Liberals Should Too / James K. Galbraith ............? amazon.com ................ amazon.co.uk /Sex and Philosophy /Edward Fullbrook ??.... amazon.com ????? amazon.co.uk /Real World Economics /51 contributors to this journal .......... amazon.com .............. amazon.co.uk * To subscribe for free to this review go _here _. To subscribe for free to the monthly /Pluralist Economics Review/ go **_here ___ **. * // -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080522/d49f9457/attachment.htm From mwangi.githiru at ua.ac.be Thu May 22 21:52:50 2008 From: mwangi.githiru at ua.ac.be (Githiru Mwangi) Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 06:52:50 +0200 Subject: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth References: <20080522.155404.22136.0@webmail20.dca.untd.com> <569984C3FC629E4DB22AFA468621699A09973984B6@EXVMBX015-3.exch015.msoutlookonline.net> Message-ID: Dear all I rarely contribute here, but I enjoy the communication and hence could not resist this time... I think I am in favour of the SCB taking a stand on economic growth. Everything starts from an idea that has to be nurtured into something of a policy - so, I dont think there is any real apology to make over "ideological statements", per se... It is clear that economic growth is an overwhelming 'problem' for conservationists. I always feel like we prescribe to others something that we are not really prepared to do ourselves. If we can take such a stand, and live by it, then I believe it will be a first small step towards overhauling the forces starked against nature conservation. Lastly, can - should - someone really ban/terminate a idea-sharing forum? I hope this is not what Alan is attempting to do. We ought not stop talking about it; we can stop 'accusing' the BOG for inaction, but should not also bring our "ideological statement" to the Policy level before we are clear of the stand and its ramifications. This can only be resolved in the kind of brainstorming going on on this forum. I think I agree with Brian that this forum offers an opportunity someone can share "ideological statements" for scrutiny from like-minded persons before bringing it 'out' to the wider audience, the BOG etc. Thanks Mwangi ________________________________ From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of Alan D Thornhill Sent: Thu 5/22/2008 10:05 PM To: brianczech at juno.com Cc: Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu; John Fitzgerald; djohns at viclink.com; jrobinson at wcs.org; Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; cpeet at mbayaq.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; cmorley at doc.govt.nz; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; jbrennerg at gmail.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; mashauri_s at yahoo.com; athornhill at conbio.org; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; Dpadilla at vt.edu; leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; drichards at ecoanalysts.com; paul.beier at nau.edu; fffh at uaf.edu; patzaradic at gmail.com; JAM at iucn.org; gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx; lampnico at msu.edu Subject: Re: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Brian - Your "initiative" has never been put in front of the policy committee. It was considered once in 2003 by the Board who deferred it to the North American Section. Since then, we have a Policy Director and a new Policy Committee. If you are going to only provide partial information, you mislead anyone who doesn't know the full story. If you wish to put something in front of the SCB Policy Committee or the Board of Governors, please follow the established protocols published on the SCB Policy website: http://www.conbio.org/activities/policy/ - you will find the guideline in the middle of the page in the blue box. We have procedures in place for a reason. I ask again, please end this discussion thread here. AT *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001- US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 AThornhill at ConBio.org http://www.conbio.org/ ***Note then new address and phone number above -- effective 28 April 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com [mailto:brianczech at juno.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 3:54 PM To: Alan D Thornhill Cc: eduardosilvar at gmail.com; McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu; gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx; Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; brianczech at juno.com; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; drichards at ecoanalysts.com; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; jrobinson at wcs.org; Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; djohns at viclink.com; cmorley at doc.govt.nz; fffh at uaf.edu; a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; jbrennerg at gmail.com; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; athornhill at conbio.org; luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; Dpadilla at vt.edu; leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; paul.beier at nau.edu; cpeet at mbayaq.org; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; patzaradic at gmail.com; JAM at iucn.org; John Fitzgerald; mashauri_s at yahoo.com; lampnico at msu.edu Subject: RE: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Alan, The WGEESS or other SCB units could decide to formally engage the process, as you suggest. But there is good reason not to, at this point in time, and good reason to let the organic support emanate through other venues (such as this one) first. Our experience is that a few people in pivotal positions on the Policy Committee and BOG would treat the initiative as if it were an "ideological statement" of "a few people." They clearly have to get some idea of the prominence of this issue in SCB prior to giving it due diligence. Also, when an initiative is defeated, a few people on the BOG treat the subject as a done deal forever. I can't speak for all the units that support an SCB position on economic growth, but I think it behooves all of us to delay a formal proposal until a little more outreach is conducted. So please do not discourage the organic feedback of our international membership. If this particular venue is not to your liking, then perhaps you can provide alternative recommendations for outreach, such as other SCB listserves and communication networks. Brian Czech, Economics Representative Social Science Working Group -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: Hello All - This is not the appropriate venue to ask SCB to consider any kind of policy statement. If you wish to put something in front of the SCB Policy Committee or the Board of Governors, please follow the established protocols published on the SCB Policy website: http://www.conbio.org/activities/policy/ - you will find the guideline in the middle of the page in the blue box. Please end this discussion here. AT *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001- US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 AThornhill at ConBio.org http://www.conbio.org/ ***Note then new address and phone number above -- effective 28 April 2008 -----Original Message----- From: Eduardo Silva [mailto:eduardosilvar at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:06 PM To: McArd Mlotha Cc: Gerardo Ceballos Gonzalez; Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; brianczech at juno.com; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; drichards at ecoanalysts.com; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; jrobinson at wcs.org; Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; djohns at viclink.com; cmorley at doc.govt.nz; fffh at uaf.edu; a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; jbrennerg at gmail.com; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; athornhill at conbio.org; luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; Dpadilla at vt.edu; leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; paul.beier at nau.edu; cpeet at mbayaq.org; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; Patricia Zaradic; JAM at iucn.org; John Fitzgerald; mashauri_s at yahoo.com; lampnico at msu.edu Subject: Re: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Dear all, I am from Chile, and I agree with Brian that a position regarding economic growth is urgent. There is a lot of discussion and consensus regarding human population growth, but few in terms of per-capita levels of consumption. Unfortunately both problems are really important and are the ultimate cause of most of the traditional conservation problems that in a daily basis we try to address (Habitat fragmentation, invasions, overexploitation, etc.). The current economic system stimulates consumption without limits, which is reflected in the goals of economic growth especially in industrialized countries. My concern is that if we do not have an official opinion regarding this issue, then as SCB we are denying one of the major if not the major problem in conservation. Best, Eduardo A. Silva PhD Student University of Florida 2008/5/22, McArd Mlotha : > Dear Gerardo, > > I come from a developing country which depends on natural resources for > its economic development. This gives me a better understanding of the > relationship between conservation of biodiversity and economic growth. > There are many professional conservation organizations that have > considered economic growth as an important chapter and some have already > adopted the position on economic growth. > > The issue of economic growth is extremely important for sustainable > development and conservation of natural resources not only in developing > countries but also in highly industrialized nations. Sustainable > ecological conservation can not be successful if the active players > involved or linked to, are ignored. > > Therefore, I would like to encourage the SCB to adopt a position on > economic growth and seek clarification if something is not clear. > > Joseph > > SCB-WGEESS Africa Chair > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > McArd Joseph Mlotha > Program Manager > Center for Tropical Ecology & Conservation (CTEC) > Antioch University New England > 40 Avon Street > Keene, NH 03431 > Tel: 603 357 3122 Ext 2348 Cell: 508 373 3819 > Fax: 603 357-0718 Attention ES Dept. > Web page: http://www.centerfortropicalecology.org/students/mlotha.cfm > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > "Gerardo Ceballos Gonzalez" on > Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 12:46 AM -0500 wrote: >>Hi All, >> >>We have discussed in detail this issue in past years. The decision has >>beehn not to take >>any position for many reasons, One of the is that is basically an >>ideologitcal position >>of a few people. As presented this time is almost trivial. ANA section >>doeas not support >>adopting this position. >> >>Kind regards >> >>Gerardo >> >>Dr. Gerardo Ceballos >>Instituto de Ecologia, UNAM >>Apdo Postal 70-275 >>Mexico D.F. 04510 >>Mexico >>Tel y fax (52) 55-56229004 >>-- >>Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org) >> >> >>---------- Original Message ----------- >>From: "Patricia Zaradic" >>To: Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org, luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it, >>paul.beier at nau.edau, >>JAM at iucn.org, thomas.sisk at nau.edu, wildcatalyst at gmail.com, >>rnoss at mail.ucf.hedu, >>djohns at viclink.com, Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com, athornhill at conbio.org, >>deborah.jensen at zoo.org, cmorley at doc.govt.nz, mashauri_s at yahoo.com, >>Jfitzgerald at conbio.org, gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx, >>jrobinson at wcs.obrg, >>a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk, g.mace at imperial.ac.uk, mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu, >>brianczech at juno.com, Eess at list.conbio.org, larson.grapids at gmail.com, >>Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de, Chuckw at coastrange.org, >>Pzaradic at videophilia.orge, >>McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu, alugo at fs.fed.us, S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk, >>Dpadillla at vt.edu, >>jbrennerg at gmail.com, fffh at uaf.edu, mgrover at vt.edu, >>leandro_castello at hotmaifl.com, >>cpeet at mbayaq.org, jaukema at alumni.brown.edu, drichards at ecoanalysts.com, >>tippydog90 at hotmail.com, lampnico at msu.edu, tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug, "Oliver >>tPergams" >> >>Sent: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:55:40 -0400 >>Subject: Support for SCB Position on economic growth >> >>> Please accept my apologies for any duplicate emails and thank you for >>yoPur >>> attention. >>> >>> I'm writing to request that SCB seriously consider adopting a position >>o n >>> economic growth. >>> >>> An increasing number of professional organizations have taken a stand on >>> economic growth, addressing the consequences for climate change and >>costos in >>> biodiversity conservation. As the leading international professional >>> conservation organization, a statement from SCB supporting a sustainable >>> steady state economy would be a powerful tool in bringing greater global >>> awareness to the biodiversity costs of unfettered economic growth. >>> >>> More information on supporting professional organizations and basic >>> information on a steady state economy can be found at: >>> >>> http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html >>> >>> Thank you for your time and consideration, >>> Patty Zaradic >>> >>> Patricia Zaradic, PhD >>> Red Rock Institute >>> 116 Petrie Avenue >>> Bryn Mawr, PA 19010 >>> 610-526-9544 >>> >>> www.redrockinstitute.org >>> >>> www.videophilia.org >>------- End of Original Message ------- >> > > > > > -- Eduardo A. Silva, M?dico Veterinario Conservaci?n y Manejo de Vida Silvestre -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080523/e94d9cfc/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Fri May 23 06:14:35 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 13:14:35 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: Economist jobs at IUCN Message-ID: <20080523.091435.16493.1@webmail20.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) is seeking to recruit two economists, as described below. Please share this announcement with anyone you think may be interested. Thank you. HEAD, ECONOMICS AND THE ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME IUCN Headquarters, Gland, Switzerland Duration: Indefinite IUCN?s Economics and the Environment Programme (EEP) provides strategic and technical support to economics activities and capacities across regional and country programmes, Global Thematic Programmes and IUCN Commissions, and works to engage IUCN members and partners in the delivery of economics results. The Head of the Economics and the Environment Programme is responsible for developing and managing the global programme; ensuring integration with IUCN?s Regional, Global Thematic and Commission Programmes; and providing leadership and support to economics activities across Regional and country Offices. Detailed responsibilities are described in the Vacancy Announcement, available at: http://cms.iucn.org/involved/jobs/index.cfm MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS: ? A PhD or Master?s degree with equivalent professional experience in a relevant field of economics. ? A minimum of 10 years? practical application of economics in conservation and natural resource management, with a minimum of 5 years? work in a developing country context. ? A minimum of 5 years? experience of programme management related to conservation and sustainable development. ? A demonstrated ability to design, monitor and evaluate economic programmes and projects. ? Knowledge of, and links with, other institutions involved in relevant areas of economics. ? Experience in training and capacity building at various levels, from policy to practice. ? Demonstrated ability to produce high-quality publications, ideally in peer-reviewed media. ? Proven fundraising abilities commensurate with the potential scale of EEP activities. ? A demonstrated ability to communicate effectively to a wide variety of audiences. ? An ability to motivate and provide leadership and to work effectively as a member of a team. ? Strong networking skills, appropriate to a multi-stakeholder, international context. ? Computer literacy and an ability to write concise and coherent documents. ? Fluency in written and spoken English and preferably one or more of IUCN?s other official languages (French and Spanish). Demonstrated proficiency in other languages is a distinct asset. ? Must be prepared to travel frequently. PROGRAMME OFFICER, ECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENT IUCN Headquarters, Gland, Switzerland Duration: Two years (renewable) The Programme Officer will provide technical and research assistance on various topics related to the intersection of economics, markets, business and the environment. Broad thematic areas of work may include: ? Analysis of the socio-economic drivers of biodiversity loss; ? Theory and practice of monetary valuation of biodiversity and ecosystem services; and ? Development and evaluation of economic incentives and financing mechanism for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management. The main tasks will be in the form of research, drafting of reports and proposals, organizing and taking minutes at meetings, and helping to prepare publications. Detailed responsibilities are described in the Vacancy Announcement, available at: http://cms.iucn.org/involved/jobs/index.cfm MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS: ? A Master?s degree with equivalent professional experience in a relevant field of economics. ? Three to five years? practical application of economics in conservation and natural resource management. Experience in a developing country context is a distinct advantage. ? A demonstrated ability to conceive and implement economic research projects. ? Good knowledge of other institutions involved in relevant areas of economics. ? Demonstrated experience in training and capacity building at various levels. ? Demonstrated ability to produce high-quality publications in peer-reviewed media. ? Demonstrated ability to communicate effectively to a wide variety of audiences. ? An ability to work effectively as a member of a team. ? Strong networking skills, appropriate to a multi-stakeholder, international context. ? Computer literacy and an ability to write concise and coherent documents. ? Fluency in written and spoken English and preferably one or more of IUCN?s other official languages (French and Spanish). Demonstrated proficiency in other languages is a distinct advantage. ? Must be prepared to travel frequently. APPLICATIONS: Candidates interested in either of the above vacancies can find further details at: http://cms.iucn.org/involved/jobs/index.cfm Those who meet the selection requirements are requested to submit their curriculum vitae, together with a supporting letter of motivation in English that specifically addresses the requirements and competencies presented above, and the names and contact details of three referees (including one recent employer) to: Human Resources Officer IUCN Rue Mauverney 28 - 1196 Gland, Switzerland Fax +41 22 999 0339 E-mail: jobapplications at iucn.org Applications by email are preferred. They should be sent only to jobapplications at iucn.org before 18 June 2008. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Joshua Bishop, PhD Chief Economist IUCN Rue Mauverney 28 CH-1196 Gland SWITZERLAND Tel: +41 22 999 0266 Fax: +41 22 999 0020 E-mail: joshua.bishop at iucn.org Web: http://www.iucn.org/ _____________________________________________________________ Click to get information on the ultimate Bahamas relaxation vacation. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3nJs5qFKchDAlzSLWSAmfr0RmtnYjsUWon76exss5fwcd0cM/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080523/8be6ffb7/attachment.html From rwdietz at yahoo.com Fri May 23 09:10:10 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 09:10:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <583911.6764.qm@web32105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear Mwangi, Thanks for the thoughtful comments. As current chair of the WGEESS (for another couple of months, anyway), I agree with your sentiments about taking a stand on economic growth and moving toward sustainable use of natural resources. I also want to use this opportunity for a bit of brainstorming. One of the criticisms levied against taking a position on economic growth is that it is too broad and there is not a path by which SCB will use such a position to affect policy. You have a start at an answer to this criticism in your comments: "If we can take such a stand, and live by it, then I believe it will be a first small step towards overhauling the forces starked against nature conservation." I hope others join this brainstorming effort and generate ideas for the policy relevance of a position on economic growth. Thanks, Rob --- Githiru Mwangi wrote: > Dear all > > I rarely contribute here, but I enjoy the > communication and hence could not resist this > time... > > I think I am in favour of the SCB taking a stand on > economic growth. Everything starts from an idea that > has to be nurtured into something of a policy - so, > I dont think there is any real apology to make over > "ideological statements", per se... > > It is clear that economic growth is an overwhelming > 'problem' for conservationists. I always feel like > we prescribe to others something that we are not > really prepared to do ourselves. If we can take such > a stand, and live by it, then I believe it will be a > first small step towards overhauling the forces > starked against nature conservation. > > Lastly, can - should - someone really ban/terminate > a idea-sharing forum? I hope this is not what Alan > is attempting to do. We ought not stop talking about > it; we can stop 'accusing' the BOG for inaction, but > should not also bring our "ideological statement" to > the Policy level before we are clear of the stand > and its ramifications. This can only be resolved in > the kind of brainstorming going on on this forum. I > think I agree with Brian that this forum offers an > opportunity someone can share "ideological > statements" for scrutiny from like-minded persons > before bringing it 'out' to the wider audience, the > BOG etc. > > Thanks > Mwangi > > ________________________________ > > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of Alan > D Thornhill > Sent: Thu 5/22/2008 10:05 PM > To: brianczech at juno.com > Cc: Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; > wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; > McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu; John Fitzgerald; > djohns at viclink.com; jrobinson at wcs.org; > Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; cpeet at mbayaq.org; > thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; > S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; > cmorley at doc.govt.nz; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; > a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; > jbrennerg at gmail.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; > luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; > mashauri_s at yahoo.com; athornhill at conbio.org; > rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; Dpadilla at vt.edu; > leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; > drichards at ecoanalysts.com; paul.beier at nau.edu; > fffh at uaf.edu; patzaradic at gmail.com; JAM at iucn.org; > gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx; lampnico at msu.edu > Subject: Re: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on > economic growth > > > > Brian - > > > > Your "initiative" has never been put in front of the > policy committee. It was considered once in 2003 by > the Board who deferred it to the North American > Section. Since then, we have a Policy Director and a > new Policy Committee. If you are going to only > provide partial information, you mislead anyone who > doesn't know the full story. > > > If you wish to put something in front of the SCB > Policy Committee or the Board of Governors, please > follow the established protocols published on the > SCB Policy website: > http://www.conbio.org/activities/policy/ - you will > find the guideline in the middle of the page in the > blue box. > > > > We have procedures in place for a reason. > > > > I ask again, please end this discussion thread here. > > > AT > > > > > > *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* > > Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director > > Society for Conservation Biology > > 1017 O Street NW > > Washington, DC 20001- US > > voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 > > fax: 1-703-995-4633 > > AThornhill at ConBio.org > > > http://www.conbio.org/ > > > > ***Note then new address and phone number above -- > effective 28 April 2008 > > > > > > From: brianczech at juno.com > [mailto:brianczech at juno.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 3:54 PM > To: Alan D Thornhill > Cc: eduardosilvar at gmail.com; > McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu; > gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx; > Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; > brianczech at juno.com; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; > Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; > drichards at ecoanalysts.com; > Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; jrobinson at wcs.org; > Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; > tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; djohns at viclink.com; > cmorley at doc.govt.nz; fffh at uaf.edu; > a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; > jbrennerg at gmail.com; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; > g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; athornhill at conbio.org; > luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; Dpadilla at vt.edu; > leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; > S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; paul.beier at nau.edu; > cpeet at mbayaq.org; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; > patzaradic at gmail.com; JAM at iucn.org; John Fitzgerald; > mashauri_s at yahoo.com; lampnico at msu.edu > Subject: RE: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on > economic growth > > > > Alan, > > > > The WGEESS or other SCB units could decide to > formally engage the process, as you suggest. But > there is good reason not to, at this point in time, > and good reason to let the organic support emanate > through other venues (such as this one) first. Our > experience is that a few people in pivotal positions > on the Policy Committee and BOG would treat the > initiative as if it were an "ideological statement" > of "a few people." They clearly have to get some > idea of the prominence of this issue in SCB prior to > giving it due diligence. > > > > Also, when an initiative is defeated, a few people > on the BOG treat the subject as a done deal forever. > I can't speak for all the units that support an SCB > position on economic growth, but I think it behooves > all of us to delay a formal proposal until a little > more outreach is conducted. > > > > So please do not discourage the organic feedback of > our international membership. If this particular > venue is not to your liking, then perhaps you can > provide alternative recommendations for outreach, > such as other SCB listserves and communication > networks. > > > > Brian Czech, Economics Representative > > Social Science Working Group > > > > -- Alan D Thornhill > wrote: > === message truncated ===> _______________________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > From tfleischner at prescott.edu Fri May 23 09:56:05 2008 From: tfleischner at prescott.edu (Tom Fleischner) Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 09:56:05 -0700 Subject: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth References: <20080522.155404.22136.0@webmail20.dca.untd.com> <569984C3FC629E4DB22AFA468621699A09973984B6@EXVMBX015-3.exch015.msoutlookonline.net> Message-ID: I have withheld comment throughout this ongoing discussion, but I am troubled enough by the last exchange to feel compelled to respond. It strikes me as inappropriate for the director of this organization to ask its members to stop discussing an issue of importance. How can squelching discussion possibly be in the interests of SCB? I concur with Alan that the policy process, as adopted and refined by the board, is valuable and critical. But I strongly disagree that it is the ONLY valid form of communication, and that members should otherwise remain silent. As a long-term (almost two decades) member of SCB and a former member of the Board of Governors, I find this quite disturbing. As to the specific issue at hand, I happen to strongly agree with the need for a strong statement by SCB of the linkage between conservation and human economic activity. And this on-line dialogue is not just idle chatter, but an attempt to clarify ideas collectively, and indicate the groundswell of concern about this issue amongst the membership. In the recent past, at least one member of the board asserted that an SCB statement on sustainable economics would not be in the interests of developing nations. I believe it has been completely appropriate to hear from more voices, especially those of members from developing nations. The on-line discussion here has made clear that at least some members from the developing world are in strong support of articulating the linkage between economics and ecology. Isn't that worth knowing? Please, let's keep this organization vibrant with healthy, constructive dialogue. Best, Tom Thomas L. Fleischner, Ph.D. Professor of Environmental Studies Prescott College 220 Grove Avenue Prescott, AZ 86301 (928)350-2219 Web Page: http://www.prescott.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/tfleischner/index.html ________________________________ From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of Alan D Thornhill Sent: Thu 22-May-08 1:05 PM To: brianczech at juno.com Cc: Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu; John Fitzgerald; djohns at viclink.com; jrobinson at wcs.org; Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; cpeet at mbayaq.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; cmorley at doc.govt.nz; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; jbrennerg at gmail.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; mashauri_s at yahoo.com; athornhill at conbio.org; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; Dpadilla at vt.edu; leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; drichards at ecoanalysts.com; paul.beier at nau.edu; fffh at uaf.edu; patzaradic at gmail.com; JAM at iucn.org; gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx; lampnico at msu.edu Subject: Re: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Brian - Your "initiative" has never been put in front of the policy committee. It was considered once in 2003 by the Board who deferred it to the North American Section. Since then, we have a Policy Director and a new Policy Committee. If you are going to only provide partial information, you mislead anyone who doesn't know the full story. If you wish to put something in front of the SCB Policy Committee or the Board of Governors, please follow the established protocols published on the SCB Policy website: http://www.conbio.org/activities/policy/ - you will find the guideline in the middle of the page in the blue box. We have procedures in place for a reason. I ask again, please end this discussion thread here. AT *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001- US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 AThornhill at ConBio.org http://www.conbio.org/ ***Note then new address and phone number above -- effective 28 April 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com [mailto:brianczech at juno.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 3:54 PM To: Alan D Thornhill Cc: eduardosilvar at gmail.com; McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu; gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx; Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; brianczech at juno.com; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; drichards at ecoanalysts.com; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; jrobinson at wcs.org; Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; djohns at viclink.com; cmorley at doc.govt.nz; fffh at uaf.edu; a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; jbrennerg at gmail.com; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; athornhill at conbio.org; luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; Dpadilla at vt.edu; leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; paul.beier at nau.edu; cpeet at mbayaq.org; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; patzaradic at gmail.com; JAM at iucn.org; John Fitzgerald; mashauri_s at yahoo.com; lampnico at msu.edu Subject: RE: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Alan, The WGEESS or other SCB units could decide to formally engage the process, as you suggest. But there is good reason not to, at this point in time, and good reason to let the organic support emanate through other venues (such as this one) first. Our experience is that a few people in pivotal positions on the Policy Committee and BOG would treat the initiative as if it were an "ideological statement" of "a few people." They clearly have to get some idea of the prominence of this issue in SCB prior to giving it due diligence. Also, when an initiative is defeated, a few people on the BOG treat the subject as a done deal forever. I can't speak for all the units that support an SCB position on economic growth, but I think it behooves all of us to delay a formal proposal until a little more outreach is conducted. So please do not discourage the organic feedback of our international membership. If this particular venue is not to your liking, then perhaps you can provide alternative recommendations for outreach, such as other SCB listserves and communication networks. Brian Czech, Economics Representative Social Science Working Group -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: Hello All - This is not the appropriate venue to ask SCB to consider any kind of policy statement. If you wish to put something in front of the SCB Policy Committee or the Board of Governors, please follow the established protocols published on the SCB Policy website: http://www.conbio.org/activities/policy/ - you will find the guideline in the middle of the page in the blue box. Please end this discussion here. AT *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001- US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 AThornhill at ConBio.org http://www.conbio.org/ ***Note then new address and phone number above -- effective 28 April 2008 -----Original Message----- From: Eduardo Silva [mailto:eduardosilvar at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:06 PM To: McArd Mlotha Cc: Gerardo Ceballos Gonzalez; Eess at list.conbio.org; Chuckw at coastrange.org; brianczech at juno.com; wildcatalyst at gmail.com; Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com; deborah.jensen at zoo.org; drichards at ecoanalysts.com; Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de; jrobinson at wcs.org; Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org; thomas.sisk at nau.edu; tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug; djohns at viclink.com; cmorley at doc.govt.nz; fffh at uaf.edu; a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk; mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu; jbrennerg at gmail.com; rnoss at mail.ucf.edu; g.mace at imperial.ac.uk; athornhill at conbio.org; luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it; Dpadilla at vt.edu; leandro_castello at hotmail.com; alugo at fs.fed.us; S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk; paul.beier at nau.edu; cpeet at mbayaq.org; Pzaradic at videophilia.org; Patricia Zaradic; JAM at iucn.org; John Fitzgerald; mashauri_s at yahoo.com; lampnico at msu.edu Subject: Re: [EESS] Support for SCB Position on economic growth Dear all, I am from Chile, and I agree with Brian that a position regarding economic growth is urgent. There is a lot of discussion and consensus regarding human population growth, but few in terms of per-capita levels of consumption. Unfortunately both problems are really important and are the ultimate cause of most of the traditional conservation problems that in a daily basis we try to address (Habitat fragmentation, invasions, overexploitation, etc.). The current economic system stimulates consumption without limits, which is reflected in the goals of economic growth especially in industrialized countries. My concern is that if we do not have an official opinion regarding this issue, then as SCB we are denying one of the major if not the major problem in conservation. Best, Eduardo A. Silva PhD Student University of Florida 2008/5/22, McArd Mlotha : > Dear Gerardo, > > I come from a developing country which depends on natural resources for > its economic development. This gives me a better understanding of the > relationship between conservation of biodiversity and economic growth. > There are many professional conservation organizations that have > considered economic growth as an important chapter and some have already > adopted the position on economic growth. > > The issue of economic growth is extremely important for sustainable > development and conservation of natural resources not only in developing > countries but also in highly industrialized nations. Sustainable > ecological conservation can not be successful if the active players > involved or linked to, are ignored. > > Therefore, I would like to encourage the SCB to adopt a position on > economic growth and seek clarification if something is not clear. > > Joseph > > SCB-WGEESS Africa Chair > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > McArd Joseph Mlotha > Program Manager > Center for Tropical Ecology & Conservation (CTEC) > Antioch University New England > 40 Avon Street > Keene, NH 03431 > Tel: 603 357 3122 Ext 2348 Cell: 508 373 3819 > Fax: 603 357-0718 Attention ES Dept. > Web page: http://www.centerfortropicalecology.org/students/mlotha.cfm > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > "Gerardo Ceballos Gonzalez" on > Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 12:46 AM -0500 wrote: >>Hi All, >> >>We have discussed in detail this issue in past years. The decision has >>beehn not to take >>any position for many reasons, One of the is that is basically an >>ideologitcal position >>of a few people. As presented this time is almost trivial. ANA section >>doeas not support >>adopting this position. >> >>Kind regards >> >>Gerardo >> >>Dr. Gerardo Ceballos >>Instituto de Ecologia, UNAM >>Apdo Postal 70-275 >>Mexico D.F. 04510 >>Mexico >>Tel y fax (52) 55-56229004 >>-- >>Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org) >> >> >>---------- Original Message ----------- >>From: "Patricia Zaradic" >>To: Michael.Mascia at wwfus.org, luigi.boitani at uniroma1.it, >>paul.beier at nau.edau, >>JAM at iucn.org, thomas.sisk at nau.edu, wildcatalyst at gmail.com, >>rnoss at mail.ucf.hedu, >>djohns at viclink.com, Ellen.Hines at myfwc.com, athornhill at conbio.org, >>deborah.jensen at zoo.org, cmorley at doc.govt.nz, mashauri_s at yahoo.com, >>Jfitzgerald at conbio.org, gceballo at miranda.ecologia.unam.mx, >>jrobinson at wcs.obrg, >>a.s.pullin at bangor.ac.uk, g.mace at imperial.ac.uk, mwschwartz at ucdavis.edu, >>brianczech at juno.com, Eess at list.conbio.org, larson.grapids at gmail.com, >>Dieterim at uni-hohenheim.de, Chuckw at coastrange.org, >>Pzaradic at videophilia.orge, >>McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu, alugo at fs.fed.us, S.Thapa at sussex.ac.uk, >>Dpadillla at vt.edu, >>jbrennerg at gmail.com, fffh at uaf.edu, mgrover at vt.edu, >>leandro_castello at hotmaifl.com, >>cpeet at mbayaq.org, jaukema at alumni.brown.edu, drichards at ecoanalysts.com, >>tippydog90 at hotmail.com, lampnico at msu.edu, tmudumba at sci.mak.ac.ug, "Oliver >>tPergams" >> >>Sent: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:55:40 -0400 >>Subject: Support for SCB Position on economic growth >> >>> Please accept my apologies for any duplicate emails and thank you for >>yoPur >>> attention. >>> >>> I'm writing to request that SCB seriously consider adopting a position >>o n >>> economic growth. >>> >>> An increasing number of professional organizations have taken a stand on >>> economic growth, addressing the consequences for climate change and >>costos in >>> biodiversity conservation. As the leading international professional >>> conservation organization, a statement from SCB supporting a sustainable >>> steady state economy would be a powerful tool in bringing greater global >>> awareness to the biodiversity costs of unfettered economic growth. >>> >>> More information on supporting professional organizations and basic >>> information on a steady state economy can be found at: >>> >>> http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html >>> >>> Thank you for your time and consideration, >>> Patty Zaradic >>> >>> Patricia Zaradic, PhD >>> Red Rock Institute >>> 116 Petrie Avenue >>> Bryn Mawr, PA 19010 >>> 610-526-9544 >>> >>> www.redrockinstitute.org >>> >>> www.videophilia.org >>------- End of Original Message ------- >> > > > > > -- Eduardo A. Silva, M?dico Veterinario Conservaci?n y Manejo de Vida Silvestre From efuetacha at yahoo.com Sat May 24 02:59:41 2008 From: efuetacha at yahoo.com (Efuetakoa Charles) Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 02:59:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] Economic growth Message-ID: <941649.25919.qm@web33505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I do agree that we take a stand on economic growth but that stand must be taking with care. We need to reduce the number of cars on our roads, number of planes in the air etc. This can be done by using more public transport than our private cars and private jets. Imagine five people in a five seated car instead one each person in his own car. This means a five times reduction in emmision. However, everybody wants his country village or quarter to develop without even considering the negative aspects. How many of us will prefer to take a 2km work qwhen we have a car and are able to pay for patrol? The position that develop countries shoud atleast halt their development is very important and must be encoraged. However, it is a pity that the burning and slashing of forest may release more cabon (IV) oxide than all cars, trucks and planes combine.That quantity of wood burnt in rural inhabitants to cook and warm themselves in winter because they lack electricity is alarming. Peasant farmers from poor country lack the necessary technology to practice modern farming and slash and burn is the order of the day. Governments from Africa and South America that still have the worlds largest forest like Brazil, Dr.Congo, Cameroon and others derive a great percentage of their income from timber exploitation. I therefore believe that as conservationists and people who care about global warming we should continue to appeal that the gab between the rich and poor be reduced. That electricity be made available to rural areas not only for light but also to cook. Imagine how much wood in the forest will be save if people in rural areas can replace the wood they use to heat themselves in winter alone by heaters. In Cameroon for instance almost everyone either uses fuel wood to cook or methane gas . It is rare to see somebody cooking with electricity but this is a country that has the highest hydro electric potential in Africa only second to Dr. Congo. We must know that no matter how much people are educated, they will do everything to survive even at the detriment of their environment. Efuetakoa Charles -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080524/7bf32a1c/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Wed May 28 05:48:28 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 12:48:28 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: [anzseelist] FW: Job Vacancy: Resource Economist on Coastal Ecosys tems Message-ID: <20080528.084828.26824.0@webmail19.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- World Resource Institute JOB POSTING Resource Economist on Coastal Ecosystems http://www.wri.org/job/9737# The People and Ecosystems Program (PEP) at the World Resources Institute (WRI) is seeking a natural resource economist to join a team working on economic valuation of coastal ecosystem goods and services in the Caribbean. The effort currently focuses on the valuation of coral reefs and mangroves in the Dominican Republic (DR), Jamaica, Belize and the eastern Caribbean, but could expand to other countries. The economist would contribute to the refinement of an economic valuation methodology and tool to guide valuation of coral reef and mangrove-associated goods and services, and would guide its implementation. WRI seeks a highly organized, detail-oriented individual with good analytical skills. Experience in ecosystem valuation and competency in Spanish (oral and written) is essential. The resource economist will report to the Senior Associate for Coastal Ecosystems and will be part of WRI's Mainstreaming Ecosystem Services Initiative (MESI). MESI's goal is to reduce ecosystem degradation by helping governments, businesses, and multilateral development banks integrate ecosystem services into their decision-making. It will achieve this by providing information and tools that connect healthy ecosystems with the attainment of economic and social goals and by creating economic and policy incentives for restoring and sustaining ecosystems. Information on WRI's coastal ecosystem projects can be found at reefsatrisk.wri.org. Responsibilities: The natural resource economist will work with partners in the Dominican Republic and Jamaica to: bring additional economic expertise to the economic valuation project. obtain, review, and utilize published studies on economic valuation; refine and adapt a coral reef and mangrove economic valuation methodology to the local context; refine and improve an economic valuation tool to guide valuation; provide training to local partners on the valuation methodology and tool; collect data to support the valuations; work with partners to implement the methodology; develop a technical summary report on the valuation results; develop materials for outreach to government officials and the public in the DR and Jamaica; ** communicate with project partners on project activities and upcoming events; develop work plans for partner inputs to the project; organize and implement workshops to obtain input on the valuation method, gather data, and review valuation results; prepare reports to donors; develop materials for the web Other responsibilities will arise, depending upon project needs and staff aptitude. Qualifications: This position requires a responsible, organized, innovative and adaptive individual with sound written and oral communication skills in English and Spanish, and good analytical abilities. Applicants should have a graduate degree (Masters or PhD) in natural resource economics or marine and coastal economics, and an interest in coastal ecosystems. Experience in economic valuation is essential[EC1] . Essential Characteristics and Skills: Good knowledge of natural resource economics and valuation of ecosystem goods and services; Experience in economic valuation Solid organizational, analytical, and research abilities; Good oral and written communication skills in English and Spanish (fluent); Good math skills; Ability to set priorities and achieve deadlines; Ability to adapt to changing circumstances; Patience and a sense of humor. Other Desirable Skills: Good knowledge of and interest in coastal ecosystems - particularly coral reefs and mangroves; Knowledge of regional economics; Experience in programming (such as Access, Macros, and HTML) Knowledge of the Caribbean region and cultures. Salary & Benefits: The position will be at the Research Analyst or Associate I level, depending upon experience. WRI offers a generous, comprehensive benefits package. Employment Period: Position is scheduled to start June 2008. Closing Date: May 30, 2008 Contact: Send resume or CV and cover letter to: Emily Cooper, Research Associate ecooper at wri.orgNo phone calls please. Qualified applicants only. WRI only accepts applications for current job openings. __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Members | Calendar Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Visit Your Group Yahoo! NewsGet it all here Breaking news to entertainment news Dog Fanaticson Yahoo! Groups Find people who are crazy about dogs. Y! Groups blogThe place to go to stay informed on Groups news! . __,_._,___ ____________________________________________________________ Scan, remove and block Spyware. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mEzAlgZTajw8QJqHafNm0AgW7YO4lapgTXChfLA2EFiXD5a/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080528/c83fcbc5/attachment-0001.htm From brianczech at juno.com Wed May 28 07:43:41 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 14:43:41 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: [IJEES] International Journal of Ecological Economics and Statist ics Self nominations for Editors :International Journal of Ecology & D evelopment Message-ID: <20080528.104341.23298.0@webmail06.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- International Journal of Ecology & Development (IJED) ISSN 0972-9984[Print], ISSN 0973-7308 [Online] http://www.ceser.res.in/ijed.html Dear Colleague, Self nominations are invited for Editor/Associate Editor for International Journal of Ecology & Development (IJED) (under volunteer appointment policy) in the following area of research: Atmospheric Modelling Hazardous Material Mobile Source Emissions Ecosystem Modelling Hydrological Modelling Aquatic Ecosystems Marine Ecosystems Air Modelling and Simulation Freshwater Ecosystems Biological Systems Agricultural Modelling Terrain Analysis Meteorological Modelling Earth System Modelling Climatic Modelling Natural Resource Management Terrestrial Ecosystems Landscape Ecology Nature Conservation Sustainable Tourism/ Suatainable Development GIS/Remote Sensing for Ecology The details about the journal available at : http://www.ceser.res.in/ijed.html Please submit your nomination through email (at isder_ceser at yahoo.com ) with your CV / www page (home page) address and area of your specialisation till June 30, 2008 to the Editor-in-Chief, IJED. With regards Dr. Kaushal K. Srivastava Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Ecology & Development (IJED) http://www.ceser.res.in/ijed.html email: isder_ceser at yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ Click now for great deals on quality business cards! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3l5Ornpb3Rk7qWxAbFGDL97ZcuPyE0SzFYQ3oU8bO1rgAgaQ/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080528/833dbcb8/attachment.html From KStade at cspinet.org Wed May 28 14:17:07 2008 From: KStade at cspinet.org (Kirsten Stade) Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 17:17:07 -0400 Subject: [EESS] Agenda for July 11 "Rejuvenating Public Sector Science" Conference Message-ID: The agenda is now available for the Center for Science in the Public Interest's fourth national Integrity in Science Conference. Rejuvenating Public Sector Sciencewill be on July 11, 2008, 9 am - 5:30 pm. at the Ronald Reagan International Center in Washington, DC. Join us in throwing a spotlight on the need for increased science funding, more independent regulatory science, and the need to protect public sector scientists from political meddling and corporate influence. Sessions will include focusing government research on the climate crisis, protecting and empowering scientists at federal agencies, insulating clean energy research from special interests, protecting endangered species, and reducing conflicts of interest on federal advisory committees. Registration rates are $200 before May 31 and $250 after, or $99 before May 31 and $109 after for non-profits, educational institutions, and government agencies. Special rate of $30 for students. For more information and to register, visit our website at http://cspinet.org/integrity/conflictedscience_conf.html Kirsten Stade Program Manager, Integrity in Science Center for Science in the Public Interest http://cspinet.org/integrity/watch/index.html Tel. (202) 777-8348 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080528/71ee70c7/attachment.htm From ken.vance-borland at oregonstate.edu Thu May 29 10:12:21 2008 From: ken.vance-borland at oregonstate.edu (Vance-Borland, Ken) Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:12:21 -0700 Subject: [EESS] RCB economic growth posting Message-ID: <451453C181B199458A55B2B1723FAC008BAA93@SAGE.forestry.oregonstate.edu> Dear EESS List, As many of you know, there is a new SCB working group on Religion and Conservation Biology. Below is an exerpt from a recent posting to their list that is relevant to the economic growth discussion. -ken ---- Ken Vance-Borland Senior Faculty Research Assistant and President, Society for Conservation Biology Freshwater Working Group Department of Forest Science, Oregon State University and USFS Aquatic and Land Interactions Program Corvallis, Oregon 97331 USA voice: (541)758-8772 ken.vance-borland at oregonstate.edu ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Tom Baugh To: rcb at list.conbio.org Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 12:01:27 PM Subject: [Rcb] Report Available from Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies Aspen conference Dear Colleagues, Dean Gus Speth's new book also underscores this point and questions the deleterious effect of unlimited economic growth on the Earth community - both natural and human. We have included a Washington Post review of his book from Yale Press titled The Bridge at the Edge of the World. Sincerely, Mary Evelyn Tucker & John Grim ________________________________ ________________________________ The Bridge at the Edge of the World by Gus Speth The following is a review of Dean Gus Speth's new book, The Bridge at the Edge of the World just published by Yale University Press - a strongly recommended read for all interested in the climate crisis and how we climb out of it. The book can be purchased at: http://yalepress.yale.edu/book.asp?isbn=9780300136111 Gus Speth, the Dean of Yale's School of Forestry and Environment Studies, was head of the Council on Environmental Quality in the Carter White House, founder of the World Resources Institute, the National Resource defense council (NRDC) and Executive Director of the UN Development Programme. His call for a sweeping reform of our economy reflects the urgent need for change toward a new low carbon economy. He also highlights the importance of the world's religions and the Earth Charter in moving us toward a sustainable future. Heating System: Why the environmental movement cannot prevent catastrophe. Reviewed by Ross Gelbspan The Washington Post Sunday, April 27, 2008; BW04 THE BRIDGE AT THE EDGE OF THE WORLD Capitalism, the Environment, and Crossing From Crisis to Sustainability By James Gustave Speth Yale Univ. 295 pp. $28 Contemporary capitalism and a habitable planet cannot coexist. That is the core message of The Bridge at the Edge of the World, by J. "Gus" Speth, a prominent environmentalist who, in this book, has turned sharply critical of the U.S. environmental movement. Speth is dean of environmental studies at Yale, a founder of two major environmental groups (the Natural Resources Defense Council and the World Resources Institute), former chairman of the President's Council on Environmental Quality (under Jimmy Carter) and a former head of the U.N. Development Program. So part of his thesis is expected: Climate change is only the leading edge of a potential cascade of ecological disasters. "Half the world's tropical and temperate forests are gone," he writes. "About half the wetlands . . . are gone. An estimated 90 percent of large predator fish are gone. . . . Twenty percent of the corals are gone. . . . Species are disappearing at rates about a thousand times faster than normal. . . . Persistent toxic chemicals can now be found by the dozens in . . . every one of us." One might assume, given this setup, that Speth would argue for a revitalization of the environmental movement. He does not. Environmentalism, in his view, is almost as compromised as the planet itself. Speth faults the movement for using market incentives to achieve environmental ends and for the deception that sufficient change can come from engaging the corporate sector and working "within the system" and not enlisting the support of other activist constituencies. Environmentalism today is "pragmatic and incrementalist," he notes, "awash in good proposals for sensible environmental action" -- and he does not mean it as a compliment. "Working only within the system will . . . not succeed when what is needed is transformative change in the system itself." In Speth's view, the accelerating degradation of the Earth is not simply the result of flawed or inattentive national policies. It is "a result of systemic failures of the capitalism that we have today," which aims for perpetual economic growth and has brought us, simultaneously, to the threshold of abundance and the brink of ruination. He identifies the major driver of environmental destruction as the 60,000 multinational corporations that have emerged in the last few decades and that continually strive to increase their size and profitability while, at the same time, deflecting efforts to rein in their most destructive impacts. "The system of modern capitalism . . . will generate ever-larger environmental consequences, outstripping efforts to manage them," Speth writes. What's more, "It is unimaginable that American politics as we know it will deliver the transformative changes needed" to save us from environmental catastrophe. "Weak, shallow, dangerous, and corrupted," he says, "it is the best democracy that money can buy." Above all, Speth faults environmentalists for assuming they alone hold the key to arresting the deterioration of the planet. That task, he emphasizes, will require the involvement of activists working on campaign finance reform, corporate accountability, labor, human rights and environmental justice, to name a few. (Full disclosure: He also approvingly cites some of this reviewer's criticisms of media coverage of environmental issues.) Speth, of course, is hardly the first person to issue a sweeping indictment of capitalism and predict that it contains the seeds of its own demise. But he dismisses a socialist alternative, and, at its core, his prescription is more reformist than revolutionary. He implies that a more highly regulated and democratized form of capitalism could be compatible with environmental salvation if it were accompanied by a profound change in personal and collective values. Instead of seeking ever more consumption, we need a "post-growth society" with a more rounded definition of well-being. Rather than using gross domestic product as the primary measure of a country's economic health, we should turn to the new field of ecological accounting, which tries to factor in the costs of resource depletion and pollution. This book is an extremely probing and thoughtful diagnosis of the root causes of planetary distress. But short of a cataclysmic event -- like the Great Depression or some equally profound social breakdown -- Speth does not suggest how we might achieve the change in values and structural reform necessary for long-term sustainability. "People have conversion experiences and epiphanies," he notes, asking, "Can an entire society have a conversion experience?" * Ross Gelbspan is author of "The Heat Is On" and "Boiling Point." He maintains the Web site www.heatisonline.org . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080529/fa99b217/attachment.htm From kstade at cspinet.org Fri May 30 06:44:47 2008 From: kstade at cspinet.org (kstade at cspinet.org) Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 09:44:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [EESS] A washingtonpost.com article from: kstade@cspinet.org Message-ID: <29172353.1212155087456.JavaMail.wlogic@webapp1.wpprivate.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080530/d5121920/attachment-0001.html From brianczech at juno.com Fri May 30 10:23:46 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 17:23:46 GMT Subject: [EESS] Degrowth Conference Declaration Message-ID: <20080530.132346.8632.0@webmail18.dca.untd.com> Listserve subscribers may recall some postings last month pertaining to the conference, ?Economic De-Growth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Justice.? The conference declaration has been finalized and is posted here: http://events.it-sudparis.eu/degrowthconference/en/Declaration%20on%20Degrowth%20EN.pdf Note that the declaration is highly consistent with the position on economic growth proposed for SCB adoption by the WGEESS and 6 other SCB units. The declaration is a bit more focused on poverty and social justice, and less on biodiversity, but the upshot is the same in both regards. Also, this declaration goes beyond the proposed SCB position in that it actually pronounces the need for degrowth; the proposed SCB position is not as ambitious. Please also note the concise policy-relevant clause (final clause). I also paste the declaration here for your convenience: Declaration This Declaration is the product of a workshop entitled ?Toward a Declaration on Degrowth?, held at the Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity in Paris on 18-19 April 2008. The goal of the workshop was to produce a Declaration that would not only reflect the points of view of the conference participants, but also articulate their shared vision of the Decroissance movement. Following the workshop, a ?core? text was drafted by a sub-group on the basis of the workshop discussions, which was then refined through an open discussion amongst the remaining workshop participants. The organisers wish to thank the following people for their participation: Michael Bell, Mauro Bonaiuti, Brian Czech, Dalma Domeneghini, Andreas Exner, Randy Ghent, Hali Healy, Daniel O'Neill, Leida Rijnhout, Avrizio Ruzzene, Francois Schneider, Stefanie Schabhuttl, and David Woodward. We, participants in the Economic De-Growth For Ecological Sustainability And Social Equity Conference held in Paris on April 18-19, 2008 make the following declaration: 1. Economic growth (as indicated by increasing real GDP or GNP) represents an increase in production, consumption and investment in the pursuit of economic surplus, inevitably leading to increased use of materials, energy and land. 2. Despite improvements in the ecological efficiency of the production and consumption of goods and services, global economic growth has resulted in increased extraction of natural resources and increased waste and emissions. 3. Global economic growth has not succeeded in reducing poverty substantially, due to unequal exchange in trade and financial markets, which has increased inequality between countries. 4. As the established principles of physics and ecology demonstrate, there is an eventual limit to the scale of global production and consumption, and to the scale national economies can attain without imposing environmental and social costs on others elsewhere or future generations. 5. The best available scientific evidence indicates that the global economy has grown beyond ecologically sustainable limits, as have many national economies, especially those of the wealthiest countries (primarily industrialised countries in the global North). 6. There is also mounting evidence that global growth in production and consumption is socially unsustainable and uneconomic (in the sense that its costs outweigh its benefits). 7. By using more than their legitimate share of global environmental resources, the wealthiest nations are effectively reducing the environmental space available to poorer nations, and imposing adverse environmental impacts on them. 8. If we do not respond to this situation by bringing global economic activity into line with the capacity of our ecosystems, and redistributing wealth and income globally so that they meet our societal needs, the result will be a process of involuntary and uncontrolled economic decline or collapse, with potentially serious social impacts, especially for the most disadvantaged. We therefore call for a paradigm shift from the general and unlimited pursuit of economic growth to a concept of ?right-sizing? the global and national economies. 1. At the global level, ?right-sizing? means reducing the global ecological footprint (including the carbon footprint) to a sustainable level. 2. In countries where the per capita footprint is greater than the sustainable global level, right-sizing implies a reduction to this level within a reasonable timeframe. 3. In countries where severe poverty remains, right-sizing implies increasing consumption by those in poverty as quickly as possible, in a sustainable way, to a level adequate for a decent life, following locally determined poverty-reduction paths rather than externally imposed development policies. 4. This will require increasing economic activity in some cases; but redistribution of income and wealth both within and between countries is a more essential part of this process. The paradigm shift involves degrowth in wealthy parts of the world. 1. The process by which right-sizing may be achieved in the wealthiest countries, and in the global economy as a whole, is ?degrowth?. 2. We define degrowth as a voluntary transition towards a just, participatory, and ecologically sustainable society. 3. The objectives of degrowth are to meet basic human needs and ensure a high quality of life, while reducing the ecological impact of the global economy to a sustainable level, equitably distributed between nations. This will not be achieved by involuntary economic contraction. 4. Degrowth requires a transformation of the global economic system and of the policies promoted and pursued at the national level, to allow the reduction and ultimate eradication of absolute poverty to proceed as the global economy and unsustainable national economies degrow. 5. Once right-sizing has been achieved through the process of degrowth, the aim should be to maintain a ?steady state economy? with a relatively stable, mildly fluctuating level of consumption. 6. In general, the process of degrowth is characterised by: an emphasis on quality of life rather than quantity of consumption; the fulfilment of basic human needs for all; societal change based on a range of diverse individual and collective actions and policies; substantially reduced dependence on economic activity, and an increase in free time, unremunerated activity, conviviality, sense of community, and individual and collective health; encouragement of self-reflection, balance, creativity, flexibility, diversity, good citizenship, generosity, and non-materialism; observation of the principles of equity, participatory democracy, respect for human rights, and respect for cultural differences. 7. Progress towards degrowth requires immediate steps towards efforts to mainstream the concept of degrowth into parliamentary and public debate and economic institutions; the development of policies and tools for the practical implementation of degrowth; and development of new, non-monetary indicators (including subjective indicators) to identify, measure and compare the benefits and costs of economic activity, in order to assess whether changes in economic activity contribute to or undermine the fulfillment of social and environmental objectives. ____________________________________________________________ Reach your goals of being healthier and happier. Click here for diet tips and solutions. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nr7Zvown5ar2nXQuWIwgSv1IhGuLFgnZyfSOgI2aEIvAGsM/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080530/44ce1990/attachment-0001.htm From rwdietz at yahoo.com Tue Jun 3 11:37:13 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 11:37:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] Lecture on Ecological Macroeconomics Message-ID: <433546.33022.qm@web32102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Today (June 3, 2008) CASSE president Brian Czech spoke to the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM) on the ?Ecological Macroeconomics and Political Economy of Biodiversity Conservation.? The 30-minute lecture is viewable here: http://www.vbs.vt.edu/content/adhoc/spring2008/Ecology_05142008.php The lecture, recorded on May 14 in the U.S. and provided electronically, was part of the IEEM?s conference, ?Moving to an Ecological Economy,? held in London. It may be of interest to members of other professional natural resources societies deliberating the tradeoff between economic growth and environmental protection. Thanks, Rob From rmunera at yahoo.com Wed Jun 4 11:31:09 2008 From: rmunera at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Claudia_M=FAnera?=) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 11:31:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] IUCN World Conservation Magazine Message-ID: <460259.56538.qm@web65609.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> There are some interesting articles in the new issue of World Conservation Magazine, realted with effects of globalization?on biodiversity http://cms.iucn.org/resources/world_conservation/2008_issue2/ Claudia Munera Biologist - Capacity Building Technician Protected Areas National Council Guatemala ____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Deportes Beta ?No te pierdas lo ?ltimo sobre el torneo clausura 2008! Ent?rate aqu? http://deportes.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080604/6210b71b/attachment.htm From rwdietz at yahoo.com Fri Jun 6 13:43:23 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 13:43:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] CASSE, ecological economics, and the SCB Message-ID: <978551.73146.qm@web32104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear WGEESS List Subscribers, I sent the following to the SSWG list a few moments ago (since it mentions the activities of the WGEESS, I decided to post it here as well -- sorry for any duplication): In his e-mail to the SSWG membership (dated May 28), Mike Mascia made a few statements to which I want to respond, especially those in the following paragraph: "The leading proponents of a SCB position statement on economic growth are affiliated with the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy, a US-based non-profit organization. As SCB members, these individuals have taken leadership positions within various SCB governing bodies and have successfully advocated for adoption of the position statement by some SCB organizational units. Proponents also established a SCB working group on ecological economics and sustainability science (WGEESS), which seeks adoption of an economic growth position statement by the SCB as a whole." Mike Mascia is correct that some members of the WGEESS board are affiliated with the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE). I am the executive director of CASSE and the chair of the WGEESS board. Brian Czech is CASSE's president and the WGEESS past chair. Dr. Czech also serves on the SSWG board as Economics Representative, and other CASSE affiliates serve on the boards of SCB units. Yet other SCB members have provided voluntary support for CASSE's efforts to promote a sustainable economy that does not exceed ecological carrying capacity. Participatory activity by the staff of nonprofit organizations like CASSE is a credit to SCB and should be welcomed. If you are curious about CASSE?s intentions or qualifications, please visit . In the CASSE bibliography, you will find reference to numerous articles by Dr. Czech that have been published in Conservation Biology and other conservation journals. You will also see that numerous SCB members, including current and former members of the Board of Governors, and many other leaders in conservation biology have e-signed the CASSE position on economic growth. The affiliations of the democratically elected board members of the WGEESS are not a relevant issue (I, for one, became affiliated with CASSE after joining SCB and reaching my own conclusions about the limits to economic growth). The relevant issue is the topic around which the WGEESS was formed -- applying ecological economics to biodiversity conservation and understanding the conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. I will address one other point in Mike Mascia?s e-mail. He states, ?The decision of the SSWG Board has no bearing on the ability of proponents to advance the economic growth position statement for consideration before the SCB Policy Committee, nor will the SSWG Board decision have any bearing upon the outcome of any future Policy Committee deliberations.? His statement is true from a procedural standpoint, but not from a practical standpoint. The WGEESS can submit the position to the SCB Policy Committee and Board of Governors at any time, but support from the SSWG clearly increases the prospects of SCB adopting the position. With each passing day, the evidence mounts, and the research provides more thoughtful analysis of the conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. About a month ago, Gus Speth, Dean of the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, published The Bridge at the Edge of the World, another scientifically sound book calling for transformation to a post-growth society. In October Peter Victor, an ecological economist at York University, will be releasing his book Managing without Growth: Slower by Design, Not Disaster. Economic growth is an ongoing problem for biodiversity, and the WGEESS will continue to provide opportunities for the SSWG membership and other SCB members to explore this issue and take action on it. Thank you, Rob Dietz Chair, SCB WGEESS Executive Director, CASSE From brianczech at juno.com Mon Jun 9 06:26:19 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 13:26:19 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: Environmental Challenges in the Arab Countries, Iran and Turkey: C all for Proposals Message-ID: <20080609.092619.21414.0@webmail10.dca.untd.com> This sounds very interesting and also in need of some ecological economics... hopefully some of our members with MENA experience can participate... ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Dear All, The Economic Research Forum (ERF) is pleased to announce a call for proposals in the context of its new project on Environmental Challenges in the Arab Countries, Iran and Turkey. ERF and non-ERF affiliates from the region are invited to submit proposals for original research under the theme of ?New Frontiers in the Economics of Environment in the ERF-Region?. Researchers are invited to submit proposals where economic analysis is used to study the environmental problem in question leading to policy implications and recommendations under certain sub-themes and related topics. The detailed call for proposals may be found on http://www.erf.org.eg/cms.php?id=events_details&news_id=23 . Kindly disseminate it as widely as possible and encourage interested researchers to participate. Don?t hesitate to contact me or Yasmine Nader ynader at erf.org.eg for any further inquiry, Best Regards, Hala Abou-Ali Economic Research Forum 7 Boulos Hanna St . Dokki, Cairo Tel: (202) 333 18 600-604 Fax: (202) 333 18 604 Website: http://www.erf.org.eg * Please accept our apologies for any crossed e-mails. ____________________________________________________________ Smart Girls Secret Weapon Read Unbiased Beauty Product Reviews, Get Helpful Tips, Tricks and Sam http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7U3xxOw48nCokPSUaPb5jNoA44mk9KEioqJ3tSM8Drg3Y4k/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080609/27477e3a/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Wed Jun 11 10:36:19 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 17:36:19 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: Re: Abstracts: on Ecosystem Services. Dec. 8-11, 2008, Naples, Flo rida Message-ID: <20080611.133619.2713.3@webmail06.dca.untd.com> ACES 2008 (A Conference on Ecosystem Services): Using Science for Decision Making in Dynamic Systems -- to be held December 8-11, 2008 in Naples, Florida -- will bring together government, non-government organizations, academia, tribal, and private sector leaders to advance the use of ecosystem services and related science in conservation, restoration resource management, and development decisions. The conference will highlight concepts and applications related to four primary themes: Mapping and Spatial Relationships: Spatial Relationships / Analysis, Landscape Dynamics, Distribution of Benefits, Remote Sensing, Data Management / Coordination, and Scale / Units of Assessment Values and Measurement: Economic, Ecological, Cultural, and Indicators and Monitoring Drivers of Change: Urbanization / Population Growth, Climate Change, Natural Hazards, Invasive Species, Non Urban Land-Use, and Resource Management Decision Making: Tools and Models, Institutions, Communities and Stakeholders, and Barriers Your help in circulating this call for abstracts would be appreciated. Best wishes... Greg Greg Arthaud, Ph.D. (Co-chair: ACES 2008) Acting National Program Leader, Economics Research Research & Development USDA Forest Service garthaud(at)fs.fed.us 703-605-4198 Greg J. Arthaud, Ph.D. Acting National Program Leader, Economics Research Research & Development USDA Forest Service Mailing address -- USDA Forest Service, RUS Staff Stop Code 1114 (RPC Bldg. 4th Floor) 1400 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20205-0003 garthaud(at)fs.fed.us 703-605-4198 703-605-5137 (fax) = ____________________________________________________________ Click here to find the right stock, bonds, and mutual funds. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mJ0ScPkHNYyRa89GYCnp4cpIH7OPrAEclnfMzlh1qooreZO/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080611/c8bcf0c0/attachment.htm From rwdietz at yahoo.com Wed Jun 11 10:47:09 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:47:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] Reminder to Vote Message-ID: <136108.56341.qm@web32107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> This is just a quick reminder to log into the SCB website and vote in the WGEESS election. Thanks, Rob Dietz Chair, SCB WGEESS From brianczech at juno.com Wed Jun 11 10:34:03 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 17:34:03 GMT Subject: [EESS] BC Nature adopts resolution on economic growth Message-ID: <20080611.133403.2713.1@webmail06.dca.untd.com> The Federation of British Columbia Naturalists (BC Nature) has adopted a resolution on economic growth. It should be posted on their website soon. Meanwhile, here is what they emailed me: 2008-04. BC Nature Position Statement on Economic Growth Whereas economic growth is an increase in the production and consumption of goods which entails an increase in the flow of natural resources, through the economy and back to the environment, and Whereas economic growth occurs when there is an increase in the product of population multiplied by per capita production and consumption, and Whereas economic growth is often and generally indicated by increasing real gross domestic product (GDP) or real gross national product (GNP), and Whereas based upon established principles of physics and ecology, there is a limit to economic growth (as demonstrated historically in many societal collapses), and Whereas a steady state economy is generally indicated by stabilized (or mildly fluctuating) real gross domestic product (GDP) or real gross national product (GNP), and Whereas a steady state economy, with a stabilized (or mildly fluctuating) product of population multiplied by per capita consumption, is an alternative to economic growth, and Whereas steady state economy, with stabilized (or mildly fluctuating) production and consumption of goods and services, is an alternative to economic growth, and Whereas steady state economy does not preclude economic development, a qualitative process in which different technologies may be employed and the relative prominence of economic sectors may evolve, and Whereas Canada is a part of the North American economy, which grows as an integrated whole consisting of agricultural, extractive, manufacturing, and services sectors that require natural resources inputs and produce wastes, and Whereas there is increasing evidence that North American economic growth is having negative effects on the long-term ecological and economic welfare of North America and the world, and Whereas upon establishing steady state economies, it would be advisable for North American nations to assist other nations in moving from the goal of economic growth to the goal of a steady state economy, beginning with those nations currently enjoying the highest levels of per capita consumption, and Whereas for many nations with widespread poverty, including Canada?s First Nations, increasing per capita consumption (or, alternatively, more equitable distributions of wealth) remains an appropriate goal for the time being; yet the ultimate goal should be the establishment of healthy ecological and social conditions within the framework of a steady state economy, and Whereas there is a fundamental conflict between economic growth and the ecological services underpinning the human economy (for example, insect and vermin control, pollination, decomposition, climate regulation), therefore Be it resolved that BC Nature support in principle the steady state economy as a sustainable alternative to economic growth, and Be it further resolved that BC Nature specifically undertake the following actions: BC Nature include a copy of this position statement as part of the BC Nature web site and in the next issue of BC Nature BC Nature undertake to educate the public and policy makers on this fundamental conflict and how it relates to human health and well-being BC Nature encourage the member clubs to adopt such a position statement to bring the matter to the attention of local communities BC Nature include mention of this root cause of loss of biodiversity as a part of their routine work in conservation BC Nature encourage Nature Canada to circulate this position statement and encourage adoption by other Provincial Affiliates and the Canadian Nature Network. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Beauty Product Reviews Read Unbiased Beauty Product Reviews and Join Our Product Review Team! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7Uvr2b65X1vmJHAL14Mpas4nsnEO6ngw33K5xPMnr0wml8Q/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080611/b4faefd0/attachment-0001.htm From nkdawe at shaw.ca Thu Jun 12 14:23:26 2008 From: nkdawe at shaw.ca (Neil K Dawe) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 13:23:26 -0800 Subject: [EESS] Economist Stiglitz: Rethink the Sources of Growth, Trickle-down doesn't work Message-ID: <485193CE.4020504@shaw.ca> Stiglitz has almost got it, recognizing that clean air and water [and ecosystems and their biodiversity] can only be had with a "new economic model," however, he still wants to hang onto the "foundations of economic growth," a fatally-flawed concept and a limiting factor to conservation. The new economic model is easy: transition to a steady state economy, one that's in balance with the regenerative and assimilative limits of the ecosphere. The difficulty: getting rid of the old paradigm that economic growth is necessary and will solve our environmental problems, which applies even to many of us in the conservation realm. As those involved in myriad conservation projects, we need to start vigorously addressing the root cause of our conservation problems--economic growth--instead of simply continuing to deal only with the symptoms. *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Stiglitz* *Wikipedia: Joseph Eugene "Joe" Stiglitz* (born February 9 , 1943 ) is an American economist and a member of the Columbia University faculty. He is a recipient of the John Bates Clark Medal (1979 ) and the The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel (2001 ). Former Senior Vice President and Chief Economist of the World Bank , he is known for his critical view of globalization , free-market economists (whom he calls "free market fundamentalists ") and some international institutions like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank . In 2000 Stiglitz founded the Initiative for Policy Dialogue (IPD), a think tank on international development based at Columbia University . Since 2001 he has been a member of the Columbia faculty, and has held the rank of University Professor since 2003. He also chairs the University of Manchester 's Brooks World Poverty Institute and is a member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences . Stiglitz is the second most cited economist in the world, as of 2008.^[1] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ June 10, 2008 *Stiglitz: Rethink the Sources of Growth* http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/06/stiglitz-rethin.html Joseph Stiglitz says we need to change our ways: The world must rethink the sources of growth, by Joseph E. Stiglitz, Commentary, Project Syndicate : Around the world, protests against soaring food and fuel prices are mounting. The poor -- and even the middle classes -- are seeing their incomes squeezed... Politicians want to respond..., but do not know what to do. ... Hillary Clinton and John McCain took the easy way out, and supported a suspension of the gasoline tax... Only Barack Obama stood his ground and rejected the proposal... But if Clinton and McCain were wrong, what should be done? One cannot simply ignore ... those who are suffering. ... When George Bush was elected, he claimed that tax cuts for the rich would cure all the economy's ailments. The benefits of tax-cut-fuelled growth would trickle down to all... Tax cuts were supposed to stimulate savings, but household savings in the US have plummeted to zero. They were supposed to stimulate employment, but labour force participation is lower than in the 1990's. What growth did occur benefited only the few at the top. Productivity grew, for a while, but it wasn't because of Wall Street financial innovations. The financial products being created didn't manage risk; they enhanced risk. ... Millions of Americans will likely lose their homes and, with them, their life savings. At the core of America's success is technology, symbolised by Silicon Valley. The irony is that the scientists making the advances..., and the venture capital firms that finance it were not the ones reaping the biggest rewards in the heyday of the real estate bubble. ... The world needs to rethink the sources of growth. If the foundations of economic growth lie in advances in science and technology, not in speculation in real estate or financial markets, then tax systems must be realigned. Why should those who make their income by gambling in Wall Street's casinos be taxed at a lower rate than those who earn their money in other ways? Capital gains should be taxed at least at as high a rate as ordinary income. ... In addition, there should be a windfall profits tax on oil and gas companies. Given the huge increase in inequality in most countries, higher taxes for those who have done well -- to help those who have lost ground from globalisation and technological change -- are in order, and could also ameliorate the strains imposed by soaring food and energy prices. ... Two factors set off today's crisis: the Iraq war contributed to the run-up in oil prices..., while bio-fuels have meant that food and energy markets are increasingly integrated. ... Huge agriculture subsidies ... have weakened agriculture in the developing world... Rich countries must reduce, if not eliminate, distortional agriculture and energy policies, and help those in the poorest countries improve their capacity to produce food. But this is just a start: we have treated our most precious resources -- clean water and air -- as if they were free. Only new patterns of consumption and production -- a new economic model -- can address that most fundamental resource problem. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080612/a2aae546/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Fri Jun 13 05:41:50 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:41:50 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: Final call for papers: India 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference, September 21-23 Message-ID: <20080613.084150.5321.0@webmail10.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- SECOND/FINAL CALL FOR PAPERS 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference, New Delhi, India September 21-23, 2008 * Apologies for any cross-postings * Dear Colleague, We are pleased to announce the second and final Call for Papers for the 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference in New Delhi, India: www.14aisdrc2008.com. The conference takes place in the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. As announced and planned upfront, the abstract submission of this second and final call closes at midnight on June 18, 2008. Abstracts can be submitted online via the conference website (www.14aisdrc2008.com). Regarding the status and the latest news of the conference, please see below: * We aim to make the conference carbon neutral by purchasing offsets for the greenhouse gas emissions of this event, e.g. travels. Details will be available on the conference website soon. * All 26 special tracks of the conference have already received a high number of quality abstracts covering all continents of the world. Please visit the individual track calls for papers on the conference website written by experts in their respective area of expertise. If you do not find a suitable track for your contribution, you can also submit your abstract to the general program. The general program encompasses a rich diversity of timely sustainability themes. Each abstract will be reviewed by international experts of the organizing committee and by the conference co-chair. Each author will receive written comments on his/her abstract. * Please visit the very interesting invited keynote speakers listed on the website. * A variety of international peer-reviewed journals will consider conference presentations for publication. Special issues are in preparation for the majority of the conference tracks. For example the journals Sustainable Development, Cleaner Production and Business Strategy and the Environment are supporting the conference. Details are available on the conference website. * Our social program enables the experience of the wilderness and wild nature of incredible India. For example tiger and elephant safaris, Himalayas and the golden sands on the coast of the Arabian Sea. We look forward to your abstract and participation in the 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference. Welcome to India! On behalf of all track organisers, and Dr. Arun Sahay, Conference chair (Management Development Institute, India) Dr. Jouni Korhonen, Conference co-chair and co-chair of ISDRS (Abo Akademi University, Finland) Prof. Richard Welford, Co-chair of ISDRS (Hong Kong University, Hong Kong, China) Ms. Kaisa Pihlatie, Coordinator of the organising committee (Abo Akademi University, Finland) -- Kaisa Pihlatie Project Manager ?bo Akademi University Faculty of Technology Department of Industrial Management Piispankatu 8, FI-20500 Turku, FINLAND Mobile: +358 50 428 0875 Fax: +358 2 215 4791 E-mail: kaisa.pihlatie at abo.fi www.abo.fi/fak/tkf/indek/ie *** 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference September 21-23, 2008, India Habitat Center New Delhi, India www.14aisdrc2008.com *** ____________________________________________________________ Come visit Florida! Click now to plan and save on your next vacation. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mppMFvXngh2iS4cIfTfozSzdY9VhW8W3HbH68UiFse0H8Us/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080613/2c9e8819/attachment-0001.html From brianczech at juno.com Fri Jun 13 07:07:48 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:07:48 GMT Subject: [EESS] WWF Science Position: Ecosystem Services Mapping and Valuation Message-ID: <20080613.100748.15551.3@webmail21.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- WWF Science Position: Ecosystem Services Mapping and Valuation World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the global conservation organization, seeks a Senior Program Officer to lead efforts to quantify and value ecosystem services within our priority ecoregions. The position is part of the Natural Capital Project, a collaboration among WWF, The Nature Conservancy, and Stanford University, focused on integrating ecosystem services into conservation and development efforts worldwide (www.naturalcapitalproject.org). The Project has been developing a set of software tools to map ecosystem services and their economic values, and we are now beginning to apply them more widely in the field. This individual will coordinate a team of scientists to apply these tools within WWF programs to achieve conservation goals. This involves training and collaborating with WWF field staff to use the software tools, working with the Project's core modeling team to revise the underlying models based on experience in the field, collaborating with WWF's policy and finance staff to link scientific results to policy outcomes, and communicating findings via scientific publications, oral presentations, and the Project's learning network. The position is within WWF's Conservation Science Program, and reports to the Director of Conservation Science. Position requirements: Significant (ideally 3-5 years) experience in ecosystem services with strong grasp of technical and non-technical issues. Successful record of applying science to international conservation problems. Masters or PhD degree in conservation biology, ecology, eco-hydrology, environmental economics, or related field. Strong analytical skills and scientific creativity. Excellent abilities in project organization, team leadership, and written and oral communications. Willingness to travel extensively. Experience with GIS, training others in science-related tools, and fundraising is preferred. AA/EOE Women and minorities are encouraged to apply. To apply visit http://www.worldwildlife.org/who/careers/jobs.html . We will begin evaluating applications June 30th. ____________________________________________________________ Click here for proven Credit Repair programs. Increase your score today! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m2LaUf2HUcrdJ7TgBTdffipZPOyWgUFBxhBECin5Y3eZIs8/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080613/37981a4c/attachment-0001.htm From KStade at cspinet.org Tue Jun 17 06:13:38 2008 From: KStade at cspinet.org (Kirsten Stade) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 09:13:38 -0400 Subject: [EESS] Prominent conservationists to debate with Interior Secretary Lynn Scarlett at Rejuvenating Public Sector Science conference July 11 Message-ID: Don't miss this opportunity to hear Interior Secretary Lynn Scarlett discuss "Conservation in a Hostile Climate" with Clinton Administration Forest Service Deputy Chief Jim Furnish, The Center for Biological Diversity's Noah Greenwald, and the National Center for Conservation Science and Policy's Dominick Dellasalla at the Center for Science in the Public Interest's Integrity in Science Conference! Rejuvenating Public Sector Science will be held July 11, 2008, 9 am. - 5:30 pm. at the Ronald Reagan International Center in Washington, DC. The conference will throw a spotlight on the need for independent regulatory science and protecting public sector scientists from political meddling and corporate influence. Sessions will include focusing government research on the climate crisis, protecting and empowering scientists at federal agencies, insulating clean energy research from special interests, standardizing scientific journal conflict of interest disclosure policies, and reducing conflicts of interest on federal advisory committees. Registration rates are $250, or $109 for affiliates of non-profits, educational institutions, and government agencies. Special rate of $30 for students, and free for press! For more information and to register, call (202) 777-8348 or visit our website at http://cspinet.org/integrity/conflictedscience_conf.html. Kirsten Stade Program Manager, Integrity in Science Center for Science in the Public Interest http://cspinet.org/integrity/watch/index.html Tel. (202) 777-8348 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080617/c4202082/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Tue Jun 17 10:06:14 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:06:14 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: Global Water for Sustainability Program, program coordinator Message-ID: <20080617.130614.467.1@webmail02.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- The Global Water for Sustainability (GLOWS) Program has an open position for a program coordinator. Please share the attached announcement with any colleagues or past students that you think might be qualified and interested. The position is based at Florida International University in Miami but may involve travel to South America, East Africa, and South Asia. The position is open immediately and will continue through September, 2009. Renewal beyond that time is possible but contingent upon renewed funding. Thanks, Michael -- Michael E. McClain Associate Professor, Dept. of Environmental Studies Director, Global Water for Sustainability Program Florida international University Miami, Florida USA 33199 tel. 1-305-348-6826 fax. 1-305-348-6137 mobile. 1-305-338-4704 email: michael.mcclain at fiu.edu http://www.fiu.edu/~mcclainm http://globalwaters.net ____________________________________________________________ Help is here! Click now for simple and easy Financial Advice. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m2fnY5Z7bAsoJlXBfzTUuGDIgzuQaVzqKisvFS1Ez3I6uza/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080617/b8c6cc1f/attachment.htm From rwdietz at yahoo.com Tue Jun 17 12:54:37 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:54:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] Jobs at the Global Footprint Network Message-ID: <642073.56877.qm@web32101.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi EESSers, There are several job openings at one of my favorite NGOs, the Global Footprint Network. The mission of the Global Footprint Network is to support a sustainable economy by advancing the ecological footprint as a measurement and management tool. To see the jobs, go to this webpage: http://www.footprintnetwork.org/gfn_sub.php?content=jobs Thanks, Rob Dietz Chair, WGEESS From nkdawe at shaw.ca Wed Jun 18 17:31:37 2008 From: nkdawe at shaw.ca (Neil K Dawe) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:31:37 -0800 Subject: [EESS] Noosa Shire Case Study Message-ID: <4859A8E9.4060904@shaw.ca> You may have already heard of Noosa Shire, Australia but, if not, it's nice to have an example of a community that values its biodiversity and natural landscapes, is aware of carrying capacity, and as a result has capped its population and is actively seeking a steady state economy. > http://www.isocarp.net/Data/case_studies/963.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080618/f6588952/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Jun 19 13:18:19 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:18:19 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: Senior economist position in New Zealand Message-ID: <20080619.161819.29039.0@webmail18.dca.untd.com> If you are interested contact Julia Porter (julia.porter at mfe.govt.nz).--------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you want to help create a sustainable New Zealand? Are you interested in influencing decisions that affect the quality of New Zealand?s environment and our economic and social wellbeing? We have a great opportunity for an experienced and highly motivated economist to join the Ministry for the Environment's Sustainability Outcomes Team. The team is responsible for strategy development within the Ministry and works with key central government agencies to develop strategic approaches to managing for sustainability outcomes. The primary purpose of this key role is to provide economic advice to: * enhance the Ministry?s strategy capability * work with other government agencies on a whole-of-government approach to advancing sustainability * help increase economic understanding and capability across the Ministry. This senior role requires a pragmatic economist who is to able to identify key economic concepts and apply them in complex policy situations. The successful candidate will play a leading role in enabling New Zealand to more effectively value the environment and its contribution to economic and social wellbeing. They will also provide advice on international developments in environmental economics and the implications of these developments for New Zealand.For more information on this position please go to http://www.mfe.govt.nz/about/jobs/economist-sustainability-outcomes-1080/ or contact me (julia.porter at mfe.govt.nz).--------------------------------------------------------------------------Regards Julia Julia Porter | Senior Manager | Sustainability Outcomes Team | Reporting and Communications Ministry for the Environment - Manat? M? Te Taiao | mfe.govt.nz Ph: (04) 439 7404 | Mobile: 027 228 4700 | Fax: (04) 439 7706 | 23 Kate Sheppard Pl | PO Box 10362 | Wellington ____________________________________________________________ Sweepstakes!!! Enter for your chance to WIN a summer spa getaway! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7Ujk0Z3N20lgFY4I09eqebjaPdBFOalQtlnN5DlUijdP6qw/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080619/60e213ce/attachment-0001.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Jun 19 15:06:56 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 22:06:56 GMT Subject: [EESS] Yale position in ecosystem economics Message-ID: <20080619.180656.29022.2@webmail21.dca.untd.com> Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies Junior or Senior Faculty Position in Economics The School of Forestry & Environmental Studies (F&ES) at Yale University invites applications for a tenure-track or tenured faculty position in economics. The successful candidate is expected to have a Ph.D. in economics and an established research program on such topics as: environment and development (sustainable development), international trade and the environment, agriculture and environment, integration of ecosystem and economic models, or global public goods. International, women, and U.S. minority candidates are especially encouraged to apply. The successful applicant will be expected to teach courses at the graduate level in F&ES and at the undergraduate level in Yale College. The successful candidate will be expected to build on existing strengths in economics at Yale and also to develop collaborative activities with other disciplines working on crosscutting environmental issues. Applicants should send a curriculum vitae, a statement of research interests, a statement of teaching interests, one representative paper, and a list of three references via email to jane.coppock at yale.edu or via surface mail to: Economics Search c/o Assistant Dean Jane Coppock Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies 205 Prospect Street New Haven, CT 06511 USA The committee will begin reviewing applications November 1, 2008. The search remains open until the position is filled. For more information about the position, contact search committee chair Professor Robert Mendelsohn at robert.mendelsohn at yale.edu. Yale University is an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer. Men and women of diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds and cultures are encouraged to apply. ____________________________________________________________ Fabulous Spa Getaway! Enter for your chance to WIN great beauty prizes everyday! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7VOA062LLJcGyUm1P213QvlXdH7NgNoiXssXkQQeIUTMb5y/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080619/c1c1a98e/attachment-0001.htm From brianczech at juno.com Fri Jun 20 18:30:49 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:30:49 GMT Subject: [EESS] "Weathercocks and Signposts" Message-ID: <20080620.213049.768.1@webmail18.dca.untd.com> http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/weathercocks_report2.pdf This cutting-edge report by the WWF-UK emphasizes the futility of the "win-win," growth-and-conservation approach that has dominated the environmental movement for the past 30 years. Here is one of the highlights: "The dominant view among governments is that sustainable consumption must be pursued through the increased consumption of more sustainable products, thus preserving the legitimacy of government pursuit of economic growth, while seeking to reduce the environmental impact of this. For example, the UK government?s approach to sustainable consumption and production is aimed at ?[b]reaking the link between economic growth and environmental pollution? and ?achieving economic growth whilst respecting environmental limits.?53 "But as Tim Jackson points out, ?it would be entirely possible, under this framing of the problem, to have a growing number of ethical and green consumers buying more and more ?sustainable? products produced by increasingly efficient production processes, and yet for the absolute scale of resource consumption ? and the associated environmental impacts ? to continue to grow... Simplistic appeals to reduce material consumption while maintaining economic growth risk charges of naivety or even disingenuousness.?54 Indeed, this perspective is supported by studies on the energy intensivity of economic growth." As the professional societies take scientifically sound positions, and the conservation NGOs stand on these positions with educational campaigns, the public and policy makers will finally reject the well-heeled but environmentally catastrophic "win-win" rhetoric and policies. The sooner it all happens, the less biodiversity will be lost, and the more room will remain for prosperity among nations. Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ The Two Coreys-New Season Child Stars. Adult Issues. New season of the Two Coreys airs Sundays 1 http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7WQrtaUmOYEjZFRQG96a5NjGKZljNO0OIVMLSewT7mikZgY/ From pshayes at maine.rr.com Mon Jun 23 06:33:01 2008 From: pshayes at maine.rr.com (Peter S. Hayes) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 09:33:01 -0400 Subject: [EESS] "Weathercocks and Signposts" In-Reply-To: <20080620.213049.768.1@webmail18.dca.untd.com> References: <20080620.213049.768.1@webmail18.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: <485FA60D.8060405@maine.rr.com> Hi Brian, As a matter of ... well, opinion (at least somewhat well-informed)... don't most of the traditional 'growth without environmental degradation' models (at least those that I've looked at) assume some rather amazing ability to produce at an increased efficiency (or as one survey paper seemed to explain it... some manner of intermediate goods requiring no environmental input, but resulting in the replacement of environmentally-derived inputs as factors of production of normal goods)? While there is certainly some historical support for this as a possible direction in technological progress, it is limited and doesn't seem to hold the promise of being anything like a 'law' of technology... The end result is that, I think, any claim to increased consumption with lessened environmental impact needs an extremely critical assessment to ensure that there aren't hidden costs (more externalities? smoke and mirrors have shifted the environmental costs from one venue to another... from green house gases to habitat destruction, or a similar problem...). The only easily verifiable, sure solution to consumption beyond any concept of carrying capacity (whether we wish to call it that or something else) is reduction of consumption... anything else is possible, but not terribly likely in most instances. Pete brianczech at juno.com wrote: > http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/weathercocks_report2.pdf > > This cutting-edge report by the WWF-UK emphasizes the futility of the "win-win," growth-and-conservation approach that has dominated the environmental movement for the past 30 years. Here is one of the highlights: > > "The dominant view among governments is that sustainable consumption must be pursued through the increased consumption of more sustainable products, thus preserving the legitimacy of government pursuit of economic growth, while seeking to reduce the environmental impact of this. For example, the UK government?s approach to sustainable consumption and production is aimed at ?[b]reaking the link between economic growth and environmental pollution? and ?achieving economic growth whilst respecting environmental limits.?53 > > "But as Tim Jackson points out, ?it would be entirely possible, under this framing of the problem, to have a growing number of ethical and green consumers buying more and more ?sustainable? products produced by increasingly efficient production processes, and yet for the absolute scale of resource consumption ? and the associated environmental > impacts ? to continue to grow... Simplistic appeals to reduce material consumption while maintaining economic growth risk charges of naivety or even disingenuousness.?54 Indeed, this perspective is supported by studies on the energy intensivity of economic growth." > > As the professional societies take scientifically sound positions, and the conservation NGOs stand on these positions with educational campaigns, the public and policy makers will finally reject the well-heeled but environmentally catastrophic "win-win" rhetoric and policies. The sooner it all happens, the less biodiversity will be lost, and the more room will remain for prosperity among nations. > > > Brian Czech, Ph.D., President > Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy > The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . > > ____________________________________________________________ > The Two Coreys-New Season > Child Stars. Adult Issues. New season of the Two Coreys airs Sundays 1 > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7WQrtaUmOYEjZFRQG96a5NjGKZljNO0OIVMLSewT7mikZgY/ > _______________________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From brianczech at juno.com Tue Jun 24 08:18:42 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 15:18:42 GMT Subject: [EESS] "Weathercocks and Signposts" Message-ID: <20080624.111842.12831.3@webmail02.dca.untd.com> Peter, Thanks for your well-thought and insightful comment. You are addressing the crucial technical matter on the relationship between economic growth and biodiversity conservation; i.e., the prospect for technological progress to reconcile the two conflicting goals. I have been investigating this topic for years and have an article in press at Conservation Biology on precisely this topic. I think it's scheduled for fall. I don?t want to ?spill the beans? prematurely, but the upshot is what I will paraphrase here as a "chicken-and-egg spiral" of technological progress and economic growth at current levels of technology, with economies of scale an essential source of R&D financing, and with concurrent erosion of biodiversity. This will also be the subject of my talk in Chattanooga. In a nutshell, I think you are on the right track. Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . -- "Peter S. Hayes" wrote: Hi Brian, As a matter of ... well, opinion (at least somewhat well-informed)... don't most of the traditional 'growth without environmental degradation' models (at least those that I've looked at) assume some rather amazing ability to produce at an increased efficiency (or as one survey paper seemed to explain it... some manner of intermediate goods requiring no environmental input, but resulting in the replacement of environmentally-derived inputs as factors of production of normal goods)? While there is certainly some historical support for this as a possible direction in technological progress, it is limited and doesn't seem to hold the promise of being anything like a 'law' of technology... The end result is that, I think, any claim to increased consumption with lessened environmental impact needs an extremely critical assessment to ensure that there aren't hidden costs (more externalities? smoke and mirrors have shifted the environmental costs from one venue to another... from green house gases to habitat destruction, or a similar problem...). The only easily verifiable, sure solution to consumption beyond any concept of carrying capacity (whether we wish to call it that or something else) is reduction of consumption... anything else is possible, but not terribly likely in most instances. Pete brianczech at juno.com wrote: > http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/weathercocks_report2.pdf > > This cutting-edge report by the WWF-UK emphasizes the futility of the "win-win," growth-and-conservation approach that has dominated the environmental movement for the past 30 years. Here is one of the highlights: > > "The dominant view among governments is that sustainable consumption must be pursued through the increased consumption of more sustainable products, thus preserving the legitimacy of government pursuit of economic growth, while seeking to reduce the environmental impact of this. For example, the UK government?s approach to sustainable consumption and production is aimed at ?[b]reaking the link between economic growth and environmental pollution? and ?achieving economic growth whilst respecting environmental limits.?53 > > "But as Tim Jackson points out, ?it would be entirely possible, under this framing of the problem, to have a growing number of ethical and green consumers buying more and more ?sustainable? products produced by increasingly efficient production processes, and yet for the absolute scale of resource consumption ? and the associated environmental > impacts ? to continue to grow... Simplistic appeals to reduce material consumption while maintaining economic growth risk charges of naivety or even disingenuousness.?54 Indeed, this perspective is supported by studies on the energy intensivity of economic growth." > > As the professional societies take scientifically sound positions, and the conservation NGOs stand on these positions with educational campaigns, the public and policy makers will finally reject the well-heeled but environmentally catastrophic "win-win" rhetoric and policies. The sooner it all happens, the less biodiversity will be lost, and the more room will remain for prosperity among nations. > > > Brian Czech, Ph.D., President > Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy > The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . > > ____________________________________________________________ > The Two Coreys-New Season > Child Stars. Adult Issues. New season of the Two Coreys airs Sundays 1 > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7WQrtaUmOYEjZFRQG96a5NjGKZljNO0OIVMLSewT7mikZgY/ > _______________________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ EESS mailing list EESS at list.conbio.org http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess ____________________________________________________________ Orlando Vacations - Click Here! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nK7ukMOeP2VLCrnfEMu1N2L2lNqHd7aVP3oxLGbgakogAJO/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080624/b3c391e2/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Tue Jun 24 11:55:34 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:55:34 GMT Subject: [EESS] Developing theme in climate change reporting Message-ID: <20080624.145534.655.2@webmail07.dca.untd.com> We are beginning to see a common thread in the reporting on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions: the unjust environmental devastation of impoverished nations resulting from the obsessive economic growth of wealthy nations. See for example: http://www.onearth.org/article/the-gathering-storm http://www.metro.co.uk/news/climatewatch/article.html?in_article_id=183284&in_page_id=59 The case of Bangladesh casts a ghastly ironic pall over the misguided philosophy of ?a rising tide lifts all boats,? the rallying cry of the economic growth lobby that is used to avoid the issue of economic justice. Of course this linkage of economic bloating and international injustice has long been recognized in ecological economics and sustainability science. It is also recognized in the proposed SCB position on economic growth, the second paragraph of which includes the following: ?The SCB takes the position that economic growth remains an appropriate goal in societies where the material standard of living is inadequate for healthy and happy lives. The SCB takes the position that economic growth is no longer an appropriate goal in wealthier parts of the world, where instances of poverty may be eliminated through the sharing of wealth rather than an attempt to amass more per capita wealth simply by growing the economy in the aggregate.? Yet we cannot blame politicians, governments, and the international community for failing to acknowledge this problem prior to it occurring. We haven?t even had the fortitude to take a stance on it in the SCB, of all places! But what we do from here is up to us. Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Internet Security Software - Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mEWrcSm3hunnxU5imZMbmbqClQMFhOZxiREIcqzGxGnp0iI/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080624/d85b0e94/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Thu Jun 26 10:32:12 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:32:12 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: Framework for cost-benefit analysis of economic growth Message-ID: <20080626.133212.3032.1@webmail19.dca.untd.com> Thanks to Mark Eads of the U.S. EPA for passing this on... Please note: forwarded message attached A cost-benefit analysis for the economic growth in China Abstract: Currently, traditional development issues such as income inequality, depletion of natural resources, environmental pollution as well as retardation of infrastructure have occurred in China. In the future, more pressures would be imposed on China by the continuous fast development of industrialization, and with transfer of the world manufacture center to China. Sustainable development, including its economic, environmental and social elements, is a key goal of decisionmakers. This paper develops a methodology on cost benefit analysis of economic growth at macroscopic level to identify issues of China's sustainability. In order to address some important issues on how to make policies to improve the quality of economic growth, the CBA framework developed in this study analyses economic?ecological?social interaction, building three accounts that reflect three dimensions of sustainable development that includes 26 sub-models in all, and finally is integrated into an index as Net Progress Proceeds (NPP). The estimation methods of these submodels, such as cost of environmental pollution, depletion of natural resources and defensive expenditures are described in detail. Based on the framework and methods, this paper examines the costs and benefits of economic growth in three aspects of economy, ecology and society. The results illustrate that NPP of China's economic growth had been negative for a long time and has just became positive since year 2000 but was quite low. Even the best was only 1.6% in 2002 (the worst was ? 24.2% in 1982). Based on the comparison between three accounts, we can draw a conclusion that ecological cost is the dominant factor that affects China's NPP. The empirical results show that if no other innovative measures or policies are taken in the future the costs of growth would outweigh its benefits, resulting in un-sustainability. Basically, the long-term economic growth would be unsustainable due to increasing environmental damage and depletion of natural resources. There are a few limitations that we consider need to be improved in our CBA framework and method, nevertheless they have many options that can be explored by policy makers, to make the development path more sustainable. (See attached file: BCA for economic growth.pdf) ____________________________________________________________ Fabulous Spa Getaway! Enter for your chance to WIN great beauty prizes everyday! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7Urpwy90dal6huASp0wEnz2rfIfao5237rIsQtUWazvPbC8/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080626/12253fe8/attachment.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: BCA for economic growth.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 723812 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080626/12253fe8/attachment-0001.pdf From mgrover at vt.edu Wed Jul 2 10:43:31 2008 From: mgrover at vt.edu (mgrover at vt.edu) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:43:31 -0400 Subject: [EESS] [SSWG] Ideas wanted: Top 100 Research Questions in Conservation In-Reply-To: <38B838B2210D8749B82E5914B5E3FA5E07B24A49@kelso.cudenver.edu> References: <38B838B2210D8749B82E5914B5E3FA5E07B24A49@kelso.cudenver.edu> Message-ID: <1215020611.486bbe43e28b2@webmail.vt.edu> 1.Will local/regional conservation efforts achieve their goals, given that we are permanently losing ecosystem services on a daily basis due to the extensive impact of a growing human economy. 2.What type of global governance and collaboration is required to stop this alarming loss? Mansi on the macro and global scale make sense Quoting "Igoe, James" : > Hello Everyone, > > I would like to add a few things to the list that Mike (hi Mike) has > already started in unpacking my more general questions. I find this one > especially interesting: > > "what indicators best measure/represent 'neoliberal conservation'?" > (i.e., what yardstick do we use to measure 'neoliberal conservation', so > that we can understand why it is more prevalent in some settings than > others, and so we can examine the impact of neoliberalizing conservation > on both people and nature...) > > and I think to this we should definitely add Robin's question: > > Does the expansion of conservation territories speed up the expansion > and intensification of market integration? > > Taking these together I would derive > > What are the relationships of conservation territories to the > commodification of nature in different contexts? > > Commodification can be roughly defined as the transformation of > previously Untradable things into tradable things (part of what I > would include in the indicators of neoliberal conservation > question > above); > > What kinds of influence does the commodification of nature have on > people's resource management practices in different contexts? > > What kinds of influence does the commodification of nature have on > people's livelihood options? Specifically, which people are best > positioned to avail themselves of these transformations and which people > are most likely to be harmed by them? > > What types of relationships can be discerned between the commodification > of nature and the emergence of different kinds of conservation policies > and/or management regimes? > > > > Thinking about conservation at more global scales, or perhaps more > accurately in the context of globalization, I think we would also want > to think about: > > How do spectacular performances of conservation through various forms of > mass media and touristic experiences influence peoples' environmental > ethos in societies with high rates of mass consumption? > > I realize that this last one needs to be operationalized in the ways > Mike did with my previous questions, but these kinds of questions are > crucially important. The reason being that the vast majority of > questions we have generated so far focus very heavily on local resource > users in areas being conserved, but conservation is connected to all > kinds of other institutions and processes that have significant > implications for the future of this planet, or perhaps more immediately > the future of conservation. Unless I am terribly mistaken, for instance, > the expenditure of energy and resources on protecting distant exotic > places is a project whose days are numbered. The current global > conservation regime relies very heavily on air and car travel, the > future of which is very much in question at the moment. More broadly, > consumers in wealthier parts of the world tend to have a much deeper > ecological footprint than people who live and make their living in the > landscapes targeted by mainstream international conservation. If some of > the questions we ask don't focus on this side of the equation, and thus > a more holistic understanding of global conservation and its complex and > varied relationships to global neoliberalism, I think we will find > ourselves in trouble in the next couple of decades. > > Best to wishes to you all, > > Jim > > > -----Original Message----- > From: sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org] > On Behalf Of Mascia, Michael > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 8:50 AM > To: SSWG ListServe > Subject: Re: [SSWG] Ideas wanted: Top 100 Research Questions in > Conservation > > Hi, everyone. > > Thanks for the excellent suggestions and run of ideas. As a reminder, > I'd like your suggestions by July 1. > > For the purposes of the workshop exercise, more discrete questions are > preferred, as they provide better direction to researchers and funding > organizations. Thus, to build on Jim's suggestion (hi, Jim), we might > want to unpack his first question: > > 1. What are the nature of relationships between biodiversity > conservation and globalizing neoliberal market regimes? > > Might become: > 1. "what impact does liberalizing trade have on deforestation patterns > and trends?" > 2. "what are the impacts of ecolabeling regimes on fisheries and > fisheries-dependent local communities?" > 3. "what are the impacts of decentralized governance on grassland > ecosystems and traditional land management practices among > pastoralists?" > 4. "what impact has the commodification of carbon had on governmental, > NGO, and private sector forest policies, and on patterns and trends of > deforestation?" > 5. "what factors shape the emergence, evolution, and performance > (ecological and social) of corporate social responsibility regimes?" > 6. "what indicators best measure/represent 'neoliberal conservation'?" > (i.e., what yardstick do we use to measure 'neoliberal conservation', so > that we can understand why it is more prevalent in some settings than > others, and so we can examine the impact of neoliberalizing conservation > on both people and nature...) > 7. "how have moves to decentralize resource governance and promote > corporate social responsibility influenced corporate control over > forests and forest peoples?" > > > I'm sure there are many, many others... these are just a few that popped > into my head this AM. > > > In addition, please don't forget the basics. For example: > 1. what are the impacts of protected areas on resource-dependent local > communities? How do the social impacts vary depending upon the nature of > PA governance? > 2. what factors explain variation in the biological and social > effectiveness of community-based conservation strategies? > 3. what are the impacts of food insecurity/scarcity on resource use > patterns (by both artisanal and industrial actors) and biodiversity > loss? > 4. What indicators best measure/represent the degree of > individual/household/community dependence upon natural > resources/biodiversity? > > Again, there are myriad others, but these are just a few that popped > into my head... > > > Thanks again for the suggestions. Keep 'em coming! > > Best, > Mike > > > > Michael B. Mascia, Ph.D. > Senior Social Scientist & > President, SCB Social Science Working Group > Conservation Science Program > World Wildlife Fund > 1250 24th Street NW > Washington, DC 20037 USA > (202) 778-9532 > michael.mascia at wwfus.org > > -----Original Message----- > From: sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org] > On Behalf Of Igoe, James > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:06 PM > To: SSWG ListServe > Subject: Re: [SSWG] Ideas wanted: Top 100 Research Questions in > Conservation > > Hello everyone, > > I absolutely agree with what Kate Ervine has written here, and I believe > that we can take this line of questioning even further: > > 1) What are the nature of relationships between biodiversity > conservation and globalizing neoliberal market regimes; > > 2) In what ways to spectacular presentations of biodiversity > conservation in the context of global consumer capitalism influence our > understandings of nature, and especially our place in nature; and > finally; > > 3)How do these relationships and processes effect the ways in which > biodiversity conservation actually gets done. > > Best to you all, > > Jim Igoe > > -----Original Message----- > From: sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org] > On Behalf Of Kate Ervine > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:14 PM > To: SSWG ListServe > Subject: Re: [SSWG] Ideas wanted: Top 100 Research Questions in > Conservation > > Hello all, > > I'm convinced that any successful attempt to conserve biodiversity > globally > (beyond mere pockets), has got to see biodiversity and its conservation > in > relational terms - which many political ecology projects have sought to > do. In > this sense, I think that a key question would look something like: > > Is is possible to (or can we) acheive conservation goals/success in the > face of > broader macro-economic trends and processes, including trade > liberalization, > neoliberal de-regulation, etc? > > I take free trade as an example. Please see the report "The > Environmental and > Social Impacts of Economic Liberalization on Corn Production in Mexico" > by > Alejandro Nadal which was commissioned by Oxfam GB and WWF International > and > published in 2000, for an example. The author provides an empirically > rich > report that demonstrates the negative relationship between the North > American > Free Trade Agreement and its elimination of tariffs on corn in Mexico, > and the > conservation of biodiversity in that country. Given that this model > continues > to proliferate globally, it must be taken seriously. My own work in > Chiapas > reveals the tensions between attempting to implement conservation > projects that > ignore larger political economic questions (and I agree that they are > also about > growth in general) - to the extent that they are unable in many > instances to > achieve what they set out for themselves. > > Of course, this takes us into the terrain of global power and politics > which is > much more difficult to address - but I nevertheless think it's > imperative to > attempt to do so - in the interests of both conservation success and > equity. > > Best, > Kate > > -- > Kate Ervine > Doctoral Candidate - Department of Political Science > Researcher - International Secretariat for Human Development > York University > Course Instructor - Trent University > Tel: 705-874-8959 > > _______________________________________________ > SSWG mailing list > SSWG at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/sswg > _______________________________________________ > SSWG mailing list > SSWG at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/sswg > From dobson at msu.edu Wed Jul 2 14:36:31 2008 From: dobson at msu.edu (Tracy Ann Dobson) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:36:31 -0400 Subject: [EESS] [SSWG] Ideas wanted: Top 100 Research Questions in Conservation In-Reply-To: <1215020611.486bbe43e28b2@webmail.vt.edu> References: <38B838B2210D8749B82E5914B5E3FA5E07B24A49@kelso.cudenver.edu> <1215020611.486bbe43e28b2@webmail.vt.edu> Message-ID: I've been away and unable to participate in this important conversation until now. I have a related thought. Allow me to provide some context. Years ago I was involved in regulatory litigation with Michigan utiities. They had plans to dot the state with nuclear power plants. After a short involvement, I could see that ngo folks like me were being overwhelmed by the tsunami of wealth and power coming against me.(On the power plant front, I would love to claim that I "won," but it was the economics that foiled their plans in the late seventies.) I'm still thinking about how to work with their natural flow to bring about the ends we desire and know are necessary for humans and others to continue existence in this exquisite place. "Natural flow" may not be the correct formulation, but clearly we have to work with them. I'm giving a presentation in Chattanooga on challenges and opportunities, and perhaps the biggest challenge is this one: bringing the powerful (business, government) around to see that conservation is indeed in their best interest. HOW DO WE DO THIS? Tracy mgrover at vt.edu writes: > 1.Will local/regional conservation efforts achieve their goals, given that we > are permanently losing ecosystem services on a daily basis due to the extensive > impact of a growing human economy. > > 2.What type of global governance and collaboration is required to stop this > alarming loss? > > Mansi > > > > > on the macro and global scale make sense Quoting "Igoe, James" > : > >> Hello Everyone, >> >> I would like to add a few things to the list that Mike (hi Mike) has >> already started in unpacking my more general questions. I find this one >> especially interesting: >> >> "what indicators best measure/represent 'neoliberal conservation'?" >> (i.e., what yardstick do we use to measure 'neoliberal conservation', so >> that we can understand why it is more prevalent in some settings than >> others, and so we can examine the impact of neoliberalizing conservation >> on both people and nature...) >> >> and I think to this we should definitely add Robin's question: >> >> Does the expansion of conservation territories speed up the expansion >> and intensification of market integration? >> >> Taking these together I would derive >> >> What are the relationships of conservation territories to the >> commodification of nature in different contexts? >> >> Commodification can be roughly defined as the transformation of >> previously Untradable things into tradable things (part of what I >> would include in the indicators of neoliberal conservation >> question >> above); >> >> What kinds of influence does the commodification of nature have on >> people's resource management practices in different contexts? >> >> What kinds of influence does the commodification of nature have on >> people's livelihood options? Specifically, which people are best >> positioned to avail themselves of these transformations and which people >> are most likely to be harmed by them? >> >> What types of relationships can be discerned between the commodification >> of nature and the emergence of different kinds of conservation policies >> and/or management regimes? >> >> >> >> Thinking about conservation at more global scales, or perhaps more >> accurately in the context of globalization, I think we would also want >> to think about: >> >> How do spectacular performances of conservation through various forms of >> mass media and touristic experiences influence peoples' environmental >> ethos in societies with high rates of mass consumption? >> >> I realize that this last one needs to be operationalized in the ways >> Mike did with my previous questions, but these kinds of questions are >> crucially important. The reason being that the vast majority of >> questions we have generated so far focus very heavily on local resource >> users in areas being conserved, but conservation is connected to all >> kinds of other institutions and processes that have significant >> implications for the future of this planet, or perhaps more immediately >> the future of conservation. Unless I am terribly mistaken, for instance, >> the expenditure of energy and resources on protecting distant exotic >> places is a project whose days are numbered. The current global >> conservation regime relies very heavily on air and car travel, the >> future of which is very much in question at the moment. More broadly, >> consumers in wealthier parts of the world tend to have a much deeper >> ecological footprint than people who live and make their living in the >> landscapes targeted by mainstream international conservation. If some of >> the questions we ask don't focus on this side of the equation, and thus >> a more holistic understanding of global conservation and its complex and >> varied relationships to global neoliberalism, I think we will find >> ourselves in trouble in the next couple of decades. >> >> Best to wishes to you all, >> >> Jim >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org] >> On Behalf Of Mascia, Michael >> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 8:50 AM >> To: SSWG ListServe >> Subject: Re: [SSWG] Ideas wanted: Top 100 Research Questions in >> Conservation >> >> Hi, everyone. >> >> Thanks for the excellent suggestions and run of ideas. As a reminder, >> I'd like your suggestions by July 1. >> >> For the purposes of the workshop exercise, more discrete questions are >> preferred, as they provide better direction to researchers and funding >> organizations. Thus, to build on Jim's suggestion (hi, Jim), we might >> want to unpack his first question: >> >> 1. What are the nature of relationships between biodiversity >> conservation and globalizing neoliberal market regimes? >> >> Might become: >> 1. "what impact does liberalizing trade have on deforestation patterns >> and trends?" >> 2. "what are the impacts of ecolabeling regimes on fisheries and >> fisheries-dependent local communities?" >> 3. "what are the impacts of decentralized governance on grassland >> ecosystems and traditional land management practices among >> pastoralists?" >> 4. "what impact has the commodification of carbon had on governmental, >> NGO, and private sector forest policies, and on patterns and trends of >> deforestation?" >> 5. "what factors shape the emergence, evolution, and performance >> (ecological and social) of corporate social responsibility regimes?" >> 6. "what indicators best measure/represent 'neoliberal conservation'?" >> (i.e., what yardstick do we use to measure 'neoliberal conservation', so >> that we can understand why it is more prevalent in some settings than >> others, and so we can examine the impact of neoliberalizing conservation >> on both people and nature...) >> 7. "how have moves to decentralize resource governance and promote >> corporate social responsibility influenced corporate control over >> forests and forest peoples?" >> >> >> I'm sure there are many, many others... these are just a few that popped >> into my head this AM. >> >> >> In addition, please don't forget the basics. For example: >> 1. what are the impacts of protected areas on resource-dependent local >> communities? How do the social impacts vary depending upon the nature of >> PA governance? >> 2. what factors explain variation in the biological and social >> effectiveness of community-based conservation strategies? >> 3. what are the impacts of food insecurity/scarcity on resource use >> patterns (by both artisanal and industrial actors) and biodiversity >> loss? >> 4. What indicators best measure/represent the degree of >> individual/household/community dependence upon natural >> resources/biodiversity? >> >> Again, there are myriad others, but these are just a few that popped >> into my head... >> >> >> Thanks again for the suggestions. Keep 'em coming! >> >> Best, >> Mike >> >> >> >> Michael B. Mascia, Ph.D. >> Senior Social Scientist & >> President, SCB Social Science Working Group >> Conservation Science Program >> World Wildlife Fund >> 1250 24th Street NW >> Washington, DC 20037 USA >> (202) 778-9532 >> michael.mascia at wwfus.org >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org] >> On Behalf Of Igoe, James >> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:06 PM >> To: SSWG ListServe >> Subject: Re: [SSWG] Ideas wanted: Top 100 Research Questions in >> Conservation >> >> Hello everyone, >> >> I absolutely agree with what Kate Ervine has written here, and I believe >> that we can take this line of questioning even further: >> >> 1) What are the nature of relationships between biodiversity >> conservation and globalizing neoliberal market regimes; >> >> 2) In what ways to spectacular presentations of biodiversity >> conservation in the context of global consumer capitalism influence our >> understandings of nature, and especially our place in nature; and >> finally; >> >> 3)How do these relationships and processes effect the ways in which >> biodiversity conservation actually gets done. >> >> Best to you all, >> >> Jim Igoe >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:sswg-bounces at list.conbio.org] >> On Behalf Of Kate Ervine >> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:14 PM >> To: SSWG ListServe >> Subject: Re: [SSWG] Ideas wanted: Top 100 Research Questions in >> Conservation >> >> Hello all, >> >> I'm convinced that any successful attempt to conserve biodiversity >> globally >> (beyond mere pockets), has got to see biodiversity and its conservation >> in >> relational terms - which many political ecology projects have sought to >> do. In >> this sense, I think that a key question would look something like: >> >> Is is possible to (or can we) acheive conservation goals/success in the >> face of >> broader macro-economic trends and processes, including trade >> liberalization, >> neoliberal de-regulation, etc? >> >> I take free trade as an example. Please see the report "The >> Environmental and >> Social Impacts of Economic Liberalization on Corn Production in Mexico" >> by >> Alejandro Nadal which was commissioned by Oxfam GB and WWF International >> and >> published in 2000, for an example. The author provides an empirically >> rich >> report that demonstrates the negative relationship between the North >> American >> Free Trade Agreement and its elimination of tariffs on corn in Mexico, >> and the >> conservation of biodiversity in that country. Given that this model >> continues >> to proliferate globally, it must be taken seriously. My own work in >> Chiapas >> reveals the tensions between attempting to implement conservation >> projects that >> ignore larger political economic questions (and I agree that they are >> also about >> growth in general) - to the extent that they are unable in many >> instances to >> achieve what they set out for themselves. >> >> Of course, this takes us into the terrain of global power and politics >> which is >> much more difficult to address - but I nevertheless think it's >> imperative to >> attempt to do so - in the interests of both conservation success and >> equity. >> >> Best, >> Kate >> >> -- >> Kate Ervine >> Doctoral Candidate - Department of Political Science >> Researcher - International Secretariat for Human Development >> York University >> Course Instructor - Trent University >> Tel: 705-874-8959 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SSWG mailing list >> SSWG at list.conbio.org >> http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/sswg >> _______________________________________________ >> SSWG mailing list >> SSWG at list.conbio.org >> http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/sswg >> > > > _______________________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > From rwdietz at yahoo.com Thu Jul 3 11:02:48 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:02:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] WGEESS Activities at the SCB Annual Meeting Message-ID: <274112.36094.qm@web32106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi All, The WGEESS will be active at the SCB annual meeting in Chattanooga later this month. We are sponsoring a symposium on the relationship between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. We will also hold a members meeting and provide information at the SCB booth. Below is a schedule of our events, as well as some related activities. I hope to see you in Chattanooga. Thanks, Rob Dietz Chair, WGEESS Tuesday July 15 -Symposium ? Economic Growth and Biodiversity: The Elemental Arguments, 10 ? 12:00, Room 4, 5 10:00 THE HUMAN 'ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT' AND COMPETITIVE EXCLUSION: WHY THE EXPANDING ECONOMY NECESSARILY MEANS BIODIVERSITY LOSS William Rees; *David Trauger 10:15 MACRO POLICY LEVEL SOLUTIONS, INCLUDING TAXATION, BANKING, FISCAL, MONETARY, AND TRADE POLICY, AND THEIR IMPACT ON BIODIVERSITY *Michael A Larson; Philip Lawn 10:30 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC GROWTH AND BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION: A HISTORICAL REVIEW OF THE ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS PERSPECTIVE *Robert Dietz 10:45 PROSPECTS FOR RECONCILING THE CONFLICT BETWEEN ECONOMIC GROWTH AND BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION WITH TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS *Brian Czech 11:00 UNDER- AND OVER-GROWN: ECONOMIC GROWTH, BIODIVERSITY, AND THE GLOBAL NORTH AND SOUTH *Jon Rosales 11:15 THE VALUATION SOLUTION Joshua Farley; *David Richards 11:30 PANEL DISCUSSION -WGEESS membership meeting 4 ? 5:30 PM, Room 18 We will give a brief overview of working group status and accomplishments, discuss the plan of activities (soliciting input from the membership), and hold a brainstorming session on the draft position on economic growth. Wednesday July 16 -WGEESS at SCB Booth, 8 ? 5:00 Related Activities Thursday July 10 - Sunday July 13 -Short Course ? The Role of the Social Sciences in Conservation Planning Friday July 11 ? Sunday July 13 -Short Course ? Targeting Behavior: Designing Conservation Behavior Change Programs Sunday, July 13 -Workshop ? How to Conserve Biological Diversity By Improving Public and Corporate Policies -Workshop ? Integrative Conservation Problem Solving: Methods to Bridge the Natural and Social Sciences Monday, July 14th -Social Science Working Group (SSWG) informational meeting, 12:00-1:30 pm, Room H of the Convention Center. Thursday July 17 -Plenary speaker, Winona LaDuke, 8 ? 9:30 AM -Symposium ? Connecting Ecological and Socioeconomic Monitoring to Management for Marine Protected Areas in California's Channel Islands, 10 - 12:00, Room 13, 14 -Closing Speaker, Bill McKibben, author of Deep Economy, 7 PM From nkdawe at shaw.ca Mon Jul 7 18:36:42 2008 From: nkdawe at shaw.ca (Neil K Dawe) Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:36:42 -0800 Subject: [EESS] [Fwd: Ecology, The Moment of Truth - An Introduction, John J. Simon] Message-ID: <4872C4AA.20002@shaw.ca> http://www.monthlyreview.org/080701foster-clark-york.php > Yet, if revolutionary solutions are increasingly required to address > the ecological problem, this is precisely what the existing social > system is guaranteed /not /to deliver. Today's environmentalism is > aimed principally at those measures necessary to lessen the impact of > the economy on the planet's ecology /without/ challenging the economic > system that in its very workings produces the immense environmental > problems we now face. What we call "/the/ environmental problem" is in > the end primarily a problem of political economy. Even the boldest > establishment economic attempts to address climate change fall far > short of what is required to protect the earth---since the "bottom > line" that constrains all such plans under capitalism is the necessity > of continued, rapid growth in production and profits. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080707/532c5ad7/attachment.html From larson.grapids at gmail.com Tue Jul 8 09:41:03 2008 From: larson.grapids at gmail.com (Mike Larson) Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:41:03 -0500 Subject: [EESS] Economic Growth & Biodiversity - symposium at SCB-Chattanooga Message-ID: <53dd27b60807080941k5c97e54ajd572e2c5fce5e824@mail.gmail.com> *Economic Growth and Biodiversity: The Elemental Arguments* Society for Conservation Biology Annual Meeting Chattanooga, TN Tuesday, July 15, 10:00 a.m to 12:00 noon Room 4 and 5 Revised Agenda -- The order has changed and is different than the order you'll see in the conference program, so you may want to print a copy of this and bring it along. (Presenters are listed with an asterisk.) 10:00 - The Relationship Between Economic Growth and Biodiversity Conservation: A Historical Review of the Ecological Economics Perspective - Robert Dietz 10:15 - The Human Ecological Footprint and Competitive Exclusion: Why the Expanding Economy Necessarily Means Biodiversity Loss - William Rees; *David Trauger 10:30 - Macroeconomic Policies for Biodiversity Conservation - Philip Lawn; *Michael A Larson 10:45 - Prospects for Reconciling the Conflict Between Economic Growth And Biodiversity Conservation via Technological Progress - *Brian Czech 11:00 - Under- And Over-Grown: Economic Growth, Biodiversity, and the Global North and South - *Jon Rosales 11:15 - The Valuation Solution - Joshua Farley; *David Richards 11:30 Panel Discussion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080708/3305918a/attachment.html From larson.grapids at gmail.com Tue Jul 8 10:24:10 2008 From: larson.grapids at gmail.com (Mike Larson) Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 12:24:10 -0500 Subject: [EESS] CORRECTION - Economic Growth & Biodiversity symposium in Chattanooga Message-ID: <53dd27b60807081024i5201f0a4hbcd760a8e1c5fbcc@mail.gmail.com> [Previous message included the original (i.e., incorrect) rather than revised schedule of presentations.] *Economic Growth and Biodiversity: The Elemental Arguments* Society for Conservation Biology Annual Meeting Chattanooga, TN Tuesday, July 15, 10:00 a.m to 12:00 noon Room 4 and 5 Revised Agenda -- The order has changed and is different than the order you'll see in the conference program, so you may want to print a copy of this and bring it along. (Presenters are listed with an asterisk.) 10:00 - The Relationship Between Economic Growth and Biodiversity Conservation: A Historical Review of the Ecological Economics Perspective - *Robert Dietz 10:15 - The Human Ecological Footprint and Competitive Exclusion: Why the Expanding Economy Necessarily Means Biodiversity Loss - William Rees; *David Trauger 10:30 - The Valuation Solution - Joshua Farley; *David Richards 10:45 - Prospects for Reconciling the Conflict Between Economic Growth And Biodiversity Conservation via Technological Progress - *Brian Czech 11:00 - Macroeconomic Policies for Biodiversity Conservation - *Michael A Larson; Philip Lawn 11:15 - Under- And Over-Grown: Economic Growth, Biodiversity, and the Global North and South - *Jon Rosales 11:30 Panel Discussion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080708/8f8029e8/attachment.htm From chuckw at coastrange.org Tue Jul 8 10:25:31 2008 From: chuckw at coastrange.org (Chuck Willer) Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 10:25:31 -0700 Subject: [EESS] Economic Growth & Biodiversity - symposium at SCB-Chattanooga In-Reply-To: <53dd27b60807080941k5c97e54ajd572e2c5fce5e824@mail.gmail.co m> References: <53dd27b60807080941k5c97e54ajd572e2c5fce5e824@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080708172614.960A0C6BE@mailman.intermedia.net> EESS list, The program looks great and I look forward to hearing the presentations. A few items: (1) I don't know if anyone brought to the attention of the group a May 5th Scientific American article by Robert Nadau: The Economist Has No Clothes. "The 19th-century creators of neoclassical economics?the theory that now serves as the basis for coordinating activities in the global market system?are credited with transforming their field into a scientific discipline. But what is not widely known is that these now legendary economists?William Stanley Jevons, L?on Walras, Maria Edgeworth and Vilfredo Pareto?developed their theories by adapting equations from 19th-century physics that eventually became obsolete. Unfortunately, it is clear that neoclassical economics has also become outdated. The theory is based on unscientific assumptions that are hindering the implementation of viable economic solutions for global warming and other menacing environmental problems." Nadau is an English professor who appears to be presenting the insights of Philip Mirowski's 1991 work More Heat Than Light. See: http://www.amazon.com/More-Heat-than-Light-Perspectives/dp/0521426898 What is interesting to read are the comments following the Nadau piece which attack him without offering a shred of substance. See: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-economist-has-no-clothes (2) Along the Macroeconomics track is a Joe McCauley review of two books about the credit crisis of 2008 which seem to be highly relevant to economic growth via the somewhat hidden institutional system that creates liquidity. I've said to Brian a number of times that financial dynamics are the key to getting a handle on capitalistic growth. Since I had a bit of insomnia last night I was rereading Keynes' General Theory and it's amazing how the system has evolved right back into what JMK warned us of and explained. McCauley offers in his review that shadow banking money creation amounts to three times M3, , which, I believe, is unregulated, off-the-books money creation in the range of $50 to $60 trillion dollars. Now that's something to get your head around. See you all at SCB 2008. Chuck Willer chuckw at coastrange.org The New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What it Means by George Soros and The Trillion Dollar Meltdown: Easy Money, high rollers, and the Great Credit Crash by Charles R. Morris There are three books that should be read in order to begin to understand where we stand financially in the world today. Second and third are the two reviewed here, the first and most basic is the one that I reviewed last year: Eichengreen's 'Globalization of Capital'. Eichengreen presents the history of the Dollar from the gold standard until convertibility was cancelled in 1971 and then through 1995. Specific details of recent financial history under deregulation, which we date from 1971, are also usefully provided in Lewis's 'Liars Poker' and Dunbar's 'Inventing Money'. We can date the use of the Dollar as international default reserve currency since 1945, while the inflation of the worldwide credit bubble dates exactly from the deregulation of the Dollar in 1971. The two books reviewed here mention the necessary background history in highly capsulized form, and focus on the onset of deregulation to the present era of worldwide financial instability due to the flood of Dollars as the result of uncontrolled derivatives creation and trading. Both Soros and Morris present numbers that help the reader to understand what's happening, but neither paints a full picture. See also the 2nd edition of my 'Dynamics of Markets' to appear in 2009, where some qualitative ideas of market instability are quantified empirically. Morris and Soros should be read in parallel, Soros consulted Morris for certain details. Morris begins with the Reagan era of easy credit, big spending, and the systematic deletion of financial rules that had been set up under FDR as a result of The Great Depression. Eichengreen correctly presents the Great Depression as a liquidity crisis that could have been avoided, we've had no depression since that time because central banks have always been able to provide adequate liquidity in financial crises (with the new shadow banking, the number of Dollars in the world is so great that this is no longer guaranteed to work as before). Morris notes that the exercise of judgment in policy making was dropped when politicians shared the illusion of economists that, under the marriage of (neoclassical) economics with high-powered math, economics had become a science. Lucas's famous laissez faire policy critique (which Soros labels 'market fundamentalism') represents the epitome of that illusion. The Chicago School of Economic ideology is rightly blamed by Morris for the current morass. Morris describes various synthetic option products, especially collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs), created in 1983 in era of the collapse of savings & loans in the U.S. as a result of splitting mortgages into derivatives (see also Lewis). CDOs, credit default swaps, and other derivatives that were useful in expanding the bubble are also described. One is the SIV (structured investment vehicle), which has been extremely useful in getting credit created by mortgages off the balance sheets of banks (again, the number of Dollars in the world is great due to uncontrolled credit, and wealthy people are always looking for profitable places to 'park' all that money). Unfortunately, the money supply is discussed by neither author, but the Dollar M2 is roughly $7 trillion, M3 is about twice that. M2 describes all money (credit is counted as money) under the control of the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank. M3 includes 'Eurodollars', money outside the U.S. that's used to create credit in, say, China, under the multiplier rules of Chinese banks. M3 includes all 'on balance book' Dollars in the world. To understand where we now stand, the reader must know about 'shadow banking', also mentioned by Morris with SIVs as the prime vehicle for that form of uncontrolled money creation. Shadow banking, so far as I've managed to understand it, includes credit that is at least triple the amount of M3. This means that the U.S. is in a worse position financially than we were in the 19th century before the Federal Government outlawed currency printing by commercial banks. In a word, and as Morris argues convincingly, financial regulations are absolutely necessary, the free market/free trade binge is over, the Dollar cannot be salvaged under current financial, trade, and political policy. I read on the web that total Dollar mortgages are on the order of magnitude of M3, meaning that mortgages are largely an unregulated form of money creation today (again, due to shadow banking where the banks that create the mortgages get them off the books quickly via derivatives). The world was quite different before the Reagan-Thatcher ideology took hold. Soros's new book tells the same story of the mistakes made in the name of 'market fundamentalism' (laissez faire) since 1971, but with some different emphasis and also with even more useful numbers provided for the readers' orientation. He states, e.g., that CDSs (collateralized debt swaps), a synthetic option invented in Europe in the early 1990s, amounts to about $43 trillion, again over three times M3. In stark contrast, U.S. household wealth is about the same, the capitalization of the U.S. stock market is $18 trillion, and the U.S. treasuries market is about $5 trillion. Again, compare the numbers with M3 and you'll understand why the oil price in Dollars has exploded, is still exploding, and will continue to explode. Until a worldwide recession sets in, and the U.S. takes drastic steps to regain control over the Dollar. In my opinion, shadow banking, combined with the U.S. trade deficit, is the reason that the Dollar is weak. The high price of oil in Dollars reflects not only the new demand for oil in Asia, but equally so far too many Dollars in the form of uncontrolled credit floating around in the world. Under free trade rules the U.S. trade deficit has exploded due to loss of manufacturing capacity to Asia, and is recycled back to Washington to finance the budget deficit (U.S. taxes are far too low) to the tune of half a trillion Dollars in interest paid largely to Beijing and Tokyo each year. It's quite clear that the U.S. taxpayer has not yet contributed to the cost of the Iraq war, that war is largely financed by loans from Beijing and Tokyo in recycled Dollars. Morris and Soros did not mention this directly, but they could have. Extremely low taxes combined with deregulation (permitting the systematic loss of manufacturing capacity to cheap labor) are the reason for the fall of America to its present severely weakened state. Soros is not less critical of deregulation and the prevailing belief in the illusion of "market equilibrium" than is Morris. George began criticizing those ideas in his first book published in 1994. Included in his new book is the autobiography of both his early years and his life as a trader, this makes for very interesting reading! A quote from his son is hilarious. In an earlier interview, the son was asked by a reporter what he thought of his father's theory (of reflexivity). The son replied that he knew as a kid that it's at least half B.S., his father trades when his back hurts! George Soros has a twenty year history warning against the prevailing belief in 'market fundamentalism' and the consequences of extreme deregulation. Because of excessive Dollar creation under those illusions, the chickens have come home to roost, it's George's day now. I would only hope that the Democratic presidential candidate in the U.S. would have enough understanding and insight to appoint him, or someone with understanding of the instability of unregulated financial markets and unregulated free trade, as his top economic advisor. McCain is of course hopeless, and Obama has as top economic advisor a nonfinancial expert from the University of Chicago. The outlook is indeed gloomy for those of us who would like to see a sharp shift in economic, taxation, and trade policy. The history of market instability under deregulation is described in chapter 9 of my coming 2nd edition of 'Dynamics of Markets', where I show explicitly that stationary markets (equilibrium markets) violate the efficient market hypothesis, and consequently the observed martingale dynamics of detrended financial returns. According to Eichengreen, there is circumstantial evidence that pre-WWI FX markets were stationary, speculators systematically made money betting in those markets. The market for derivatives emerged with the deregulation of FX markets in 1971, after which the instability exploded. This history is included in the new chapter 9, while chapter 10 revisits the 'rational expectations' model and the modeling basis for Lucas's laissez faire policy advice. We're in a worldwide financial crisis because the required liquidity cannot be provided without degrading the Dollar even further: as I've stated above, known shadow banking is at least three times M3. We face either depression (unlikely) or a Dollar plunging even deeper (more likely) because more Dollars must be 'printed' as credit to avoid a worldwide financial collapse. Such a collapse would likely be worse (as Soros points out) than The Great Depression. Soros's idea of reflexitivity is qualitatively correct, the financial system is not inherently stable, it's inherently unstable. Free markets are not a stable self-regulating dynamical system, markets can only be stabilized by adding regulations. Because of the inventiveness with which 'rocket sciences' can invent derivatives to avoid regulations, derivatives creation must be strongly limited. Either that, or continue as we do now with the instability and degradation of the Dollar. Both Morris and Soros point out that Alan Greenspan, an ideological follower of the free market extremism of Ayn Rand ('Atlas Shrugged', 'The Fountainhead') absolutely refused to consider regulating derivatives and preventing the mortgage bubble. Well, the party is over. The Dollar will have to be replaced as international reserve currency by a basket of regulated currencies, and free trade will have to be regulated if the West is to avoid massive unemployment in the long run. I end with a joke. A CSU (Bavarian CDU) politician recently responded to concern expressed by a voter over the loss of manufacturing capacity in Germany. He responded (my translation): "Oh, it will be covered by international finance market investments." Lots of other McCauley book reviews at: http://www.unifr.ch/econophysics/bookreviews.php At 09:41 AM 7/8/2008, Mike Larson wrote: >Economic Growth and Biodiversity: The Elemental Arguments > >Society for Conservation Biology Annual Meeting >Chattanooga, TN >Tuesday, July 15, 10:00 a.m to 12:00 noon >Room 4 and 5 > >Revised Agenda -- The order has changed and is >different than the order you'll see in the >conference program, so you may want to print a >copy of this and bring it along. (Presenters are listed with an asterisk.) > >10:00 - The Relationship Between Economic Growth >and Biodiversity Conservation: A Historical >Review of the Ecological Economics Perspective - Robert Dietz > >10:15 - The Human Ecological Footprint and >Competitive Exclusion: Why the Expanding Economy >Necessarily Means Biodiversity Loss - William Rees; *David Trauger > >10:30 - Macroeconomic Policies for Biodiversity >Conservation - Philip Lawn; *Michael A Larson > >10:45 - Prospects for Reconciling the Conflict >Between Economic Growth And Biodiversity >Conservation via Technological Progress - *Brian Czech > >11:00 - Under- And Over-Grown: Economic Growth, >Biodiversity, and the Global North and South - *Jon Rosales > >11:15 - The Valuation Solution - Joshua Farley; *David Richards > >11:30 Panel Discussion >_______________________________________________ >EESS mailing list >EESS at list.conbio.org >http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080708/b4645728/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Wed Jul 9 07:15:02 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 14:15:02 GMT Subject: [EESS] CASSE volunteer positions - meeting at SCB conference Message-ID: <20080709.101502.1478.1@webmail08.dca.untd.com> The Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE) announces the establishment of volunteer positions corresponding with particular taxonomic or ecological expertise. This will help to build upon CASSE?s strong foundation in biodiversity conservation. Volunteers may be students, retirees, or professionals in between! We would like to meet with prospective volunteers at the SCB conference in Chattanooga. CASSE volunteer positions typically entail 4-8 hours of activity per week. Volunteer activities are tailored to the individual?s interests and experience, as applicable to CASSE?s efforts toward educating the public and policy makers on the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. No money changes hands but occasionally CASSE volunteers receive speaking invitations whereby honoraria are offered. For the time being, we are most interested in two volunteer positions: Fisheries Specialist and Marine Specialist. The Fisheries Specialist is expected to have more expertise in freshwater fisheries. The Marine Specialist may have a focus on marine fisheries or other aspects of marine biodiversity and ecology. (We may consider other volunteer positions on a case-by-case basis.) Volunteers may be from anywhere in the world, with research or conservation interests in any part of the world. If you are interested in one of these positions, and will be attending the SCB conference, please call me at 703-901-7190 before or during the conference. We?ll then arrange to meet. If you are interested but will not be attending the conference, email me at czech at vt.edu with a copy to Rob Dietz, CASSE Executive Director, at rob_dietz at steadystate.org. Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Fabulous Spa Getaway! Enter for your chance to WIN great beauty prizes everyday! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7UrpUaV6UGMnu9Wy0veXJDvQeAdrlzbAfCNBnfhQViqhC6Q/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080709/c2b04b13/attachment.html From rmunera at yahoo.com Wed Jul 9 08:11:48 2008 From: rmunera at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Claudia_M=FAnera?=) Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 08:11:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] CORRECTION - Economic Growth & Biodiversity symposium in Chattanooga Message-ID: <713541.48177.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Dear Mike, for those people that will not be able to attend the annual meeting, how can we obtain abstracts of these interesting conferences? Claudia M?nera ----- Mensaje original ---- De: Mike Larson Para: eess at list.conbio.org Enviado: martes, 8 de julio, 2008 11:24:10 Asunto: [EESS] CORRECTION - Economic Growth & Biodiversity symposium in Chattanooga [Previous message included the original (i.e., incorrect) rather than revised schedule of presentations.] Economic Growth and Biodiversity: The Elemental Arguments Society for Conservation Biology Annual Meeting Chattanooga, TN Tuesday, July 15, 10:00 a.m to 12:00 noon Room 4 and 5 Revised Agenda -- The order has changed and is different than the order you'll see in the conference program, so you may want to print a copy of this and bring it along.(Presenters are listed with an asterisk.) 10:00 - The Relationship Between Economic Growth and Biodiversity Conservation: A Historical Review of the Ecological Economics Perspective - *Robert Dietz 10:15 - The Human Ecological Footprint and Competitive Exclusion: Why the Expanding Economy Necessarily Means Biodiversity Loss - William Rees; *David Trauger 10:30 - The Valuation Solution - Joshua Farley; *David Richards 10:45 - Prospects for Reconciling the Conflict Between Economic Growth And Biodiversity Conservation via Technological Progress - *Brian Czech 11:00 - Macroeconomic Policies for Biodiversity Conservation - *Michael A Larson; Philip Lawn 11:15 - Under- And Over-Grown: Economic Growth, Biodiversity, and the Global North and South - *Jon Rosales 11:30 Panel Discussion __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ?gratis! Reg?strate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080709/1cdfd3b9/attachment.htm From larson.grapids at gmail.com Wed Jul 9 21:28:57 2008 From: larson.grapids at gmail.com (Mike Larson) Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 23:28:57 -0500 Subject: [EESS] CORRECTION - Economic Growth & Biodiversity symposium in Chattanoog In-Reply-To: <713541.48177.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <713541.48177.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <53dd27b60807092128r723bea03p69a15a13f6c2b8e0@mail.gmail.com> Claudia and others: The abstracts are available now on the conference web site. The following link is to a PDF that is 1.5 MB: http://tinyurl.com/5omnj5 . Our symposium is session 30, beginning on page 56. [The full URL is http://www.conbio.org/activities/meetings/2008/program/SCB2008_Abstract_Book.pdf] Furthermore, I think most or all of the symposium presentations are based on manuscripts that are being published in a special section of Conservation Biology. Mike On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Claudia M?nera wrote: > Dear Mike, > > > > for those people that will not be able to attend the annual meeting, how > can we obtain abstracts of these interesting conferences? > > > > Claudia M?nera > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080709/5074bfae/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Jul 10 06:34:34 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:34:34 GMT Subject: [EESS] WGEESS members at the SCB conference Message-ID: <20080710.093434.6433.0@webmail01.dca.untd.com> Fellow WGEESS members, For those of us attending the SCB conference in Chattanooga, let?s participate in the numerous WGEESS venues and related venues of significance to WGEESS activities. Participation is important because there are those in the SCB ? perhaps not many but some very vocal ? that have expressed opposition to WGEESS priorities and activities. While we are at the conference, it would help considerably if we chatted with non-members about the priorities of the WGEESS and the rationale for them. Let?s remind them that the WGEESS reflects the priorities of ecological economics, and that those priorities are necessary not only for ecologically prudent economic policy, but for biodiversity conservation as well. We can summarize for them that the priorities in ecological economics are: 1) Sustainable scale; i.e., limits to growth. This is where our priority of a position on economic growth comes from. 2) Equitable distribution of wealth. We know that the neoclassical metaphor of ?a rising tide lifts all boats? has proven disastrous to biodiversity and many developing countries. This is where the scale and distribution issue converge. 3) Efficient allocation of resources, as manifest in the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation via the valuation of natural capital and ecosystem services. It?s important to get the prices right, and to reform or supplement national income accounts such as GDP, but only after the appropriate goal (not economic growth) is recognized. Otherwise it?s just a more efficient milking of natural capital. Let?s bring multiple copies of our proposed position on economic growth, accessible here: http://www.conbio.org/workinggroups/EESS/Proposed_Position_on_EG_for_SCB_at_Large_VI.pdf and hand them out to the folks we converse with. We can have these conversations throughout the halls of the conference, but here is a short list (far from comprehensive) of significant venues: Tuesday, July 15, Symposium ? Economic Growth and Biodiversity: The Elemental Arguments, 10 ? 12:00, Room 4, 5. Sponsored by the WGEESS. Tuesday, July 15, WGEESS membership meeting 4 ? 5:30 PM, Room 18. Wednesday, July 16, WGEESS at SCB Booth, 8 ? 5:00. The SSWG will also be staffing this booth. Here we will have an opportunity to explore collaborative activities with SSWG folks. This booth will also provide an opportunity to ask SSWG board representatives why the 43-5 majority vote of SSWG members, many of which are also WGEESS members, for supporting an SCB position on economic growth was overruled by the SSWG board. Monday, July 14, SSWG business/members meeting (open to all SCB members), 12-1:30 pm, Convention Center, Room H. Ditto. Monday, 7pm, Joint SSWG & ANA Section Social, Convention Center, Rotunda. Ditto. For those attending the Short Course on ?Targeting Behavior: Designing Conservation Behavior Change Programs? and workshops on ?How to Conserve Biological Diversity By Improving Public and Corporate Policies? and ?Integrative Conservation Problem Solving: Methods to Bridge the Natural and Social Sciences,? please help to engage the participants in our WGEESS thoughts and priorities. Let's encourage friends, colleagues, and new acquaintances to join the WGEESS, too. I would be most happy to meet any WGEESS members about ideas, questions, or concerns. Please give me a call during the conference if you?d like to meet: 703-901-7190. Sunday, Monday, Wednesday, or Thursday morning would be best for me. Hope to see you all there! Brian Czech, Past Chair, WGEESS ____________________________________________________________ Click to find affordable options to attain your business degree. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3l7gMyLIL4ZgiCjzFzj8Dr2EN7pIezu0FCN2T42TGAHzvgq4/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080710/fad05031/attachment-0001.html From brianczech at juno.com Fri Jul 18 08:02:45 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:02:45 GMT Subject: [EESS] FAO position in rangeland economics Message-ID: <20080718.110245.18783.0@webmail07.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- This position might be of interest to economists with an interest in the environment, developing economies and livestock related issues. http://www.fao.org/VA/PROF/2061AGA_en.htm Regards, Jerry Gerald Nelson, professor emeritus and Senior Research Fellow Intl. Food Policy Research Inst. 2033 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 g.nelson at cgiar.org ____________________________________________________________ Click for online loan, fast & no lender fee, approval today http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m3WMONgjEX5jvYMgQdDfZ4Z6bnodimdLOReJpgaodwdIdB6/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080718/36aac917/attachment.htm From jed.holtzman at aya.yale.edu Sat Jul 19 20:58:35 2008 From: jed.holtzman at aya.yale.edu (Jed Holtzman) Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 23:58:35 -0400 Subject: [EESS] Tenured or tenure-track faculty position in economics Message-ID: Hello listserv members. It was a pleasure to meet some of you at the meeting last week. Whatever was the outcome of the Board of Governors meeting? As I mentioned to Brian and Kirsten later, one of the big environmental economics professors at the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies announced his retirement a few months ago, and several of my fellow students and I (who uncoincidentally had all taken a 'capitalism and the environment' course with Gus Speth last year) wrote the Board of Permanent Officers to encourage them to replace him with an ecological economist. A couple months later, the position description was released and it largely conforms to our requests. The letter is below and the position description is attached. Please pass it around widely to individuals who may be interested, and certainly include yourselves. Best, Jed Holtzman, MEM '08 To the Board of Permanent Officers: Professor Robert Repetto's retirement at the end of this semester will leave an opening in the F&ES economics faculty. We believe this opening presents a unique opportunity for F&ES to distinguish itself as an institution at the center of the connection among economics, ecology, and equity. The time is right to hire an ecological economist. We distinguish ecological economists from environmental economists on the basis of their research. The research agenda of an ecological economist will focus predominantly on one or more of the following areas: intra- and inter-generational equity in natural resource use; measures and indicators of sustainability and economic development; integration of economic and ecological models; scale, throughput, and substitutability of artificial and natural capital; and trade, environment, and development. We believe these research areas are important, relevant to intellectual discourse at F&ES, and underrepresented in the research agendas of the current faculty. A faculty member that integrates these themes into a coherent body of research and teaching would be an asset to the F&ES community. Indeed, as members of the F&ES community interested in the cutting-edge field of ecological economics, we have observed that many of the broader questions addressed by this subdiscipline underlie much of the intellectual discourse within the F&ES student body. Yet, despite this undercurrent, there are limited opportunities to explore the themes of ecological economics with academic rigor, and to acquire the trans-disciplinary analytical tools that we will need to tackle these issues in the real world. As society begins to address the broad social and environmental challenges before us, the long-term answers may increasingly be found in ecological economics. F&ES has the opportunity to make a mark on history by embracing this emerging field and equipping students with its tools and insights. To broaden the resources available to F&ES students and faculty, strengthen the school's dialogue surrounding sustainability, and promote graduates' ability to effect positive action, we strongly believe that F&ES should recruit an ecological economist to fill the faculty position soon vacant. Sincerely yours, -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080719/d6f65cee/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FES Economics Position Description FINAL 6-10-08.doc Type: application/msword Size: 134656 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080719/d6f65cee/attachment-0001.doc From jed.holtzman at aya.yale.edu Sat Jul 19 21:01:34 2008 From: jed.holtzman at aya.yale.edu (Jed Holtzman) Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 00:01:34 -0400 Subject: [EESS] position description Message-ID: I see now that the list can't accept attachments. Here's the position description I just posted about. -Jed Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies *Junior or Senior Faculty Position in Economics* The School of Forestry & Environmental Studies (F&ES) at Yale University invites applications for a tenure-track or tenured faculty position in economics. The successful candidate is expected to have a Ph.D. in economics and an established research program on such topics as: environment and development (sustainable development), international trade and the environment, agriculture and environment, integration of ecosystem and economic models, or global public goods. International, women, and U.S. minority candidates are especially encouraged to apply. The successful applicant will be expected to teach courses at the graduate level in F&ES and at the undergraduate level in Yale College. The successful candidate will be expected to build on existing strengths in economics at Yale and also to develop collaborative activities with other disciplines working on crosscutting environmental issues. Applicants should send a curriculum vitae, a statement of research interests, a statement of teaching interests, one representative paper, and a list of three references via email to jane.coppock at yale.edu or via surface mail to: Economics Search c/o Assistant Dean Jane Coppock Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies 205 Prospect Street New Haven, CT 06511 USA The committee will begin reviewing applications November 1, 2008. The search remains open until the position is filled. For more information about the position, contact search committee chair Professor Robert Mendelsohn at robert.mendelsohn at yale.edu. *Yale** **University** is an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer. Men and women of diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds and cultures are encouraged to apply.* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080720/784ba579/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Tue Jul 22 04:49:20 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:49:20 GMT Subject: [EESS] EcoNorfolk Foundation endorses position on economic growth Message-ID: <20080722.074920.10688.3@webmail17.dca.untd.com> The Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE) has received from the EcoNorfolk Foundation its 35th organizational endorsement of the CASSE position on economic growth. The EcoNorfolk Foundation is the principal environmental organisation on the South Pacific Territory of Norfolk Island. EcoNorfolk has a long record of involvement with international initiatives. EcoNorfolk is dedicated to promoting ecologically sustainable development and biodiversity conservation in and from Norfolk Island, and also to assisting in advancing the science of sustainability with the wider international community. CASSE Australian Director Geoff Moseley is working with EcoNorfolk toward endorsements from other Pacific Island organizations. For further information on EcoNorfolk see www.econorfolk.nf. Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Learn to trade with confidence! Online Stock Trading. Click Now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mKCawEjy0B6CzyP6EFov5yWEWvIGvznx5Z6PB2cPIuvte1m/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080722/56d397be/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Tue Jul 22 10:08:55 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:08:55 GMT Subject: [EESS] SCB co-founder: study the impacts of growh or "fight them"? Message-ID: <20080722.130855.10545.0@webmail18.dca.untd.com> Michael Soule, SCB co-founder and CASSE signatory, is now wrestling with the issue of whether to study the impacts of economic growth or to "fight them," as the article notes. He and colleagues such as Paul Ehrlich have done plenty of the former and are now turning toward the latter, as all the studies haven't translated into conservation. It would have helped them to have a scientifically sound SCB position describing the basic trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. Without such positions, it will be too easy for local pols to portray these champions of biodiversity conservation as radical "greens" intent on shutting down the economy, when instead the whole Front Range could be forthrightly addressing the need to balance size of the economy with the amount of ecological integrity. At least Soule and colleagues will have the positions of The Wildlife Society and American Society of Mammalogists to stand on, but of course those are far from a firm foundation of professional society position statements. July 22, 2008Where Research and Tourism Collide By MICHELLE NIJHUISGOTHIC, Colo. ? When Michael Soul? researched butterflies in this mountain valley in the early 1960s, the nearby town of Crested Butte was little more than a busted coal-mining settlement. ?You couldn?t even buy a mug or a T-shirt,? said Dr. Soul?, now a conservation biologist. Crested Butte, reborn as a skiing and mountain-biking mecca, today has rows of boutique shops and easy mountain access. At the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory, where Dr. Soul? and generations of other researchers have studied remote alpine habitats, growth is changing both the landscape and the data they collect. The lab, like many other long-running ecological research sites, is trying to decide whether to study such changes or fight them. Founded in 1928 on the site of an abandoned silver-mining town, the independent lab attracts students and scientists from around the world. Working beside a 12,625-foot peak reminiscent of a Gothic cathedral, researchers have gathered decades of data on stream insects, salamanders, marmots and the flowering schedules of alpine plants. ?The whole lab works in one way or another on essentially long-term experiments,? said Paul Ehrlich of Stanford University, who has studied butterfly populations in and around the laboratory since 1960. Global warming has sharpened scientific interest in these unusually long data sets, which reveal climate-induced changes that cannot be seen in shorter studies. As tourism continues in Crested Butte, visitors pour into the steep-sided valley that the lab calls home. The narrow dirt road between the ski area and the laboratory grounds leads to mountain-biking trails and camping spots, and is often clogged with cars, bicycles and off-road vehicles. Daily traffic through the laboratory can exceed 750 vehicles ? laughably light by urban standards, but a marked change for this once-isolated valley, where lines of cars kick up persistent clouds of dust. Researchers find that the hubbub near the road makes even common white-crowned sparrows more likely to abandon their nests. The growing crowds also take a toll on research: despite warning signs, bicyclists and hikers pull up flags and stakes marking research plots, and unleashed dogs leap into field experiments. Road dust is sometimes so thick that researchers find it difficult to observe wildlife from afar, and speeding traffic kills long-studied individual birds and mammals. ?While marmots may be exquisitely evolved to deal with predators, they haven?t exquisitely evolved to deal with cars,? said Daniel T. Blumstein, a biologist at the University of California, Los Angeles. On a weekend morning in early July, Dr. Blumstein?s field crew collected a freshly road-killed marmot, its ear tags identifying it as a member of the laboratory?s 46-year study of marmot behavior. Since these rodents live as long as 15 years, a single animal can represent a treasured store of data. ?Every breeding female is priceless,? he said. Not long ago, he added, a tagged marmot climbed into a car parked near the laboratory and turned up at a gas station in the Denver suburb of Aurora, some 250 miles away ? an extreme example of what he called ?car dispersal? of marmots in and out of the laboratory grounds. Even as scientists undertake new long-term research efforts like the National Ecological Observatory Network to document the effects of climate change and other global phenomena, many longstanding field sites face increasing pressure from growth and development. ?The places where we?ve done key work ? where we now have a foundation, where we can go back and do something 10 times as interesting because we have new technology and understanding ? many of these sites we can?t return to because they?re gone,? said Julio Betancourt, a paleoecologist with the United States Geological Survey. ?This is happening over and over and over again.? Dr. Betancourt has spent most of his career at the Desert Laboratory, a 105-year-old botanical research preserve on the outskirts of Tucson. The laboratory, once surrounded by desert, is now bordered by development and besieged not only by eager hikers but also by an invasive, fire-prone pasture grass. Despite the laboratory?s tradition of passive observation, it has set limited hours for visitors and has taken to fighting the weed with pry bars and herbicides. Some sites in the Long-Term Ecological Research Network, a system of 26 areas financed by the National Science Foundation, have taken a similarly active approach to encroaching civilization, working to preserve surrounding land, manage visitors and eradicate invasive species. Most, however, have had little choice but to turn incursions into research opportunities. At Palmer Station in Antarctica, William R. Fraser has spent more than 30 years studying the effects of tourism on the demographics of Ad?lie penguins, concluding that strict regulations on tourist traffic have so far succeeded in protecting penguins at the station. In central New Mexico, a large ranch bordering a long-term research site based at the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge recently sold to a residential developer. ?We?ve gone from being fairly isolated to wondering, any time we drive out there, if bulldozers will be putting in roads and fire hydrants,? said Scott Collins, principal investigator for the site. ?It?s completely out of our control.? While a few scientists at the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory study the consequences of tourism, the laboratory as a whole is using its influence to manage and minimize the impact of the crowds. ?I think that if this is going to be an area that we don?t love to death, where we can take advantage of the intellectual capital that?s accumulated through time, there are going to have to be changes,? said Ian Billick, the laboratory director. The county has begun treating part of the road with magnesium chloride, which reduces dust but also encourages faster driving. The laboratory, along with the Town of Crested Butte, offers a free, twice-daily bus service into the valley. Dr. Billick and other laboratory staff members are working with town and county officials, ski area representatives and others on new regulations for the road, discussing options like limited closings, mandatory or increased voluntary busing and a permit system for private cars. One oft-cited example is the road leading to the popular Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness, near Aspen, Colo., where a public bus service replaces private cars on summer days. Though local officials are largely supportive of public transportation on the laboratory road, the details are controversial, for any rules will have to address the needs of hikers, bicyclists, equestrians and the scientists themselves. In the rural West, where many people prize the freedom to go anywhere at any time, science can find itself at odds with local society. Visitors to the valley are expected to increase. The Crested Butte ski area, which is proposing to expand its terrain, is planning for 1,100 new residential units on the north end of its property, closest to the laboratory, and 450 to 500 condominium and hotel units at the base of the mountain. Although the mountain land surrounding the laboratory is mostly public, managed by the United States Forest Service, it is dotted with an estimated 6,000 acres of mining claims, private inholdings likely to rise in value as development continues nearby. The Trust for Public Land, along with a local land trust, the laboratory and other groups, has so far purchased or conserved more than 1,600 acres of these properties. Laboratory researchers, for the most part, are loath to become students of disturbance. ?We could document the destruction of this valley, but for scientists, that?s kind of a trivial, boring problem,? said John Harte of the University of California, Berkeley, who has studied the ecological effects of warming temperatures near the laboratory for the past 18 years. ?What?s good science is to be able to study the behavior of plants and animals, and their interactions with the climate and everything else, over a long period of time.? Johannes Foufopoulos, laboratory ecologist and a professor at the University of Michigan, added: ?There?s a place to study disturbance ecology, and there?s a place to try and study intact ecosystems. If I want to study disturbance ecology, I can do that on the outskirts of Detroit.? ------------------------------------- Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Get the shot you need with a discreet new spy camera. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m1EqaO1MF76Ttp78q9UeibjmeCjSCLTAV1ZdtBcoaSbiIPa/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080722/9ee432a9/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Jul 24 14:42:02 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:42:02 GMT Subject: [EESS] Fw: Job Openings for Economists in USEPA, NCEE - Open Period 7/24 - 8/ 6, 2008 for Grades 11, 12 and 13 Message-ID: <20080724.174202.5594.1@webmail09.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- NCEE has some openings for vacant Economist positions in our organization. JOB ANNOUNCEMENT #1 - HQ-OA-DE-2008-0025 http://jobsearch.usajobs.gov/getjob.asp?JobId=74160376&AVSDM=2008%2D07%2D24+00%3A03%3A01 Economist, GS-0110-11 / 12 SALARY RANGE: 58,206.00 - 90,698.00 USD per year PROMOTION POTENTIAL: 13 POSITION INFORMATION: Full-time Permanent OPEN PERIOD: Thursday, July 24, 2008 to Wednesday, August 06, 2008 DUTY LOCATIONS: 2 vacancies - Washington DC Metro Area, DC WHO MAY BE CONSIDERED: ANY U.S. CITIZEN MAY APPLY JOB ANNOUNCEMENT #2: HQ-OA-DE-2008-0026 http://jobsearch.usajobs.gov/getjob.asp?JobId=74159702&AVSDM=2008%2D07%2D24+00%3A03%3A01 Economist, GS-0110-13 SALARY RANGE: 82,961.00 - 107,854.00 USD per year PROMOTION POTENTIAL: 13 POSITION INFORMATION: Full-time Permanent OPEN PERIOD: Thursday, July 24, 2008 to Wednesday, August 06, 2008 DUTY LOCATIONS: 2 vacancies - Washington DC Metro Area, DC WHO MAY BE CONSIDERED: ANY U.S. CITIZEN MAY APPLY JOB SUMMARIES: These positions are located in the Office of the Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics & Innovation, National Center for Environmental Economics, (NCEE), Research & Program Support Division (RPSD). The staff is responsible for promoting the integration of environmental policy with economic and social policy in order to advance environmental protection, economic well-being, and a sustainable future. Founded in 1970, EPA is a dynamic organization employing people from diverse backgrounds dedicated to improving and preserving the quality of public health and the environment. EPA seeks to recruit exceptional men and women who will work in new creative ways that are cleaner for the environment, cheaper for business and taxpayers, and smarter for America's future. MAJOR DUTIES: Incumbent initiates, conducts and reviews benefit-cost and other economic analyses of proposed Agency policies and regulations in order to help design and evaluate standards and programs that maximize net social benefits as required by Executive Order 12866, giving consideration to distributional effects (e.g., regulatory impacts on small businesses and governments) and quantitative cost-benefit information. Performs professional research, applies scientific methods including identifying and conceptualizing research/study needs, planning study approach, collecting and analyzing data and preparing detailed interpretation of result findings. Participates with senior level economists in managing, coordinating major research/study projects, uses computer application models and works closely with contractors on timelines, methodologies and other pertinent issues. QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED: Degree: Successful completion of a full 4-year course of study in an accredited college or university leading to a bachelor's or higher degree in economics, that includes at 21 semester hours in economics and 3 semester hours in statistics, accounting, or calculus, or combination of education and experience: Successful completion of courses equivalent to a major in economics, as shown above, plus appropriate experience or additional education. SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSAs): 1. Knowledge of environmental, natural resource, or agricultural economics; 2. Ability to apply economic analysis to environmental benefits-cost issues; 3. Skill in applying research methods such as market, revealed and direct methods used to prepare economic analyses; 4. Skill in writing research reports and working papers; 5. Ability to collect and integrate economic data for economic studies; and 6. Skill in using automated statistical applications (e.g., SAS, Limdep, GAUSS, Stata, S-Plus-, TSP and SPSS) to conduct quantities economic analysis and methods to produce findings. Agency Contact for more information: Stacey Robinson Phone: 202-564-0515 Fax: 202-564-0685 Email: HOD-DEU at epa.gov Or write: Environmental Protection Agency Office Administration and Resource Management 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460-000 Fax: 202-564-0685 For more information on NCEE, please visit our website: http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/pages/homepage ____________________________________________________________ Get everything you need to hook up your own wireless network by clicking now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3npyAP7Av1Kh4qeYRHMbno0jBukbPoRwcZwzUH6Shs0ZWkNm/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080724/63f3e16a/attachment.html From rwdietz at yahoo.com Mon Jul 28 10:20:06 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] Future of the WGEESS Message-ID: <527140.10528.qm@web32104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi All, The WGEESS had a very up and down meeting in Chattanooga, Tennessee at the SCB annual meeting. Let me explain what I mean by "up and down." Up: We had an outstanding symposium on economic growth and biodiversity conservation. Quite a few people approached me and said that it was the best session of the conference. The six presenters provided theory and evidence of the conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation, and they generated quite a bit of discussion and buzz. Thanks to Jon Rosales for organizing it. Our member meeting was also successful, and we received useful input on working group activities from the participants. Down: The SCB Board of Governors voted to reject the working group authorization package we submitted. Georgina Mace (SCB President) informed me that the board perceived 2 problems: (1) Our documents refer to the "conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation" rather than the "relationship between economic activities and biodiversity conservation." (2) The activities we proposed to advance the topics of ecological economics and sustainability science are too narrow. I should be receiving an official letter from Georgina Mace within a few weeks. The result is that the WGEESS is no longer an official sub-unit of the SCB. I was very disappointed by the board's vote, and I expressed that disappointment in several conversations with board members. I view the issues cited by the board as relatively minor and certainly not cause for rejection of the working group charter. It was especially disappointing on the heels of the symposium. We can apply to become a working group again, and if we do, the SCB Board of Governors will take it up at their next meeting in six months. I recommend that we continue to operate as if we are still a working group, although we are not allowed to represent ourselves publicly as such. I would also like to plan a coordinated response to the SCB Board of Governors, so I will share the official letter when I receive it from Georgina. Thanks, Rob Dietz Past Chair of the WGEESS From ronkejj at yahoo.com Tue Jul 29 00:57:16 2008 From: ronkejj at yahoo.com (Ibironke Olubamise) Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:57:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] Future of the WGEESS Message-ID: <272123.15991.qm@web90507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear Rob, I write to say CONGRATULATIONS for all your efforts and that of others who have contributed?so far to the process. I do not see the "down" as a really down because to me it only teaches us and confirms the importance of positive communication. Although I have not been so active in this effort as I would have loved to but I have followed the discussions by email up until the time of the last meeting and I was hopeful that this efforts would be rewarded accrodingly. I will appreciate if we rather fire up the desire to make success in this endeavour. I am very hopeful that I will Sbe more active this time. My regards Ronke?? +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Ibironke Olubamise (Mrs.) Head, Strategic Operations Nigerian Conservation Foundation , KM 19, Lagos-Epe Expressway,Lekki, P. O. Box 74638, Victoria Island, Lagos. Nigeria Tel: 234-1-2642498, 234-1-8923717, 234-1-4718693, Fax: 234-1-2642497 Mobile: 234 805 988 6269, 234 808 433 9698 E-mail: ibironke.olubamise at ncfnigeria.org website: www.ncfnigeria.org Alternate e-mail: ronkejj at yahoo.com, ibironk at yahoo.co.uk ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ----- Original Message ---- From: robert dietz To: eess at list.conbio.org Cc: g.mace at imperial.ac.uk Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 7:20:06 PM Subject: [EESS] Future of the WGEESS Hi All, The WGEESS had a very up and down meeting in Chattanooga, Tennessee at the SCB annual meeting.? Let me explain what I mean by "up and down." Up: We had an outstanding symposium on economic growth and biodiversity conservation.? Quite a few people approached me and said that it was the best session of the conference.? The six presenters provided theory and evidence of the conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation, and they generated quite a bit of discussion and buzz.? Thanks to Jon Rosales for organizing it.? Our member meeting was also successful, and we received useful input on working group activities from the participants. Down: The SCB Board of Governors voted to reject the working group authorization package we submitted.? Georgina Mace (SCB President) informed me that the board perceived 2 problems: (1) Our documents refer to the "conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation" rather than the "relationship between economic activities and biodiversity conservation." (2) The activities we proposed to advance the topics of ecological economics and sustainability science are too narrow. I should be receiving an official letter from Georgina Mace within a few weeks. The result is that the WGEESS is no longer an official sub-unit of the SCB.? I was very disappointed by the board's vote, and I expressed that disappointment in several conversations with board members.? I view the issues cited by the board as relatively minor and certainly not cause for rejection of the working group charter.? It was especially disappointing on the heels of the symposium. We can apply to become a working group again, and if we do, the SCB Board of Governors will take it up at their next meeting in six months.? I recommend that we continue to operate as if we are still a working group, although we are not allowed to represent ourselves publicly as such.? I would also like to plan a coordinated response to the SCB Board of Governors, so I will share the official letter when I receive it from Georgina. Thanks, Rob Dietz Past Chair of the WGEESS ? ? ? _______________________________________________ EESS mailing list EESS at list.conbio.org http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080729/516f7309/attachment.html From rwdietz at yahoo.com Tue Jul 29 10:39:08 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:39:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [EESS] More ecologists weigh in on economic growth Message-ID: <752762.50405.qm@web32103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi All, First, I want to express my thanks for the supportive messages that you have sent regarding the status of the working group (feel free to keep them coming!). I will keep you posted on how we proceed. I also just received the official letter from the SCB Board of Governors. After I share it with the unofficial WGEESS board, I will put the text out on this listserve. Second, please check out the latest issue of Pacific Ecologist. The title on the cover is "Why We Must Phase Out Economic Growth." It includes a series of articles and wealth of information on growth, consumption, and natural resource depletion. You can view a couple of the articles and synopses of the others at this website: http://www.pacificecologist.org/archive/16/ Thanks, Rob Dietz Past Chair WGEESS From brianczech at juno.com Thu Jul 31 13:53:01 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 20:53:01 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Postdoc/RA, fisheries economics Message-ID: <20080731.165301.3517.0@webmail08.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- POSTDOCTORAL RESEARCHER/RESEARCH ASSOCIATE 4 OR 5 (Fisheries Extension Enhancement/50% Extension/50% Research) Office of Sea Grant Development through Department of Agricultural Economics & Agribusiness/Center for Natural Resource Economics & Policy (CNREP) Funding for the position is provided by the Louisiana Sea Grant College Program through a Fisheries Extension Enhancement grant from the National Sea Grant College Program. The incumbent will work in conjunction with CNREP researchers (www.cnrep.lsu.edu) in support of the Louisiana Sea Grant Marine Extension Program (www.seagrantfish.lsu.edu). Required Qualifications: (Postdoctoral Researcher) Ph.D. in Resource Economics, Agricultural Economics, Fisheries Science, or a closely related field from an accredited college or university; (Research Assoc. 4 or 5) Master?s degree in Resource Economics, Agricultural Economics, Fisheries Science, or a closely related field from an accredited college or university with two years of related experience; (Research Assoc. 5) one additional year of related experience; (All Levels) ability to communicate and work effectively with a variety of audiences; possess a demonstrable record of expository writing for print media communications with technical, scientific, and lay audiences. Additional Qualifications Desired: Experience in survey work, statistics, and/or geographic information systems. Special Requirements: Ability and willingness to travel overnight and use personal vehicle. Responsibilities: formulates and conducts applied research and outreach activities that address socioeconomic aspects of coastal and marine resource policies with a major emphasis on Louisiana?s coastal fisheries; develops communications to inform coastal stakeholders about programs, policies, and activities of federal, state, and local resource managers; analyzes economic information and develops alternative scenarios for coastal fisheries management in Louisiana and the northern Gulf of Mexico; initiates effective educational programs and materials on the relationships between coastal habitats and fisheries production for youth and adult audiences; works collaboratively with Sea Grant marine extension faculty, other academic faculty, and other relevant public and private interests. Salary will be commensurate with qualifications and experience. Louisiana State University has an attractive benefits package with a wide variety of benefit options. Benefits offered include retirement, multiple medical insurance options, supplemental insurances (dental, life, long-term disability, accident, vision, long-term care, etc.), Tax Saver Flexible Benefits Plan (saves tax dollars on some child care and medical expenses), university holidays (14 per year, typically includes a week off at Christmas), generous annual (vacation) and sick leave benefits, Employee Assistance Program, and possible educational leave and tuition exemption for coursework at campuses of the LSU System. Specific benefits depend on job category, percent effort and length of employment. An offer of employment is contingent on a satisfactory pre-employment background check. Application deadline is August 15, 2008 or until a candidate is selected. Submit a letter of application, contact information (including e-mail address), detailed curriculum vitae, university transcripts, and the names and addresses of three professional references to the address below: Dr. Rex H. Caffey, Professor and Director Center for Natural Resource Economics & Policy Department of Agricultural Economics & Agribusiness 101 Agricultural Administration Building Louisiana State University Ref: Log #1180 Baton Rouge, LA 70803 Phone: (225) 578-2393 Fax: (225) 578-2716 LSU IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/EQUAL ACCESS EMPLOYER ____________________________________________________________ Fashion Design Education - Click Here! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oIaxxwf74z0PwG2OinkSDZAM1VV6tU9mn0znwAUdiMYzj44/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080731/04fbebcf/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Fri Aug 1 08:58:23 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 15:58:23 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Earthscan publishes new research on valuing ecosystem services Message-ID: <20080801.115823.13866.0@webmail08.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Earthscan are pleased to announce the publication of Valuing Ecosystem Services: The Case of Multi-Functional Wetlands, written by R. Kerry Turner, Stavros Georgiou and Brendan Fisher. Ecosystem services can be broadly defined as the aspects of ecosystems that provide benefits to people. The ecosystem services approach breaks new ground by adding economic arguments to scientific and ethical arguments in favour of more nature conservation The aim of this book is to provide guidance on the valuation of ecosystem services, using the case of multifunctional wetlands to illustrate and make recommendations regarding the methods and techniques that can be applied to appraise management options. Although concentrating on wetlands, the approaches suggested provide an assessment framework that can be applied to other types of ecosystem assets. ____________________________________________________________ Click here for low prices on a huge selection of popcorn poppers! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mS8SkGwUaaWW6KkWrY5jg4iyDjRZbu3vrwJGpQjFabIerYQ/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080801/474c215d/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Tue Aug 5 19:25:03 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 02:25:03 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Indian conf on growth and development Message-ID: <20080805.222503.10076.3@webmail03.dca.untd.com> Acknowledgements to Alexey Voinov for forwarding the info. Sounds like timely opp for paper on growth vs. biodiversity and sustainability... ------------------------------------ The Policy and Planning Research Unit (PPRU) at the Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi, invites researchers to submit papers for the 4th annual conference on economic growth and development. The Conference provides a forum for dissemination of modern research in economic growth and development economics using both theoretical and empirical approaches. Papers with an India focus are especially welcome. Please send your research paper with an abstract (in a separate page) of at most 150 words either by email or by post to the undersigned no later than 30 September 2008. Authors of accepted papers will be informed by 15 October 2008. All papers will be refereed. Outstation participants will be provided with accommodation and limited domestic travel support as per the rules of the institute. Email Address for Submission: isid_dev at isid.ac.in Postal Address for Submission: Tridip Ray Planning Unit Indian Statistical Institute (Delhi Centre) 7, Shahid Jeet Singh Sansanwal Marg New Delhi 110016 India Tel: +91-11-41493941 Fax: +91-11-41493981 ____________________________________________________________ Click to see huge collection of designer watches. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mc2x8FSIYhhiLnXFc0K9atQNDQSWyNWzYrnfBZGlkSBXIhG/ From mgrover at vt.edu Wed Aug 6 09:07:23 2008 From: mgrover at vt.edu (mgrover at vt.edu) Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 12:07:23 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] [NCSE] BIODIVERSITY CONFERENCE- Mark Your Calendars- Registration Opens the week of August 25th! Message-ID: <1218038843.4899cc3bd72fe@webmail.vt.edu> The NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE AND THE ENVIRONMENT invites you to participate in the 9th National Conference on Science, Policy and the Environment: Biodiversity in a Rapidly Changing World December 8-10, 2008 at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center in Washington, DC. Registration will open the week of August 25th. Register early to take advantage of the early bird registration rate. The program has many diverse sessions that will greatly expand your knowledge of current scientific and conservation efforts and how to effectively tackle the challenges posed to biodiversity in our rapidly changing world. Topics include: a.. Biomass, Biofuels, and Biodiversity b.. Scaling Biodiversity c.. Conservation Relient Species d.. The Future of Biodiversity in Africa e.. The Global Loss of Amphibians f.. Ecosystem Services g.. Stategies and Tactics for Mobilizing Public Will for Biodiversity Conservation h.. Conservation Leadership in a Rapidly Changing World i.. Ocean Biodiversity j.. How Health Depends on Nature k.. and many others! GET INVOLVED- There are still many ways to get involved in the conference: a.. Create an Exhibition b.. Join us as a Sponsor c.. Become a Collaborating Organization d.. Submit a Poster for the Poster Session- Abstracts due Monday, September 15, 2008 e.. Organize a Workshop- Proposals due Friday, August 22, 2008 Visit the website for information. Questions?: Email conference at ncseonline.org or call 202.530.5810 ----- End forwarded message ----- -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: unnamed Url: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080806/65eb20c7/attachment.pot -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080806/65eb20c7/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: unnamed Url: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080806/65eb20c7/attachment-0001.pot From brianczech at juno.com Wed Aug 6 13:04:25 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 20:04:25 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] GORDON AND BETTY MOORE FOUNDATION'S MARINE CONSERVATION INITIATIVE: SE NIOR PROGRAM OFFICER-California Message-ID: <20080806.160425.20237.0@webmail03.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- GORDON AND BETTY MOORE FOUNDATION'S MARINE CONSERVATION INITIATIVE: SENIOR PROGRAM OFFICER LOCATION: PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation's Marine Conservation Initiative is seeking qualified candidates for their Senior Program Officer position. The Senior Program Officer will oversee a portfolio of grants, which seeks to ensure resilient and productive marine ecosystems in British Columbia, the California Current ecosystem, and New England. More specifically, he or she will proactively work to achieve Initiative national and policy level outcomes; serve as grant lead on national level grants, which includes developing potential grant concepts, presenting grant concepts to the Initiative Lead, collaborating with potential grantees to develop grant proposals and documents for approval, coordinating work of the grant team, completing due diligence activities, and implementing appropriate monitoring and evaluation; and evaluate progress of active grantees and is accountable for grantee performance in our crosscutting strategies. Qualifications: The qualified candidate will have a master?s (M.S., M.B.A., or M.A.) degree; however, a Ph.D. or equivalent experience preferred; ten to fifteen years work experience in a leadership role in marine conservation policy, science, or economics; demonstrated leadership and ability in developing, negotiating, facilitating, and implementing effective marine conservation programs; the vision and ability to analyze, synthesize, and effectively communicate complex information in support of the Initiative's goals; and proven skills in strategic thinking, analysis methods, problem solving, and project management, including developing indicators of progress. This position also requires 25-30 percent travel. For a full position description, go to: http://www.moore.org/employment.aspx?id=2568 To apply, send a resume and cover letter to: jobs at moore.org. ____________________________________________________________ Compete with the big boys. Click here to find products to benefit your business. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m7tDSJ7QmAaOnsGHe8F4TG6iFQ7ntonDq9Zh5LVhTfvKPe8/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080806/d86feafd/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Tue Aug 12 07:30:39 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:30:39 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Biodiversity Economics featuring valuation of biodiversity Message-ID: <20080812.103039.14862.0@webmail18.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Biodiversity Economics update email - edition 10, 11 Aug 2008 ==================== Welcome to the 10th edition of the Biodiversity Economics quarterly update email and especially to the many new subscribers who have joined Biodiversity Economics since our last update. In this issue of Biodiversity Economics, we offer you a special edition dedicated to the valuation of biodiversity. The recently released interim report on 'The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity' (TEEB) offers a good opportunity to reflect on the issues that lie at the heart of the environmental economics discipline. This global study, led by Pavan Sukhdev, is set to follow up on the landmark work of Sir Nicholas Stern on the economics of climate change, by shifting the focus to biodiversity and to the many ecosystem services it supports. To accompany the TEEB phase 1 report, we are featuring two other similar efforts. One of the valuation studies focuses on a specific ecosystem - forests (Mullan and Kontoleon, 2008), while the other assesses the benefits and costs of conservation at the scale of a country - Ireland (Bullock et al., 2008). As usual, we have also included some announcements of upcoming events related to biodiversity economics. In this regard, we would like to take this opportunity to draw your attention to the upcoming IUCN World Conservation Congress (October 5-14 ??? Barcelona, Spain), which will feature many different workshops, meetings, and other events related to 'biodiversity economics'. We look forward to seeing you there! Thank you for your continuing support and helping us to create a practical on-line network of biodiversity economists and reference materials. Best wishes, D. Huberman, on behalf of Joshua Bishop Senior Advisor, Economics and Environment, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Contact: David.Huberman at iucn.org Pavan Sukhdev (study leader) (2008) The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) -------------------- This is the interim report of a comprehensive study on the economic values of ecosystems and biodiversity. It outlines the costs to society of a 'business as usual' scenario of environmental degradation, presents some key outstanding challenges and presents policies that could be used to address them. http://www.biodiversityeconomics.org/applications/library_documents/lib_document.rm?document_id=1145§ion_id=14 Katrina Mullan and Andreas Kontoleon (2008) Benefits and Costs of Forest Biodiversity: Economic Theory and Case Study Evidence -------------------- This report examines the available case study evidence on the benefits and costs of conserving forest biodiversity. It presents an analytical framework and then presents the findings from over 200 case studies. http://www.biodiversityeconomics.org/applications/library_documents/lib_document.rm?document_id=1143§ion_id=14 Craig Bullock, Conor Kretsch and Enda Candon (2008) Benefits and Costs of Biodiversity in Ireland -------------------- This report presents an assessment of social and economic benefits of selected ecosystem services in Ireland. The analysis covers a broad range of sectors, including agriculture, marine, health, and forestry. It finds that there are many net benefits to be derived from biodiversity conservation when compared to the policy costs. http://www.biodiversityeconomics.org/applications/library_documents/lib_document.rm?document_id=1142§ion_id=15 EVENT - IUCN World Conservation Congress - Barcelona 2008 -------------------- 5 Oct 2008 to 14 Oct 2008 Barcelona, Spain This year Congress theme is 'A diverse and sustainable world'. Thematic streams include: i) a new climate for change; ii) healthy environments - healthy people; iii) safeguarding the diversity of life. The Congress starts with the four-day Forum run by IUCN members and partners discussing cutting edge ideas, thinking and practice. The Forum leads into the four-day IUCN Members??? Assembly, a unique global environmental parliament of governments and NGOs. Registration is now open, and a draft agenda of the Forum is availabe at: www.iucn.org/congress Contact congress at iucn.org http://www.biodiversityeconomics.org/events/iucn_world.html EVENT - International Society for Ecological Economics (ISEE) 2008 Conference -------------------- Aug 7-11 Nairobi, Kenya The conference, "ISEE2008 NAIROBI: APPLYING ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS FOR SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY" is a joint undertaking by the International Society for Ecological Economics (ISEE), African Society for Ecological Economics (ASEE) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The conference will highlight the vision, methods and policy adjustments needed for ecological economics principles to be applied to the design and management of environmentally and socially sustainable development processes. The conference seeks to build capacity in this area in developing countries in the face of increasing global change and interdependence. Over 40 scientists and practitioners from a broad range of fields in institutions on five continents are organizing thematic symposia and pre-conference workshops. Contact secretariat at ecoeco.org http://www.biodiversityeconomics.org/events/blank.html EVENT - Katoomba Meeting XIII - Tanzania -------------------- 2008 East and Southern Africa Katoomba Group meeting Taking Stock and Charting a Way Forward for PES in Africa. The 2008 East and Southern African Katoomba Group meeting will offer hands-on capacity building combined with strategy discussions about scaling PES up in the region. The meeting will open with a "PES Trade Fair" - where prospective ecosystem service 'sellers' will have materials describing the ecosystem services at their sites, and potential buyers will be invited to meet with the sellers and explore new PES deals September 16-17, 2008 Organized by Forest Trends and the Katoomba Group Phone: (202) 298-3000 tanzania at katoombagroup.org White Sands Hotel and Resort Dar-es-salaam, Tanzania http://www.katoombagroup.org/event_details.php?id=18 EVENT - 10th Annual BIOECON Conference -------------------- 28 Sep 2008 to 30 Sep 2008 Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge The focus of the conference is on understanding what instruments are most effective and efficient in inducing biodiversity conservation. Instruments include auctions of biodiversity conservation contracts, payment???for???services contracts, taxes, tradable permits, voluntary mechanisms, and straightforward command and control. Papers may be submitted for presentation within the conference and will be considered by the programme committee. Electronic copies (in WORD or PDF format) should be sent to Jan Stoop (J.T.R.Stoop at uvt.nl) no later than 15th May 2008. Acceptance of papers will be notified by email in June 2008. Registrations for the conference are due by 30th June 2008. Contact J.T.R.Stoop at uvt.nl http://www.biodiversityeconomics.org/events/tenth_annual.html ---------------------------------------- Thank you for receiving Biodiversity Economics updates. If you have any queries about the site or the Update Service please contact us at editor at biodiversityeconomics.org To unsubscribe please go to: http://www.biodiversityeconomics.org/about/unsubscribe_from.html ____________________________________________________________ Make money while helping others. Click here for information on becoming a personal trainer. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nlvV0nn6fF1xZgEcdvkiE0VqUICzrRle8XwMMbnBBV4JbMQ/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080812/1752fae9/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Wed Aug 13 06:34:09 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:34:09 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Conference on Environmental Law and Economics - invitation to co-autho r a talk Message-ID: <20080813.093409.9464.2@webmail11.dca.untd.com> Working group members may have a general interest in this conference. In addition, I think it would be a good opportunity for a talk on ?The Endangered Species Act: An Implicit Policy for a Steady State Economy? or, more generally, on the ecological macroeconomics of biodiversity conservation. I cannot make it to this conference so if anyone is interested in teaming up for such a talk please email me directly. I would help a co-author with the material, slides, etc., to the extent necessary. The co-author would give the presentation and tailor it to his or her scenario, experience, or expertise. Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Apologies for cross-postings. CALL FOR PAPERS The inaugural meeting of the Society for Environmental Law and Economics will be held on March 27 and 28, 2009, at the University of British Columbia Faculty of Law in Vancouver, Canada. This will be the first of hopefully many meetings of a community of environmental scholars interested in working in the intersection of law, economics, and environmental or natural resource issues. We hope to attract economists, psychologists and other social scientists who wish to seriously engage in legal complexities, legal scholars that recognize the value of analytical methods, and environmental scientists that are willing to venture into the policy realm. In the spirit of collegiality, the meeting will take place in a workshop format, in which all sessions will be plenary. We encourage all attendees to try to stay for as much of the workshop as possible, though of course we understand that travel constraints often make this difficult. Our goal is to create a program that includes a variety of disciplinary perspectives, ideally consisting of 20-30 papers over the two-day period. Further announcements will be forthcoming regarding housing arrangements. There will not be funding available for travel or lodging expenses, but the UBC Faculty of Law will provide for food and drink during the workshop. To submit a paper, please email a Word or pdf file to hsu at law.ubc.ca, with the subject line "SELE SUBMISSION," by September 30, 2008. We will review all the papers and get back to you by November 1. Daniel H. Cole R. Bruce Townsend Professor of Law, Indiana University School of Law ? Indianapolis Jonathan R. Nash Professor, Emory University School of Law Richard O. Zerbe Daniel J. Evans Distinguished Professor of Public Policy, Evans School of Public Affairs, University of Washington Shi-Ling Hsu Associate Dean for Special Projects, University of British Columbia Faculty of Law ____________________________________________________________ Need cash? Click to get a cash advance. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mKetlXgzi74qpNctxUaAqrSmVSjE2j8rmPo0Sddu6p46Smw/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080813/aa865090/attachment.htm From rwdietz at yahoo.com Wed Aug 13 22:47:39 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:47:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Presentations from Symposium at SCB Annual Meeting Message-ID: <937826.28597.qm@web32108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi All, I have uploaded the presentations from the symposium on economic growth and biodiversity conservation to the following website: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSESymposium.html I believe that the November issue of Conservation Biology will feature several articles along the same lines as these presentations. Thanks, Rob Dietz Past Chair, WGEESS From larson.grapids at gmail.com Fri Aug 15 07:37:02 2008 From: larson.grapids at gmail.com (Mike Larson) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 09:37:02 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fwd: Bloomington Commission Adopts Position on Economic Growth In-Reply-To: <489CA91B.8010107@shaw.ca> References: <489CA91B.8010107@shaw.ca> Message-ID: <53dd27b60808150737r2ecd6fc1o3094e8f8def29aa5@mail.gmail.com> FYI. Bloomington, Indiana. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Neil K Dawe Date: Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 3:14 PM Subject: [Tws-l] [Fwd: Fw: Bloomington Commission Adopts Position on Economic Growth] To: TWS ListServe I believe The Wildlife Society, one of the original postion-takers on economic growth, deserves some credit for this: --------------------------------------------------- PRESS RELEASE *FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 8, 2008 * *Contact: Kelly Boatman, Chair, City of Bloomington Environmental Commission * *(812) 287-0031 * * * *ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION ADDRESSES GROWTH * The City of Bloomington Environmental Commission has adopted a position statement and completed a report to increase awareness of growth and sustainable development. The statement, "Position of the City of Bloomington Environmental Commission on Economic Growth in the United States" is modeled on similar statements issued by the United States Society for Ecological Economics and over 40 other groups inspired by the work of the Center for the Advancement of a Steady State Economy (CASSE). The statement advocates a steady-state economy in which resource consumption and waste production are maintained within the environment's capacity to regenerate resources and assimilate waste, emphasizing development as a qualitative, rather than quantitative, process. "This position statement acknowledges that the human economy is contained within, and dependent on, a finite and depletable natural environment," said Environmental Commission member Heather Reynolds. "Ever-increasing economic growth ultimately leads to resource consumption and waste production at rates greater than can be sustained by nature." A steady-state economy for the U.S. will depend in no small part on the efforts made by communities across the nation to achieve sustainable local economies. The first step is awareness and acceptance of the concepts, both of which it is hoped that the position statement will foster. The report, "An Examination of the Costs Associated with Residential Growth in Bloomington" is modeled after similar studies in other communities. Such studies have shown that infrastructure costs to support growth often outpace the benefits of that growth to the city. A sustainable approach to development would mean ensuring long-term benefits outweigh costs. The Commission's report focuses on the City of Bloomington's capital expenditures and how these expenditures are impacted by residential growth. The report is not intended to define the full costs of growth in Bloomington, but rather to illustrate that there are substantial costs incurred by the City to provide necessary infrastructure to residences. To fully examine costs, further analysis of not only facilities and infrastructure, but also social and environmental impacts is needed. "The Commission's report illustrates that the City incurs real costs that are associated with residential growth," said Environmental Commission member Mike Litwin. "The Commission would like to see the costs of growth balanced against the benefits and incorporated into the decision-making process in order to promote sustainable development in Bloomington." The report and position statement are available on the Environmental Commission website at *http://bloomington.in.gov/environmental-commission*. ####### Position of the City of Bloomington Environmental Commission on Economic Growth in the United States (Adapted from the Position of the United States Society for Ecological Economics on Economic Growth in the United States and adopted on May 22, 2008 in a 4-2-0 vote following two years of discussion.) *Whereas:* 1) Economic growth, as understood by most professional economists, policy officials and private citizens, is an increase in the production and consumption of goods and services, and; 2) Economic growth occurs when there is an increase in the multiplied product of population and per capita consumption, and; 3) Economic growth has long been a primary policy goal of U.S. society and government because of the belief that it leads to an enhanced quality of life, and; 4) Economic growth is usually measured by increasing gross domestic product (GDP), although this is an incomplete indicator of quality of life that excludes the equity of income distribution, other social factors such as physical health and level of crime, and ecological health, and; 5) The U.S. economy grows as an integrated whole consisting of agricultural, extractive, manufacturing, and services sectors (and the supporting infrastructure) that requires physical inputs of non-renewable resources, land and water, and that produces wastes, and; 6) Economic growth occurs in a finite and depletable biophysical context, and; 7) Continuing non-renewable resource-intensive economic growth is having unintended damaging consequences for ecosystems and human societies? *Therefore, the Bloomington Environmental Commission takes the position that based on the above evidence: * 1) There is a fundamental conflict between economic growth and ecosystem health (in such areas as biodiversity conservation, clean air and water, and atmospheric stability) and the ecosystem services deriving from healthy ecosystems that underpin the human economy (for example, regeneration of renewable resources, decomposition and recycling of wastes, pollination of crops and other vegetation, and climate regulation), and; 2) Although technological progress and unregulated markets have had many positive effects they cannot be depended upon to fully reconcile the conflict between economic growth and the long-term ecological and social welfare of the U.S. and the world, and; 3) A sustainable economy (that is, an economy with a relatively stable, mildly fluctuating product of population and per capita consumption) is a viable alternative to a growing economy and has become a more appropriate goal for the U.S. and other large, wealthy economies, and; 4) A long-run sustainable economy requires its establishment at a size small enough to avoid the breaching of ecological and economic capacity (especially during supply shocks such as droughts and energy shortages) to promote the efficient use of energy, materials and water, and enable an accelerated shift toward the use of renewable energy sources, and; 5) A sustainable economy supports economic development, an increase in human welfare through strategic changes in the relative prominence of economic sectors and techniques (e.g. renewable vs. non-renewable energy) that maintains the human economy within the regenerative and assimilative capacity of the larger earth system, and; 6) While establishing a sustainable economy, it would be advisable for the U.S. to assist other nations in moving from the goal of economic growth to the goal of a sustainable economy, beginning with those nations currently enjoying adequate per capita consumption, and; 7) For many nations with widespread poverty, increasing per capita consumption through economic growth and often via more equitable distributions of wealth remains an appropriate goal. ____________________________________________________________ You don't have to do it on your own. Click here for great parenting help! _______________________________________________ Tws-l mailing list Tws-l at wildlifeprofessional.org http://wildlifeprofessional.org/mailman/listinfo/tws-l_wildlifeprofessional.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080815/b2cb5492/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Fri Aug 15 13:33:38 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 20:33:38 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Vacancy: VP for Ecology & Economics Research, The Wilderness Society Message-ID: <20080815.163338.24692.1@webmail02.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Position Announcement, Vice President for Ecology & Economics Research, The Wilderness Society The Wilderness Society (TWS) is seeking an experienced professional to lead its Ecology and Economics Research Department (EERD). EERD is responsible for providing science and research leadership within TWS and the conservation community by employing ecological, economic, legal, and landscape analysis to advance wildland conservation, public land stewardship, and related public education goals. EERD?s staff of 21 professionals currently includes 11 Ph.D. and 9 M.S. level scientists and one attorney whose work is focused primarily on the U.S. federal lands (National Forests, Parks, Wildlife Refuges and Public Domain lands) but is accomplished in the context of larger landscapes and systems that include non-federal lands. The VP is responsible for direct supervision of our senior scientific and legal staff as well as a research project coordinator, overseeing the department?s budget of approximately $2 million, and ensuring ongoing strategic program development, including grant-based and other fundraising. As part of The Wilderness Society?s senior management team, the VP is also responsible for building and maintaining strong working relationships with The Wilderness Society?s other departments, with the Governing Council (Board), and with outside academic, research, and land management entities. For a full position description and application instructions, please visit http://wilderness.org/AboutUs/careers.cfm and click on the ?Vice President, Ecology and Economics Research Department? link. Michelle Haefele, Ph.D. Resource Economist The Wilderness Society 1660 Wynkoop St. Suite 850 Denver CO 80202 (303) 650-5818 ext. 109 www.wilderness.org To preserve wilderness and inspire Americans to care for our wild places ____________________________________________________________ Discount Business Consulting Services - Click Now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m0mYLe0ryax7niLXhy1VpQDgJlliZVULA4RF17UpubsrB4g/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080815/7f79eb03/attachment.html From litwin at kiva.net Tue Aug 19 16:06:19 2008 From: litwin at kiva.net (Mike Litwin) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:06:19 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] CASSE position statement Message-ID: <00aa01c90250$312de3a0$6401a8c0@mike8d14fa682f> The enclosed attachments are a recent "sustainable economy" position statement and press release from the City of Bloomington (Indiana) Environmental Commission, based on the Center for Advancement of a Steady State Economy's position statement. The position statement was presented to the Bloomington City Council on August 6, 2008. I also cut and pasted the position statement into this message. Michael Litwin Bloomington Environmental Commission Position of the City of Bloomington Environmental Commission on Economic Growth in the United States (Adapted from the Position of the United States Society for Ecological Economics on Economic Growth in the United States and adopted on May 22, 2008 in a 4-2-0 vote following two years of discussion.) Whereas: 1) Economic growth, as understood by most professional economists, policy officials and private citizens, is an increase in the production and consumption of goods and services, and; 2) Economic growth occurs when there is an increase in the multiplied product of population and per capita consumption, and; 3) Economic growth has long been a primary policy goal of U.S. society and government because of the belief that it leads to an enhanced quality of life, and; 4) Economic growth is usually measured by increasing gross domestic product (GDP), although this is an incomplete indicator of quality of life that excludes the equity of income distribution, other social factors such as physical health and level of crime, and ecological health, and; 5) The U.S. economy grows as an integrated whole consisting of agricultural, extractive, manufacturing, and services sectors (and the supporting infrastructure) that requires physical inputs of non-renewable resources, land and water, and that produces wastes, and; 6) Economic growth occurs in a finite and depletable biophysical context, and; 7) Continuing non-renewable resource-intensive economic growth is having unintended damaging consequences for ecosystems and human societies. Therefore, the Bloomington Environmental Commission takes the position that based on the above evidence: 1) There is a fundamental conflict between economic growth and ecosystem health (in such areas as biodiversity conservation, clean air and water, and atmospheric stability) and the ecosystem services deriving from healthy ecosystems that underpin the human economy (for example, regeneration of renewable resources, decomposition and recycling of wastes, pollination of crops and other vegetation, and climate regulation), and; 2) Although technological progress and unregulated markets have had many positive effects they cannot be depended upon to fully reconcile the conflict between economic growth and the long-term ecological and social welfare of the U.S. and the world, and; 3) A sustainable economy (that is, an economy with a relatively stable, mildly fluctuating product of population and per capita consumption) is a viable alternative to a growing economy and has become a more appropriate goal for the U.S. and other large, wealthy economies, and; 4) A long-run sustainable economy requires its establishment at a size small enough to avoid the breaching of ecological and economic capacity (especially during supply shocks such as droughts and energy shortages) to promote the efficient use of energy, materials and water, and enable an accelerated shift toward the use of renewable energy sources, and; 5) A sustainable economy supports economic development, an increase in human welfare through strategic changes in the relative prominence of economic sectors and techniques (e.g. renewable vs. non-renewable energy) that maintains the human economy within the regenerative and assimilative capacity of the larger earth system, and; 6) While establishing a sustainable economy, it would be advisable for the U.S. to assist other nations in moving from the goal of economic growth to the goal of a sustainable economy, beginning with those nations currently enjoying adequate per capita consumption, and; 7) For many nations with widespread poverty, increasing per capita consumption through economic growth and often via more equitable distributions of wealth remains an appropriate goal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080819/3e7cfd08/attachment.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CASSE-SEE position_statement final 8-6-08.doc Type: application/msword Size: 35328 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080819/3e7cfd08/attachment-0001.doc -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SEE-COG press_release.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 78953 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080819/3e7cfd08/attachment-0001.pdf From brianczech at juno.com Thu Aug 21 08:09:39 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:09:39 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Post-doc Biofuel Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Message-ID: <20080821.110939.12743.0@webmail02.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- The new DOE Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) has an opening for an ecologist to investigate the consequences of cellulosic biofuel production systems on biodiversity and ecosystem services. The successful candidate will design and direct studies examining the impacts of cellulosic biofuel crops on insect biodiversity and ecosystem services at the landscape scale. In addition, the position will hold responsibility for helping to coordinate a team of researchers examining similar impacts on bird, plant and microbial diversity. We are particularly interested in applicants with excellent organizational and communication skills and some combination of experience in landscape ecology, spatial analysis, GIS, and evaluation of insect-mediated ecosystem services including biological pest control or pollination. A PhD degree in Entomology or a related discipline preferred. A valid driver?s license is required. The position will be located in E. Lansing with frequent travel throughout the lower peninsula of Michigan. This is a 2 year position with potential for renewal. Salary and benefits are highly competitive. Applications should be submitted as a single pdf file and include CV, a summary of relevant research experience, and the names and contact information for three professional references. The review of applications will begin Sept. 1, 2008 and will continue until a suitable candidate is identified. The start date is approximately Jan. 1, 2008. Application materials should be sent electronically to Douglas Landis (landisd at msu.edu). More information about the GLBRC can be found at www.greatlakesbioenergy.org/. Michigan State University is an Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer. ____________________________________________________________ Internet Security Software - Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mEWsEPjL2VrE8jBj5EzXnGyxD9S8cPdM8YYRKAzdzYgV6NW/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080821/87d85f4e/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Aug 21 08:49:07 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:49:07 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: NOAA Fisheries Alaska Fisheries Science Center Post-doc in Seattle , WA Message-ID: <20080821.114907.12743.2@webmail02.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- This is an announcement for a post-doctoral economist position at the NOAA Fisheries Alaska Fisheries Science Center in Seattle, WA. Below is an informal position description followed by the official announcement and a description of the Economics and Social Science Research Program at the NOAA Fisheries Alaska Fisheries Science Center (where the position will be located). _ _ *Position Description* This post doctoral economist will be a key member of our group involved in the Bering Sea Integrated Research Program (BSIERP), sponsored by the North Pacific Research Board (http://bsierp.nprb.org/ ). The post-doc will work with project P.I. Alan Haynie and other members of the BSIERP team to develop fully integrated models of the pollock and cod fisheries in the Bering Sea. The BSIERP is a path-breaking effort that involves a large interdisciplinary team that intends to model and forecast the impacts of climate change on the marine environment, economy, and local communities of the Bering Sea. While it is not necessary that applicants have fisheries research experience, familiarity and experience with survey design and data collection is advantageous. Our group works extensively with leading university researchers around the U.S. and is in particularly close proximity to the University of Washington ? facilitating a good working relationship with their faculty and graduate students. If you have any questions about this position, please send them via email to Alan Haynie at Alan.Haynie at noaa.gov . *Official Position Announcement: Industry Economist SALARY RANGE: 57,657.00 - 89,842.00 USD per year * OPEN PERIOD: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 to Friday, September 05, 2008 SERIES & GRADE: ZP-0110-3/3 POSITION INFORMATION: Term Position NTE 13 months (may be extended up to 4 years) Full-time TERM Appointment PROMOTION POTENTIAL: 3 DUTY LOCATIONS: 1 vacancy - Seattle WHO MAY BE CONSIDERED: All qualified U.S. citizens, and candidates eligible for noncompetitive appointments including former Federal employees with reinstatement rights, CTAP/ICTAP eligibles, and applicants eligible under Special Appointing Authorities (e.g., former ACTION volunteers, Persons with Disabilities, 30% or more disabled veterans, VRA eligibles, etc.). JOB SUMMARY: National Marine Fisheries Service is dedicated to stewardship of our nation's living marine resources and habitat through scientific research, management and enforcement. NMFS provides effective stewardship to benefit the nation through domestic and international programs supporting coastal communities that depend upon the resources, while providing safe and healthy seafood to consumers and recreational opportunities. This position is located in the National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, Resource Ecology and Fisheries Management Division, in Seattle, Washington. The person filling this position will assist in conducting research that will increase the net national benefits derived from regional use of national living marine resources and their environment. The Pay Band ZP/3 is equivalent to the GS/11-12. This application requires the completion of an online assessment and/or the submission of supplemental materials. Please thoroughly review the vacancy announcement and carefully follow all instructions. Failure to provide the required information and/or materials may result in you not being considered for the vacancy. For problems applying to a vacancy announcement, contact USAJOBS at http://help.usajobs.opm.gov or click on HELP. For problems during the application process such as faxing documents, contact the Help Desk at 1-877-662-7730 or send email to mgshelp at monster.com . The Help Desk is available Monday through Friday from 7 AM to 7 PM ET. You may call and leave a voice mail message at all other times. KEY REQUIREMENTS: Applications will only be accepted from United States Citizens. _Background on the Alaska Fisheries Science Center_ The Alaska Fisheries Science Center is a part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Service, commonly referred to as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The primary mission of the Economic and Social Sciences Research Program is to conduct economic and sociocultural research and data collection that assists NMFS in meeting its stewardship responsibilities for the nation?s marine resources. We conduct a broad range of research and data collection activities to advance the public?s knowledge about the effects of changing fishery management actions, markets, ecosystems, and climate on the welfare of commercial, recreational, and subsistence resource users as well as affected communities and regional economies. Our group consists of six economists, one environmental anthropologist and a data support programmer. In the last five years, ESSRP staff have published more than 30 peer-reviewed scientific papers, five technical memoranda/reports, and currently have an additional 10 papers under review at scientific journals. ESSRP staff have extensive expertise in several areas such as bio-economic modeling, time-series analysis, climate models, cultural and demographic analysis, spatial site-choice modeling, recreational demand modeling, non-market and biodiversity valuation, regional economic and community impacts modeling, and efficiency and productivity analysis. These skills have been brought to bear on a variety of topics germane to Alaskan fisheries and fishing communities, general fishery management policy questions, and national and international public interest issues. In addition to applied work we also partake in and encourage innovations in modeling and empirical methodologies. Specific activities in support of our mission include: (1) collecting economic and sociocultural data relevant for the conservation and management of living marine resources; (2) developing statistical and mathematical models to use that data both to monitor changes in economic and sociocultural indicators and to estimate the economic and sociocultural impacts of alternative management measures; (3) preparing peer-reviewed publications and reports; (4) collaborating with researchers at universities and NGOs; (5) participating in working groups with staff from the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and other state and federal agencies; (6) preparing and reviewing research proposals and programs; and (7) preparing analyses of proposed management measures. -- Alan Haynie, Ph.D. NOAA/NMFS, Alaska Fisheries Science Center 7600 Sand Point Way NE Seattle, WA 98115 Ph. (206) 526-4253, Fax (206) 526-6723 ____________________________________________________________ Get the shot you need with a discreet new spy camera. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m1EqbeFsm4O0hJqU81VHdh00rqlbNOW2SUiLi9VpcSJpJxy/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080821/73c496e8/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Fri Aug 22 14:05:11 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 21:05:11 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Tenure track in Environmental and/or Natural Resource Economics Message-ID: <20080822.170511.5060.3@webmail17.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- POSITION ANNOUNCEMENT Assistant Professor Environmental and/or Natural Resource Economics Tenure track, 9-month appointment Department of Agricultural EconomicsMississippi State University QUALIFICATIONS: Ph.D. in Economics, Agricultural Economics, or a related field with a strong emphasis in environmental and/or natural resource economics. Outstanding oral and written communication skills are required. The successful candidate must be able to develop a nationally and internationally recognized research program in environmental and/or natural resource economics as evidenced by scholarly publications in peer reviewed journals. A willingness and ability to make significant contributions to interdisciplinary research efforts is also required. JOB DESCRIPTION: This position has a 75 percent research appointment and a 25 percent teaching appointment with both research and teaching appointments focusing primarily on environmental and/or natural resource economics. Examples of potential research areas include: environmental and/or natural-resource public policy; marine and coastal resource management; soil and water conservation; risk as it relates to environmental and natural resource management; wildlife management and conservation; and water quality. Responsibilities include: (1) development of a nationally and internationally recognized research program in environmental and/or natural resource economics, (2) providing excellent graduate and/or undergraduate teaching in environmental and/or natural resource economics, (3) advising of undergraduate students, (4) direction of graduate student programs, (5) development of interdisciplinary relationships with scientists in other departments, and (6) securing external research grants and contracts. APPLICATIONS: Applications will be received until October 17, 2008, or until a suitable candidate is found. Applicants should submit a letter of interest, a curriculum vitae, official transcripts of all college and university work, and have three professional letters of reference sent to: Dr. Steven C. Turner, Department of Agricultural Economics, Box 5187, Mississippi State, MS 39762. Inquiries can be emailed to turner at agecon.msstate.edu. More information about the Department of Agricultural Economics at Mississippi State can be obtained via our web site at http://www.agecon.msstate.edu/. Mississippi State University is an affirmative action/equal employment opportunity employer. ____________________________________________________________ Make a big mistake? Click here to find a lawyer to help you. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oJBMD6Z6hhbr2lsvq8r1Nv4r0rmkN3xZe2fr92Vq7DWAFH2/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080822/878643de/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Wed Aug 27 08:20:20 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 15:20:20 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Fisheries economist - contract position Message-ID: <20080827.112020.11142.0@webmail17.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Please share this with those that might be interested. For more information please contact Laura Shulman, lshulman at integratedstatistics.com or 508-540-8560. Gisele *Natural Resource Economist Needed* Integrated Statistics is looking for an economist to work with Fisheries/NOAA in Gloucester, MA. Requirements: College degree with a major in economics with coursework in natural resource economics, experience in writing environmental assessments at a minimum, experience in writing environmental impact statements preferred. Please send a resume and two references to HR at integratedstatistics.com Wage: $20-$29/hour depending on education and experience Benefits: Health, Dental, Retirement, paid sick leave, vacation, and holidays -- Gisele Magnusson, EconomistProtected Species BranchNortheast Fisheries Science CenterNOAA Fisheries166 Water StreetWoods Hole, MA 02543508-495-2137 ____________________________________________________________ Learn digital and video photography techniques, lighting and printing. Click now. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oLSqPlAj8uTtnAOCmbm0DxLSF6XD3pLvLCKrO9VoHQSCLXu/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080827/706311b5/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Wed Aug 27 11:23:38 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:23:38 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: MS Assistantship Iowa State University - biomass economics Message-ID: <20080827.142338.13173.1@webmail11.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- I have one 2-year MS assistantship available for a student interested in the social and economic aspects of natural resource management and alternative energy systems. Location: Department of Natural Resource Ecology & Management, Iowa State University. Ames, IA. You would become one of the founding members of the NREM Socio-Economic Research Lab. Ideal students will have an interest in sociology, economics, and ecology. The research involved is in the realm of sustainable biomass systems for biofuel/bioproduct production. Key research questions involve: What biomass fuel sources most effectively supply jointly produced economic, social, and environmental benefits (while minimizing potential negative impacts) in the US Cornbelt? What new crops, cropping systems, forest management practices, machinery and techniques for harvesting, storing, and transporting biomass are required for its sustainable development? What ecosystem goods and services can be qualified and then quantified within a partially perennialized agricultural landscape as compared to traditional row-crop systems. Research flexibility is always provided for the development of student-interest research questions. Research will involve systems modeling, stakeholder based assessments and interdisciplinary perspectives. Quantitative aptitude and reasonably developed verbal and written skills are a distinct plus. The student will be expected to present results of his/her research at regional and national meetings and to prepare manuscripts of these findings for publication in the peer-reviewed literature. Stipend: $18,000 per year plus health benefits and subsidized tuition (at least 50%). Start date: ISU Spring semester 2009. Prior to formal application to Iowa State University, interested applicants are strongly encouraged to contact Dr. John Tyndall (jtyndall at iastate.edu; 515.294.4912) with a letter of interest, including cumulative GPA, GRE scores if available, description of any previous research experience, and contact information for three references. Please feel free to contact John with any informal inquiries. If you wish to send hard copies, these may be submitted to John Tyndall, Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, 339 Science II, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50014. Review of applications will begin immediately and continue until a suitable applicant is found. ____________________________________________________________ Get educated. Click here for Adult Education programs. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nNbX1gwDlrEINPM2K4P80KcU4uPxhc3DHDs6ZJmKyqZjVoA/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080827/d1ebecd4/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Fri Aug 29 08:42:24 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:42:24 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Faculty Position in Coastal Sustainability Message-ID: <20080829.114224.28076.1@webmail06.dca.untd.com> EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY Coastal Studies Institute Associate/Full Professor, Coastal Sustainability (Vacancy # 929926) East Carolina University and the UNC Coastal Studies Institute (CSI) seek candidates for a full-time, faculty appointment at the rank of Associate or Full Professor to begin August 11, 2008. Position will be filled either as tenure-track or with consideration for tenure dependent upon qualifications. This administrative, research and teaching position involves an appointment between the UNC Coastal Studies Institute and East Carolina University. The selected candidate will serve as Program Head and will be responsible for the CSI Human Dimensions of Coastal Sustainability Program. JOB DESCRIPTION/QUALIFICATIONS: The position is broadly defined to consider all candidates with strong evidence of Social Science research pertaining to coastal sustainability. Relevant fields or areas of expertise include economics, sociology, recreation and tourism, geography, political science/public administration, anthropology, coastal resource management or other fields related to human dimensions of sustainability. The Program Head for Coastal Sustainability will be primarily located at CSI in Manteo, but will also bear research and limited teaching responsibilities in the home department at ECU. Appropriate service to the university, community and profession is expected. Salary will be competitive and commensurate with qualifications. Minimum requirements for the position include a doctoral degree from an appropriately accredited institution in one of the above-mentioned disciplines, established publication record and relevant work experience. LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION: The successful candidate will demonstrate ability to lead and facilitate collaborative multi-partner research programs; develop and administer budgets, interact with relevant communities (ranging from academic to local stakeholder) coordinate facility use, lead and coordinate hiring of CSI scientists who will hold joint appointments. RESEARCH: The ideal candidate will have a significant and active publication record and evidence of external funding. The head will also serve as a catalyst for new research projects involving faculty collaborators from the UNC system and beyond. Demonstrated evidence of an active collaborative research program that incorporates environmental, economic, and quality of life-related issues pertaining to coastal sustainability is a plus. OUTREACH/SERVICE: Desirable qualities include ability to interact with decision makers and stakeholders to formulate a responsive research agenda. Ability to communicate research findings to a wide range of audiences is a must. TEACHING: Evidence of effective teaching and active involvement in all aspects of undergraduate and graduate research and education is desired. ABOUT THE UNIVERSITY: East Carolina University, the third largest university in the UNC system, is a rapidly growing institution of over 25,000 students committed to excellence in research and teaching. ECU is located within North Carolina's coastal plain and a short distance of the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system. Additional information about ECU is available at: http://www.ecu.edu/ ABOUT THE CSI: The Coastal Studies Institute, a recently formed program located in Manteo, NC, desires to develop solid academically rigorous research programs in partnership with degree-granting institutions of the University of North Carolina system. Additional information about CSI can be found at: http://csi.northcarolina.edu/ APPLICATION PROCEDURE: To apply, please see: http://www.jobtarget.com/c/jobclick.cfm?site=3207&job=4706866 Screening will continue until the position is filled. To apply, submit a candidate profile, letter of interest, current curriculum vita, and the names and contact information of three current references to: CONTACT: East Carolina University Department of Human Resources at Web: http://www.jobs.ecu.edu Official transcripts will be required upon employment. Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer View this posting at: https://ecu.peopleadmin.com/applicants/Central?quickFind=57905 ____________________________________________________________ Click to find information on your credit score and your credit report. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m2PcTMkEz9cPtjs4kSKQ5DfecosWTitVkebnZ3FukGqizda/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080829/08b58549/attachment-0001.html From brianczech at juno.com Fri Aug 29 12:44:14 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:44:14 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Important new legal scholarship on EG v. environmental protection Message-ID: <20080829.154414.9778.0@webmail03.dca.untd.com> Excerpt from the introduction? ?As we will see, the resulting legal structure, still with us today, envisions not only that the economy can grow forever, but also that the total scale of legally-justified damage to the Earth can grow forever as well. It was invented when the American continent seemed ?empty,? when pollution sinks and resources seemed boundless and the atmosphere infinite, and there always was another forest, another river, another fishery that could be sacrificed to the social priority of economic growth. This is the essential environmental problem with our modern property law: it promotes an economy that is permitted to inflict damage to the Earth, while containing no means of constraining cumulative environmental damage to a scale that is ecologically sustainable.? Full article here: http://www.vjel.org/journal/pdf/VJEL10068.pdf Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Need cash? Click to get a loan. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mKiv8KYgYuk5nNwVORfnHSuR7jl7VFOzQKrTcf856oRHRjm/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080829/434273ea/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Tue Sep 2 11:59:23 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 18:59:23 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Senior Researcher in Forestry and Land Use Message-ID: <20080902.145923.22115.3@webmail09.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Dear Colleagues, The International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) is pleased to announce that we are recruiting for the post of Senior Researcher in Forestry and Land Use. We are looking for an inspiring forestry leader to develop and manage a programme of research and partnership building to improve the sustainability and local livelihood benefits of forestry. If you believe that forestry involves multiple goods, services and stakeholders and that locally-owned decision-making and international support are vital to improve forest investment and stakeholders empowerment, by joining the team you will be able to directly influence the setting up of a global forest partnership initiative. Please help us circulate news of this vacancy as widely as possible by sharing this message with your networks and contacts around the world. An application form, background information and job description can be found at: http://www.iied.org/aboutiied/HR/index.html#current With best regards, Donata Gnisci ____________________________________________________________ Click to shop and compare great deals on new vehicles. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nd6M3qidwlAjOA0u60C8m7BElHZpJEF3wTP2bV9STXIScrS/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080902/f4a0e22b/attachment-0001.htm From brianczech at juno.com Wed Sep 3 06:59:58 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 13:59:58 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: India program, ISDRS Conference Message-ID: <20080903.095958.7902.0@webmail03.dca.untd.com> ------------------Forwarded Message------------------ Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to invite you to the 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference which will be held on September 21-23, 2008 at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi, India (www.14aisdrc2008.com). India provides a very important platform and context for sustainable development research. The topics discussed and research themes addressed will cover the diversity of aspects and approaches in sustainable development research. Regarding the status and the latest developments of the conference, please see below: - We aim to make the conference carbon neutral by purchasing offsets for the greenhouse gas emissions of this event, e.g. travels. - The conference has received a high number of quality abstracts covering all continents of the world. The keynote highlights include the former president of India and TATA. The preliminary conference program with detailed track schedules is attached to this message and will be available on the website www.14aisdrc2008.com. - The conference has eight international scientific peer-reviewed journals as collaborators for which the presentations accommodating the feedback received on-site are considered for article publication. - Exciting social events will run throughout the conference. During the conference we will have two gala dinners including local cultural entertainment. In addition there are diverse and rich social program options including, e.g. tiger and elephant safari. We welcome you to participate in the 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference. The deadline for registration is September 8th. Welcome to India! On behalf of all track organisers, and Dr. Arun Sahay, Conference chair (Management Development Institute, India) Dr. Jouni Korhonen, Conference co-chair and Co-Chair of ISDRS (Abo Akademi University, Finland) Prof. Richard Welford, Co-Chair of ISDRS (Hong Kong University, Hong Kong, China) Ms. Kaisa Pihlatie, Coordinator of the organising committee (Abo Akademi University, Finland) *** The 14th annual conference of the International Sustainable Development Research Society is hosted by the Management Development Institute, Gurgaon, India (www.mdi.ac.in) in collaboration with Corporate Social Responsibility in Asia (CSR Asia, www.csr-asia.com), University of Hong Kong (www.hku.hk), ERP Environment (www.erpenvironment.org), ?bo Akademi University (www.abo.fi), The Finnish Environment Institute (http://www.ymparisto.fi/default.asp?node=5297&lan=en) and Academy of Finland (www.aka.fi). -- Kaisa Pihlatie Project Manager ?bo Akademi University Faculty of Technology Department of Industrial Management Piispankatu 8, FI-20500 Turku, FINLAND Mobile: +358 50 428 0875 Fax: +358 2 215 4791 E-mail: kaisa.pihlatie at abo.fi www.abo.fi/fak/tkf/indek/ie *** 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference September 21-23, 2008, India Habitat Center New Delhi, India www.14aisdrc2008.com *** ____________________________________________________________ Click for FHA loan, $0 lender fees, low rates & approvals nationwide http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mItjcc7sHtmwDE6yVNi42WKgFOaBQc7f5uo09mAYkYoe9dy/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080903/f73d0a9f/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AISDRC_Detailed Schedule_Draft.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 209640 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080903/f73d0a9f/attachment-0001.pdf From brianczech at juno.com Wed Sep 3 07:19:55 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 14:19:55 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] INAUGURAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND ECONOMICS Message-ID: <20080903.101955.7902.4@webmail03.dca.untd.com> --------------Forwarded Message---------------- CALL FOR PAPERS INAUGURAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND ECONOMICS March 27 and 28, 2009 Vancouver, Canada The inaugural meeting of the Society for Environmental Law and Economics will be held on March 27 and 28, 2009, at the University of British Columbia Faculty of Law in Vancouver, Canada. OVERVIEW: This will be the first of hopefully many meetings of a community of environmental scholars interested in working in the intersection of law, economics, and environmental or natural resource issues. We hope to attract economists, psychologists and other social scientists who wish to seriously engage in legal complexities, legal scholars that recognize the value of analytical methods, and environmental scientists that are willing to venture into the policy realm. We seek papers and scholars that engage in the interdisciplinary aspects of environmental issues. In the spirit of collegiality, the meeting will take place in a workshop format, in which all sessions will be plenary. We encourage all attendees to try to stay for as much of the workshop as possible, though of course we understand that travel constraints often make this difficult. Our goal is to create a program that includes a variety of disciplinary perspectives, ideally consisting of 20-30 papers over the two-day period. Further announcements will be forthcoming regarding housing arrangements. There will not be funding available for travel or lodging expenses, but the UBC Faculty of Law will provide for food and drink during the workshop. PAPER SUBMISSION PROCEDURE: To submit a paper, please email a Word or pdf file to: Email: MAILTO:hsu at law.ubc.ca with the subject line "SELE SUBMISSION," by September 30, 2008. Please direct inquiries to this same email address. We will review all the papers and get back to you by November 1. Daniel H. Cole R. Bruce Townsend Professor of Law, Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis Richard O. Zerbe Daniel J. Evans Distinguished Professor of Public Policy, Evans School of Public Affairs, University of Washington Jonathan R. Nash Professor, Emory University School of Law Shi-Ling Hsu Associate Dean for Special Projects, University of British Columbia Faculty of Law Apologies for cross-postings. ____________________________________________________________ Click now to choose from thousands of designs for your checks! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m7Aj7jOLjp107sO1rbVj3yvNjYaMHTemu30Z5FLzVO20R0g/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080903/8a98f8d2/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Wed Sep 3 12:11:40 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 19:11:40 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Call for Papers: Voluntary Approaches Message-ID: <20080903.151140.27982.1@webmail04.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- This is a general call for papers to be included in a workshop on the economics of voluntary approaches to environmental protection. The workshop is being organized by Charlie Kolstad and Matthew Kotchen and will be held at the University of California, Santa Barbara on April 24-25, 2009. The aim to assemble leading scholars with work relevant to international agreements, voluntary programs, and voluntary actions as they relate to environmental management. We intend to draw on a diversity of fields within economics, including environmental, international, industrial organization, behavioral, and public economics. We envision both theoretical and empirical contributions. The workshop will consist of approximately 12 papers to be presented and discussed over a two day period. Travel expenses and a modest honorarium will be provided for all paper presenters. Presented papers will be a combination of those selected from submissions and those specifically invited. The submission deadline is January 15, 2009, and decisions about acceptances will be made no later than February 15, 2009. Please send paper submissions to Kolstad and Kotchen at the email address envecon at bren.ucsb.edu. Further details about the workshop can be found at the following url: http://www2.bren.ucsb.edu/~kotchen/links/volconfer.htm ____________________________________________________________ Want more out of life? Click here to find a massage therapy school and begin an exciting career. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3l9deCBGDuG1c5Fn3ckd4ZxKF261PJ4kKVcYArkDXgpDBT5a/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080903/71f6708d/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Thu Sep 4 10:51:40 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:51:40 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: [Fwd: New position - Natural Resource Economist] Message-ID: <20080904.135140.11640.0@webmail17.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Dear colleague, The French marine research institute Ifremer has recently opened a new position for a natural resource economist. Information on the position and how to apply is available at the following web address: http://wwz.ifremer.fr/institut/actualites/postes_ouverts/economiste_des_ressources_marines_vivantes_h_f Please forward this information to potentially interested colleagues. For more information on the position, please contact: Olivier Th?baud IFREMER B.P. 70 29280 PLOUZANE FRANCE Tel: + 33 (0)298224960 Email: Olivier.Thebaud at ifremer.fr Web: http://www.ifremer.fr/drvsem/ http://www.gdr-amure.fr/ http://www.umr-amure.fr/ ____________________________________________________________ Click here for great computer networking solutions! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oHgMwCNyFrN9YhHsS8MwTBysnHLvw0m2sdLBaSZqJUipy7S/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080904/1867aa02/attachment.html From cpeet at davidsuzuki.org Thu Sep 4 13:17:22 2008 From: cpeet at davidsuzuki.org (Corey Peet) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:17:22 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Looking for help quantifying ecosystem services in aquaculture In-Reply-To: <20080904.135140.11640.0@webmail17.dca.untd.com> References: <20080904.135140.11640.0@webmail17.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: <6DA97A1AADDFAA4B8237A941A939743801D28460@exchange.kits.davidsuzuki.org> Hi All; I am looking for help on the best sources of information on quantifying ecosystem services in the marine environment. I am working on a project that seeks to compare, by way of full cost accounting, open net pen vs. closed containment salmon farming in British Columbia Canada. We are looking for references and resources that can help us better understand how to quantify ecosystem services. If anyone has any suggestions of papers, people I should talk to, or resources that might be helpful I would really appreciate it. Regards, Corey _________________________________ Corey Peet Aquaculture Scientist and Campaigner David Suzuki Foundation Suite 219 - 2211 West 4th Avenue Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6K 4S2 604-732-4228 ext 271 cpeet at davidsuzuki.org www.davidsuzuki.org _________________________________ ________________________________ From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com Sent: September 4, 2008 10:52 AM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: [Fwd: New position - NaturalResource Economist] ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Dear colleague, The French marine research institute Ifremer has recently opened a new position for a natural resource economist. Information on the position and how to apply is available at the following web address: http://wwz.ifremer.fr/institut/actualites/postes_ouverts/economiste_des_ressources_marines_vivantes_h_f Please forward this information to potentially interested colleagues. For more information on the position, please contact: Olivier Th?baud IFREMER B.P. 70 29280 PLOUZANE FRANCE Tel: + 33 (0)298224960 Email: Olivier.Thebaud at ifremer.fr Web: http://www.ifremer.fr/drvsem/ http://www.gdr-amure.fr/ http://www.umr-amure.fr/ ____________________________________________________________ Click here for great computer networking solutions! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080904/67d32cdc/attachment.htm From rwdietz at yahoo.com Fri Sep 5 10:25:19 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 10:25:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Looking for help quantifying ecosystem services in aquaculture In-Reply-To: <6DA97A1AADDFAA4B8237A941A939743801D28460@exchange.kits.davidsuzuki.org> Message-ID: <424977.10279.qm@web32105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Resources for the Future (RFF) is an economics think tank that develops research and papers on topics like the one you are interested in. It has been quite some time since I've used their materials, but after looking at their website for a minute, I found this link to marine resources: http://www.rff.org/Research_Topics/Pages/Marine_Resources.aspx The researchers at RFF would be a good place to start. Thanks, Rob -- Rob Dietz Executive Director Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy rob_dietz at steadystate.org --- On Thu, 9/4/08, Corey Peet wrote: > From: Corey Peet > Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Looking for help quantifying ecosystem services in aquaculture > To: Eess at list.conbio.org > Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 1:17 PM > Hi All; > > > > I am looking for help on the best sources of information on > quantifying ecosystem services in the marine environment. > > > > I am working on a project that seeks to compare, by way of > full cost accounting, open net pen vs. closed containment > salmon farming in British Columbia Canada. We are looking > for references and resources that can help us better > understand how to quantify ecosystem services. > > > > If anyone has any suggestions of papers, people I should > talk to, or resources that might be helpful I would really > appreciate it. > > > > Regards, > > > > Corey > > > > _________________________________ > > Corey Peet > > Aquaculture Scientist and Campaigner > > David Suzuki Foundation > > Suite 219 - 2211 West 4th Avenue > > Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6K 4S2 > > > > 604-732-4228 ext 271 > > cpeet at davidsuzuki.org > > www.davidsuzuki.org > > _________________________________ > > ________________________________ > > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org > [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of > brianczech at juno.com > Sent: September 4, 2008 10:52 AM > To: Eess at list.conbio.org > Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: [Fwd: New > position - NaturalResource Economist] > > > > > ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- > Dear colleague, > > The French marine research institute Ifremer has recently > opened a new > position for a natural resource economist. Information on > the position > and how to apply is available at the following web address: > > http://wwz.ifremer.fr/institut/actualites/postes_ouverts/economiste_des_ressources_marines_vivantes_h_f > > Please forward this information to potentially interested > colleagues. > > For more information on the position, please contact: > > Olivier Th?baud > IFREMER > B.P. 70 > 29280 PLOUZANE > FRANCE > Tel: + 33 (0)298224960 > Email: Olivier.Thebaud at ifremer.fr > Web: http://www.ifremer.fr/drvsem/ > http://www.gdr-amure.fr/ > http://www.umr-amure.fr/ > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > Click here for great computer networking solutions! > > > > _______________________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess From rwdietz at yahoo.com Fri Sep 5 11:24:45 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 11:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Humans and the Extinction of Nonhuman Species Message-ID: <531133.47492.qm@web32101.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear EESSers, I just read this article from BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7403989.stm Reporting on data from the Zoological Society of London, as well as commentary from the UK World Wildlife Fund, the article makes the following points (among others): -Humans are wiping out about 1% of all other species every year, and one of the "great extinction episodes" in the Earth's history is under way. -Pollution, farming, urban expansion, over-fishing, and hunting are blamed. -Numbers of marine species plummeted by 28% in just 10 years, between 1995 and 2005. -Populations of ocean birds have fallen by 30% since the mid 1990s, while land-based populations have dropped by 25%. -The UK's Biodiversity Minister, Joan Ruddock said, "The fact that human activities have caused more rapid changes in biodiversity in the last 50 years than at any other time in human history should concern us all." I am not at all surprised by the trends and bad news in the article -- conservationists face these facts every day. Once you've been hit over the head with a hammer a thousand times, what does one more hammer blow matter? Certainly it is frustrating to read such statistics, but equally frustrating is the lack of action on the cause. Notice that Joan Ruddock talks about "human activities" as the cause. The report also blames pollution, farming, urban expansion, over-fishing, and hunting. Are the nations of the world supposed to curb human activities? Should we stop farming and hunting? The only instance where the article gets it right is in the term "over-fishing." Fishing is not the problem, but over-fishing is. Pollution is not the problem, but over-pollution is. We have to get the scale of human activities (namely human economies) in line with the scale of our ecosystems. Without sustainably scaled economies, we will continue to witness the decline of other species as we grow and grow the niche of our own species. So, what do we do? The nations of the world have adopted policies aimed squarely at continuing the exponential expansion of human economies. In his landmark book, Steady-State Economics (originally published in 1977), Herman Daly put forth a rock-solid set of arguments for adjusting our economic systems. He posits institutions that can achieve economic development and prosperity without reliance on perpetual growth. He even notes that once societies decide to switch from growth to stability, remodeling our economic architecture is relatively trivial. In the 3 decades since this work was published, we have continued our unending march of growth. The species extinctions are one among many costs of this growth. Conservationists can play a big part in helping nations decide that it is time to remodel the economic architecture. Time is slipping away -- loss of biodiversity increases as economic growth continues to trump ecological health. I hope we can address the causes of species loss before we are left with no bricks and mortar to undertake the remodeling project. Thanks, Rob -- Rob Dietz Past Chair, EESS Executive Director Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy www.steadystate.org From lwalko at conbio.org Sat Sep 6 10:23:46 2008 From: lwalko at conbio.org (Laura Walko) Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 10:23:46 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] 2009 SCB Awards - Call for Nominations! Message-ID: <569984C3FC629E4DB22AFA468621699A09ABEF5E39@EXVMBX015-3.exch015.msoutlookonline.net> Greetings EESS subscribers ~ The Society for Conservaiton Biology is soliciting nominations for the 2009 Edward T. LaRoe Award, 2009 Distinguished Service Awards, and 2009 Early Career Conservationinst Awards. Please see the attached nomination form or http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Awards/ for more information. Nominations are due 1 October 2008. Thank you, in advance, for your nominations. Laura Walko Membership Coordinator Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001 202.234.4133 x100 703.995.4633 FAX www.conbio.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080906/5017f1c7/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCB_Awards_NominationForm_2009_FINAL.doc Type: application/msword Size: 52736 bytes Desc: SCB_Awards_NominationForm_2009_FINAL.doc Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080906/5017f1c7/attachment-0001.doc From brianczech at juno.com Wed Sep 10 19:55:35 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:55:35 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Symposium on Poverty & Landscape Ecology Message-ID: <20080910.225535.1779.1@webmail11.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Hi Folks, We are putting together a special symposium on poverty and landscape ecology for next year's Landscape Ecology meeting and are still looking for a couple more participants. The symposium is entitled "Aligning Conservation and Poverty Alleviation at the Landscape Scale: Trade-offs and Opportunities" (see abstract below) and we are hoping to convene an exciting group of scholars who are doing empirical work at the interface of landscape ecology and poverty. The symposium will be held at the annual meeting of the International Association of Landscape Ecology (IALE) in Snowbird, Utah from April 12-16, 2009 (http://www.usiale.org/snowbird2009/). IALE is a great conference: fairly small (~300-400 people) and usually quite open to interdisciplinary studies and approaches. We don't have travel funds to offer, but IALE does have good student travel awards as well as a foreign scholar award. Please contact me soon if you are interested or would like more information as we need to submit the proposal Sept. 15th. Best, Jeanine Rhemtulla Fabrice DeClerck Jeanine Rhemtulla Postdoctoral Fellow Dept. of Geography McGill University 805 Sherbrooke St. W. Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2K6 tel: 514-577-5437 email: jeanine.rhemtulla at mcgill.ca ******* Symposium Proposal US-IALE 2009 Annual Symposium "Coupling Humans and Complex Ecological Landscapes" Snowbird, UT - April 12-16 Convenors: Jeanine Rhemtulla1 and Fabrice DeClerck2 1Dept. Geography, McGill University, Montreal, Canada H3A 2K6; tel: 514-577-5437; email: jeanine.rhemtulla at mcgill.ca 2CATIE 7170, Turriabla, Costa Rica; ph: 507-558-259; email: fdeclerck at catie.ac.cr Title: Aligning Conservation and Poverty Alleviation at the Landscape Scale: Trade-offs and Opportunities Abstract: Are conservation and poverty alleviation compatible goals in human-dominated landscapes? Many of the world's poorest peoples live in biodiversity-rich areas, but little is known about the interactions between poverty and ecosystem structure and function, especially at the landscape scale. In this symposium, we present a series of empirical studies examining: the effects of poverty on landscape composition and configuration; the interactions between poverty and stocks and flows of ecosystem services; and the trade-offs and opportunities for aligning poverty alleviation and ecological conservation in complex human-dominated landscapes. Presentations will include case studies from both tropical and temperate regions, marine and terrestrial ecosystems. ____________________________________________________________ Ultimate Travel Deals - Click Now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3msU62S2iO0pYtB12zTPkmOboioGEs17w3ew4XqNNpgPtSdm/ From brianczech at juno.com Thu Sep 11 12:19:04 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 19:19:04 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Ecological macro-economics (July 2008, 22 pages) Message-ID: <20080911.151904.16256.1@webmail04.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- ECOLOGICAL MACROECONOMICS: CONSUMPTION, INVESTMENT, AND CLIMATE CHANGE by Jonathan Harris, July 2008, 22 pages: http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/wp/08-02EcologMacroEconJuly08.pdf Abstract: The challenge of reducing global carbon emissions by 50-85 per cent by the year 2050, which is suggested by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as a target compatible with limiting the risk of a more-than-2??C temperature increase, clearly conflicts with existing patterns of economic growth, which are heavily dependent on increased use of fossil fuel energy. While it is theoretically possible to conceive of economic growth being "delinked" from fossil fuel consumption, any such delinking would represent a drastic change from economic patterns of the last 150 years. A path of reduced carbon emissions would require major modifications in economic growth patterns. Achieving a low-carbon path requires population stabilization, limited consumption, and major investments in environmental protection and social priorities such as public health, nutrition, and education. Macroeconomic theory must be adapted to reflect these new realities. ____________________________________________________________ Click to find airline tickets for your next trip. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nMQlihadLXnvoqNp1pvFenLDVXlpLwdbyOqjFeNgR0aVJcY/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080911/3e3c8bfa/attachment.htm From larson.grapids at gmail.com Mon Sep 15 12:32:20 2008 From: larson.grapids at gmail.com (Mike Larson) Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:32:20 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] proposed activities - valuation of ecosystem services Message-ID: <53dd27b60809151232h6b2e4618ibbc0a2e886781467@mail.gmail.com> In the letter from the President of the SCB Board of Governors she said "the focus and activities proposed for the WGEESS would be limited and appears unhelpfully aligned" with initiatives related to the economics of biodiversity loss (e.g., the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment & its follow-ups). I think she was referring to our focus on macroeconomics and activities related to adopting a position statement on the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. It is a fair question, though, whether we as a working group should get involved in such initiatives. A problem I see is that existing economic initiatives related to ecosystems and biodiversity are beholden to or at least rely heavily upon mainstream economics. That is, they are often limited to methods for assessing the economic value of ecosystem functions. Despite our recognition that seeking appropriate prices for natural capital is not a sufficient long-term solution to biodiversity loss, are sufficient gains possible to warrant our interest and effort? We discussed this issue during a confernece call of the board of the working group, and I may not have summarized it completely or completely accurately. In addition to offering comments and ideas on this topic, please feel free to help refine it. Thanks, Mike Mike Larson, EESS Chair -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080915/21aff8bb/attachment.html From dobson at msu.edu Mon Sep 15 12:41:05 2008 From: dobson at msu.edu (Tracy Dobson) Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 15:41:05 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] proposed activities - valuation of ecosystem services In-Reply-To: <53dd27b60809151232h6b2e4618ibbc0a2e886781467@mail.gmail.co m> References: <53dd27b60809151232h6b2e4618ibbc0a2e886781467@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.0.2.0.2.20080915153840.02aa5e58@mail.msu.edu> Mike, As a former SCB board member, I can say that a large part of the concerns about the working group related to its appearance as an advocacy group rather than a scientific working group. I don't think a particular issue was thought to be inappropriate, but rather, to be affiliated with SCB, the group needs to be engaged in research rather than advocacy. At least that's what I heard. Tracy At 03:32 PM 9/15/2008, Mike Larson wrote: >In the letter from the President of the SCB Board of Governors she said >"the focus and activities proposed for the WGEESS would be limited and >appears unhelpfully aligned" with initiatives related to the economics of >biodiversity loss (e.g., the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment & its >follow-ups). I think she was referring to our focus on macroeconomics and >activities related to adopting a position statement on the trade-off >between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. It is a fair >question, though, whether we as a working group should get involved in >such initiatives. > >A problem I see is that existing economic initiatives related to >ecosystems and biodiversity are beholden to or at least rely heavily upon >mainstream economics. That is, they are often limited to methods for >assessing the economic value of ecosystem functions. Despite our >recognition that seeking appropriate prices for natural capital is not a >sufficient long-term solution to biodiversity loss, are sufficient gains >possible to warrant our interest and effort? > >We discussed this issue during a confernece call of the board of the >working group, and I may not have summarized it completely or completely >accurately. In addition to offering comments and ideas on this topic, >please feel free to help refine it. > >Thanks, > >Mike > >Mike Larson, EESS Chair > > >_______________________________________________ >EESS mailing list >EESS at list.conbio.org >http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess Tracy Dobson, J.D. Professor, Fisheries & Wildlife Michigan State University 13 Natural Resources Bldg. E. Lansing 48824-1222 517/432-1711 fax: 432-1699 dobson at msu.edu http://www.fw.msu.edu/people/DobsonTracy/index.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080915/46822b6d/attachment.html From btp22 at cam.ac.uk Mon Sep 15 13:33:38 2008 From: btp22 at cam.ac.uk (Ben Phalan) Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:33:38 +0100 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] proposed activities In-Reply-To: <53dd27b60809151232h6b2e4618ibbc0a2e886781467@mail.gmail.com> References: <53dd27b60809151232h6b2e4618ibbc0a2e886781467@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <48CEC6A2.5050105@cam.ac.uk> Hi all, Surely what is needed is to produce evidence that cannot be disregarded by mainstream economists, on their terms, and in their language (which I for one, as an ecologist, do not speak)? To what questions? (1) Do the marginal benefits of the current model of human development outweigh the marginal costs in terms of lost natural capital, on a global scale? (2) Will the marginal benefits of an adequate and comprehensive global effort to conserve biodiversity outweigh the costs (including opportunity costs)? There are other issues, such as the extent to which we are diminishing the resilience of the biosphere, but as I see it, those two are the crucial questions, and we do not have an unequivocal answer to them. Most of the world still operates under the assumption that the answer to (1) is "yes", and doesn't think at all about (2). The current TEEB project: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/index_en.htm is (at least in theory) aiming to address question (2), but what would really challenge mainstream economists to sit up and take notice is if someone could show clearly that the answer to (1), using the best available evidence, is likely to be "no". An appropriate (if challenging) goal for the working group could perhaps be to work towards synthesising the available evidence to help us answer question (1)? The question "what is the global value of biodiversity?" is almost irrelevant here, because it is infinite (Toman 1998). However, surely there are ways of plotting curves of the marginal value of components of the biosphere, which are relatively low when they are plentiful but approach infinity as they become scarce? Perhaps someone's already worked this out, in which case what we need to do is publicise it better, or perhaps it's such a difficult problem that we can't answer it any time soon, or perhaps you will feel that it's not framed in the right way (because obviously we can't just substitute human capital for natural capital, and there are too many "non-economic" values to be considered). However, it seems to me that in principle, these are questions that can and must be answered. Just my two cents! Ben Reference: Toman, M. (1998). Why not to calculate the value of the world?s ecosystem services and natural capital. Ecological Economics 25: 57-60. Mike Larson wrote: > In the letter from the President of the SCB Board of Governors she said > "the focus and activities proposed for the WGEESS would be limited and > appears unhelpfully aligned" with initiatives related to the economics > of biodiversity loss (e.g., the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment & its > follow-ups). I think she was referring to our focus on macroeconomics > and activities related to adopting a position statement on the trade-off > between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. It is a fair > question, though, whether we as a working group should get involved in > such initiatives. > > A problem I see is that existing economic initiatives related to > ecosystems and biodiversity are beholden to or at least rely heavily > upon mainstream economics. That is, they are often limited to methods > for assessing the economic value of ecosystem functions. Despite our > recognition that seeking appropriate prices for natural capital is not a > sufficient long-term solution to biodiversity loss, are sufficient gains > possible to warrant our interest and effort? > > We discussed this issue during a confernece call of the board of the > working group, and I may not have summarized it completely or completely > accurately. In addition to offering comments and ideas on this topic, > please feel free to help refine it. > > Thanks, > > Mike > > Mike Larson, EESS Chair > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess -- Ben Phalan http://www.zoo.cam.ac.uk/zoostaff/csg/bphalan.html From jrosales at stlawu.edu Tue Sep 16 06:33:25 2008 From: jrosales at stlawu.edu (Jon Rosales) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] proposed activities - valuation of ecosystem services In-Reply-To: <6.0.2.0.2.20080915153840.02aa5e58@mail.msu.edu> References: <53dd27b60809151232h6b2e4618ibbc0a2e886781467@mail.gmail.com> <6.0.2.0.2.20080915153840.02aa5e58@mail.msu.edu> Message-ID: <48CFB5A5.4080301@stlawu.edu> All: Unfortunately, I think Tracy is right on this. It is too bad that SCB shies away from advocacy, it is one of the founding principles Soule and others encouraged us to pursue. Evidence-based advocacy, in my opinion, is an ethical approach to our work and it is what I think the working group has done from the beginning. The problem was that the board and membership did not see the evidence, science, and work that was established before calling for a position statement. That is why some of us have worked to develop the economic growth related literature in the journal. Jon Tracy Dobson wrote: > Mike, > > As a former SCB board member, I can say that a large part of the > concerns about the working group related to its appearance as an > advocacy group rather than a scientific working group. I don't think a > particular issue was thought to be inappropriate, but rather, to be > affiliated with SCB, the group needs to be engaged in research rather > than advocacy. At least that's what I heard. > > Tracy > > At 03:32 PM 9/15/2008, Mike Larson wrote: > >> In the letter from the President of the SCB Board of Governors she >> said "the focus and activities proposed for the WGEESS would be >> limited and appears unhelpfully aligned" with initiatives related to >> the economics of biodiversity loss (e.g., the Millenium Ecosystem >> Assessment & its follow-ups). I think she was referring to our focus >> on macroeconomics and activities related to adopting a position >> statement on the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity >> conservation. It is a fair question, though, whether we as a working >> group should get involved in such initiatives. >> >> A problem I see is that existing economic initiatives related to >> ecosystems and biodiversity are beholden to or at least rely heavily >> upon mainstream economics. That is, they are often limited to >> methods for assessing the economic value of ecosystem functions. >> Despite our recognition that seeking appropriate prices for natural >> capital is not a sufficient long-term solution to biodiversity loss, >> are sufficient gains possible to warrant our interest and effort? >> >> We discussed this issue during a confernece call of the board of the >> working group, and I may not have summarized it completely or >> completely accurately. In addition to offering comments and ideas on >> this topic, please feel free to help refine it. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Mike >> >> Mike Larson, EESS Chair >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> EESS mailing list >> EESS at list.conbio.org >> http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > > > > > > Tracy Dobson, J.D. > Professor, Fisheries & Wildlife > Michigan State University > 13 Natural Resources Bldg. > E. Lansing 48824-1222 > 517/432-1711 > fax: 432-1699 > dobson at msu.edu > http://www.fw.msu.edu/people/DobsonTracy/index.htm > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > -- Jon Rosales, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Environmental Studies St. Lawrence University Canton, NY 13617 USA (315) 229-5852 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080916/d27907a7/attachment.html From mudsnail1 at hotmail.com Tue Sep 16 14:16:47 2008 From: mudsnail1 at hotmail.com (David Richards) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:16:47 +0000 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 7 Message-ID: "We see ourselves as a premier outlet for cutting-edge science for what has been termed a 'crisis discipline'. We also see the journal performing an important function in communicating that science to where it is most needed: management of natural resources and the policy that drives the management". Could someone remind me who wrote the above quote? Thanks. I am particularly concerned about the part of "communicating science to where it is most needed:....policy. Sounds like advocacy to me. From bogus@does.not.exist.com Thu Feb 14 00:16:06 2008 From: bogus@does.not.exist.com () Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:16:06 -0000 Subject: No subject Message-ID: o directly link human economic activity to loss of biodiversity. I would s= ubmit that human economic activity is far and away the leading cause of bio= diversity loss. I am at a loss for why SCB members and leadership aren't e= mbracing and helping to refine the goals of WGEESS=2C instead of discouragi= ng and abandoning the group. Why isn't SCB encouraging and directing scien= tific inquiry towards the problem of human economic activity at its roots= =2C=3Bthe neoclassical economic paradigm?. My fear is the SCB leadership i= s towing the line of political correctness and is afraid of biting the hand= that feeds them. Obviously=2C most funding for conservation biology resea= rch and activities come from government agencies or NGOs whose source of mo= nies are generated from current economic activities. Any scientific questi= oning of that big taboo=2C the neoclassical economic paradigm=2C and commun= icating that science to where it is most needed=2C management and policy is= apparently not part of SCB. I guess I better just stick to conducting PVA= s and reporting the demise of threatened and endangered species. David C. Richards Ph.D. Senior Research Ecologist EcoAnalysts Inc. Center f= or Aquatic Studies 11 E. Main St. Suite M Bozeman=2C MT 59715 Affiliate Ass= itant ProfessorLand Resources and Environmental SciencesMontana State Unive= rsity=2C Bozeman=2C MT406.580.7816 mudsnail1 at hotmail.com 'nature=2C like li= berty=2C has no price tag'... 'species are priceless=2C as are human dignit= y and freedom' Leakey (1997) = --_da0802d3-4718-4f52-954f-ec1976961365_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "We see ourselves as a premier outlet for cutting-edge science for what has= been termed a 'crisis discipline'. We also see the journal performing an i= mportant function in communicating that science to where it is most needed:= management of natural resources and the policy that drives the management"= .
 =3B
Could someone remind me who wrote the above quote? =3B Thanks. =3B =
 =3B
I am particularly concerned about the part of "communicating science to whe= re it is most needed:....policy. =3B Sounds like advoc= acy to me.
 =3B
From bogus@does.not.exist.com Thu Feb 14 00:16:06 2008 From: bogus@does.not.exist.com () Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:16:06 -0000 Subject: No subject Message-ID: o directly link human economic activity to loss of biodiversity. =3B I = would submit that human economic activity is far and away the leading cause= of biodiversity loss. =3B I am at a loss for why SCB members and leade= rship aren't embracing and helping to refine the goals of WGEESS=2C instead= of discouraging and abandoning the group. =3B Why isn't SCB encouragin= g and =3Bdirecting scientific inquiry towards the problem of human econ= omic activity at its roots=2C=3Bthe neoclassical economic paradigm?. = =3B My fear is the SCB leadership is towing the line of political correctne= ss and is afraid of biting the hand that feeds them. =3B Obviously=2C m= ost funding for conservation biology research and activities come from gove= rnment agencies or NGOs whose source of monies =3Bare generated =3B= from current economic activities. =3B Any scientific questioning of tha= t big taboo=2C the neoclassical economic paradigm=2C and communicating that= science to where it is most needed=2C management and policy is =3Bappa= rently not part of SCB. =3B I guess I better just stick to conducting P= VAs and reporting the demise of threatened and endangered species.


David C. Richards Ph.D.

Senior Research Ecologist
EcoAn= alysts Inc. Center for Aquatic Studies
11 E. Main St. Suite M
Bozem= an=2C MT 59715

Affiliate Assitant Professor
Land Resources and E= nvironmental Sciences
Montana State University=2C Bozeman=2C MT

4= 06.580.7816

mudsnail1 at hotmail.com

'nature=2C like liberty= =2C has no price tag'... 'species are priceless=2C as are human dignity and= freedom'
Leakey (1997)


= --_da0802d3-4718-4f52-954f-ec1976961365_-- From luisgutierrez at peoplepc.com Tue Sep 16 21:07:11 2008 From: luisgutierrez at peoplepc.com (Luis Gutierrez) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:07:11 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Ethical Dimension of Sustainable Development Message-ID: <48D0826F.4090203@peoplepc.com> "Solidarity, Sustainability, and Nonviolence" -- monthly newsletter, free access A series of articles on "dimensions of sustainable development" is being published. Please post and/or forward this notice to friends/associates who might be interested in sustainable development and related issues. The September 2008 issue has been posted: Ethical Dimension of Sustainable Development http://pelicanweb.org/solisustv04n09.html See the archive for previously posted newsletters: May 2005 to August 2008 Archive http://pelicanweb.org/solisust.html Any feedback is deeply appreciated. Sincerely, Luis _______________________ Luis T. Gutierrez, Ph.D. Sustainability & Sustainable Development Solidarity, Sustainability, and Nonviolence Newsletter From brianczech at juno.com Thu Sep 18 11:08:24 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 18:08:24 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Position/ECONOMIC ANALYST-California Message-ID: <20080918.140824.17474.0@webmail01.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: ECONOMIC ANALYST LOCATION: SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA The Environmental Defense Fund is seeking qualified candidates for their Economic Analyst position. The Economic Analyst will serve as the lead analyst and model designer for the Ocean Economics team, working closely with the Managing Director and other team members; identify, design, and conduct in-depth, project-specific analyses to support implementation of market-based incentives for fisheries management; and analyze and evaluate existing market-based conservation strategies and deliver reports and presentations based on findings. Qualifications: the qualified candidate will have an MBA in business or M.S. or Ph.D. in resource economics; 5+ years work experience in roles with increasing responsibility; and experience with various economic modeling and analysis procedures (e.g., business modeling, financial projections, efficiency audits, cost-benefit analyses, cost effectiveness analyses, resource equivalency analyses, contingent valuation, small business profit/loss, structured financing and resource pool profit/loss) For a full position description, go to: http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagid=371&jobID=393 To apply, submit a cover letter, resume, and salary requirements to: Melissa Clack Search Coordinator Environmental Defense Fund Email: OEAnalyst at ceaconsulting.com Web: www.environmentaldefense.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "American Fisheries Society" group. To post to this group, send email to afs-fisheries at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to afs-fisheries-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/afs-fisheries?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- ____________________________________________________________ Click for free info on college degrees. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3l8WvGFy9CQPIWQcJfC6pgEWghuFKTSlIvBinoidTSjmFhSE/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080918/ea272d33/attachment.htm From tfleischner at prescott.edu Thu Sep 18 21:16:19 2008 From: tfleischner at prescott.edu (Tom Fleischner) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:16:19 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 7 References: Message-ID: I think everyone has every reason and right to be confused and miffed at the way the SCB leadership keeps tossing roadblocks in the path of this group. Discouragement and abandonment, yes. I, too, served on the Board of Governors, and I found that, in general, the board was far and away the most conservative part of the organization. In some cases, there's good cause for caution, but it has gotten much worse recently. The board has increasingly tended to be peopled by folks who are closely connected to institutional elites--it takes such connections to be able to afford being on the board, as it globe-trots about. So it's not too surprising that some people on the board actively discourage challenging fundamental assumptions that prop up societal elites. A great many long-time members of SCB are growing increasingly dissatisfied with its current approach to governance and decision-making. This working group should be getting supported as working at the roots of conservation solutions, not being patronized. I, like many others, am really frustrated. Best, Tom Thomas L. Fleischner, Ph.D. Professor of Environmental Studies Prescott College 220 Grove Avenue Prescott, AZ 86301 (928)350-2219 Web Page: http://www.prescott.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/tfleischner/index.html President, Natural History Network http://www.naturalhistorynetwork.org Imagination is better than a sharp instrument. To pay attention, this is our endless and proper work. --Mary Oliver ________________________________ From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of David Richards Sent: Tue 16-Sep-08 2:16 PM To: eess at list.conbio.org Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 7 "We see ourselves as a premier outlet for cutting-edge science for what has been termed a 'crisis discipline'. We also see the journal performing an important function in communicating that science to where it is most needed: management of natural resources and the policy that drives the management". Could someone remind me who wrote the above quote? Thanks. I am particularly concerned about the part of "communicating science to where it is most needed:....policy. Sounds like advocacy to me. From bogus@does.not.exist.com Thu Feb 14 00:16:06 2008 From: bogus@does.not.exist.com () Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:16:06 -0000 Subject: No subject Message-ID: to directly link human economic activity to loss of biodiversity. I = would submit that human economic activity is far and away the leading = cause of biodiversity loss. I am at a loss for why SCB members and = leadership aren't embracing and helping to refine the goals of WGEESS, = instead of discouraging and abandoning the group. Why isn't SCB = encouraging and directing scientific inquiry towards the problem of = human economic activity at its roots,;the neoclassical economic = paradigm?. My fear is the SCB leadership is towing the line of = political correctness and is afraid of biting the hand that feeds them. = Obviously, most funding for conservation biology research and activities = come from government agencies or NGOs whose source of monies are = generated from current economic activities. Any scientific questioning = of that big taboo, the neoclassical economic paradigm, and communicating = that science to where it is most needed, management and policy is = apparently not part of SCB. I guess I better just stick to conducting = PVAs and reporting the demise of threatened and endangered species. David C. Richards Ph.D.=20 Senior Research Ecologist=20 EcoAnalysts Inc. Center for Aquatic Studies=20 11 E. Main St. Suite M=20 Bozeman, MT 59715=20 Affiliate Assitant Professor Land Resources and Environmental Sciences Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 406.580.7816=20 mudsnail1 at hotmail.com=20 'nature, like liberty, has no price tag'... 'species are priceless, as = are human dignity and freedom'=20 Leakey (1997)=20 From phildesfish at besmug.org Fri Sep 19 10:15:45 2008 From: phildesfish at besmug.org (Phil Pister) Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:15:45 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <821DC61F-9E3F-4E83-84E6-861F04D12581@besmug.org> All: What Tom says is very true. We are undergoing the same sort of thing in our attempt to gain acceptance within the American Fisheries Society. "We shall overcome!" I have observed through the years that even the most inadequate mind can ultimately comprehend the obvious. But perhaps this is being overly optimistic! Phil Edwin P. (Phil) Pister Executive Secretary, Desert Fishes Council P.O. Box 337, Bishop, CA 93515 (for regular mail) For FedEx or UPS: 437 East South Street, Bishop, CA 93514 (760) 872-8751 [FAX and voice phone] e-mail: phil at desertfishes.org "To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant." ...Amos Bronson Alcott On Sep 18, 2008, at 9:16 PM, Tom Fleischner wrote: > I think everyone has every reason and right to be confused and > miffed at the way the SCB leadership keeps tossing roadblocks in > the path of this group. Discouragement and abandonment, yes. I, > too, served on the Board of Governors, and I found that, in > general, the board was far and away the most conservative part of > the organization. In some cases, there's good cause for caution, > but it has gotten much worse recently. The board has increasingly > tended to be peopled by folks who are closely connected to > institutional elites--it takes such connections to be able to > afford being on the board, as it globe-trots about. So it's not > too surprising that some people on the board actively discourage > challenging fundamental assumptions that prop up societal elites. > A great many long-time members of SCB are growing increasingly > dissatisfied with its current approach to governance and decision- > making. This working group should be getting supported as working > at the roots of conservation solutions, not being patronized. I, > like many others, am really frustrated. > > Best, Tom > > > Thomas L. Fleischner, Ph.D. > Professor of Environmental Studies > Prescott College > 220 Grove Avenue > Prescott, AZ 86301 > (928)350-2219 > > Web Page: http://www.prescott.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/ > tfleischner/index.html > > President, Natural History Network > http://www.naturalhistorynetwork.org www.naturalhistorynetwork.org/> > > Imagination is better than a sharp instrument. > To pay attention, this is our endless and proper work. > --Mary Oliver > > ________________________________ > > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of David Richards > Sent: Tue 16-Sep-08 2:16 PM > To: eess at list.conbio.org > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24, > Issue 7 > > > "We see ourselves as a premier outlet for cutting-edge science for > what has been termed a 'crisis discipline'. We also see the journal > performing an important function in communicating that science to > where it is most needed: management of natural resources and the > policy that drives the management". > > Could someone remind me who wrote the above quote? Thanks. > > I am particularly concerned about the part of "communicating > science to where it is most needed:....policy. Sounds like > advocacy to me. > > From my over 30 years of reading and research, I find it impossible > not to directly link human economic activity to loss of > biodiversity. I would submit that human economic activity is far > and away the leading cause of biodiversity loss. I am at a loss > for why SCB members and leadership aren't embracing and helping to > refine the goals of WGEESS, instead of discouraging and abandoning > the group. Why isn't SCB encouraging and directing scientific > inquiry towards the problem of human economic activity at its > roots,;the neoclassical economic paradigm?. My fear is the SCB > leadership is towing the line of political correctness and is > afraid of biting the hand that feeds them. Obviously, most funding > for conservation biology research and activities come from > government agencies or NGOs whose source of monies are generated > from current economic activities. Any scientific questioning of > that big taboo, the neoclassical economic paradigm, and > communicating that science to where it is most needed, management > and policy is apparently not part of SCB. I guess I better just > stick to conducting PVAs and reporting the demise of threatened and > endangered species. > > > David C. Richards Ph.D. > > Senior Research Ecologist > EcoAnalysts Inc. Center for Aquatic Studies > 11 E. Main St. Suite M > Bozeman, MT 59715 > > Affiliate Assitant Professor > Land Resources and Environmental Sciences > Montana State University, Bozeman, MT > > 406.580.7816 > > mudsnail1 at hotmail.com > > 'nature, like liberty, has no price tag'... 'species are priceless, > as are human dignity and freedom' > Leakey (1997) > > > > _______________________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess From efuetacha at yahoo.com Sat Sep 20 01:59:09 2008 From: efuetacha at yahoo.com (Efuetakoa Charles) Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 01:59:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Saving wildlife in poor nations Message-ID: <609157.2266.qm@web33504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I am writting this mail from Cameroon which is one of the richest country in biodiversity. Cameroon still has many species of gorillas, chimpanzees, elephants, drills and many other apes species. In addition the equitorial rain forest is very rich in tree species including timber species and medicinal plants. Non timber forestry products are also abundant. ? The goverment of Cameroon, NGOs and civil societies are trying to conserve this rich biodiverty but a lack of knowledge is hindering their progress. There is still a lot of hunting and poaching in Cameroon. Although local inhabitants are often allowed to hunt outside protected areas, no one is suppose to hunt class A animals. However many native cannot identify class A animals. ? I hope that conservationist should try other means of education. If posters containing endangered and treathened species of animals and plants and produce and distributed to the natives, it may go a long way to promote awareness against the killing of these species. Posters are very few and are most often limited to offices. We should try to have as many pictures of these species as possible including most impotant information on their status and importance and distribute. ? I hope this will go a long way to protect nature. ? Efuetakoa. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080920/b6d6fae7/attachment.htm From rwdietz at yahoo.com Sat Sep 20 15:58:35 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:58:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 7 In-Reply-To: <821DC61F-9E3F-4E83-84E6-861F04D12581@besmug.org> Message-ID: <920128.29220.qm@web32102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I am glad to see that others share my frustration with the refusal in SCB to tackle the economic growth issue head-on. I understand that members of the Board of Governors and staff are probably responding to political pressures that we do not see, but why shut down the group? I was especially frustrated that the board voted to disband the WGEESS in the wake of a highly successful and much-praised symposium on economic growth and biodiversity conservation. That symposium represented the kind of activity the Board of Governors had called on the WGEESS to plan and support. The move to disband also occurred right on the heels of an election of a new board for the WGEESS -- what was the point of holding the election when the working group was dissolved on the very day new officers were to begin their terms of service? I believe it is critical at this time to turn the frustration into a positive outcome. We are in the process of re-applying for working group status. We will address the concerns of the Board of Governors, and we will keep pushing the SCB to dig deeper on the connection between exponential economic growth and unprecedented loss of biodiversity. Thanks, Rob Dietz Past Chair WGEESS --- On Fri, 9/19/08, Phil Pister wrote: > From: Phil Pister > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 7 > To: "Tom Fleischner" > Cc: eess at list.conbio.org, "David Richards" > Date: Friday, September 19, 2008, 10:15 AM > All: > > What Tom says is very true. We are undergoing the same sort > of thing > in our attempt to gain acceptance within the American > Fisheries > Society. "We shall overcome!" I have observed > through the years that > even the most inadequate mind can ultimately comprehend the > obvious. > But perhaps this is being overly optimistic! > > Phil > > Edwin P. (Phil) Pister > Executive Secretary, Desert Fishes Council > P.O. Box 337, Bishop, CA 93515 (for regular mail) > For FedEx or UPS: 437 East South Street, Bishop, CA 93514 > (760) 872-8751 [FAX and voice phone] > e-mail: phil at desertfishes.org > > "To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady > of the > ignorant." ...Amos Bronson Alcott > > > On Sep 18, 2008, at 9:16 PM, Tom Fleischner wrote: > > > I think everyone has every reason and right to be > confused and > > miffed at the way the SCB leadership keeps tossing > roadblocks in > > the path of this group. Discouragement and > abandonment, yes. I, > > too, served on the Board of Governors, and I found > that, in > > general, the board was far and away the most > conservative part of > > the organization. In some cases, there's good > cause for caution, > > but it has gotten much worse recently. The board has > increasingly > > tended to be peopled by folks who are closely > connected to > > institutional elites--it takes such connections to be > able to > > afford being on the board, as it globe-trots about. > So it's not > > too surprising that some people on the board actively > discourage > > challenging fundamental assumptions that prop up > societal elites. > > A great many long-time members of SCB are growing > increasingly > > dissatisfied with its current approach to governance > and decision- > > making. This working group should be getting > supported as working > > at the roots of conservation solutions, not being > patronized. I, > > like many others, am really frustrated. > > > > Best, Tom > > > > > > Thomas L. Fleischner, Ph.D. > > Professor of Environmental Studies > > Prescott College > > 220 Grove Avenue > > Prescott, AZ 86301 > > (928)350-2219 > > > > Web Page: > http://www.prescott.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/ > > tfleischner/index.html > > > > President, Natural History Network > > http://www.naturalhistorynetwork.org > www.naturalhistorynetwork.org/> > > > > Imagination is better than a sharp instrument. > > To pay attention, this is our endless and proper work. > > > --Mary Oliver > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of David > Richards > > Sent: Tue 16-Sep-08 2:16 PM > > To: eess at list.conbio.org > > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS > Digest, Vol 24, > > Issue 7 > > > > > > "We see ourselves as a premier outlet for > cutting-edge science for > > what has been termed a 'crisis discipline'. We > also see the journal > > performing an important function in communicating that > science to > > where it is most needed: management of natural > resources and the > > policy that drives the management". > > > > Could someone remind me who wrote the above quote? > Thanks. > > > > I am particularly concerned about the part of > "communicating > > science to where it is most needed:....policy. Sounds > like > > advocacy to me. > > > > From my over 30 years of reading and research, I find > it impossible > > not to directly link human economic activity to loss > of > > biodiversity. I would submit that human economic > activity is far > > and away the leading cause of biodiversity loss. I am > at a loss > > for why SCB members and leadership aren't > embracing and helping to > > refine the goals of WGEESS, instead of discouraging > and abandoning > > the group. Why isn't SCB encouraging and > directing scientific > > inquiry towards the problem of human economic activity > at its > > roots,;the neoclassical economic paradigm?. My fear > is the SCB > > leadership is towing the line of political correctness > and is > > afraid of biting the hand that feeds them. Obviously, > most funding > > for conservation biology research and activities come > from > > government agencies or NGOs whose source of monies are > generated > > from current economic activities. Any scientific > questioning of > > that big taboo, the neoclassical economic paradigm, > and > > communicating that science to where it is most needed, > management > > and policy is apparently not part of SCB. I guess I > better just > > stick to conducting PVAs and reporting the demise of > threatened and > > endangered species. > > > > > > David C. Richards Ph.D. > > > > Senior Research Ecologist > > EcoAnalysts Inc. Center for Aquatic Studies > > 11 E. Main St. Suite M > > Bozeman, MT 59715 > > > > Affiliate Assitant Professor > > Land Resources and Environmental Sciences > > Montana State University, Bozeman, MT > > > > 406.580.7816 > > > > mudsnail1 at hotmail.com > > > > 'nature, like liberty, has no price tag'... > 'species are priceless, > > as are human dignity and freedom' > > Leakey (1997) > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > EESS mailing list > > EESS at list.conbio.org > > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > > _______________________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess From mudsnail1 at hotmail.com Mon Sep 22 12:15:20 2008 From: mudsnail1 at hotmail.com (David Richards) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:15:20 +0000 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Salutations All Earth Portal just posted an interesting story on "integration of environmental resources into national and corporate accounts" by Dr. Bartelmus. Check it out if you have time. http://www.earthportal.org/?p=1026David C. Richards Ph.D. Senior Research Ecologist EcoAnalysts Inc. Center for Aquatic Studies 11 E. Main St. Suite M Bozeman, MT 59715 Affiliate Assitant ProfessorLand Resources and Environmental SciencesMontana State University, Bozeman, MT406.580.7816 mudsnail1 at hotmail.com 'nature, like liberty, has no price tag'... 'species are priceless, as are human dignity and freedom' Leakey (1997) > From: eess-request at list.conbio.org> Subject: EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 11> To: eess at list.conbio.org> Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 12:00:07 -0700> > Send EESS mailing list submissions to> eess at list.conbio.org> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit> http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to> eess-request at list.conbio.org> > You can reach the person managing the list at> eess-owner at list.conbio.org> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific> than "Re: Contents of EESS digest..."> > > Today's Topics:> > 1. Saving wildlife in poor nations (Efuetakoa Charles)> 2. Re: EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 7 (robert dietz)> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> > Message: 1> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 01:59:09 -0700 (PDT)> From: Efuetakoa Charles > Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Saving wildlife in poor> nations> To: EESS at list.conbio.org> Message-ID: <609157.2266.qm at web33504.mail.mud.yahoo.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"> > I am writting this mail from Cameroon which is one of the richest country in biodiversity. Cameroon still has many species of gorillas, chimpanzees, elephants, drills and many other apes species. In addition the equitorial rain forest is very rich in tree species including timber species and medicinal plants. Non timber forestry products are also abundant.> ?> The goverment of Cameroon, NGOs and civil societies are trying to conserve this rich biodiverty but a lack of knowledge is hindering their progress. There is still a lot of hunting and poaching in Cameroon. Although local inhabitants are often allowed to hunt outside protected areas, no one is suppose to hunt class A animals. However many native cannot identify class A animals.> ?> I hope that conservationist should try other means of education. If posters containing endangered and treathened species of animals and plants and produce and distributed to the natives, it may go a long way to promote awareness against the killing of these species. Posters are very few and are most often limited to offices. We should try to have as many pictures of these species as possible including most impotant information on their status and importance and distribute.> ?> I hope this will go a long way to protect nature.> ?> Efuetakoa.> > > > -------------- next part --------------> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...> URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080920/b6d6fae7/attachment.html > > ------------------------------> > Message: 2> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:58:35 -0700 (PDT)> From: robert dietz > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24,> Issue 7> To: eess at list.conbio.org> Message-ID: <920128.29220.qm at web32102.mail.mud.yahoo.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii> > I am glad to see that others share my frustration with the refusal in SCB to tackle the economic growth issue head-on. I understand that members of the Board of Governors and staff are probably responding to political pressures that we do not see, but why shut down the group? I was especially frustrated that the board voted to disband the WGEESS in the wake of a highly successful and much-praised symposium on economic growth and biodiversity conservation. That symposium represented the kind of activity the Board of Governors had called on the WGEESS to plan and support. The move to disband also occurred right on the heels of an election of a new board for the WGEESS -- what was the point of holding the election when the working group was dissolved on the very day new officers were to begin their terms of service?> > I believe it is critical at this time to turn the frustration into a positive outcome. We are in the process of re-applying for working group status. We will address the concerns of the Board of Governors, and we will keep pushing the SCB to dig deeper on the connection between exponential economic growth and unprecedented loss of biodiversity.> > Thanks,> Rob Dietz> Past Chair WGEESS> > > --- On Fri, 9/19/08, Phil Pister wrote:> > > From: Phil Pister > > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 7> > To: "Tom Fleischner" > > Cc: eess at list.conbio.org, "David Richards" > > Date: Friday, September 19, 2008, 10:15 AM> > All:> > > > What Tom says is very true. We are undergoing the same sort> > of thing > > in our attempt to gain acceptance within the American> > Fisheries > > Society. "We shall overcome!" I have observed> > through the years that > > even the most inadequate mind can ultimately comprehend the> > obvious. > > But perhaps this is being overly optimistic!> > > > Phil> > > > Edwin P. (Phil) Pister> > Executive Secretary, Desert Fishes Council> > P.O. Box 337, Bishop, CA 93515 (for regular mail)> > For FedEx or UPS: 437 East South Street, Bishop, CA 93514> > (760) 872-8751 [FAX and voice phone]> > e-mail: phil at desertfishes.org> > > > "To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady> > of the > > ignorant." ...Amos Bronson Alcott> > > > > > On Sep 18, 2008, at 9:16 PM, Tom Fleischner wrote:> > > > > I think everyone has every reason and right to be> > confused and > > > miffed at the way the SCB leadership keeps tossing> > roadblocks in > > > the path of this group. Discouragement and> > abandonment, yes. I, > > > too, served on the Board of Governors, and I found> > that, in > > > general, the board was far and away the most> > conservative part of > > > the organization. In some cases, there's good> > cause for caution, > > > but it has gotten much worse recently. The board has> > increasingly > > > tended to be peopled by folks who are closely> > connected to > > > institutional elites--it takes such connections to be> > able to > > > afford being on the board, as it globe-trots about. > > So it's not > > > too surprising that some people on the board actively> > discourage > > > challenging fundamental assumptions that prop up> > societal elites. > > > A great many long-time members of SCB are growing> > increasingly > > > dissatisfied with its current approach to governance> > and decision- > > > making. This working group should be getting> > supported as working > > > at the roots of conservation solutions, not being> > patronized. I, > > > like many others, am really frustrated.> > >> > > Best, Tom> > >> > >> > > Thomas L. Fleischner, Ph.D.> > > Professor of Environmental Studies> > > Prescott College> > > 220 Grove Avenue> > > Prescott, AZ 86301> > > (928)350-2219> > >> > > Web Page: > > http://www.prescott.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/ > > > tfleischner/index.html> > >> > > President, Natural History Network> > > http://www.naturalhistorynetwork.org > > www.naturalhistorynetwork.org/>> > >> > > Imagination is better than a sharp instrument.> > > To pay attention, this is our endless and proper work.> > > > > --Mary Oliver> > >> > > ________________________________> > >> > > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of David> > Richards> > > Sent: Tue 16-Sep-08 2:16 PM> > > To: eess at list.conbio.org> > > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] EESS> > Digest, Vol 24, > > > Issue 7> > >> > >> > > "We see ourselves as a premier outlet for> > cutting-edge science for > > > what has been termed a 'crisis discipline'. We> > also see the journal > > > performing an important function in communicating that> > science to > > > where it is most needed: management of natural> > resources and the > > > policy that drives the management".> > >> > > Could someone remind me who wrote the above quote? > > Thanks.> > >> > > I am particularly concerned about the part of> > "communicating > > > science to where it is most needed:....policy. Sounds> > like > > > advocacy to me.> > >> > > From my over 30 years of reading and research, I find> > it impossible > > > not to directly link human economic activity to loss> > of > > > biodiversity. I would submit that human economic> > activity is far > > > and away the leading cause of biodiversity loss. I am> > at a loss > > > for why SCB members and leadership aren't> > embracing and helping to > > > refine the goals of WGEESS, instead of discouraging> > and abandoning > > > the group. Why isn't SCB encouraging and> > directing scientific > > > inquiry towards the problem of human economic activity> > at its > > > roots,;the neoclassical economic paradigm?. My fear> > is the SCB > > > leadership is towing the line of political correctness> > and is > > > afraid of biting the hand that feeds them. Obviously,> > most funding > > > for conservation biology research and activities come> > from > > > government agencies or NGOs whose source of monies are> > generated > > > from current economic activities. Any scientific> > questioning of > > > that big taboo, the neoclassical economic paradigm,> > and > > > communicating that science to where it is most needed,> > management > > > and policy is apparently not part of SCB. I guess I> > better just > > > stick to conducting PVAs and reporting the demise of> > threatened and > > > endangered species.> > >> > >> > > David C. Richards Ph.D.> > >> > > Senior Research Ecologist> > > EcoAnalysts Inc. Center for Aquatic Studies> > > 11 E. Main St. Suite M> > > Bozeman, MT 59715> > >> > > Affiliate Assitant Professor> > > Land Resources and Environmental Sciences> > > Montana State University, Bozeman, MT> > >> > > 406.580.7816> > >> > > mudsnail1 at hotmail.com> > >> > > 'nature, like liberty, has no price tag'...> > 'species are priceless, > > > as are human dignity and freedom'> > > Leakey (1997)> > >> > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________> > > EESS mailing list> > > EESS at list.conbio.org> > > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess> > > > _______________________________________________> > EESS mailing list> > EESS at list.conbio.org> > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess> > > > > > ------------------------------> > _______________________________________________> EESS mailing list> EESS at list.conbio.org> http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess> > > End of EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 11> ************************************ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080922/5704df4a/attachment.htm From rwdietz at yahoo.com Tue Sep 23 14:12:40 2008 From: rwdietz at yahoo.com (robert dietz) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:12:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Ecological Econ Perspective on Financial Meltdowns Message-ID: <471008.89025.qm@web32104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi EESSers, Brian Czech will be interviewed on radio program tonight about the recent financial meltdowns and the ecological economics perspective on them. Here is the information for the broadcast: Join Colorado teacher and world bicycle traveler Frosty Wooldridge on ?CONNECTING THE DOTS? with Republic Broadcasting Network as he features Dr. Brian Czech author of SHOVELING FUEL FOR A RUNAWAY TRAIN. Date?September 23, 2008 Time: 8:00 to 9:00 pm EST; 7:00 to 8:00 pm CT, 6:00 to 7:00 pm MT, 5:00 to 6:00 pm PT Radio: Listen live across America Computer Link: www.republicbroadcasting.org Go to website and follow directions for listening to the show through your computer. Call in number: 1-800 313 9443 Host: Frosty Wooldridge writes for www.NewsWithViews.com ; www.rense.com ; www.americanchronicle.com Questions by email: frostyw at juno.com Thanks, Rob Dietz Past Chair WGEESS From cara.lin at msa.hinet.net Wed Sep 24 01:46:23 2008 From: cara.lin at msa.hinet.net (Cara Lin Bridgman) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:46:23 +0800 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] conservation science vs conservation advocacy, was EESS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <48D9FE5F.5030207@msa.hinet.net> I've heard a lot about how scientists lose credibility if they move towards advocacy, but haven't seen too much actual loss of credibility--probably just evidence of my limited experience... What is interesting to me is how Jim Hansen is becoming increasingly vocal and public as he advocates for recognition and resolution of global warming. Increasingly, I'm sensing panic from those that study global warming, especially as parameters out pace predictions. So, with all the mountain of evidence of conservation disasters and doom, why are we conservation biologists so laid back? I was at the 2000 SCB meeting when Soule urged SCB to go to Washington and advocate. He got a standing ovation! I'd hate to think he got it because he is Soule and not because of what he was urging. I teach in the Institute of Wildlife Conservation, National Pingtung University, Taiwan. An important goal of this institute is to train Taiwan's next generation of conservation biologists. In my classes and when talking with students I stress the importance of communicating their research to ordinary people--like gas station attendants and restaurant workers. I also point out that each species that goes extinct indicates a conservation failure. I further point out that if they are successful, then they will have worked themselves out of a job--wouldn't that be wonderful! The thing is, if we really are conservation biologists, then our work and lives should be directed as much as possible to achieve success in conservation. If habitats and study subjects keep going extinct, then we're not doing our jobs very well. So, I see policy and advocacy as built right into the name: Society of Conservation Biologists--we're the scientists working for conservation. CL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cara Lin Bridgman cara.lin at msa.hinet.net P.O. Box 013 Shinjhuang http://megaview.com.tw/~caralin Longjing Township http://www.BugDorm.com Taichung County 43499 Taiwan Phone: 886-4-2632-5484 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From brianczech at juno.com Fri Sep 26 07:01:24 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:01:24 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: ERM UK - Environmental Economist position Message-ID: <20080926.100124.8222.1@webmail09.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Job Opportunity: Environmental economist (and potentially a socio-economist) ERM UK is looking to recruit an ambitious environmental economist with between 3-10 years relevant experience to join and help develop their exciting and expanding environmental economics practice. The ideal candidate will have broad environmental economics experience, with a particular interest in topics such as the economics of ecosystem services, water and/or climate change. They will also have consultancy experience or a proven ability to work to tight deadlines. Skills and interest in socio-economic and ?human wellbeing? impact assessments would be an added bonus (although a second position focussing on this is planned soon). Given that ERM is the largest pure environmental consultancy in the world (with over 3,500 consultants and offices in 40 countries) you will have access to a significant and varied UK and global client base (public and private sector) requiring a wide range of environmental, social and sustainability services. The position offers considerable freedom, flexibility and support to develop your own areas of interest. The potential also exists for rapid career progress and ?partnership? within a highly dynamic, innovative, friendly, growing and successful organisation. The position will be based in one of our UK offices (preferably London, Oxford or Edinburgh) and offers a competitive remuneration package. Over the past 20 years, the UK based ERM economics practice has built an impressive UK and international track record. Projects in the past year have included, amongst others: Undertaking CBA for groundwater remediation and renewable energy schemes; Assessing the economic impacts of climate change and adaptation; Valuing environmental damages and developing a compensation package (including biodiversity offsets) for a port development; Evaluating the business case for carbon neutral/green buildings; Evaluating environmental, social and economic issues associated with biofuel alternatives; Developing an innovative economic evaluation methodology for integrated river basin management decision-making; Creating an online environmental economics course, factsheets and workshops for ICZM and sustainable development; Undertaking socio-economic impact assessments for infrastructure, regeneration and industrial developments; Developing a model for evaluating the financial viability of climate mitigation technology; Developing an environmental improvement investment decision-making tool; Assessing the implications of a proposed MBI on a private sector company; and Producing a synthesis report on the linkages between ecosystem services, their values and poverty alleviation, and associated research needs. If interested, please submit a CV and covering letter ASAP to the Senior Environmental Economist position on the following web link: http://tbe.taleo.net/NA9/ats/careers/requisition.jsp?org=ERMGINC&cws=1&rid=3901 Many thanks. Kind regards. James James Spurgeon Technical Director ? Head of Environmental Economics for Europe, Middle East and Africa. Strategic Services Team London and Oxford Environmental Resources Management http://www.erm.com This electronic mail message may contain information which is (a) LEGALLY PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY IN NATURE, OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) intended only for the use of the Addressee (s) names herein. If you are not the Addressee (s), or the person responsible for delivering this to the Addressee (s), you are hereby notified that reading, copying, or distributing this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please contact us immediately and take the steps necessary to delete the message completely from your computer system. Thank you. Please visit ERM's web site: http://www.erm.com ____________________________________________________________ Improve your home. Click for products, services, and project ideas. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nHrmSLvyOjC2FNHJqRHNq0nyZuPz1btyvCYgPrI8VP3GYPa/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080926/87316edf/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Fri Sep 26 07:04:30 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:04:30 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Professorship in Natural Resource Economics Message-ID: <20080926.100430.8222.3@webmail09.dca.untd.com> ---------------------Forwarded Message--------------------- UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA Tuscaloosa, AL Department of Economics, Finance and Legal Studies Professorship in Natural Resource Economics Q - Natural Resource Economics; Environmental The Department of Economics, Finance and Legal Studies is seeking a candidate to be appointed as the Dwight Harrigan Endowed Professor in Natural Resource Economics. This is a tenure track position beginning August 16, 2009. Rank and salary are dependent upon qualifications. JOB QUALIFICATIONS: Candidates at all ranks will be considered; however, we have a preference for a candidate at the senior level who has a record of publishing in high-quality journals, demonstrated teaching effectiveness and experience with external grants. Information about the department is available at: http://cba.ua.edu/econ/ The department offers excellent research support. Strong research productivity and high-quality teaching at the graduate/undergraduate level are expected of the successful candidate. APPLICATION PROCEDURE: Only online applications are accepted. Candidates must apply online at: https://facultyjobs.ua.edu and attach a curriculum vita that includes three references. One or two current unpublished papers must also be attached. Items not attached at time of application will be disqualified. Review of applicants will continue until the position is filled. The University of Alabama is an Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer. Women and minorities are encouraged to apply. ____________________________________________________________ Click here to grab coupons and discounts. Many stores, many deals. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oKYF5Z1dJte06yCyzGVkIFEUCyhsJ2AoEt8vsxwpPx73kpm/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20080926/365c31c1/attachment.html From luisgutierrez at peoplepc.com Sun Oct 5 19:00:08 2008 From: luisgutierrez at peoplepc.com (Luis Gutierrez) Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:00:08 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Cultural Dimension of Sustainable Development Message-ID: <48E97128.3070607@peoplepc.com> "Solidarity, Sustainability, and Nonviolence" -- technology, culture, human development -- monthly newsletter, free access The October 2008 issue is in preparation: Cultural Dimension of Sustainable Development http://pelicanweb.org/solisustv04n10.html A series of articles on "dimensions of sustainable development" is being published. Please post and/or forward this notice to friends/associates who might be interested in interdisciplinary research of human solidarity, sustainable development, and related issues. See the archive for previously posted newsletters: May 2005 to September 2008 Archive http://pelicanweb.org/solisust.html Any feedback is deeply appreciated. Sincerely, Luis _______________________ Luis T. Gutierrez, Ph.D. Sustainability & Sustainable Development Editor, "Solidarity, Sustainability, and Nonviolence" From larson.grapids at gmail.com Mon Oct 6 08:34:41 2008 From: larson.grapids at gmail.com (Mike Larson) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 10:34:41 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Volunteer for SCB Policy activities Message-ID: <53dd27b60810060834w5704b94elfe2fc593bc7d4c39@mail.gmail.com> In the recent email update from SCB, the following items occurred under "Policy Office Update": -----------begin quote--------------------------------- - Met with a new Deputy Assistant Secretary of Treasury of the US at his request to discuss environment and energy policy in climate change, foreign assistance and World Bank programs. We still need volunteers to help our five main issue task forces (see the top five issues on the main policy webpage http://www.conbio.org/resources/policy/) do this work. If you are interested, please send an email to jfitzgerald at conbio.org. --------------end quote------------------------------ I think, for example, meeting with the US Dept. of the Treasury and answering questions listed on the web page of the 5th main policy issue (Green Investing) would best be addressed by task forces that include someone with expertise or at least interest in ecological economics. Please consider contacting John to volunteer to help with economics-related policy issues. Perhaps once the working group is officially recognized we can establish a more formal relationship with the Policy Office, but for now I think individual efforts could be very helpful. If you volunteer or if you have already, please let me know. Mike Larson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081006/9e15918b/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Mon Oct 6 16:44:07 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 23:44:07 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Job opening: Natural Resource Economist, Gloucester, MA Message-ID: <20081006.194407.18969.2@webmail17.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Please share with those that may be interested. Questions should be directed to Laura Shulman (lshulman at integratedstatistics.com) at Integrated Statistics (508-540-8560) >>>> *Natural Resource Economist Needed* Integrated Statistics is looking for an economist to work with the Protected Resources Division of the National Marine Fisheries Service. We are seeking a candidate with strong natural resource economics knowledge, training and experience to prepare economic analysis and environmental analysis to accompany rule making activities. Specifically, the candidate will prepare economic analysis to accompany proposals to designate critical habitat for species listed or proposed to be listed under the Endangered Species Act. Such analysis will estimate the anticipated costs incurred to avoid or minimize potential impacts to the habitat features determined to be essential to the conservation and recovery of listed species. This will involve contacting businesses, companies, industries and other potentially affected entities to estimate the number affected and the severity of the potential impact (cost of compliance). In addition, the candidate will prepare environmental analysis to accompany rulemaking packages which identify and analyze the potential economic impacts of complying with proposed regulations. Knowledge of natural resource economics and experience writing environmentally focused economic reports is strongly desired. Requirements: College degree with a major in economics with coursework in natural resource economics, experience in writing environmental assessments at a minimum, experience in writing environmental impact statements preferred. Please send a resume to HR at integratedstatistics.com Wage: $20-$29/hour depending on education and experience Benefits: Health, Dental, Retirement, paid sick leave, vacation, and holidays -- Gisele Magnusson, Economist Protected Species Branch Northeast Fisheries Science Center NOAA Fisheries 166 Water Street Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-495-2137 ____________________________________________________________ Click here and choose from thousands of high quality used cars. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oE0cPhljdyl3CK4BunUx33YiWveGgvMOAjdPj7SMepkZsdu/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081006/5633fdee/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Tue Oct 7 06:21:01 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 13:21:01 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Professorship in Natural Resource Economics Message-ID: <20081007.092101.21715.0@webmail09.dca.untd.com> UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA Tuscaloosa, AL Department of Economics, Finance and Legal Studies Professorship in Natural Resource Economics Q - Natural Resource Economics; Environmental The Department of Economics, Finance and Legal Studies is seeking a candidate to be appointed as the Dwight Harrigan Endowed Professor in Natural Resource Economics. This is a tenure track position beginning August 16, 2009. Rank and salary are dependent upon qualifications. JOB QUALIFICATIONS: Candidates at all ranks will be considered; however, we have a preference for a candidate at the senior level who has a record of publishing in high-quality journals, demonstrated teaching effectiveness and experience with external grants. Information about the department is available at: http://cba.ua.edu/econ/ The department offers excellent research support. Strong research productivity and high-quality teaching at the graduate/undergraduate level are expected of the successful candidate. APPLICATION PROCEDURE: Only online applications are accepted. Candidates must apply online at: https://facultyjobs.ua.edu and attach a curriculum vita that includes three references. One or two current unpublished papers must also be attached. Items not attached at time of application will be disqualified. Review of applicants will continue until the position is filled. The University of Alabama is an Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer. Women and minorities are encouraged to apply. ____________________________________________________________ Make more on your investments with qualified asset management. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3npt7SdjrJDHslovESQD9rgDrGZqLwjl92uetyhA67F1k2S4/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081007/fc84a60e/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Tue Oct 7 13:53:30 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 20:53:30 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: POST-DOC in Conservation & Development Economics Message-ID: <20081007.165330.21026.0@webmail11.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- A postdoctoral position in conservation and development is available immediately in the Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources at North Carolina State University. Candidates are expected to have completed all requirements for a PhD in economics or a related field by January 2009. The appointment is for a minimum of 9 months and up to 3 years contingent upon performance. Salary will be commensurate with experience. Responsibilities include planning and supervising a household survey and related data collection in the Brazilian Amazon, econometric analyses of spatial panel household datasets, and writing and editing manuscripts for peer-reviewed journals. Possible research topics include the evolution of welfare and land use on the Amazon frontier, program evaluation of community forestry initiatives, design and assessment of projects to reduce carbon emissions from deforestation (REDD), and markets for ecosystem services. Depending on the interests and skills of the successful candidate, the scope of work could be expanded to include collaboration on research proposals, project management, advising and supervising masters students, and development of international academic programs. The post-doctoral researcher will work directly with Dr. Erin Sills, while also collaborating with other PIs on a panel survey in the Amazon. The position will offer opportunities to engage with the extensive network of environmental, resource, and development economists in the Research Triangle of North Carolina (e.g., CenRep at NC State; Environment and Policy at Duke University; and the US Forest Service). The post-doc will be based primarily at NC State, but must be willing to travel to Brazil as needed. Requirements include a strong background in a relevant field of economics (e.g., environment, development) and experience in applied economic research methods, econometric analysis, and statistical software. Field experience with household surveys (or other primary research), fluency in Portuguese (or Spanish), knowledge of spatial and/or panel data methods, strong technical writing ability, and GIS skills are desirable and will be taken into consideration in the evaluation of applications. Qualified candidates from developing countries (broadly defined), women, and minorities are particularly encouraged to apply. To apply, send cover letter, CV, graduate transcripts, contact information for three references, and two research writing samples via email to sills at ncsu.edu (with ?post-doc? in the subject line). Materials may also be mailed to Erin Sills Dept of Forestry & Environmental Resources North Carolina State University Raleigh, NC 27695 - 8008 Evaluation of applications will begin on October 15 and continue until position is filled. ____________________________________________________________ Free information on EMR systems. Click here to compare systems. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oIm5jTs4TmJB3YNRBZtO2AFIT6Oa1a1ZpQYL5UgB3vgQFTu/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081007/33b30e0a/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Wed Oct 8 07:42:28 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 14:42:28 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Leading sustainability scientist honing in on steady state economics Message-ID: <20081008.104228.7292.0@webmail08.dca.untd.com> http://www.exchangemagazine.com/morningpost/2008/week41/Wednesday/1008015.html New tools for ?climate emergency? Thomas Homer-Dixon - Arts Fleeing the disciplinary confines of his past, Thomas Homer-Dixon has arrived at Waterloo, a free-range academic. ?Coming to Waterloo is like breathing pure oxygen. I?m being allowed to do what I want for the first time since I was a post-doc.? The global visionary, award-winning author (The Upside of Down, The Ingenuity Gap), and former director of the Trudeau Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Toronto has joined the new Balsillie School of International Affairs and holds cross-appointments to the faculties of arts and environment at Waterloo. ?I?m at a watershed point in my career,? he explains. ?I?ve built a foundation of knowledge and ideas. It?s a great time to arrive at Waterloo. One of the principal reasons I came here is the interdisciplinary nature of my work, which draws on political science, economics, environmental studies, geography, cognitive science, social psychology, and complex system theory. The problems we have now are located at the interfaces of professional domains.? Homer-Dixon?s current research focuses on ?global responses to the climate emergency ? the need to move as quickly as possible to zero carbon emissions.? To study the policy implications of different emergency scenarios, ?we need new tools,? he says, adding he finds complexity theory ?very provocative. It?s guiding everything I?m doing now. ?According to complex adaptive system theory, the most adaptive systems tend to be distributed and decentralized in their problem solving,? he says, pointing to Wikipedia as an example. Over the next two years, Homer-Dixon plans to embark on two additional research projects. ?Beyond the Growth Imperative: Challenges of a Global Steady-State Economy? will explore the need to move away from the commitment to global growth. ?Open-architecture Democracy? will study the application of collaborative problem-solving on the Web to address what he terms ?humankind?s extraordinarily complex social, political, and environmental problems.? Is there still time to save ourselves ? and the planet? ?I have two little kids,? he says. ?I have to hope we have time.? ----------------------------------- Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Don't let your life go up in flames. Click here for the latest fire saftey products. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oFSuAyaGnJHlMVOGZyYbXTSk07y8CI7zuPrgJzLuanReH5S/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081008/d671e419/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Oct 9 05:54:32 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 12:54:32 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Assoc. Prof. in Env. Resource Economics - Denmark Message-ID: <20081009.085432.6797.1@webmail06.dca.untd.com> UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK Department of Environmental and Business Economics Associate Professor in Environmental and Resource Economics and Management The University of Southern Denmark invites applications for a position as Associate Professor (tenure) in Environmental and Resource Economics and Management, targeted towards the economics of marine living resources. The University also encourages applicants with broader research and teaching experience within Business Economics and Applied Microeconomics who wish to contribute to the development of the research area. ABOUT THE DEPARTMENT: The Department of Environmental and Business Economics - http://www.sdu.dk/ime - is part of the Faculty of Social Science and is located in Esbjerg. The research at the Department of Environmental and Business Economics is mainly dealing with the analysis of economic consequences of market demands and regulation in relation to the environment and resources. Within environmental and resource economics focus is particularly on: - Environmental regulation and management - Risk analysis and management - Pollution of marine living resources - The enterprise, environment and local resources - Establishment of markets for and price formation of environmental goods - Integrated environmental-economy analysis and modeling - Strategic behavior in Environmental and Resource problems Research in the Department is conducted in a variety of fields and has emphasized participation in international projects. The successful candidate is expected to contribute to raise external funds and take part in the development of research projects related to Environmental and Resource Economics. The department hosts the Centre for Fisheries and Aquaculture Management and Economics (FAME), which consists of a network and a research school connecting researchers within resource economics and management with particular focus on fisheries and aquaculture ? http://www.sdu.dk/fame. The Department also provides teaching for degrees in Enterprise development (M.Sc. Business economics), Environmental and resource management (MSc.), Environmental planning (B.Sc.), business economics and administration (B.Sc.) and diploma programs in business economics and administration. The department also offers Ph.D. courses and contributes modules to the M.Sc. programmes in public health management and Biological Oceanography. The Department provides a competitive salary, modern facilities for research and teaching, as well as resources for research assistants and for travel and conference participation. JOB QUALIFICATIONS: Employment in an associate professorship requires scientific qualifications documented though a PhD degree or the equivalent as well as research and teaching qualifications corresponding to a level to be expected after employment as an assistant professor. An associate professorship is of indefinite duration, but a trial period of one and one half years may be decided on if the applicant does not have sufficient teaching experience. Within a three-year-period foreign appointees are expected to be able to teach in Danish. FURTHER INFORMATION: Further information can be obtained from: CONTACT: Head of Department Eva Roth Tel: +45 6550 4186 Email: MAILTO:er at sam.sdu.dk or CONTACT: Professor Niels Vestergaard Tel: +45 6550 4181 Email: MAILTO:nv at sam.sdu.dk Appointment to the position will be in accordance with the salary agreement between the Ministry of Finance and the Danish Confederation of Professional Associations and in accordance with the job description for instructors and academic personnel at institutions of higher education. APPLICATION PROCEDURE: Applications must contain the following documents: - Curriculum Vitae - A complete publications list, indicating which publications the applicant finds most relevant for the position (max. 10) - 3 copies of each of these most relevant papers - Documentation of teaching experience and other relevant information - A list of all enclosures. All enclosures must be numbered, signed and, where necessary, assembled in sets Applications will be assessed by a committee. The assessment committee is only obliged to include those parts of the enclosed material considered necessary to make an assessment. The committee may request additional material, in which case it is the responsibility of the applicant to procure the necessary copies of the material. When the evaluation committee has submitted its report, the applicant will receive the part of the evaluation that concerns him/her. All interested persons are encouraged to apply, regardless of age, gender, religious affiliation or ethnic background. Please send 4 copies of the application, CV and publication list (publications in 3 copies) marked Position No. 341/522-085454 before 14 November 2008 at 12.00 noon to: CONTACT: The University of Southern Denmark The Faculty of Social Sciences Campusvej 55 DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark ____________________________________________________________ Click for the latest fitness products and trends. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nD5HjHbF5glxN6IjOCeeWCSgi3KPJRrflpEknFByBvaA0o8/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081009/602d3ec3/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Oct 9 05:55:41 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 12:55:41 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Tufts - Environmental/Resource Economics Message-ID: <20081009.085541.6797.2@webmail06.dca.untd.com> TUFTS UNIVERSITY The Fletcher School Assistant/Associate Professor of Environmental/Resource Economics The Fletcher School, established in 1933 as the first graduate school of international affairs in the United States, seeks to fill a full-time, tenure-track or tenured position at the rank of Assistant or Associate Professor in Environmental/Resource Economics beginning September 2008. ABOUT THE SCHOOL: The Fletcher School's faculty is multidisciplinary with a focus on connecting theory with practice. We prepare our masters and doctoral students to use the latest political, economic, business, and legal thinking to generate pragmatic policies that will successfully shape global events. JOB DESCRIPTION: The new faculty member will be a member of the Center for International Environment and Resource Policy which is home to a multidisciplinary group of faculty and students that offers a field of concentration through course work, an ongoing research program and a vigorous program of speakers, conferences and other events. JOB QUALIFICATIONS: Special consideration will be given to candidates with research interests in any of the following areas - international climate change and energy policy, environmental policy in developing countries and emerging market economies, sustainable development, natural resource management, pollution control, and environmental health. A Ph.D. or its equivalent is required along with a record of distinguished scholarly publication appropriate for rank of appointment. Review of applications will begin December 1, 2008. APPLICATION PROCEDURE: Applicants should send their curriculum vitae, any supporting materials and three letters of reference to: CONTACT: Chair, Environmental/Resource Economics Search The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy 160 Packard Avenue Tufts University Medford, MA 02155 USA The Fletcher School is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer and the administration, faculty, and student body are committed to attracting talented candidates from groups presently underrepresented on campus. ____________________________________________________________ Fast Computer Training. Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mAUCwWeDN5uVvPN8m0LT4FAVaitsaHuqG3CYZexTiX9sgjy/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081009/9c1c4900/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Thu Oct 9 06:07:53 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 13:07:53 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] International Sustainable Development Research Conference Message-ID: <20081009.090753.6797.3@webmail06.dca.untd.com> http://globalchallenge2009.geo.uu.nl Invitation and Call for Papers 15th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference Utrecht, The Netherlands July, 5-8th, 2009 !!!! Apologies for any cross-postings !!!! The International Sustainable Development Research Society (ISDRS, www.isdrs.org) is pleased to announce its 15th annual conference to be held in Utrecht, The Netherlands (conference flyer: http://globalchallenge2009.geo.uu.nl/pdfmap/isdrFlyer.pdf ). The Netherlands provides a very exiting platform and context for global sustainable development scientific research, policy and practice. The central theme of the conference is ?Taking Up the Global Challenge: Analysing the implementation of innovations and governance for sustainable development". We have a very attractive plenary program, with amongst the international speakers Prof. Dr R.K. Pachauri (Director General TERI, India, Chairman IPCC) and the famous Prof. Dr. Dennis Meadows (Institute for Policy and Social Science Research, University of New Hampshire, USA), author of Limits to Growth and many subsequent works. We organize many track sessions, grouped in 5 main themes: Sustainability Science; Climate Change and Energy; Sustainable Land Use & Regional Approaches; Innovation for Sustainable Production and Consumption and Governance for Sustainable Development. Calls for Papers are available for all track sessions. The deadline for abstracts is January 1st, 2009. About 400-500 environmental scientists from all around the world will participate in this event. The general scope of the debate, as well as the 25 track calls are described in detail on the conference website We explicitly encourage PhD-researchers from developing countries to submit their research papers. Visit the website for details about our sponsor program for this. We will also organize cost free hosting for PhD-researchers from developing countries by our students in Sustainable Development. Please now also note the very exciting excursion program. On the website you can find various alternatives for post conference excursions which will enable you to experience the various front running examples of implementing sustainable development strategies in The Netherlands. The conference works with double blind peer reviewed papers and also has an option for poster presentations. Deadline for submitting abstracts to the call for papers is January 1st, 2009. Please visit the conference website at http://globalchallenge2009.geo.uu.nl for further information and guidelines for abstract submission. Papers presented at the conference are considered for publication in special issues of international scientific peer reviewed journals. The conference has several supporting journals, including Sustainable Development, Business Strategy and the Environment, Journal of Cleaner Production, Progress in Industrial Ecology, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, European Environment and International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development. The full registration fee also covers a one year membership in the International Sustainable Development Research Society, ISDRS (www.isdrs.org) including a one year subscription, with six issues a year, of the academic journal Sustainable Development. >>>> Welcome to Utrecht! <<<< On behalf of all track organisers, and Dr. Walter J.V. Vermeulen and Prof. ir. N.D. van Egmond, Conference chairs Prof. Richard Welford, Co-Chair of ISDR Society (Hong Kong University, Hong Kong, China) Dr. Jouni Korhonen, Co-Chair of ISDR Society (Abo Akademi University, Finland) -- Kaisa PihlatieProject Manager?bo Akademi UniversityFaculty of TechnologyDepartment of Industrial ManagementPiispankatu 8, FI-20500 Turku, FINLANDMobile: +358 50 428 0875Fax: +358 2 215 4791E-mail: kaisa.pihlatie at abo.fiwww.abo.fi/fak/tkf/indek/ie***15th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference5-8 July 2009, Utrecht, The Netherlandshttp://globalchallenge2009.geo.uu.nl ____________________________________________________________ Inventors: Does your idea have potential for millions? Click for info. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mfCNnzGS5DH9fysuPbKi6T7SGFJpLZ51tESHByDkGnFhfu0/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081009/da273a00/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Oct 9 16:10:34 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 23:10:34 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections Message-ID: <20081009.191034.11862.1@webmail18.dca.untd.com> Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science (WGEESS), Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB Board of Governors voted ?against authorization? of the WGEESS. I can assure you that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not indifference. The BOG?s vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was puzzling if for no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having completed the official process that SCG working groups go through for such purposes. It is more accurate to say that the working group was ?de-authorized? in Tennessee. In any event, the formal status of the working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, WGEESS Chair and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision. I trust their judgments ? with member inputs ? with the redrafting of the charter and so forth. I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous members who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join the SCB itself in order to do so. Many of you felt that the working group was a promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win political rhetoric that ?there is no conflict between growing the economy and protecting the environment,? and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing island of ecological reality in a sea of political expedience. Most of us ? I think the vast majority of us ? recognized an SCB position on economic growth as an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win rhetoric. We worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at large, including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting. (I?ll attach the position here as a reminder.) The action of the BOG at the annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large ?transaction cost,? in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and other WGEESS initiatives back into the mix. With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should be useful going forward. Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the WGEESS, some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB membership for 2009. I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at the $20, non-journal level. Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only continue to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed position on economic growth, as well as the widespread international support for the common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position. So please retain your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more quickly on these issues. I think we all realize that our planet?s biodiversity is plunging precipitously while ?leaders? in and out of the SCB belabor themselves with antiquated political ?correctness.? Most of us have heard that ?Ignorance of the law is no excuse.? Lawbreakers go to jail, whether they know the law or not. Regarding those SCB office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore recognize the thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically macroeconomic implications, we might say, ?Ignorance of the natural laws is no excuse.? If they?re not going to lead on this issue, they?ll need to get out of the way because we will. They have had numerous years now since some of us began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to biodiversity conservation, some years back. Some of them have literally and even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have consistently weighed in against our initiatives! That?s not acceptable for officials who represent SCB members. Another thing we should all be aware of is that the ?vote? to de-authorize the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed. Although I?d venture to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally ? and perhaps none exists ? apparently the vote was 7-5. Some of those who voted to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business as their terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the Tennessee meeting). Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature of this vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of negative votes. I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society sociology and psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a large amount of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving of the WGEESS. I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a public listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display. Let me just say that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty statements in the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don?t square with the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation. They may view a retreat from such positions as a ?loss of face,? even though reconsideration and admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence. Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional society, to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the interests of others. This too has played a major role in the opposition to the WGEESS. None of this should come as a surprise though ? this is standard ?fuzz? in political decision-making. However, it should encourage us that the opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic growth are founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and psychological weaknesses. So, let?s not be discouraged and let?s continue to fill the niche we have filled from the beginning. SCB needs this niche to be filled properly, and more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if biodiversity is to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level. I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG nominations process. BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details of the nominations for ?Government Representative? in 2007 (noting too that we have no Government Representative on the BOG as a result). The nominations process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB members. Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this out many times. This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some of the other SCB subunits as well. I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG. The only position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB President because the others are for NGO and academia representatives. (I do have NGO and academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation Biologist in civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will prevail for those positions.) I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the victims of the oligarchical nominations process in 2007. The same outcome could occur in 2008, for the reasons outlined above. Probably the only way I would get on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me. There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned with other professional natural resources societies that have done likewise. If not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and venues. Finally, I would like to say that I firmly ? now more than ever ? believe in the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural resource societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and providing a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I described in Bioscience last year (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation-Movement.pdf) . I strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate to the fullest feasible extent in making it happen. You can see what progress has already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new heights! Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3norRXd4iiGFuatAhKVhaW0giMrZhCdqSoDFZpJ5sjTQaui4/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081009/cc4db940/attachment.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Proposed Position on EG for SCB at Large VI.doc Type: application/msword Size: 34816 bytes Desc: Proposed Position on EG for SCB at Large VI.doc Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081009/cc4db940/attachment-0001.doc From brianczech at juno.com Fri Oct 10 06:11:46 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:11:46 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Please post on EESS: Bangladesh Environmental Economics Position Message-ID: <20081010.091146.10927.0@webmail06.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Asian University for Women Core Liberal Arts Faculty Positions The Asian University for Women (www.asian-university.org) invites applications for its inaugural faculty of 16 positions to begin in Bangladesh July 2009. Four positions in Social Sciences & Economics with preference for Environmental Economics, Economics of Inequality, Economics of Asia Region, Integrated Economics. Ph.D preferred; exceptional teaching plus All But Dissertated or Masters considered. Teaching responsibilities equivalent to 2 courses/semester. Collaborative development of interdisciplinary, theme-based curriculum during 6 week Faculty Development Session (July-Aug 2009). See ad on AUW website for details (http://www.asian-university.org/facultyAndStaff/facultyrecuritment.htm). A clear commitment to active-learning pedagogy and mentoring students is expected. The AUW is being established as a leading institution of higher education for women across South and Southeast Asia. While international in its vision and scope, the University will remain rooted in a context unique to the diverse cultural, religious, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds of South and South East Asia. The civic and academic goal of the AUW is to better prepare disadvantaged women of high ability and potential through a world-class education that will encompass both the progressive liberal arts & sciences and the requisite professional training in order to further the intellectual and professional development of eligible young women. The university encourages applicants who are women, connected to the region served, dual career couples, early- or late-career. Send the following, clearly labeled, to nicole.santamaria at asian-university.org: a letter of application, curriculum vitae, teaching portfolio (one page statement of teaching philosophy, syllabi and major assignments from recent courses taught/designed, Review of applications will begin 24 October 2008 and continue until the position is filled. -- Michelle Zjhra, Ph.D Chair of Faculty Search Committee Dean of Natural Sciences Asian University for Women www.asian-university.org 20/A M.M. Ali Road Chittagong-4000, Bangladesh AUW Support Foundation 1100 Massachusetts Ave., Suite 300 Cambridge, MA 02138 USA tel. 617.914.0500 direct 617.914.0512 fax. 617.354.0247 ____________________________________________________________ Free Fashion Design Education Information. Click now. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oIaxucBLjUXIZlFlrB4OXFxeLWl8eET3ghbhmRcyghGwqqo/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081010/e6dff7b1/attachment.htm From AlanDThornhill at conbio.org Fri Oct 10 08:32:39 2008 From: AlanDThornhill at conbio.org (Alan D Thornhill) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 08:32:39 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections In-Reply-To: <20081009.191034.11862.1@webmail18.dca.untd.com> References: <20081009.191034.11862.1@webmail18.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: <569984C3FC629E4DB22AFA468621699A1C9C8C4A73@EXVMBX015-3.exch015.msoutlookonline.net> Hello All - There are several inaccuracies in Brian's email that I now take the time to correct. 1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ 2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5. 3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process. 4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/ The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process. 5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve. AT _______________________________________________________ Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001-4229 US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 www.conbio.org From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:11 PM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science (WGEESS), Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB Board of Governors voted "against authorization" of the WGEESS. I can assure you that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not indifference. The BOG's vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was puzzling if for no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having completed the official process that SCG working groups go through for such purposes. It is more accurate to say that the working group was "de-authorized" in Tennessee. In any event, the formal status of the working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, WGEESS Chair and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision. I trust their judgments - with member inputs - with the redrafting of the charter and so forth. I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous members who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join the SCB itself in order to do so. Many of you felt that the working group was a promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win political rhetoric that "there is no conflict between growing the economy and protecting the environment," and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing island of ecological reality in a sea of political expedience. Most of us - I think the vast majority of us - recognized an SCB position on economic growth as an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win rhetoric. We worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at large, including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting. (I'll attach the position here as a reminder.) The action of the BOG at the annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large "transaction cost," in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and other WGEESS initiatives back into the mix. With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should be useful going forward. Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the WGEESS, some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB membership for 2009. I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at the $20, non-journal level. Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only continue to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed position on economic growth, as well as the widespread international support for the common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position. So please retain your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more quickly on these issues. I think we all realize that our planet's biodiversity is plunging precipitously while "leaders" in and out of the SCB belabor themselves with antiquated political "correctness." Most of us have heard that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." Lawbreakers go to jail, whether they know the law or not. Regarding those SCB office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore recognize the thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically macroeconomic implications, we might say, "Ignorance of the natural laws is no excuse." If they're not going to lead on this issue, they'll need to get out of the way because we will. They have had numerous years now since some of us began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to biodiversity conservation, some years back. Some of them have literally and even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have consistently weighed in against our initiatives! That's not acceptable for officials who represent SCB members. Another thing we should all be aware of is that the "vote" to de-authorize the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed. Although I'd venture to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally - and perhaps none exists - apparently the vote was 7-5. Some of those who voted to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business as their terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the Tennessee meeting). Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature of this vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of negative votes. I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society sociology and psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a large amount of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving of the WGEESS. I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a public listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display. Let me just say that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty statements in the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don't square with the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation. They may view a retreat from such positions as a "loss of face," even though reconsideration and admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence. Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional society, to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the interests of others. This too has played a major role in the opposition to the WGEESS. None of this should come as a surprise though - this is standard "fuzz" in political decision-making. However, it should encourage us that the opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic growth are founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and psychological weaknesses. So, let's not be discouraged and let's continue to fill the niche we have filled from the beginning. SCB needs this niche to be filled properly, and more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if biodiversity is to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level. I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG nominations process. BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details of the nominations for "Government Representative" in 2007 (noting too that we have no Government Representative on the BOG as a result). The nominations process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB members. Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this out many times. This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some of the other SCB subunits as well. I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG. The only position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB President because the others are for NGO and academia representatives. (I do have NGO and academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation Biologist in civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will prevail for those positions.) I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the victims of the oligarchical nominations process in 2007. The same outcome could occur in 2008, for the reasons outlined above. Probably the only way I would get on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me. There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned with other professional natural resources societies that have done likewise. If not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and venues. Finally, I would like to say that I firmly - now more than ever - believe in the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural resource societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and providing a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I described in Bioscience last year (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation-Movement.pdf) . I strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate to the fullest feasible extent in making it happen. You can see what progress has already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new heights! Click now! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081010/c28d0be0/attachment-0001.html From AlanDThornhill at conbio.org Fri Oct 10 08:46:50 2008 From: AlanDThornhill at conbio.org (Alan D Thornhill) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 08:46:50 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections References: <20081009.191034.11862.1@webmail18.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: <569984C3FC629E4DB22AFA468621699A1C9C8C4AA7@EXVMBX015-3.exch015.msoutlookonline.net> Oh, for clarity on that Govt Rep note, the Forest Service is, of course, within Ag, rather than Interior. So rather than the Interior Department making the determination, in Curtis' case it was the Forest Service. In other cases, the Fish and Wildlife Service has tried to make these over-reaching interpretations applying the criminal conflict of interest statute to board service for scientific societies. AT _______________________________________________________ Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001-4229 US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 www.conbio.org From: Alan D Thornhill Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:33 AM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: RE: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections Hello All - There are several inaccuracies in Brian's email that I now take the time to correct. 1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ 2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5. 3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process. 4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/ The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process. 5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve. AT _______________________________________________________ Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001-4229 US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 www.conbio.org From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:11 PM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science (WGEESS), Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB Board of Governors voted "against authorization" of the WGEESS. I can assure you that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not indifference. The BOG's vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was puzzling if for no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having completed the official process that SCG working groups go through for such purposes. It is more accurate to say that the working group was "de-authorized" in Tennessee. In any event, the formal status of the working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, WGEESS Chair and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision. I trust their judgments - with member inputs - with the redrafting of the charter and so forth. I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous members who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join the SCB itself in order to do so. Many of you felt that the working group was a promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win political rhetoric that "there is no conflict between growing the economy and protecting the environment," and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing island of ecological reality in a sea of political expedience. Most of us - I think the vast majority of us - recognized an SCB position on economic growth as an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win rhetoric. We worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at large, including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting. (I'll attach the position here as a reminder.) The action of the BOG at the annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large "transaction cost," in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and other WGEESS initiatives back into the mix. With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should be useful going forward. Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the WGEESS, some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB membership for 2009. I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at the $20, non-journal level. Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only continue to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed position on economic growth, as well as the widespread international support for the common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position. So please retain your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more quickly on these issues. I think we all realize that our planet's biodiversity is plunging precipitously while "leaders" in and out of the SCB belabor themselves with antiquated political "correctness." Most of us have heard that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." Lawbreakers go to jail, whether they know the law or not. Regarding those SCB office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore recognize the thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically macroeconomic implications, we might say, "Ignorance of the natural laws is no excuse." If they're not going to lead on this issue, they'll need to get out of the way because we will. They have had numerous years now since some of us began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to biodiversity conservation, some years back. Some of them have literally and even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have consistently weighed in against our initiatives! That's not acceptable for officials who represent SCB members. Another thing we should all be aware of is that the "vote" to de-authorize the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed. Although I'd venture to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally - and perhaps none exists - apparently the vote was 7-5. Some of those who voted to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business as their terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the Tennessee meeting). Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature of this vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of negative votes. I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society sociology and psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a large amount of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving of the WGEESS. I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a public listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display. Let me just say that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty statements in the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don't square with the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation. They may view a retreat from such positions as a "loss of face," even though reconsideration and admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence. Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional society, to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the interests of others. This too has played a major role in the opposition to the WGEESS. None of this should come as a surprise though - this is standard "fuzz" in political decision-making. However, it should encourage us that the opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic growth are founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and psychological weaknesses. So, let's not be discouraged and let's continue to fill the niche we have filled from the beginning. SCB needs this niche to be filled properly, and more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if biodiversity is to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level. I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG nominations process. BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details of the nominations for "Government Representative" in 2007 (noting too that we have no Government Representative on the BOG as a result). The nominations process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB members. Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this out many times. This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some of the other SCB subunits as well. I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG. The only position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB President because the others are for NGO and academia representatives. (I do have NGO and academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation Biologist in civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will prevail for those positions.) I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the victims of the oligarchical nominations process in 2007. The same outcome could occur in 2008, for the reasons outlined above. Probably the only way I would get on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me. There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned with other professional natural resources societies that have done likewise. If not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and venues. Finally, I would like to say that I firmly - now more than ever - believe in the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural resource societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and providing a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I described in Bioscience last year (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation-Movement.pdf) . I strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate to the fullest feasible extent in making it happen. You can see what progress has already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new heights! Click now! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081010/1936600e/attachment-0001.html From brianczech at juno.com Fri Oct 10 09:11:15 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:11:15 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Another environmentally focused politician - and party - advocating st eady state economy Message-ID: <20081010.121115.3137.0@webmail08.dca.untd.com> Although the steady state economy is essential for sustainable utilitarian purposes, and most of the steady state impetus comes from that angle, it is interesting and appropriate that the animal rights folks, too, are advocating the steady state economy. In fact I'll attach a chapter on the relevance of the steady state to wild animal welfare that I was asked to write by the Humane Society of the United States. But todays news on this front is here... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://theontarion.ca/viewarticle.php?id_pag=1895 (1) Please state your name, age and current occupation. Karen Levenson, 50, campaigner, for the environment and animals, with Animal Alliance of Canada and Environment Voters. (2) Please provide some background information about your past education, work, community service and political involvement which highlight your qualifications to hold public office. I have been active in both human and animal causes. While in the U.S., I fundraised for migrant workers and volunteered to help Vietnamese and Cambodian immigrants and refuges adapt to the laws and social requirements of American society. I was also involved with the Big Sister program for several years and with the SPCA run shelter in Manchester, New Hampshire. In Guelph, I worked with the Canadian Mental Health Association, assisting people with mental health issues and developing and running peer support groups in Fergus, Arthur and Mount Forest. In addition, was a volunteer teacher of creative writing for the Spark of Brilliance program. Previously, I worked as a senior writing in the advertising industry both in Boston and in Toronto for over 25 years, developing advertising campaigns for corporations, government agencies and non-profit organizations. While in Guelph, I had a contract with the Office of Research Communications and volunteered in the research dog walking program. For a couple of years, I also worked in the independent film industry in Toronto and wrote and produced a short film, which was bought and broadcast by CBC. Most recently, I work for Animal Alliance of Canada and Environment Voters, two national non-profit organizations dedicated to protecting animals and the environment. I also sit on the Board of Directors of Animal Alliance of Canada and am an adviser for the Animal Alliance Environment Voter Party of Canada. In addition, I am a consultant with the Humane Society of the United States. While a university student, I helped create the first women's studies major and was its first degree recipient at Brandeis University in Waltham, Massachusetts, where I received my B.A. in 1979. I hold an MFA from York University in film and video. (3) Is this the first election campaign in which you are a candidate? If not, in what previous campaigns have you run? (If applicable) How long has your party been around? This is the first political campaign in which I have run, although, I have assisted in the municipal campaign of former Toronto city council candidate, David White, and the provincial campaign of MPP, Cheri DiNovo, through my work in Animal Alliance of Canada and .Environment Voters. The Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada (AAEV) was founded in 2005 and was accepted as a federal registered political party on 10 December 2005. AAEV is running four candidates in the October 14, 2008 general election: Liz White, the leader of the party, in Toronto Centre; Marie Crawford, a board member, in Toronto-Danforth;Karen Levenson, Guelph resident and AAEV colleague, in Guelph; and Simon Luisi, an AAEV supporter and long-time activist, in Davenport. AAEV was founded by people associated with Animal Alliance of Canada (AAC) and Environment Voters (EV): two organizations that have campaigned in elections since 1999 to promote progressive environmental and animal protection policies at the municipal, provincial and federal levels. AAC and EV campaigned to elect candidates and parties with good environmental and animal protection records and to oppose those with poor ones. Since 1999, the groups have participated in over 50 campaigns. Founding the party became necessary when the federal Liberal government passed laws that were intended to so restrict the election activities of groups like AAC and EV - so-called 'third parties' - that their election activities would have no appreciable effect on election outcomes. (4) Why did you decide to run? What would you say is your primary mandate - or the primary mandate of your party ? should you be elected? Animals and the environment do not have any say in how they are treated. They cannot advocate for legislation to protect them from individual or institutional abuse. They do not vote. They rely on people to protect them and in Canada we have failed them abysmally. The Liberals and Conservatives have repeatedly failed to help stop animal abuse and environmental degredation. In this election, no politician is talking about improving the conditions of animals, even though we have some of the worst animal protection and welfare polices of the industrialized nations. That's why I am running for political office. Legislation that most effects the lives of animals is made at the federal level. For instance, Liberal Senator John Bryden introduced a bill that makes worthless amendments to the anti-cruelty legislation under the Criminal Code. The bill was supported by Conservatives and passed this spring. It raises fines for animal abuse, but does nothing to close the loopholes that make it difficult for our courts to successfully prosecute offenders. A person who tortures or kills an animal is often violent toward people and there is a strong link between animal abuse and domestic violence. Stronger anti-cruelty legislation under the Criminal Code, which actually helped put abusers behind bars, would increase human safety and hopefully deter further instances of animal abuse. Guelph is the perfect riding in which to run as a candidate with the Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada. Guelph has companion animals, farm animals and wildlife and has been transitioning over the last twenty years from a rural agricultural city to a urban one. We have several large protected areas of park land and forest as well as numerous developments that threaten our wild animals and spaces. We have a veterinary college, animal research institution and agricultural university that uses animals in research, teaching and testing, and that investigates cloning of livestock. It receives federal funding. We have the provincial Ministry of Natural Resources, which supports hunting, fishing and trapping. The decision to regulate instead of ban trapping in Canada was made at the international level under the Agreement of International Humane Trapping Standards. We have the Canadian Food Inspection Agency that helps determine how agricultural animals are raised and slaughtered. Guelph has a plethora of animal issues, which need to be addressed. This makes it a great city to run as a candidate with the AAEV Party. The primary mandate of my party is to create a better future for every living being and every living thing with whom we share this planet, and on whom we depend for our very survival. (5) In your opinion, what are some of the most pressing concerns for constituents in Guelph? At a national level? Fifty percent of the population of Guelph have companion animals (dogs and cats) and about 98% of the population eat them. Yet no other politician is talking about animals. Why is it so difficult for politicians to show compassion toward the animals that live in this riding and the animals with whom we share this planet? My constituents are those people who honour a principle of just and equitable human progress -- progress that respects, protects, and enhances the environment upon which we all depend and the lives of the animals with which we share our world. The people who vote for me want an end to inhumane practices like Canada's commercial seal hunt. They want more humane treatment of farm animals and an end to the use of animals in abusive research. They want a Criminal Code which considers animals as sentient beings with the rights to be protected from abuse and the power to convict perpetrators of violence to animals. I am dedicated to these issues. (6) As a Member of Parliament, what measures would you champion to improve life for people at the University of Guelph and in the riding? The majority of students I have spoken to at the University of Guelph understand that compassion toward animals does not exclude, but enhances, compassion toward humans. Today we have a political system that looks after the strongest. Many adults are disillusioned about the way our country is run with both Conservative and Liberal parties in power. I want to make sure that the ideas and ideals of those who are working toward a better world are made possible, so that our next generations do not become disillusioned. I come from the 60's generation ? a generation of idealists and activists. Where are they when the world needs them most? Many are the people in power today and they are doing no better ? perhaps worse, in many ways ? than the generations before them. Some have kept their ideals and are continuing to sacrifice huge salaries and corporate benefits for the benefits of doing good. They are helping the homeless, they are empowering the poor, and they are advocating for animals and the environment. They are making small changes that are raising the bar for our society. But they do not get a lot of support from our society. They are often left to the fringe. I don't want today's students to have to make a choice between doing good and living well. I don't want faculty members who recognize abuse in industry to be silenced and their livelihoods threatened. I want the people of Guelph to build a community in which we all play an important role and all have a voice in the way government is run. (7) (If applicable) Are there any planks in you or your party's platform that might be of interest to students? We believe in a Steady State economy, advocated by Herman Daly, that recognizes the need for a stable economy that provides long-term stability, a good living wage and quality of life for everyone, not tremendous wealth for some, and not financial instability for the majority. We want to protect animals from abusive research and welcome students to demand alternatives to animals in teaching, testing and research. Dr. John Pippin, Senior Medical and Research Advisor of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine stated, "For every instance where they're using live animals, there are methods that can be used instead that would provide either equivalent or superior educational value." Or in the words of George Bernard Shaw, "The pursuit of knowledge should be subject to the same civilized morality and legality as any other activity." We welcome students and researchers to embark on research that does not use animals and explores novel ways to create or test health care and consumer products. We want to end Canada's commercial seal hunt, which is being condemned all over the world. We would like students to develop ideas to help sealers and fishers transition from this dying industry to more humane, sustainable 21st century jobs. We welcome students to work on methods of communication that create bridges between divergent groups of people, such as sealers and activists, or fishers and conservationists that enable us to solve problems that threaten our marine environment today. We want to improve animal welfare on farms and move away from gestation and veal crates, castration, debeaking, tail docking, inhumane slaughter and failure to provide farm animals with conditions that allow their natural expression. We welcome students who have ideas on how to improve these conditions. We support legislation that protects whistle blowers who speak out against unethical or improperly conducted research. (8) What makes you the best candidate for the job? My ambitions are not to promote my political career. I have ambitions to create a more humane, compassionate, just and ethical Canada, that provides good living and work conditions for the majority of Canadians, not for a small minority of already wealthy individuals. I want an environment that allows us to be healthy, with safe water to drink and clean air to breathe. I want to see jobs that promote public health and safety, that protect the environment and whose innovation doesn't destroy the planet. I want a Canada that is compassionate towards all life. Deep down I believe a majority of people have these ideals, but do not see a way of realizing them. Their ideals and values have been crushed by the day-to-day fears of making a living and providing for their families. It's time to stop being afraid and make this a Canada that has the best interests of its people animals and environment at heart. ____________________________________________________________ Click for free information on accounting careers, $150 hour potential. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3l691sgfh1ljAozJBs9Gee2nWoL62GQlHd98Yx7eb1tAGbec/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081010/96841c7b/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Chapter 8 on SSE and Humane Treatment.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 259979 bytes Desc: Chapter 8 on SSE and Humane Treatment.pdf Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081010/96841c7b/attachment-0001.pdf From brianczech at juno.com Tue Oct 14 10:36:07 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:36:07 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Grad student opportunity in non-market valuation research Message-ID: <20081014.133607.1267.1@webmail01.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Please distribute the following graduate non-market valuation research opportunity advertisement widely among your colleagues. Please contact me with queries or for a pdf copy of the advertisement. Cheers, Tyron. PhD or Masters level Non-market Valuation Research Opportunity College of Forestry and Conservation, The University of Montana, Missoula, MT The College of Forestry and Conservation at The University of Montana is seeking one PhD or Masters student to conduct research on social preferences for invasive species management in Idaho, Oregon and Montana. The successful applicant will meet stakeholders, and assist with the design and analysis of data from a choice modeling (choice experiment) survey. This research is funded by a federal government grant and is part of a larger project developing a decision-support tool to aid invasive species management in the western United States. The successful applicant will receive two-years of research stipend and tuition support. Teaching assistantships and other funds are likely to be available to provide a third year of stipend and tuition support for a PhD student. Essential qualifications 1. Bachelors or Masters degree in economics, forest economics or a related field. Desirable qualifications 1. Strong econometrics skills 2. Strong written and oral communication skills 3. Strong background in natural resource and environmental economics 4. Knowledge of and experience in applying non-market valuation methods Screening of applicants will commence 1 December 2008 and continue until a suitable applicant is found. The successful applicant will commence as soon as practicable ? Spring Semester (January) 2009 is preferred, although commencement dates as late as Fall Semester (August) 2009 will be considered. Please prepare an application package consisting of: a letter of interest, CV, transcript of academic record (copies acceptable), GRE scores (if available), telephone and email contacts for two professional referees that can speak about your economic skills, and up to three examples of your writing skills (e.g. peer-reviewed papers, technical reports and senior-year college projects). Email or post this package to Dr. Tyron Venn (tyron.venn at umontana.edu), College of Forestry and Conservation, The University of Montana, 32 Campus Drive, Missoula, MT, 59812. The successful applicant will be required to complete the standard University of Montana Graduate School application. University and Community Information The University of Montana has approximately 14,000 students, including 2100 graduate students. The main campus includes 64 buildings and a 23,500-seat football stadium spread over 156 acres at the base of Mount Sentinel, and is bordered by the Clark Fork River and downtown Missoula. The University of Montana?s 180-acre South Campus offers housing, a golf course and soccer, softball and track fields. The successful applicant will work closely with Dr. Venn, but will be encouraged to liase with other social and natural scientists in the College of Forestry and Conservation, the Department of Economics and the Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station (located immediately adjacent to the university campus). Missoula is a thriving community with a population of 70,000 in the greater urban area. Nestled in the Rocky Mountain grandeur of western Montana, Missoula is unparalleled as a natural outdoor playground. The city is at an elevation of 3,200 feet and situated at the hub of five valleys and three major rivers ? the Blackfoot, the Bitterroot and the Clark Fork. Missoula lies roughly halfway between Glacier and Yellowstone national parks, and is surrounded by national and state forests, parks, wildlife refuges, and wilderness areas. Missoula is a blend of small-town charm and big-city sophistication, being one of the most dynamic cultural centers in the Northwest. Missoula is also a major retail and medical hub in western Montana and claims one of the nation's highest doctor to patient ratios. The Missoula school system is considered excellent with three public and two private high schools, numerous elementary schools, a College of Technology and The University of Montana. Dr. Tyron Venn Assistant Professor of Natural Resource Economics College of Forestry and Conservation The University of Montana Missoula, MT, 59812. USA. Phone: +1 (406) 243 6702 Fax: +1 (406) 243 4845 Email: tyron.venn at umontana.edu ____________________________________________________________ Click here to learn more about nursing jobs. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nEvqAkiII9UgSXUZswChXGhBQNaP1yQMev8L7qxowUXcklm/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081014/a5755e87/attachment-0001.htm From brianczech at juno.com Tue Oct 14 10:36:46 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:36:46 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Postdoc in wildfire economics Message-ID: <20081014.133646.1267.2@webmail01.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Please distribute the following postdoctoral research opportunity advertisement widely among your colleagues. Please contact me with queries or for a pdf copy of the advertisement. Cheers, Tyron. POST DOCTORAL RESEARCH OPPORTUNITY University of Montana and US Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT The University of Montana, College of Forestry and Conservation (CFC) and USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station (RMRS) are recruiting a Post Doctoral Researcher in Wildfire Economics to fill a 24-month full-time position. Prospects exist for the position to become longer-term, subject to performance and funding. The duty station will be the Forestry Sciences Laboratory in Missoula, Montana. The successful applicant will work directly with scientists from the RMRS Human Dimensions program and the CFC. The successful applicant?s primary responsibility will be conducting economics research into federal fire management. The successful applicant will plan and conduct research to assess economic aspects of both market and non-market resource values that may be impacted by wildland fire. Spatial analysis, econometrics, and fire management experience are all desired skills. In addition to planning and conducting research, the successful candidate will be adept at analyzing data, writing and publishing peer-reviewed articles, and presenting results orally to diverse audiences. A demonstrated ability to work cooperatively with a diverse team of researchers and other technical specialists is desired. The CFC and RMRS is seeking candidates who can demonstrate a strong scholarly background similar to that expected from someone with a doctoral degree in natural resource economics or related forestry or natural resource management field. Essential requirements of this position include a working knowledge of applied resource economics, a demonstrated ability for planning and conducting research, and examples of work dealing with allocation issues associated with natural resources. Candidates must also have strong skills in planning, organizing, coordinating, analyzing, and implementing a program of work that includes scientists and technical specialists not necessarily under their direct supervision. Salary will be commensurate with experience. Screening of applicants will commence 17 November 2008 and continue until the position is filled. The position will begin immediately, contingent on availability of the successful applicant. Interested applicants, or those desiring further information, should contact Dave Calkin, at decalkin at fs.fed.us, (406) 542-4151 or Tyron Venn at tyron.venn at umontana.edu, (406) 243-6702. Applications should include a letter of interest, CV, academic transcripts (copies acceptable) and contact details for three professional referees. Please email or post applications to Tyron Venn, College of Forestry and Conservation, The University of Montana, 32 Campus Drive, Missoula, MT 59812. Community Information Missoula is a thriving community with a population of 70,000 in the greater urban area. Nestled in the Rocky Mountain grandeur of western Montana, Missoula is unparalleled as a natural outdoor playground. The city is at an elevation of 3,200 feet and situated at the hub of five valleys and three major rivers ? the Blackfoot, the Bitterroot and the Clark Fork. Missoula lies roughly halfway between Glacier and Yellowstone national parks, and is surrounded by national and state forests, parks, wildlife refuges, and wilderness areas. Missoula is a blend of small-town charm and big-city sophistication, being one of the most dynamic cultural centers in the Northwest. Missoula is also a major retail and medical hub in western Montana and claims one of the nation's highest doctor to patient ratios. The Missoula school system is considered excellent with three public and two private high schools, numerous elementary schools, a College of Technology and The University of Montana. Criminal Background Investigation is required prior to Offer of Employment In accordance with University policy, finalists for this position will be subject to criminal background investigations. ADA/EOE/AA/Veteran's Preference Qualified candidates must be able to meet minimum requirements and perform the primary functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation. As an Equal opportunity/Affirmative Action employer, we encourage applications from minorities, Vietnam era veterans, and women. This material is available in an alternative format upon request. Qualified candidates may request veterans? preference in accordance with state law. References References in addition to those listed on the application may be contacted without applicant's prior approval. Testing Individual hiring departments at UM-M may elect to administer pre-employment tests, which are relevant to essential job functions. Dr. Tyron Venn Assistant Professor of Natural Resource Economics College of Forestry and Conservation The University of Montana Missoula, MT, 59812. USA. Phone: +1 (406) 243 6702 Fax: +1 (406) 243 4845 Email: tyron.venn at umontana.edu ____________________________________________________________ Click here and choose from thousands of high quality used cars. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oE0bdMYqNICTecUk5FUMPR74SbRDS4ZVrLkBonhYKKfuKgU/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081014/63b4ef44/attachment-0001.html From lwalko at conbio.org Wed Oct 15 04:27:12 2008 From: lwalko at conbio.org (Laura Walko) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 04:27:12 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] SCB 2009 annual meeting - UPDATES Message-ID: <569984C3FC629E4DB22AFA468621699A1CA32F871A@EXVMBX015-3.exch015.msoutlookonline.net> SCB 2009 - CALL FOR PROPOSALS FOR SYMPOSIA, WORKSHOPS, DISCUSSION GROUPS, AND SHORT COURSES is extended to October 31 2008. The 23rd annual meeting of the Society for Conservation Biology, Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society, will be held from 11-16 July in Beijing, China. All proposals must be submitted by 31 October 2008. Decisions will be made by mid-December. Complete instructions for submitting proposals are available at the meeting Web site, www.conbio.org/2009/proposals , or from 2009 at conbio.org . Contributions from all fields of conservation research and practice are welcome, including natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities. Please help us to spread the word! ***The SCB website is currently down for maintenance. It will be operational beginning the evening of 15 October or the morning of 16 October. Membership Coordinator Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001 202.234.4133 x100 703.995.4633 FAX www.conbio.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081015/d9de1547/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Wed Oct 15 08:51:26 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:51:26 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Setting a low bar for "heroes" Message-ID: <20081015.115126.24992.4@webmail19.dca.untd.com> ...and for "realism"! But without the professional, scientific organizations like SCB to set the record straight on limits to growth, what should we expect? "Optimists" will be "heroes" no matter how unhitched from reality... "...Shellenberger and Nordhaus ? despite the title of that infamous essay ? are optimists. The green movement's mistake has been to define climate change in terms of limitations: to our lifestyles, our energy use, our economy. Instead, they argue, what's needed is a shift to "the politics of possibility," fed by epic government investment in energy technology that will make renewables economically viable on their own merits against fossil fuels. That will be a tough battle with the global economy entering choppy waters, but at least Shellenberger and Nordhaus have injected a vital strain of realism into an issue far too critical to founder on green dreams." http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1841778_1841779_1841804,00.html Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Criminal Lawyers - Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oGdgqzCvX7nkwKfHsoyh39obyvYe27RDSM5fm28EbL95tCk/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081015/923778a8/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Wed Oct 15 10:36:04 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:36:04 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Here's a real hero... Message-ID: <20081015.133604.10969.0@webmail06.dca.untd.com> And it's not surprising that we are seeing a subtantial upsurge in media coverage of ecological economics... http://features.csmonitor.com/environment/2008/10/15/toward-a-greener-economy/#comment-4301 Toward a greener economy Scientists seek a more sustainable model for growth By Moises Velasquez-Manoff| Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor/ October 15, 2008 edition Courtesy Prof. Herman E. Daly/U. of Maryland Former World Bank official advocates redirecting economy toward frugality. New York Market bubbles occur when goods are traded at prices that greatly exceed real value. They burst when they grow so bloated that they become unstable. The current economic turmoil, widely viewed as the worst since 1929, is one example of what can happen when the difference between market value and actual value becomes too great. Environmentally minded economists have long warned that equally burstable ecological bubbles can occur if humanity lives beyond earth?s capacity to regenerate. The problem, they say, is that we?re addicted to economic growth. Mainstream economics assumes that the economy, the engine of modern civilization, can grow perpetually. But if growth means ever-increasing consumption of natural resources (and it has, since the start of the Industrial Revolution 250 years ago), then it can?t continue indefinitely. Earth and its resources are finite. Herman Daly, an economist at the University of Maryland?s School of Public Policy in College Park, says that humanity is already at or beyond the point where economic growth is counterproductive, where the environmental and social costs more than cancel the gains. ?So-called ?economic? growth already has become uneconomic,? Professor Daly stated in a talk last spring. ?The growth economy is failing.? For some time, Daly and others have called for a rethinking and restructuring of our economy before nature restructures it for us. The notion of perpetual economic growth warrants scrutiny before it drives us over a cliff, they argue. The science of economics must be overhauled to better account for earth?s physical realities. Civilization won?t have to stop in its tracks, just shift emphasis, says Daly. The ?steady state economy? he foresees emphasizes qualitative development over quantitative growth. ?Growth is more of the same stuff,? he says. ?Development is the same amount of better stuff.? In his 2000 book, ?Something New Under the Sun,? John McNeill, professor of environmental history at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., tells how unprecedented the past two centuries of human history have been. ?Most economists are under the impression that 2 to 6 percent annual growth is a normal condition for human society,? says Professor McNeill. ?A longer historical view would tell you such growth is a peculiar period in human society.? -------------------------------------------- Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Click here to compare prices and features on point of sale systems. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3l5GmbDvjXBfdQtbZAoEOqvRkOaC2b9yaHX7m3CQUWK0nuTi/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081015/732a51ae/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Oct 16 06:42:10 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:42:10 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] ISEE newsletter Message-ID: <20081016.094210.15382.3@webmail02.dca.untd.com> There is a wealth of information in the ISEE newsletter, just released: http://www.ecoeco.org/pdf/Newsletter_2008_Oct.pdf News from the '08 conference, awards, UNEP collaboration, jobs... see especially pages 19-22 on economic growth positions. Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Planning for retirement? Click for free information on 401(k) plans. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3mKKgTgxmkOpmx9kqyw35HQkLSS6uLGUZxV2j2tLIHDGYX3O/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081016/654a67aa/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Thu Oct 16 10:30:52 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:30:52 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections Message-ID: <20081016.133052.9380.0@webmail17.dca.untd.com> In response to Alan Thornhill?s posting: ?1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ ? It is true that I have not served on the Board of Governors, and the reason is related to #5 about why we don?t have a Government Representative. When I was nominated for that position for the 2007 ballot, four members of the SCB BOG decided against the SCB members who nominated me - there were approximately eight members who did so. Those four members of the BOG, christened the ?Nominations Committee,? consisted of the President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President. And actually, I was informed that one of them actually approved of my nomination, so three (or maybe even two?) SCB members decided for the 10,000-member SCB that I would not be on the ballot. The end result was that the 2007 ?ballot? included one person for the Government Representative position. In other words, there was no legitimate election of a Government Representative; the Government Representative was selected by three members of the BOG. In political science, we?d call that oligarchy, especially given the composition of the tiny bloc (President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President). If the U.S., for example, operated like this, we?d have the current and past three presidents ? they and only they - deciding who could run for office. How would we like that? Then, as it turned out, the selected Government Representative, Curt Flather, had to turn the position down for reasons having to do with civil service protocol. For the record, I have the utmost respect for Curt and consider him to be a friend and colleague. None of this undemocratic SCB business was his responsibility. The upshot is we have not Government Representative on the BOG. ?2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5.? Who voted what, then? Or are our elected BOG members, who represent us SCB members, immune from accountability? Also, I believe the vote would have been much different if there was a Government Representative to provide some leadership to the rest of the BOG on this issue. We know where I stand on the issue, and Curt Flather is among the 60-some individuals proposing a similar position on economic growth in the Ecological Society of America. ?3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process.? The contradiction here is that there were three working groups already established and recognized by the SCB when the BOG decided, retroactively, to require an authorization process. These working groups included the Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science, the Social Science Working Group, and the Freshwater Working Group. In other words, the ?provisional status? was applied retroactively, at about the time the Religions and Conservation Biology Working Group was forming. The reason given for de-authorizing or not authorizing the WGEESS was that the WGEESS ?assumed? a conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation, when nothing could have been further from the truth. The WGEESS is the one group that has assessed the relationship between economic growth and biodiversity conservation with due diligence and great detail. The conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation was concluded from laws of physics, principles of ecology, and a plethora of empirical evidence, not assumed. ?4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/ The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process.? This is another a-historical factoid. The proposed position was submitted to the SCB BOG long before there was ever ?the policy process.? Now given the new policy process, it is a matter of time before the proposed position is considered in that venue. However, WGEESS members are not na?ve to the political machinations of position-taking, and we will ensure that we aren?t wasting our time by sending a proposed position into a gauntlet. The oligarchical tendencies of the BOG and its ?vote? against the WGEESS have us in a holding pattern, during which time we continue to network and educate conservation biologists on the conflict. See for example the upcoming issue of Conservation Biology with its Conservation Focus section on Economic Growth and Biodiversity Conservation. ?5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve.? See #1 above. -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: Hello All - There are several inaccuracies in Brian's email that I now take the time to correct. 1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ 2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5. 3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process. 4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/ The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process. 5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve. AT _______________________________________________________ Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001-4229 US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 www.conbio.org From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:11 PM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science (WGEESS), Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB Board of Governors voted ?against authorization? of the WGEESS. I can assure you that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not indifference. The BOG?s vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was puzzling if for no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having completed the official process that SCG working groups go through for such purposes. It is more accurate to say that the working group was ?de-authorized? in Tennessee. In any event, the formal status of the working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, WGEESS Chair and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision. I trust their judgments ? with member inputs ? with the redrafting of the charter and so forth. I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous members who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join the SCB itself in order to do so. Many of you felt that the working group was a promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win political rhetoric that ?there is no conflict between growing the economy and protecting the environment,? and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing island of ecological reality in a sea of political expedience. Most of us ? I think the vast majority of us ? recognized an SCB position on economic growth as an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win rhetoric. We worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at large, including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting. (I?ll attach the position here as a reminder.) The action of the BOG at the annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large ?transaction cost,? in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and other WGEESS initiatives back into the mix. With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should be useful going forward. Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the WGEESS, some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB membership for 2009. I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at the $20, non-journal level. Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only continue to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed position on economic growth, as well as the widespread international support for the common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position. So please retain your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more quickly on these issues. I think we all realize that our planet?s biodiversity is plunging precipitously while ?leaders? in and out of the SCB belabor themselves with antiquated political ?correctness.? Most of us have heard that ?Ignorance of the law is no excuse.? Lawbreakers go to jail, whether they know the law or not. Regarding those SCB office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore recognize the thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically macroeconomic implications, we might say, ?Ignorance of the natural laws is no excuse.? If they?re not going to lead on this issue, they?ll need to get out of the way because we will. They have had numerous years now since some of us began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to biodiversity conservation, some years back. Some of them have literally and even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have consistently weighed in against our initiatives! That?s not acceptable for officials who represent SCB members. Another thing we should all be aware of is that the ?vote? to de-authorize the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed. Although I?d venture to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally ? and perhaps none exists ? apparently the vote was 7-5. Some of those who voted to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business as their terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the Tennessee meeting). Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature of this vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of negative votes. I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society sociology and psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a large amount of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving of the WGEESS. I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a public listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display. Let me just say that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty statements in the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don?t square with the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation. They may view a retreat from such positions as a ?loss of face,? even though reconsideration and admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence. Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional society, to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the interests of others. This too has played a major role in the opposition to the WGEESS. None of this should come as a surprise though ? this is standard ?fuzz? in political decision-making. However, it should encourage us that the opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic growth are founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and psychological weaknesses. So, let?s not be discouraged and let?s continue to fill the niche we have filled from the beginning. SCB needs this niche to be filled properly, and more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if biodiversity is to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level. I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG nominations process. BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details of the nominations for ?Government Representative? in 2007 (noting too that we have no Government Representative on the BOG as a result). The nominations process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB members. Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this out many times. This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some of the other SCB subunits as well. I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG. The only position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB President because the others are for NGO and academia representatives. (I do have NGO and academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation Biologist in civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will prevail for those positions.) I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the victims of the oligarchical nominations process in 2007. The same outcome could occur in 2008, for the reasons outlined above. Probably the only way I would get on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me. There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned with other professional natural resources societies that have done likewise. If not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and venues. Finally, I would like to say that I firmly ? now more than ever ? believe in the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural resource societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and providing a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I described in Bioscience last year (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation-Movement.pdf) . I strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate to the fullest feasible extent in making it happen. You can see what progress has already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new heights! Click now! ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3miig4ZzaK0ynvhpxBZc3YuibpJFZ0vClFzOml0lKLw93SKw/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081016/a8d4c6fd/attachment.html From ciumioan at yahoo.com Fri Oct 17 02:29:29 2008 From: ciumioan at yahoo.com (Ioan Manuel Ciumasu) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 02:29:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Mesage to post on the EESS listserve. Thank you! Message-ID: <484533.71175.qm@web33805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Note: Some of you might have received an earlier version of this email during a dialogue within the WGEESS members. Thank you for your understanding upon any potential repetitions. Dear subscribers to the SCB-EESS listserve, Like virtually all of you, I have been informed that the Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science (WGEESS), to which I have subscribed as a SCB member, has been withdrawn the official Working Group status. I share the opinion that this decision of the Board is largely a consequence of a temporary lack of visibility of the benefits of having such a thematic group within SCB. In order to heighten the WGEESS's profile, I would like to suggest that we might (or should) consider to start building links, at least at personal level, with the International Society for Ecological Economics - ISEE, www.ecoeco.org I have attended the last ISEE meeting, 7-11.08.2008 in Nairobi, Kenya, and I can testify for the very inspiring atmosphere and topics - including typical SCB interrests but with a more ecological economics relevance, e.g. ecosystem thermodynamics, payment for ecosystem services, etc. You can also find a summary brochure at the above-provided internet link. Next year, there will be a wave of meetings of the regional branches (deadlines for abstracts is also approaching), which are great opportunities to build collaborations and attract Ecological Economics people into SCB. I also personally think that dual, SCB and ISEE, membership can help. I am aware that this might create some competition effects, especially when deciding which conference to attend, but I believe we should confront this risk and pursue a long term goal of cooperation between the two societies and its members. There is, at least in my perception, a deficit of ecologists in ISEE and a deficit of economists in SCB. I suggest that the (future) WGEESS could assume the connection role between the two societies. With best regards, Ioan M. Ciumasu Research Associate (Coordinator), PhD Centre of Expertise for Sustainable Exploitation of Ecosystems - CESEE "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" University of IASI, ROMANIA http://www.bio.uaic.ro/Articole_fisiere/ceexs/CEXDUREC/ Phone in Romania:??? Office ++40(0)232201511?? Mobile ++40(0)732326127 Phone in France:?????? Office ++33(0)388235358?? Mobile ++33(0)616548823 Email: ciumioan at yahoo.com ; Ioan.M.Ciumasu at alumni.tum.de INTECOL ? The International Association for Ecology: http://www.intecol.net/pages/002_personal.php?id=Ciumasu Ad Astra ? An online project for the Romanian Scientific Community: http://www.ad-astra.ro/whoswho/view_profile.php?user_id=1899 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081017/2781bcc0/attachment.htm From McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu Fri Oct 17 14:46:51 2008 From: McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu (McArd Mlotha) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:46:51 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] =?iso-8859-1?q?Mesage_to_post_o?= =?iso-8859-1?q?n_the_EESS_=09listserve=2E__Thank?= In-Reply-To: <484533.71175.qm@web33805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <484533.71175.qm@web33805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: ciumioan at yahoo.com on Friday, October 17, 2008 at 5:29 AM -0500 wrote: >I share the opinion that this decision of the Board is largely a >consequence of a temporary lack of visibility of the benefits of having >such a thematic group within SCB. Dear Loan Ciumasu, Can you explain exactly what do you mean when you say "lack of visibility of the benefits of having such a thematic group within SCB"???. Joseph ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- McArd Joseph Mlotha Program Manager Center for Tropical Ecology & Conservation (CTEC) Antioch University New England 40 Avon Street Keene, NH 03431 Tel: 603 357 3122 Ext 2348 Cell: 508 373 3819 Fax: 603 357-0718 Attention ES Dept. Web page: http://www.centerfortropicalecology.org/students/mlotha.cfm --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081017/68a13bc2/attachment.html From folababs2000 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 20 07:42:20 2008 From: folababs2000 at yahoo.com (Fola Babalola) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:42:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections In-Reply-To: <20081016.133052.9380.0@webmail17.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: <352644.35269.qm@web31408.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear all Ex-WGEESS, ? I just cannot believe all these political issues going on in SCB! It is unbelievable to read that WGEESS was not approved. What a mess! And some of our people disqualified from contesting...... ? Despite of the caliber of people in SCB -?with great?academic achievements -?what will other "people" outside the folks say if they hear of the politics we are playing around conservation and environmental management, and Economic growth? ? Are we even ready to save the world as a?renown body working in conservation disciplines? Are we ready or have we even started to tackle the ever increasing Climate Change in the face of the negative impact of Economic growth? ? Where are going.....? Fola Nigeria ________________________ Babalola, Fola. D. BSc. MSc. [Forest Econs and Mgt] University of Ibadan, Nigeria? Phone: +2348025487802 Skype: folababs2000 --- On Thu, 10/16/08, brianczech at juno.com wrote: From: brianczech at juno.com Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections To: Eess at list.conbio.org Date: Thursday, October 16, 2008, 10:30 AM In response to Alan Thornhill?s posting: ? ?1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has.?? http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ ? ? It is true that I have?not?served on the Board of Governors, and the reason is related to #5 about why we don?t have a Government Representative.? When I was nominated for that position for the 2007 ballot, four members of the SCB BOG decided against the SCB members who nominated me - there were approximately eight members who did so.? Those four members of the BOG, christened the ?Nominations Committee,? consisted of the President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President. ?And actually, I was informed that one of them actually approved of my nomination, so three (or maybe even two?) SCB members decided for the 10,000-member SCB that I would not be on the ballot. ?The end result was that the 2007 ?ballot? included one person for the Government Representative position.? In other words, there was no legitimate election of a Government Representative; the Government Representative was selected by three members of the BOG. ? ? In political science, we?d call that oligarchy, especially given the composition of the tiny bloc (President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President). ?If the U.S. , for example, operated like this, we?d have the current and past three presidents ? they and only they - deciding who could run for office. ?How would we like that? ? Then, as it turned out, the selected Government Representative, Curt Flather, had to turn the position down for reasons having to do with civil service protocol.? For the record, I have the utmost respect for Curt and consider him to be a friend and colleague.? None of this undemocratic SCB business was his responsibility. ?The upshot is we have not Government Representative on the BOG. ? ?2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5.? ? ? Who voted what, then?? Or are our elected BOG members, who represent us SCB members, immune from accountability? ? ? Also, I believe the vote would have been much different if there was a Government Representative to provide some leadership to the rest of the BOG on this issue.? We know where I stand on the issue, and Curt Flather is among the 60-some individuals proposing a similar position on economic growth in the Ecological Society of America. ? ?3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/?? This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process.? ? The contradiction here is that there were three working groups already established and recognized by the SCB when the BOG decided, retroactively, to require an authorization process. ?These working groups included the Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science, the Social Science Working Group, and the Freshwater Working Group.? In other words, the ?provisional status? was applied retroactively, at about the time the Religions and Conservation Biology Working Group was forming.? ? The reason given for de-authorizing or not authorizing the WGEESS was that the WGEESS ?assumed? a conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation, when nothing could have been further from the truth.? The WGEESS is the one group that has assessed the relationship between economic growth and biodiversity conservation with due diligence and great detail. ?The conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation was concluded from laws of physics, principles of ecology, and a plethora of empirical evidence, not assumed. ? ? ? ?4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/?? The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process.? ? This is another a-historical factoid.? The proposed position was submitted to the SCB BOG long before there was ever ?the policy process.?? Now given the new policy process, it is a matter of time before the proposed position is considered in that venue. ?However, WGEESS members are not na?ve to the political machinations of position-taking, and we will ensure that we aren?t wasting our time by sending a proposed position into a gauntlet.? The oligarchical tendencies of the BOG and its ?vote? against the WGEESS have us in a holding pattern, during which time we continue to network and educate conservation biologists on the conflict. ?See for example the upcoming issue of Conservation Biology with its Conservation Focus section on Economic Growth and Biodiversity Conservation. ? ? ? ?5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve.? ? See #1 above. ? -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: Hello All - ? There are several inaccuracies in Brian's email that I now take the time to correct. ? 1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has.?? http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ ? 2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5. ? 3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ ??This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process. ? 4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/?? The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process. ? ? 5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve. ? AT ? _______________________________________________________ ? Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org ? ?Society for Conservation Biology???? ?1017 O Street NW???? ?Washington, DC 20001-4229 US?? ?voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 ?fax: 1-703-995-4633 ? www.conbio.org ? ? From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:11 PM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections ? Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science (WGEESS), ? Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB Board of Governors voted ?against authorization? of the WGEESS.? I can assure you that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not indifference.? ? The BOG?s vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was puzzling if for no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having completed the official process that SCG working groups go through for such purposes.? It is more accurate to say that the working group was ?de-authorized? in Tennessee.? In any event, the formal status of the working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, WGEESS Chair and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision.? I trust their judgments ? with member inputs ? with the redrafting of the charter and so forth. ? I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous members who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join the SCB itself in order to do so.? Many of you felt that the working group was a promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation.? Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win political rhetoric that ?there is no conflict between growing the economy and protecting the environment,? and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing island of ecological reality in a sea of political expedience.? Most of us ? I think the vast majority of us ? recognized an SCB position on economic growth as an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win rhetoric.? We worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at large, including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting.? (I?ll attach the position here as a reminder.)? The action of the BOG at the annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large ?transaction cost,? in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and other WGEESS initiatives back into the mix.? ? With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should be useful going forward.? ? Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the WGEESS, some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB membership for 2009.? I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at the $20, non-journal level.? Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only continue to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed position on economic growth, as well as the widespread international support for the common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position.? So please retain your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more quickly on these issues.? I think we all realize that our planet?s biodiversity is plunging precipitously while ?leaders? in and out of the SCB belabor themselves with antiquated political ?correctness.?? ? Most of us have heard that ?Ignorance of the law is no excuse.?? Lawbreakers go to jail, whether they know the law or not.? Regarding those SCB office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore recognize the thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically macroeconomic implications, we might say, ?Ignorance of the natural laws is no excuse.?? If they?re not going to lead on this issue, they?ll need to get out of the way because we will.? They have had numerous years now since some of us began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to biodiversity conservation, some years back.? Some of them have literally and even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have consistently weighed in against our initiatives!? That?s not acceptable for officials who represent SCB members. ? Another thing we should all be aware of is that the ?vote? to de-authorize the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed.? Although I?d venture to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally ? and perhaps none exists ? apparently the vote was 7-5.? Some of those who voted to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business as their terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the Tennessee meeting).? Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature of this vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of negative votes. ? I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society sociology and psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a large amount of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving of the WGEESS.? I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a public listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display.? Let me just say that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty statements in the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don?t square with the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation.? They may view a retreat from such positions as a ?loss of face,? even though reconsideration and admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence. ? Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional society, to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the interests of others.? This too has played a major role in the opposition to the WGEESS. ? None of this should come as a surprise though ? this is standard ?fuzz? in political decision-making.? However, it should encourage us that the opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic growth are founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and psychological weaknesses. ? So, let?s not be discouraged and let?s continue to fill the niche we have filled from the beginning.? SCB needs this niche to be filled properly, and more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if biodiversity is to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level.? ? I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG nominations process.? BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details of the nominations for ?Government Representative? in 2007 (noting too that we have no Government Representative on the BOG as a result).? The nominations process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB members.? Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this out many times.? This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some of the other SCB subunits as well. ? I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG.? The only position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB President because the others are for NGO and academia representatives.? (I do have NGO and academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation Biologist in civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will prevail for those positions.)? I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the victims of the oligarchical nominations process in 2007.? The same outcome could occur in 2008, for the reasons outlined above.? Probably the only way I would get on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me.? ? There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned with other professional natural resources societies that have done likewise.? If not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and venues.? ? Finally, I would like to say that I firmly ? now more than ever ? believe in the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural resource societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and providing a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I described in Bioscience last year (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation-Movement.pdf) .? I strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate to the fullest feasible extent in making it happen.? You can see what progress has already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html .? Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new heights! Click now!_______________________________________________ 11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in 北京 (Beijing), China. More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology today! www.conbio.org/join EESS mailing list EESS at list.conbio.org http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081020/309ba2a5/attachment-0001.htm From btp22 at cam.ac.uk Mon Oct 20 08:29:55 2008 From: btp22 at cam.ac.uk (Ben Phalan) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:29:55 +0100 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] New Scientist feature "The folly of growth" In-Reply-To: <352644.35269.qm@web31408.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <352644.35269.qm@web31408.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <48FCA3F3.2090409@cam.ac.uk> Hi all, It's encouraging to see a feature in the latest issue of New Scientist entitled "the folly of growth", with a cover image that needs little explanation. A couple of the articles, including an interview with Gus Speth, are free to view on the New Scientist site: http://www.newscientist.com/channel/opinion/mg20026786.000-special-report-how-our-economy-is-killing-the-earth.html New Scientist has a circulation of 170,000. All the best, Ben -- Ben Phalan http://www.zoo.cam.ac.uk/zoostaff/csg/bphalan.html From mudsnail1 at hotmail.com Mon Oct 20 11:23:53 2008 From: mudsnail1 at hotmail.com (David Richards) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:23:53 +0000 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Don't worry Fola Message-ID: Yes indeed it is very frustrating to be an SCB member and fully understand the direct link between human economic activity and biodiversity loss and then to be considered an extremist in the society that portends to be the leader of biodiversity conservation. But don't worry Fola, we haven't even begun to fight. Truth will prevail.David C. Richards Ph.D. Senior Research Ecologist EcoAnalysts Inc. Center for Aquatic Studies 11 E. Main St. Suite M Bozeman, MT 59715 Affiliate Assitant ProfessorLand Resources and Environmental SciencesMontana State University, Bozeman, MT406.580.7816 mudsnail1 at hotmail.com 'nature, like liberty, has no price tag'... 'species are priceless, as are human dignity and freedom' Leakey (1997) > From: eess-request at list.conbio.org> Subject: EESS Digest, Vol 25, Issue 16> To: eess at list.conbio.org> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:11:48 -0700> > Send EESS mailing list submissions to> eess at list.conbio.org> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit> http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to> eess-request at list.conbio.org> > You can reach the person managing the list at> eess-owner at list.conbio.org> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific> than "Re: Contents of EESS digest..."> > > Today's Topics:> > 1. Re: BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections (Fola Babalola)> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> > Message: 1> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:42:20 -0700 (PDT)> From: Fola Babalola > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of> WGEESS; SCB elections> To: Eess at list.conbio.org, "brianczech at juno.com" > Message-ID: <352644.35269.qm at web31408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"> > Dear all Ex-WGEESS,> ?> I just cannot believe all these political issues going on in SCB! It is unbelievable to read that WGEESS was not approved. What a mess! And some of our people disqualified from contesting......> ?> Despite of the caliber of people in SCB -?with great?academic achievements -?what will other "people" outside the folks say if they hear of the politics we are playing around conservation and environmental management, and Economic growth?> ?> Are we even ready to save the world as a?renown body working in conservation disciplines? Are we ready or have we even started to tackle the ever increasing Climate Change in the face of the negative impact of Economic growth?> ?> Where are going.....? > > Fola> Nigeria> ________________________> Babalola, Fola. D. > BSc. MSc. [Forest Econs and Mgt] > University of Ibadan, Nigeria?> Phone: +2348025487802> Skype: folababs2000> > --- On Thu, 10/16/08, brianczech at juno.com wrote:> > From: brianczech at juno.com > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections> To: Eess at list.conbio.org> Date: Thursday, October 16, 2008, 10:30 AM> > > > In response to Alan Thornhill?s posting:> ?> ?1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has.?? http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ ?> ?> It is true that I have?not?served on the Board of Governors, and the reason is related to #5 about why we don?t have a Government Representative.? When I was nominated for that position for the 2007 ballot, four members of the SCB BOG decided against the SCB members who nominated me - there were approximately eight members who did so.? Those four members of the BOG, christened the ?Nominations Committee,? consisted of the President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President. ?And actually, I was informed that one of them actually approved of my nomination, so three (or maybe even two?) SCB members decided for the 10,000-member SCB that I would not be on the ballot. ?The end result was that the 2007 ?ballot? included one person for the Government Representative position.? In other words, there was no legitimate election of a Government Representative; the Government Representative was selected by three members of the BOG.> ?> ?> In political science, we?d call that oligarchy, especially given the composition of the tiny bloc (President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President). ?If the U.S. , for example, operated like this, we?d have the current and past three presidents ? they and only they - deciding who could run for office. ?How would we like that?> ?> Then, as it turned out, the selected Government Representative, Curt Flather, had to turn the position down for reasons having to do with civil service protocol.? For the record, I have the utmost respect for Curt and consider him to be a friend and colleague.? None of this undemocratic SCB business was his responsibility. ?The upshot is we have not Government Representative on the BOG.> ?> ?2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5.? ?> ?> Who voted what, then?? Or are our elected BOG members, who represent us SCB members, immune from accountability? ?> ?> Also, I believe the vote would have been much different if there was a Government Representative to provide some leadership to the rest of the BOG on this issue.? We know where I stand on the issue, and Curt Flather is among the 60-some individuals proposing a similar position on economic growth in the Ecological Society of America.> ?> ?3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/?? This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process.?> ?> The contradiction here is that there were three working groups already established and recognized by the SCB when the BOG decided, retroactively, to require an authorization process. ?These working groups included the Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science, the Social Science Working Group, and the Freshwater Working Group.? In other words, the ?provisional status? was applied retroactively, at about the time the Religions and Conservation Biology Working Group was forming.? > ?> The reason given for de-authorizing or not authorizing the WGEESS was that the WGEESS ?assumed? a conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation, when nothing could have been further from the truth.? The WGEESS is the one group that has assessed the relationship between economic growth and biodiversity conservation with due diligence and great detail. ?The conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation was concluded from laws of physics, principles of ecology, and a plethora of empirical evidence, not assumed. ?> ?> ?> ?4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/?? The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process.?> ?> This is another a-historical factoid.? The proposed position was submitted to the SCB BOG long before there was ever ?the policy process.?? Now given the new policy process, it is a matter of time before the proposed position is considered in that venue. ?However, WGEESS members are not na?ve to the political machinations of position-taking, and we will ensure that we aren?t wasting our time by sending a proposed position into a gauntlet.? The oligarchical tendencies of the BOG and its ?vote? against the WGEESS have us in a holding pattern, during which time we continue to network and educate conservation biologists on the conflict. ?See for example the upcoming issue of Conservation Biology with its Conservation Focus section on Economic Growth and Biodiversity Conservation. ?> ?> ?> ?5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth,> he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve.?> ?> See #1 above.> ?> -- Alan D Thornhill wrote:> > > Hello All - > ?> There are several inaccuracies in Brian's email that I now take the time to correct. > ?> 1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has.?? http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ > ?> 2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5. > ?> 3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ ??This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process. > ?> 4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/?? The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process. ?> ?> 5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he> was told by the ethics officers he could not serve. > ?> AT> ?> _______________________________________________________> ?> Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org> ?> ?Society for Conservation Biology???? > ?1017 O Street NW???? > ?Washington, DC 20001-4229 US?? > ?voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102> ?fax: 1-703-995-4633> ?> www.conbio.org> ?> ?> > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:11 PM> To: Eess at list.conbio.org> Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections> ?> Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science (WGEESS),> ?> Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB Board of Governors voted ?against authorization? of the WGEESS.? I can assure you that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not indifference.? > ?> The BOG?s vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was puzzling if for no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having completed the official process that SCG working groups go through for such purposes.? It is more accurate to say that the working group was ?de-authorized? in Tennessee.? In any event, the formal status of the working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, WGEESS Chair and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision.? I trust their judgments ? with member inputs ? with the redrafting of the charter and so forth.> ?> I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous members who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join the SCB itself in order to do so.? Many of you felt that the working group was a promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation.? Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win political rhetoric that ?there is no conflict between growing the economy and protecting the environment,? and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing island of ecological reality in a sea of political expedience.? Most of us ? I think the vast majority of us ? recognized an SCB position on economic growth as an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win rhetoric.? We worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at large,> including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting.? (I?ll attach the position here as a reminder.)? The action of the BOG at the annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large ?transaction cost,? in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and other WGEESS initiatives back into the mix.? > ?> With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should be useful going forward.? > ?> Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the WGEESS, some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB membership for 2009.? I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at the $20, non-journal level.? Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only continue to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed position on economic growth, as well as the widespread international support for the common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position.? So please retain your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more quickly on these issues.? I think we all realize that our planet?s biodiversity is plunging precipitously while ?leaders? in and out of the SCB belabor themselves> with antiquated political ?correctness.?? > ?> Most of us have heard that ?Ignorance of the law is no excuse.?? Lawbreakers go to jail, whether they know the law or not.? Regarding those SCB office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore recognize the thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically macroeconomic implications, we might say, ?Ignorance of the natural laws is no excuse.?? If they?re not going to lead on this issue, they?ll need to get out of the way because we will.? They have had numerous years now since some of us began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to biodiversity conservation, some years back.? Some of them have literally and even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have consistently weighed in against our initiatives!? That?s not acceptable for officials who represent SCB members.> ?> Another thing we should all be aware of is that the ?vote? to de-authorize the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed.? Although I?d venture to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally ? and perhaps none exists ? apparently the vote was 7-5.? Some of those who voted to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business as their terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the Tennessee meeting).? Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature of this vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of negative votes.> ?> I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society sociology and psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a large amount of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving of the WGEESS.? I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a public listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display.? Let me just say that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty statements in the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don?t square with the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation.? They may view a retreat from such positions as a ?loss of face,? even though reconsideration and admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence.> ?> Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional society, to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the interests of others.? This too has played a major role in the opposition to the WGEESS.> ?> None of this should come as a surprise though ? this is standard ?fuzz? in political decision-making.? However, it should encourage us that the opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic growth are founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and psychological weaknesses.> ?> So, let?s not be discouraged and let?s continue to fill the niche we have filled from the beginning.? SCB needs this niche to be filled properly, and more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if biodiversity is to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level.? > ?> I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG nominations process.? BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details of the nominations for ?Government Representative? in 2007 (noting too that we have no Government Representative on the BOG as a result).? The nominations process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB members.? Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this out many times.? This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some of the other SCB subunits as well.> ?> I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG.? The only position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB President because the others are for NGO and academia representatives.? (I do have NGO and academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation Biologist in civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will prevail for those positions.)? I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the victims of the oligarchical nominations process in 2007.? The same outcome could occur in 2008, for the reasons outlined above.? Probably the only way I would get on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me.? > ?> There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned with other professional natural resources societies that have done likewise.? If not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and venues.? > ?> Finally, I would like to say that I firmly ? now more than ever ? believe in the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural resource societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and providing a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I described in Bioscience last year (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation-Movement.pdf) .? I strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate to the fullest feasible extent in making it happen.? You can see what progress has already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html .? > > > Cheers, Brian> > Brian Czech, Ph.D., President> Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy> The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html .> > > ____________________________________________________________ > Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new heights! Click now!_______________________________________________> 11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: Harmony> for Nature and Society in 北京 (Beijing), China.> More information at: www.conbio.org/2009> > Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global community by> becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology today! > www.conbio.org/join > > EESS mailing list> EESS at list.conbio.org> http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess> > > __________________________________________________> Do You Yahoo!?> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > -------------- next part --------------> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...> URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081020/309ba2a5/attachment.htm > > ------------------------------> > _______________________________________________> 11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in 北京 (Beijing), China.> More information at: www.conbio.org/2009> > Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology today! www.conbio.org/join > > EESS mailing list> EESS at list.conbio.org> http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess> > > End of EESS Digest, Vol 25, Issue 16> ************************************ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081020/e36adc36/attachment-0001.htm From pergams at uic.edu Tue Oct 21 12:09:32 2008 From: pergams at uic.edu (Oliver Pergams) Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:09:32 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization ofWGEESS; SCB elections Message-ID: One thing that seems clear (at least to me) is that the SCB electoral process should be more transparent and democratic. Here are some ideas to go in that direction:? 1. I don?t think there is currently a formal Nominating Committee, rather Board nominations are part of the duty of the Governance Committee. The Governance Committee consists of ? the three most immediate past Presidents and any other members appointed by the Chair? (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 3) and one of their duties is to ? prepare slates of nominees for elected offices of the Board of Governors? (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 4). 2. Perhaps a new Nominating Committee should be peeled off from the Governance Committee. This new committee might still include the President-Elect and a couple of Board members he/she appoints (for guidance and continuity), but it might also include a few new, non-Board members. The new committee members would also be selected by membership vote at the Board election. This is the way many other societies work. 3. If I understand correctly, currently the Governance Committee reduces each ballot to two candidates no matter how many were nominated by membership. I do not think two candidates should be a firm limit. I think a new Nominating Committee should slate all qualified candidates and let the membership decide. 4. I don?t think that SCB provides the actual vote count after an election. If this is correct, I?m guessing it may be because voter turnout is sometimes embarrassing. If poor turnout is the reason maybe knowledge of it and embarrassment among the membership would improve it. In any case, if this is current procedure it is highly opaque and should stop. Not only candidates but the membership should be made aware of the vote totals immediately after the election.? The Constitution and Bylaws may be modified by a majority of the members present and voting at any scheduled general meeting of the Society (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 24). ? _______________________________ Oliver Pergams, Ph.D. Dept. of Biological Sciences (MC 066) University of Illinois at Chicago 845 W. Taylor St. Chicago, IL 60607-7060 USA ? 1.312.996.5446 www.pergams.com www.videophilia.org -----Original Message----- From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 12:31 PM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization ofWGEESS; SCB elections In response to Alan Thornhill?s posting: ?1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ ? It is true that I have not served on the Board of Governors, and the reason is related to #5 about why we don?t have a Government Representative. When I was nominated for that position for the 2007 ballot, four members of the SCB BOG decided against the SCB members who nominated me - there were approximately eight members who did so. Those four members of the BOG, christened the ?Nominations Committee,? consisted of the President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President. And actually, I was informed that one of them actually approved of my nomination, so three (or maybe even two?) SCB members decided for the 10,000-member SCB that I would not be on the ballot. The end result was that the 2007 ?ballot? included one person for the Government Representative position. In other words, there was no legitimate election of a Government Representative; the Government Representative was selected by three members of the BOG. In political science, we?d call that oligarchy, especially given the composition of the tiny bloc (President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President). If the U.S., for example, operated like this, we?d have the current and past three presidents ? they and only they - deciding who could run for office. How would we like that? Then, as it turned out, the selected Government Representative, Curt Flather, had to turn the position down for reasons having to do with civil service protocol. For the record, I have the utmost respect for Curt and consider him to be a friend and colleague. None of this undemocratic SCB business was his responsibility. The upshot is we have not Government Representative on the BOG. ?2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5.? Who voted what, then? Or are our elected BOG members, who represent us SCB members, immune from accountability? Also, I believe the vote would have been much different if there was a Government Representative to provide some leadership to the rest of the BOG on this issue. We know where I stand on the issue, and Curt Flather is among the 60-some individuals proposing a similar position on economic growth in the Ecological Society of America. ?3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process.? The contradiction here is that there were three working groups already established and recognized by the SCB when the BOG decided, retroactively, to require an authorization process. These working groups included the Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science, the Social Science Working Group, and the Freshwater Working Group. In other words, the ?provisional status? was applied retroactively, at about the time the Religions and Conservation Biology Working Group was forming. The reason given for de-authorizing or not authorizing the WGEESS was that the WGEESS ?assumed? a conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation, when nothing could have been further from the truth. The WGEESS is the one group that has assessed the relationship between economic growth and biodiversity conservation with due diligence and great detail. The conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation was concluded from laws of physics, principles of ecology, and a plethora of empirical evidence, not assumed. ?4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/ The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process.? This is another a-historical factoid. The proposed position was submitted to the SCB BOG long before there was ever ?the policy process.? Now given the new policy process, it is a matter of time before the proposed position is considered in that venue. However, WGEESS members are not na?ve to the political machinations of position-taking, and we will ensure that we aren?t wasting our time by sending a proposed position into a gauntlet. The oligarchical tendencies of the BOG and its ?vote? against the WGEESS have us in a holding pattern, during which time we continue to network and educate conservation biologists on the conflict. See for example the upcoming issue of Conservation Biology with its Conservation Focus section on Economic Growth and Biodiversity Conservation. ?5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve.? See #1 above. -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: Hello All - There are several inaccuracies in Brian's email that I now take the time to correct. 1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ 2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5. 3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process. 4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/ The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process. 5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve. AT _______________________________________________________ Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001-4229 US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 www.conbio.org From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:11 PM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science (WGEESS), Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB Board of Governors voted ?against authorization? of the WGEESS. I can assure you that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not indifference. The BOG?s vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was puzzling if for no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having completed the official process that SCG working groups go through for such purposes. It is more accurate to say that the working group was ?de-authorized? in Tennessee. In any event, the formal status of the working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, WGEESS Chair and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision. I trust their judgments ? with member inputs ? with the redrafting of the charter and so forth. I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous members who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join the SCB itself in order to do so. Many of you felt that the working group was a promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win political rhetoric that ?there is no conflict between growing the economy and protecting the environment,? and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing island of ecological reality in a sea of political expedience. Most of us ? I think the vast majority of us ? recognized an SCB position on economic growth as an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win rhetoric. We worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at large, including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting. (I?ll attach the position here as a reminder.) The action of the BOG at the annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large ?transaction cost,? in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and other WGEESS initiatives back into the mix. With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should be useful going forward. Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the WGEESS, some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB membership for 2009. I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at the $20, non-journal level. Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only continue to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed position on economic growth, as well as the widespread international support for the common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position. So please retain your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more quickly on these issues. I think we all realize that our planet?s biodiversity is plunging precipitously while ?leaders? in and out of the SCB belabor themselves with antiquated political ?correctness.? Most of us have heard that ?Ignorance of the law is no excuse.? Lawbreakers go to jail, whether they know the law or not. Regarding those SCB office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore recognize the thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically macroeconomic implications, we might say, ?Ignorance of the natural laws is no excuse.? If they?re not going to lead on this issue, they?ll need to get out of the way because we will. They have had numerous years now since some of us began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to biodiversity conservation, some years back. Some of them have literally and even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have consistently weighed in against our initiatives! That?s not acceptable for officials who represent SCB members. Another thing we should all be aware of is that the ?vote? to de-authorize the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed. Although I?d venture to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally ? and perhaps none exists ? apparently the vote was 7-5. Some of those who voted to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business as their terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the Tennessee meeting). Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature of this vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of negative votes. I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society sociology and psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a large amount of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving of the WGEESS. I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a public listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display. Let me just say that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty statements in the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don?t square with the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation. They may view a retreat from such positions as a ?loss of face,? even though reconsideration and admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence. Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional society, to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the interests of others. This too has played a major role in the opposition to the WGEESS. None of this should come as a surprise though ? this is standard ?fuzz? in political decision-making. However, it should encourage us that the opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic growth are founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and psychological weaknesses. So, let?s not be discouraged and let?s continue to fill the niche we have filled from the beginning. SCB needs this niche to be filled properly, and more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if biodiversity is to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level. I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG nominations process. BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details of the nominations for ?Government Representative? in 2007 (noting too that we have no Government Representative on the BOG as a result). The nominations process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB members. Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this out many times. This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some of the other SCB subunits as well. I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG. The only position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB President because the others are for NGO and academia representatives. (I do have NGO and academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation Biologist in civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will prevail for those positions.) I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the victims of the oligarchical nominations process in 2007. The same outcome could occur in 2008, for the reasons outlined above. Probably the only way I would get on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me. There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned with other professional natural resources societies that have done likewise. If not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and venues. Finally, I would like to say that I firmly ? now more than ever ? believe in the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural resource societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and providing a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I described in Bioscience last year (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation-Movement.pdf) . I strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate to the fullest feasible extent in making it happen. You can see what progress has already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new heights! Click now! _____________________________________________________________ Click here to learn more about nursing jobs. From brianczech at juno.com Wed Oct 22 08:15:20 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:15:20 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: "must, must read" Message-ID: <20081022.111520.25099.5@webmail01.dca.untd.com> I agree with Dave Gardner that this is a must-read, at least for those not yet familiar with what Gus Speth has been saying. (Otherwise, perhaps not quite as prioritizable.) I happened to post Comment # 13, which may be of interest to SCB members... Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- This is profound. It is on the money. It is what drives me every day to crawl out of bed at 5:30 or 6 and devote 8, 10 or 12 hours a day to my unpaid profession as rebel documentarian. It is long. Sorry. May take 15 minutes to read. But it is so true! Environmental Failure: A Ruined Planet Is Closer to Reality By James Gustave Speth, Yale Environment 360 Environmental groups have grown in strength and sophistication, but the environment has continued to go downhill. Why? Read more ? Dave Gardner, President, Citizen-Powered Media Producing the Documentary, GROWTHBUSTERS TM presents Hooked on Growth: Our Misguided Quest for Prosperity Visit www.growthbusters.com < mailto:dave at growthbusters.com> 760 Wycliffe Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80906 719-576-5565 _____________________________________________________________ Click to become a master chef, own a restaurant and make millions. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3m4pDOjwDHNkeGso50M7HcN0fIciij3freF65gYDBDAfYOpm/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081022/6fc5c13b/attachment.html From larson.grapids at gmail.com Wed Oct 22 08:20:37 2008 From: larson.grapids at gmail.com (Mike Larson) Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 10:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] climate change & economic growth Message-ID: <53dd27b60810220820n36b5949y8a3e72cd0cc6f31@mail.gmail.com> EESS listers: I'm trying to identify the links and correlations between the metrics and drivers of climate change on one hand and economic growth and pro-growth policies on the other. If you have any information (e.g., literature, figures, data sets), please reply to me directly. I can share later the info. I receive. Thanks, Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081022/2dd642f4/attachment.htm From KStade at cspinet.org Thu Oct 23 08:54:34 2008 From: KStade at cspinet.org (Kirsten Stade) Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:54:34 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] The 'win-win' solution failing the rainforests Message-ID: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/20/conservation-brazil The 'win-win' solution failing the rainforests Market-based answers to deforestation in Latin America are backfiring, say conservation groups Oliver Balch in Buenos Aires guardian.co.uk, Monday October 20 2008 10.21 BST Article history Photograph: Randy Green/Getty On paper, the idea looks like a conservation masterstroke. Take a huge swath of pristine rainforest, put a price on the rainfall it produces and other "services", and sell these off to rich philanthropists with a conscience. That's precisely the rescue package dreamt up by investment house Canopy Capital. And it's working. The London-based firm has persuaded 10 wealthy individuals to buy into the "ecosystem services" of Guyana's heavily forested Iwokrama Reserve. The logic is straightforward. Trees need to be worth more standing up than chopped down. Giving them a "utility value" is one way of achieving that. "How can it be that Google's services are worth billions, but those from all the world's rainforests amount to nothing?" Canopy Capital's director, Hylton Philipson, is fond of saying. Putting a price on trees' services ? climate regulation, biodiversity maintenance and water storage, for example ? is the latest in a long list of market-based measures designed to save Latin America's forests. Governments across the region have bought into ecotourism, forest certification, biodiversity offsets and carbon emission trading in recent years. Market-based mechanisms appeal because they appear a win-win, says Ronnie Hall, coordinator for Global Forest Coalition, an international coalition of environmental groups. "Governments don't have to dip into the public purse so much, and private investors think they can make a profit out of it ? It's very skewed. In the end, it's all become about money", she says. As the world's financial markets totter, Latin Americans are wondering if the business theorists haven't hoodwinked them. "The problems that have been caused by companies with their own rules cannot be solved by the same companies with the same rules," says Ana Filippini, spokesperson for the World Rainforest Movement, a Uruguayan-based conservation group. Despite millions being poured into sustainable projects in the Amazon, for example, illegal loggers are still hard at work in the world's largest rainforest. Monthly deforestation rates in August were almost three times higher than the same time last year, according to Brazil's National Institute for Space Research. Business-based schemes also have a habit of generating unintended consequences. The Global Forest Coalition lists examples in a new report, Life as Commerce: the Impact of Market-based Conservation. Take tree plantations. Under the Kyoto protocol, the carbon captured by so-called carbon sinks can be sold to buyers in developing countries. As a result, companies across the continent have been fighting over themselves to plant fast-growing plantations for the profitable carbon market. The climate change benefits of monoculture plantations, however, are arguably offset by the enormous damage they cause to local biodiversity. In endorsing commercial plantations, timber certification schemes such as the Forest Stewardship Council are also cited in the report for doing more harm than good. Market-based schemes fail the residents of Latin America's forests as much as the forests themselves, says the Global Forest Coalition. Often complex and poorly explained, business mechanisms frequently leave local inhabitants sidelined and disenfranchised. In Costa Rica, for example, conflicts have flared up among indigenous groups after individuals in these communities sold medicinal plants to pharmaceutical companies ? a practice known as bioprospecting. Forest communities in Colombia, meanwhile, have reportedly lost control over what trees to plant on their own land after agreeing to participate in a carbon-credit reforestation programme. In some cases, the forests they were regenerating have been reclassified as stubble to make way for timber plantations. "Although there's a theoretical opportunity for indigenous people, they can't really engage [with market-based schemes] because there's so many hurdles they have to jump," says Hall. Just as they have with the financial markets, governments need to step in with a robust rescue plan, says Sergio Leitao, campaign director of Greenpeace Brazil. "We can't leave such an important subject for the future of the planet as forest preservation in private hands," he says. He cites the example of Paraguay, not a country associated with strong public governance. A recent moratorium on deforestation cut illegal logging in the forest-rich state by 83% in one year. Simone Lovera, author of the report, suggests an alternative: leave the forest communities of Latin America to protect their natural habitat. After all, the best-preserved forests today are found on indigenous territories, she points out. "Indigenous-led conservation initiatives have proven to be very cost-efficient," she says. Regrettably, few residents of Latin America's forests are likely to make it to the next round of climate change talks in Poland in December. As business-minded negotiators brush down their suits in preparation, though, the message of cost-efficiency may win them a hearing. Kirsten Stade Program Manager, Integrity in Science Center for Science in the Public Interest http://cspinet.org/integrity/watch/index.html Tel. (202) 777-8348 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081023/61d25f49/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 34177 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081023/61d25f49/attachment-0001.jpe From brianczech at juno.com Fri Oct 24 08:41:15 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:41:15 GMT Subject: "Five-Star Green Hypocrisy?" and steady state economy Message-ID: <20081024.114115.27111.1@webmail05.dca.untd.com> Does anyone know about the factual merits of this article called ?Five-Star Green Hypocrisy?? The author writes, ?carbon charlatanism has come to town in the form of the World Wildlife Fund?s luxury getaway called ?Around the World: A Private Jet Expedition?? ?For a price tag that starts at $64,950 per person, travelers will meet at the Ritz-Carlton in Orlando, Fla. on April 6, 2009 and then fly to ?remote corners? of the world on a ?specially outfitted jet that carries just 88 passengers in business-class comfort?.? (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,435202,00.html ) I happened upon this article quite incidentally while reading a different article describing how, one by one, leading sustainability thinkers are advocating a steady state economy (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,443755,00.html). The author of the article was not friendly to this movement, and found as ammunition the ?Green Hypocrisy? link. In other words, he lumped all the conservation entities into one bunch and used the alleged WWF luxury flights as a bulls-eye to target us all. Someone out there please tell us its? not so! This is just when many of us were wondering if the WWF-UK, at least, was becoming the heroic conservation organization we?ve been looking for to support. Earlier this year WWF-UK published the groundbreaking ?Weathercocks and Signposts? describing how conservation organizations were missing the boat - and catching the plane? - by playing into the win-win rhetoric of combining economic growth with environmental protection. Presumably the WWF luxury jet expeditions are being conducted by a WWF entity other than the UK version?? Anyway, if this is a true report, this is the last thing we needed in the conservation biology community and in the broader conservation movement. Especially at this point in economic history! Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . _____________________________________________________________ Learn about VA loan programs and benefits. Click now. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3m3mWsLwlKikSs1C2GMv42oPpyiR6FULF2yrJCjuC5PCubuc/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081024/0bf5f2ca/attachment.html From McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu Sat Oct 25 08:05:15 2008 From: McArd_Mlotha at antiochne.edu (McArd Mlotha) Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 11:05:15 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] =?iso-8859-1?q?=93Five-Star_Gre?= =?iso-8859-1?q?en_Hypocrisy=3F=94__and_steady_state_economy?= In-Reply-To: <20081024.114115.27111.1@webmail05.dca.untd.com> References: <20081024.114115.27111.1@webmail05.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: Hello Brian, It looks genuine to me. Check the following link: http://www.worldwildlife.org/travel/2009/Africa/WWFTripitem7467.html Joseph "brianczech at juno.com" on Friday, October 24, 2008 at 11:41 AM -0500 wrote: >Does anyone know about the factual merits of this article called >?Five-Star Green Hypocrisy?? The author writes, ?carbon charlatanism has >come to town in the form of the World Wildlife Fund?s luxury getaway >called ?Around the World: A Private Jet Expedition? ?For a price tag >that starts at $64,950 per person, travelers will meet at the >Ritz-Carlton in Orlando, Fla. on April 6, 2009 and then fly to ?remote >corners? of the world on a ?specially outfitted jet that carries just 88 >passengers in business-class comfort?.? ([ >http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,435202,00.html >]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,435202,00.html ) > >I happened upon this article quite incidentally while reading a different >article describing how, one by one, leading sustainability thinkers are >advocating a steady state economy ([ >http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,443755,00.html >]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,443755,00.html). The author of the >article was not friendly to this movement, and found as ammunition the >?Green Hypocrisy? link. In other words, he lumped all the conservation >entities into one bunch and used the alleged WWF luxury flights as a >bulls-eye to target us all. > >Someone out there please tell us its? not so! This is just when many of >us were wondering if the WWF-UK, at least, was becoming the heroic >conservation organization we?ve been looking for to support. Earlier >this year WWF-UK published the groundbreaking ?Weathercocks and >Signposts? describing how conservation organizations were missing the >boat - and catching the plane? - by playing into the win-win rhetoric >of combining economic growth with environmental protection. Presumably >the WWF luxury jet expeditions are being conducted by a WWF entity other >than the UK version?? > >Anyway, if this is a true report, this is the last thing we needed in the >conservation biology community and in the broader conservation movement. > Especially at this point in economic history! > > >Brian Czech, Ph.D., President >Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy >The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: >http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . > >_____________________________________________________________ >[ >http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2122/fc/Ioyw6i3m3mWsLwlKikSs1C2GMv42oPpyiR6FULF2yrJCjuC5PCubuc/?count=1234567890 >]Learn about VA loan programs and benefits. Click now. >______________________________________________ >*11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: >Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China. >More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 >*Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global >community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology >today! www.conbio.org/join >__________________________________ >EESS mailing list >EESS at list.conbio.org >http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- McArd Joseph Mlotha Program Manager Center for Tropical Ecology & Conservation (CTEC) Antioch University New England 40 Avon Street Keene, NH 03431 Tel: 603 357 3122 Ext 2348 Cell: 508 373 3819 Fax: 603 357-0718 Attention ES Dept. Web page: http://www.centerfortropicalecology.org/students/mlotha.cfm --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081025/0f7b07a7/attachment.htm From tfleischner at prescott.edu Sun Oct 26 10:58:38 2008 From: tfleischner at prescott.edu (Tom Fleischner) Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 10:58:38 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization ofWGEESS; SCB elections References: Message-ID: I believe that Oliver's version of what's transpired in the past is fully accurate (I was a bit player in some of those events), and his suggestions for needed reforms are right on. Best, Tom Thomas L. Fleischner, Ph.D. Professor of Environmental Studies Prescott College 220 Grove Avenue Prescott, AZ 86301 (928)350-2219 Web Page: http://www.prescott.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/tfleischner/index.html President, Natural History Network http://www.naturalhistorynetwork.org Imagination is better than a sharp instrument. To pay attention, this is our endless and proper work. --Mary Oliver ________________________________ From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of Oliver Pergams Sent: Tue 21-Oct-08 12:09 PM To: eess at list.conbio.org Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization ofWGEESS;SCB elections One thing that seems clear (at least to me) is that the SCB electoral process should be more transparent and democratic. Here are some ideas to go in that direction: 1. I don't think there is currently a formal Nominating Committee, rather Board nominations are part of the duty of the Governance Committee. The Governance Committee consists of "...the three most immediate past Presidents and any other members appointed by the Chair" (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 3) and one of their duties is to "...prepare slates of nominees for elected offices of the Board of Governors" (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 4). 2. Perhaps a new Nominating Committee should be peeled off from the Governance Committee. This new committee might still include the President-Elect and a couple of Board members he/she appoints (for guidance and continuity), but it might also include a few new, non-Board members. The new committee members would also be selected by membership vote at the Board election. This is the way many other societies work. 3. If I understand correctly, currently the Governance Committee reduces each ballot to two candidates no matter how many were nominated by membership. I do not think two candidates should be a firm limit. I think a new Nominating Committee should slate all qualified candidates and let the membership decide. 4. I don't think that SCB provides the actual vote count after an election. If this is correct, I'm guessing it may be because voter turnout is sometimes embarrassing. If poor turnout is the reason maybe knowledge of it and embarrassment among the membership would improve it. In any case, if this is current procedure it is highly opaque and should stop. Not only candidates but the membership should be made aware of the vote totals immediately after the election. The Constitution and Bylaws may be modified by a majority of the members present and voting at any scheduled general meeting of the Society (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 24). _______________________________ Oliver Pergams, Ph.D. Dept. of Biological Sciences (MC 066) University of Illinois at Chicago 845 W. Taylor St. Chicago, IL 60607-7060 USA 1.312.996.5446 www.pergams.com www.videophilia.org -----Original Message----- From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 12:31 PM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization ofWGEESS; SCB elections In response to Alan Thornhill's posting: "1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ " It is true that I have not served on the Board of Governors, and the reason is related to #5 about why we don't have a Government Representative. When I was nominated for that position for the 2007 ballot, four members of the SCB BOG decided against the SCB members who nominated me - there were approximately eight members who did so. Those four members of the BOG, christened the "Nominations Committee," consisted of the President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President. And actually, I was informed that one of them actually approved of my nomination, so three (or maybe even two?) SCB members decided for the 10,000-member SCB that I would not be on the ballot. The end result was that the 2007 "ballot" included one person for the Government Representative position. In other words, there was no legitimate election of a Government Representative; the Government Representative was selected by three members of the BOG. In political science, we'd call that oligarchy, especially given the composition of the tiny bloc (President-Elect, President, Past President, and Past-Past President). If the U.S., for example, operated like this, we'd have the current and past three presidents - they and only they - deciding who could run for office. How would we like that? Then, as it turned out, the selected Government Representative, Curt Flather, had to turn the position down for reasons having to do with civil service protocol. For the record, I have the utmost respect for Curt and consider him to be a friend and colleague. None of this undemocratic SCB business was his responsibility. The upshot is we have not Government Representative on the BOG. "2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5." Who voted what, then? Or are our elected BOG members, who represent us SCB members, immune from accountability? Also, I believe the vote would have been much different if there was a Government Representative to provide some leadership to the rest of the BOG on this issue. We know where I stand on the issue, and Curt Flather is among the 60-some individuals proposing a similar position on economic growth in the Ecological Society of America. "3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process." The contradiction here is that there were three working groups already established and recognized by the SCB when the BOG decided, retroactively, to require an authorization process. These working groups included the Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science, the Social Science Working Group, and the Freshwater Working Group. In other words, the "provisional status" was applied retroactively, at about the time the Religions and Conservation Biology Working Group was forming. The reason given for de-authorizing or not authorizing the WGEESS was that the WGEESS "assumed" a conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation, when nothing could have been further from the truth. The WGEESS is the one group that has assessed the relationship between economic growth and biodiversity conservation with due diligence and great detail. The conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation was concluded from laws of physics, principles of ecology, and a plethora of empirical evidence, not assumed. "4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/ The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process." This is another a-historical factoid. The proposed position was submitted to the SCB BOG long before there was ever "the policy process." Now given the new policy process, it is a matter of time before the proposed position is considered in that venue. However, WGEESS members are not na?ve to the political machinations of position-taking, and we will ensure that we aren't wasting our time by sending a proposed position into a gauntlet. The oligarchical tendencies of the BOG and its "vote" against the WGEESS have us in a holding pattern, during which time we continue to network and educate conservation biologists on the conflict. See for example the upcoming issue of Conservation Biology with its Conservation Focus section on Economic Growth and Biodiversity Conservation. "5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve." See #1 above. -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: Hello All - There are several inaccuracies in Brian's email that I now take the time to correct. 1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our bylaws state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the Board of Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ 2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5. 3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not authorize the group. See the process here: http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into place July 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required to go through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are subject to the same process. 4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/Policy/ The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into the policy process--no one has ever submitted it to the process. 5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely correct. Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but shortly after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal organizations that have a business or potential business relationship with the Department or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their official duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official capacity as a board member of such an organization has the potential to undermine the fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and possibly call into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a formal ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the Society of Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, he was told by the ethics officers he could not serve. AT _______________________________________________________ Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org Society for Conservation Biology 1017 O Street NW Washington, DC 20001-4229 US voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 fax: 1-703-995-4633 www.conbio.org From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess-bounces at list.conbio.org] On Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:11 PM To: Eess at list.conbio.org Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of WGEESS; SCB elections Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science (WGEESS), Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB Board of Governors voted "against authorization" of the WGEESS. I can assure you that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not indifference. The BOG's vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was puzzling if for no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having completed the official process that SCG working groups go through for such purposes. It is more accurate to say that the working group was "de-authorized" in Tennessee. In any event, the formal status of the working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, WGEESS Chair and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision. I trust their judgments - with member inputs - with the redrafting of the charter and so forth. I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous members who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join the SCB itself in order to do so. Many of you felt that the working group was a promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win political rhetoric that "there is no conflict between growing the economy and protecting the environment," and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing island of ecological reality in a sea of political expedience. Most of us - I think the vast majority of us - recognized an SCB position on economic growth as an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win rhetoric. We worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at large, including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting. (I'll attach the position here as a reminder.) The action of the BOG at the annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large "transaction cost," in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and other WGEESS initiatives back into the mix. With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should be useful going forward. Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the WGEESS, some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB membership for 2009. I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at the $20, non-journal level. Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only continue to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed position on economic growth, as well as the widespread international support for the common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position. So please retain your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more quickly on these issues. I think we all realize that our planet's biodiversity is plunging precipitously while "leaders" in and out of the SCB belabor themselves with antiquated political "correctness." Most of us have heard that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." Lawbreakers go to jail, whether they know the law or not. Regarding those SCB office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore recognize the thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically macroeconomic implications, we might say, "Ignorance of the natural laws is no excuse." If they're not going to lead on this issue, they'll need to get out of the way because we will. They have had numerous years now since some of us began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to biodiversity conservation, some years back. Some of them have literally and even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have consistently weighed in against our initiatives! That's not acceptable for officials who represent SCB members. Another thing we should all be aware of is that the "vote" to de-authorize the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed. Although I'd venture to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally - and perhaps none exists - apparently the vote was 7-5. Some of those who voted to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business as their terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the Tennessee meeting). Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature of this vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of negative votes. I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society sociology and psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a large amount of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving of the WGEESS. I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a public listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display. Let me just say that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty statements in the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don't square with the ecological economics of biodiversity conservation. They may view a retreat from such positions as a "loss of face," even though reconsideration and admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence. Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional society, to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the interests of others. This too has played a major role in the opposition to the WGEESS. None of this should come as a surprise though - this is standard "fuzz" in political decision-making. However, it should encourage us that the opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic growth are founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and psychological weaknesses. So, let's not be discouraged and let's continue to fill the niche we have filled from the beginning. SCB needs this niche to be filled properly, and more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if biodiversity is to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level. I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG nominations process. BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details of the nominations for "Government Representative" in 2007 (noting too that we have no Government Representative on the BOG as a result). The nominations process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB members. Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this out many times. This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some of the other SCB subunits as well. I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG. The only position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB President because the others are for NGO and academia representatives. (I do have NGO and academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation Biologist in civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will prevail for those positions.) I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the victims of the oligarchical nominations process in 2007. The same outcome could occur in 2008, for the reasons outlined above. Probably the only way I would get on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me. There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned with other professional natural resources societies that have done likewise. If not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and venues. Finally, I would like to say that I firmly - now more than ever - believe in the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural resource societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and providing a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I described in Bioscience last year (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation-Movement.pdf) . I strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate to the fullest feasible extent in making it happen. You can see what progress has already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new heights! Click now! _____________________________________________________________ Click here to learn more about nursing jobs. _______________________________________________ 11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in 北京 (Beijing), China. More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology today! www.conbio.org/join EESS mailing list EESS at list.conbio.org http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess From phildesfish at besmug.org Sun Oct 26 14:44:20 2008 From: phildesfish at besmug.org (Phil Pister) Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 14:44:20 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization ofWGEESS; SCB elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <866CEE3E-5F00-4922-B2A5-E6F6C6FD15FD@besmug.org> Tom, Oliver, and all: Hear, Hear!! Phil Edwin P. (Phil) Pister Executive Secretary, Desert Fishes Council P.O. Box 337, Bishop, CA 93515 (for regular mail) For FedEx or UPS: 437 East South Street, Bishop, CA 93514 (760) 872-8751 [FAX and voice phone] e-mail: phil at desertfishes.org "To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant." ...Amos Bronson Alcott On Oct 26, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Tom Fleischner wrote: > I believe that Oliver's version of what's transpired in the past is > fully accurate (I was a bit player in some of those events), and > his suggestions for needed reforms are right on. > Best, Tom > > Thomas L. Fleischner, Ph.D. > Professor of Environmental Studies > Prescott College > 220 Grove Avenue > Prescott, AZ 86301 > (928)350-2219 > > Web Page: http://www.prescott.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/ > tfleischner/index.html > > President, Natural History Network > http://www.naturalhistorynetwork.org www.naturalhistorynetwork.org/> > > Imagination is better than a sharp instrument. > To pay attention, this is our endless and proper work. > --Mary Oliver > > ________________________________ > > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of Oliver Pergams > Sent: Tue 21-Oct-08 12:09 PM > To: eess at list.conbio.org > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization > ofWGEESS;SCB elections > > > > One thing that seems clear (at least to me) is that the SCB electoral > process should be more transparent and democratic. Here are some > ideas to go > in that direction: > > 1. I don't think there is currently a formal Nominating Committee, > rather > Board nominations are part of the duty of the Governance Committee. > The > Governance Committee consists of "...the three most immediate past > Presidents > and any other members appointed by the Chair" (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, > Sec. 3) > and one of their duties is to "...prepare slates of nominees for > elected > offices of the Board of Governors" (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 4). > > 2. Perhaps a new Nominating Committee should be peeled off from the > Governance Committee. This new committee might still include the > President-Elect and a couple of Board members he/she appoints (for > guidance > and continuity), but it might also include a few new, non-Board > members. The > new committee members would also be selected by membership vote at > the Board > election. This is the way many other societies work. > > 3. If I understand correctly, currently the Governance Committee > reduces > each ballot to two candidates no matter how many were nominated by > membership. I do not think two candidates should be a firm limit. I > think a > new Nominating Committee should slate all qualified candidates and > let the > membership decide. > > 4. I don't think that SCB provides the actual vote count after an > election. > If this is correct, I'm guessing it may be because voter turnout is > sometimes embarrassing. If poor turnout is the reason maybe > knowledge of it > and embarrassment among the membership would improve it. In any > case, if > this is current procedure it is highly opaque and should stop. Not > only > candidates but the membership should be made aware of the vote totals > immediately after the election. > > The Constitution and Bylaws may be modified by a majority of the > members > present and voting at any scheduled general meeting of the Society > (SCB > Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 24). > > _______________________________ > Oliver Pergams, Ph.D. > Dept. of Biological Sciences (MC 066) > University of Illinois at Chicago > 845 W. Taylor St. > Chicago, IL 60607-7060 > USA > > 1.312.996.5446 > www.pergams.com > www.videophilia.org > > > -----Original Message----- > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess- > bounces at list.conbio.org] On > Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com > Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 12:31 PM > To: Eess at list.conbio.org > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization > ofWGEESS; SCB elections > > > > In response to Alan Thornhill's posting: > > > > "1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because > our bylaws > state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the > Board of > Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/ > bylaws/ " > > > > It is true that I have not served on the Board of Governors, and > the reason > is related to #5 about why we don't have a Government > Representative. When > I was nominated for that position for the 2007 ballot, four members > of the > SCB BOG decided against the SCB members who nominated me - there were > approximately eight members who did so. Those four members of the > BOG, > christened the "Nominations Committee," consisted of the President- > Elect, > President, Past President, and Past-Past President. And actually, > I was > informed that one of them actually approved of my nomination, so > three (or > maybe even two?) SCB members decided for the 10,000-member SCB that > I would > not be on the ballot. The end result was that the 2007 "ballot" > included > one person for the Government Representative position. In other > words, > there was no legitimate election of a Government Representative; the > Government Representative was selected by three members of the BOG. > > > > In political science, we'd call that oligarchy, especially given the > composition of the tiny bloc (President-Elect, President, Past > President, > and Past-Past President). If the U.S., for example, operated like > this, > we'd have the current and past three presidents - they and only they - > deciding who could run for office. How would we like that? > > > > Then, as it turned out, the selected Government Representative, Curt > Flather, had to turn the position down for reasons having to do > with civil > service protocol. For the record, I have the utmost respect for > Curt and > consider him to be a friend and colleague. None of this > undemocratic SCB > business was his responsibility. The upshot is we have not Government > Representative on the BOG. > > > > "2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5." > > > > Who voted what, then? Or are our elected BOG members, who > represent us SCB > members, immune from accountability? > > > > Also, I believe the vote would have been much different if there was a > Government Representative to provide some leadership to the rest of > the BOG > on this issue. We know where I stand on the issue, and Curt > Flather is > among the 60-some individuals proposing a similar position on economic > growth in the Ecological Society of America. > > > > "3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was > operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not > authorize the group. See the process here: > http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into > place July > 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required > to go > through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are > subject > to the same process." > > > > The contradiction here is that there were three working groups already > established and recognized by the SCB when the BOG decided, > retroactively, > to require an authorization process. These working groups included > the > Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science, the > Social Science Working Group, and the Freshwater Working Group. In > other > words, the "provisional status" was applied retroactively, at about > the time > the Religions and Conservation Biology Working Group was forming. > > > > The reason given for de-authorizing or not authorizing the WGEESS > was that > the WGEESS "assumed" a conflict between economic growth and > biodiversity > conservation, when nothing could have been further from the truth. > The > WGEESS is the one group that has assessed the relationship between > economic > growth and biodiversity conservation with due diligence and great > detail. > The conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation was > concluded from laws of physics, principles of ecology, and a > plethora of > empirical evidence, not assumed. > > > > > > "4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy > Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/ > Policy/ > The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into > the policy > process--no one has ever submitted it to the process." > > > > This is another a-historical factoid. The proposed position was > submitted > to the SCB BOG long before there was ever "the policy process." > Now given > the new policy process, it is a matter of time before the proposed > position > is considered in that venue. However, WGEESS members are not na?ve > to the > political machinations of position-taking, and we will ensure that > we aren't > wasting our time by sending a proposed position into a gauntlet. The > oligarchical tendencies of the BOG and its "vote" against the > WGEESS have us > in a holding pattern, during which time we continue to network and > educate > conservation biologists on the conflict. See for example the > upcoming issue > of Conservation Biology with its Conservation Focus section on > Economic > Growth and Biodiversity Conservation. > > > > > > "5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government > Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely > correct. > Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but > shortly > after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance > regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal > organizations > that have a business or potential business relationship with the > Department > or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their > official > duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official > capacity > as a board member of such an organization has the potential to > undermine the > fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and > possibly call > into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a > formal > ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the > Society of > Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, > he was > told by the ethics officers he could not serve." > > > > See #1 above. > > > > > -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: > > Hello All - > > > > There are several inaccuracies in Brian's email that I now take the > time to > correct. > > > > 1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our > bylaws > state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the > Board of > Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ > > > > 2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5. > > > > 3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was > operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not > authorize the group. See the process here: > http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into > place July > 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required > to go > through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are > subject > to the same process. > > > > 4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy > Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/ > Policy/ > The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into > the policy > process--no one has ever submitted it to the process. > > > > 5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government > Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely > correct. > Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but > shortly > after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance > regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal > organizations > that have a business or potential business relationship with the > Department > or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their > official > duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official > capacity > as a board member of such an organization has the potential to > undermine the > fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and > possibly call > into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a > formal > ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the > Society of > Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, > he was > told by the ethics officers he could not serve. > > > > AT > > > > _______________________________________________________ > > > > Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org > > > > Society for Conservation Biology > > 1017 O Street NW > > Washington, DC 20001-4229 US > > voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 > > fax: 1-703-995-4633 > > > www.conbio.org > > > > > > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess- > bounces at list.conbio.org] On > Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:11 PM > To: Eess at list.conbio.org > Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of > WGEESS; > SCB elections > > > > Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and > Sustainability Science (WGEESS), > > > > Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB > Board of > Governors voted "against authorization" of the WGEESS. I can > assure you > that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not > indifference. > > > > The BOG's vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was > puzzling if for > no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having > completed the official process that SCG working groups go through > for such > purposes. It is more accurate to say that the working group was > "de-authorized" in Tennessee. In any event, the formal status of the > working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, > WGEESS Chair > and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision. I trust their > judgments - > with member inputs - with the redrafting of the charter and so forth. > > > > I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous > members > who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join > the SCB > itself in order to do so. Many of you felt that the working group > was a > promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological > economics > of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics > demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity > conservation. Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win > political > rhetoric that "there is no conflict between growing the economy and > protecting the environment," and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing > island of > ecological reality in a sea of political expedience. Most of us - > I think > the vast majority of us - recognized an SCB position on economic > growth as > an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win > rhetoric. We > worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at > large, including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting. > (I'll > attach the position here as a reminder.) The action of the BOG at the > annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large > "transaction > cost," in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and > other > WGEESS initiatives back into the mix. > > > > With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should > be useful > going forward. > > > > Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the > WGEESS, > some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB > membership > for 2009. I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at > the $20, > non-journal level. Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is > clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only > continue > to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming > theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed > position on > economic growth, as well as the widespread international support > for the > common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position. So > please retain > your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more > participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more > quickly > on these issues. I think we all realize that our planet's > biodiversity is > plunging precipitously while "leaders" in and out of the SCB belabor > themselves with antiquated political "correctness." > > > > Most of us have heard that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." > Lawbreakers > go to jail, whether they know the law or not. Regarding those SCB > office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore > recognize the > thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically > macroeconomic > implications, we might say, "Ignorance of the natural laws is no > excuse." > If they're not going to lead on this issue, they'll need to get out > of the > way because we will. They have had numerous years now since some > of us > began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to > biodiversity conservation, some years back. Some of them have > literally and > even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have > consistently > weighed in against our initiatives! That's not acceptable for > officials who > represent SCB members. > > > > Another thing we should all be aware of is that the "vote" to de- > authorize > the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed. Although I'd > venture > to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally - and > perhaps none exists - apparently the vote was 7-5. Some of those > who voted > to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business > as their > terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the > Tennessee > meeting). Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature > of this > vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of > negative > votes. > > > > I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society > sociology and > psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a > large amount > of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving > of the > WGEESS. I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a > public > listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display. Let me > just say > that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty > statements in > the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don't square > with the > ecological economics of biodiversity conservation. They may view a > retreat > from such positions as a "loss of face," even though > reconsideration and > admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence. > > > > Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional > society, > to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented > fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the > interests of > others. This too has played a major role in the opposition to the > WGEESS. > > > > None of this should come as a surprise though - this is standard > "fuzz" in > political decision-making. However, it should encourage us that the > opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic > growth are > founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and > psychological > weaknesses. > > > > So, let's not be discouraged and let's continue to fill the niche > we have > filled from the beginning. SCB needs this niche to be filled > properly, and > more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if > biodiversity is > to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level. > > > > I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG > nominations process. BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of > democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details > of the > nominations for "Government Representative" in 2007 (noting too > that we have > no Government Representative on the BOG as a result). The nominations > process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB > members. Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this > out many > times. This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some > of the > other SCB subunits as well. > > > > I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG. The > only > position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB > President because > the others are for NGO and academia representatives. (I do have > NGO and > academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation > Biologist in > civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will > prevail for > those positions.) I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the > victims of > the oligarchical nominations process in 2007. The same outcome > could occur > in 2008, for the reasons outlined above. Probably the only way I > would get > on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me. > > > > There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the > wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the > conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned > with > other professional natural resources societies that have done > likewise. If > not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and > venues. > > > > Finally, I would like to say that I firmly - now more than ever - > believe in > the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural > resource > societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and > environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and > providing > a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I > described in Bioscience last year > (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation- > Movement.pdf) . I > strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate > to the > fullest feasible extent in making it happen. You can see what > progress has > already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/ > CASSEPositionOnEG.html . > > > > Cheers, Brian > > Brian Czech, Ph.D., President > Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy > The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: > http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new > heights! Click > now! > > > > _____________________________________________________________ > Click here to learn more about nursing jobs. > > _______________________________________________ > 11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, > Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in 北京 > (Beijing), China. > More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 > > Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global > community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation > Biology today! www.conbio.org/join > > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > > > ______________________________________________ > *11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, > Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China. > More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 > *Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global > community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation > Biology today! www.conbio.org/join > __________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess From Carolyn_Scafidi at fws.gov Mon Oct 27 09:29:58 2008 From: Carolyn_Scafidi at fws.gov (Carolyn_Scafidi at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 09:29:58 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization ofWGEESS; SCB elections In-Reply-To: <866CEE3E-5F00-4922-B2A5-E6F6C6FD15FD@besmug.org> Message-ID: Many thanks to Brian for beginning this conversation. So, where does this leave us? As Oliver states: "The Constitution and Bylaws may be modified by a majority of the members present and voting at any scheduled general meeting of the Society (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 24)." How do we get the membership informed - and must we wait until the next annual meeting for a vote? Given the location of the next several meetings (i.e., outside of the U.S.), I suspect very few, if any, U.S. and state government rep's will be able to attend. We need a strategy and a venue for airing these issues among the larger membership, and an opportunity for all voices to be heard. ____________________________________ Carolyn R. Scafidi, Acting Branch Manager Federal Activities Branch Western Washington Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 510 Desmond Dr. SE, Suite 102 Lacey, WA 98503 (360) 753-4068 carolyn_scafidi at fws.gov "History shows clearly that humanity is moved forward not by people who stop at every moment in an attempt to gauge the ultimate success of their venture, but by those who think deeply about what is right and put all their energy into it." -- M. Gell-Mann Phil Pister To Sent by: "Tom Fleischner" eess-bounces at list .conbio.org cc eess at list.conbio.org Subject 10/26/2008 02:44 Re: [Ecological Economics PM Discussion] BOG de-authorization ofWGEESS; SCB elections Tom, Oliver, and all: Hear, Hear!! Phil Edwin P. (Phil) Pister Executive Secretary, Desert Fishes Council P.O. Box 337, Bishop, CA 93515 (for regular mail) For FedEx or UPS: 437 East South Street, Bishop, CA 93514 (760) 872-8751 [FAX and voice phone] e-mail: phil at desertfishes.org "To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant." ...Amos Bronson Alcott On Oct 26, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Tom Fleischner wrote: > I believe that Oliver's version of what's transpired in the past is > fully accurate (I was a bit player in some of those events), and > his suggestions for needed reforms are right on. > Best, Tom > > Thomas L. Fleischner, Ph.D. > Professor of Environmental Studies > Prescott College > 220 Grove Avenue > Prescott, AZ 86301 > (928)350-2219 > > Web Page: http://www.prescott.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/ > tfleischner/index.html > > President, Natural History Network > http://www.naturalhistorynetwork.org www.naturalhistorynetwork.org/> > > Imagination is better than a sharp instrument. > To pay attention, this is our endless and proper work. > --Mary Oliver > > ________________________________ > > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org on behalf of Oliver Pergams > Sent: Tue 21-Oct-08 12:09 PM > To: eess at list.conbio.org > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization > ofWGEESS;SCB elections > > > > One thing that seems clear (at least to me) is that the SCB electoral > process should be more transparent and democratic. Here are some > ideas to go > in that direction: > > 1. I don't think there is currently a formal Nominating Committee, > rather > Board nominations are part of the duty of the Governance Committee. > The > Governance Committee consists of "...the three most immediate past > Presidents > and any other members appointed by the Chair" (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, > Sec. 3) > and one of their duties is to "...prepare slates of nominees for > elected > offices of the Board of Governors" (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 4). > > 2. Perhaps a new Nominating Committee should be peeled off from the > Governance Committee. This new committee might still include the > President-Elect and a couple of Board members he/she appoints (for > guidance > and continuity), but it might also include a few new, non-Board > members. The > new committee members would also be selected by membership vote at > the Board > election. This is the way many other societies work. > > 3. If I understand correctly, currently the Governance Committee > reduces > each ballot to two candidates no matter how many were nominated by > membership. I do not think two candidates should be a firm limit. I > think a > new Nominating Committee should slate all qualified candidates and > let the > membership decide. > > 4. I don't think that SCB provides the actual vote count after an > election. > If this is correct, I'm guessing it may be because voter turnout is > sometimes embarrassing. If poor turnout is the reason maybe > knowledge of it > and embarrassment among the membership would improve it. In any > case, if > this is current procedure it is highly opaque and should stop. Not > only > candidates but the membership should be made aware of the vote totals > immediately after the election. > > The Constitution and Bylaws may be modified by a majority of the > members > present and voting at any scheduled general meeting of the Society > (SCB > Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 24). > > _______________________________ > Oliver Pergams, Ph.D. > Dept. of Biological Sciences (MC 066) > University of Illinois at Chicago > 845 W. Taylor St. > Chicago, IL 60607-7060 > USA > > 1.312.996.5446 > www.pergams.com > www.videophilia.org > > > -----Original Message----- > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess- > bounces at list.conbio.org] On > Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com > Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 12:31 PM > To: Eess at list.conbio.org > Subject: Re: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization > ofWGEESS; SCB elections > > > > In response to Alan Thornhill's posting: > > > > "1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because > our bylaws > state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the > Board of > Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/ > bylaws/ " > > > > It is true that I have not served on the Board of Governors, and > the reason > is related to #5 about why we don't have a Government > Representative. When > I was nominated for that position for the 2007 ballot, four members > of the > SCB BOG decided against the SCB members who nominated me - there were > approximately eight members who did so. Those four members of the > BOG, > christened the "Nominations Committee," consisted of the President- > Elect, > President, Past President, and Past-Past President. And actually, > I was > informed that one of them actually approved of my nomination, so > three (or > maybe even two?) SCB members decided for the 10,000-member SCB that > I would > not be on the ballot. The end result was that the 2007 "ballot" > included > one person for the Government Representative position. In other > words, > there was no legitimate election of a Government Representative; the > Government Representative was selected by three members of the BOG. > > > > In political science, we'd call that oligarchy, especially given the > composition of the tiny bloc (President-Elect, President, Past > President, > and Past-Past President). If the U.S., for example, operated like > this, > we'd have the current and past three presidents - they and only they - > deciding who could run for office. How would we like that? > > > > Then, as it turned out, the selected Government Representative, Curt > Flather, had to turn the position down for reasons having to do > with civil > service protocol. For the record, I have the utmost respect for > Curt and > consider him to be a friend and colleague. None of this > undemocratic SCB > business was his responsibility. The upshot is we have not Government > Representative on the BOG. > > > > "2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5." > > > > Who voted what, then? Or are our elected BOG members, who > represent us SCB > members, immune from accountability? > > > > Also, I believe the vote would have been much different if there was a > Government Representative to provide some leadership to the rest of > the BOG > on this issue. We know where I stand on the issue, and Curt > Flather is > among the 60-some individuals proposing a similar position on economic > growth in the Ecological Society of America. > > > > "3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was > operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not > authorize the group. See the process here: > http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into > place July > 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required > to go > through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are > subject > to the same process." > > > > The contradiction here is that there were three working groups already > established and recognized by the SCB when the BOG decided, > retroactively, > to require an authorization process. These working groups included > the > Working Group for Ecological Economics and Sustainability Science, the > Social Science Working Group, and the Freshwater Working Group. In > other > words, the "provisional status" was applied retroactively, at about > the time > the Religions and Conservation Biology Working Group was forming. > > > > The reason given for de-authorizing or not authorizing the WGEESS > was that > the WGEESS "assumed" a conflict between economic growth and > biodiversity > conservation, when nothing could have been further from the truth. > The > WGEESS is the one group that has assessed the relationship between > economic > growth and biodiversity conservation with due diligence and great > detail. > The conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation was > concluded from laws of physics, principles of ecology, and a > plethora of > empirical evidence, not assumed. > > > > > > "4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy > Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/ > Policy/ > The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into > the policy > process--no one has ever submitted it to the process." > > > > This is another a-historical factoid. The proposed position was > submitted > to the SCB BOG long before there was ever "the policy process." > Now given > the new policy process, it is a matter of time before the proposed > position > is considered in that venue. However, WGEESS members are not na?ve > to the > political machinations of position-taking, and we will ensure that > we aren't > wasting our time by sending a proposed position into a gauntlet. The > oligarchical tendencies of the BOG and its "vote" against the > WGEESS have us > in a holding pattern, during which time we continue to network and > educate > conservation biologists on the conflict. See for example the > upcoming issue > of Conservation Biology with its Conservation Focus section on > Economic > Growth and Biodiversity Conservation. > > > > > > "5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government > Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely > correct. > Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but > shortly > after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance > regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal > organizations > that have a business or potential business relationship with the > Department > or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their > official > duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official > capacity > as a board member of such an organization has the potential to > undermine the > fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and > possibly call > into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a > formal > ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the > Society of > Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, > he was > told by the ethics officers he could not serve." > > > > See #1 above. > > > > > -- Alan D Thornhill wrote: > > Hello All - > > > > There are several inaccuracies in Brian's email that I now take the > time to > correct. > > > > 1. Brian would not be eligible to run for SCB President because our > bylaws > state that "Nominees for President Elect must have served on the > Board of > Governors" -- Brian never has. http://www.conbio.org/AboutUs/bylaws/ > > > > 2. The vote mentioned was 7 to 4, not 7 to 5. > > > > 3. The working group was not de-authorized by the vote--the group was > operating in provisional status until the vote. The board chose to not > authorize the group. See the process here: > http://www.conbio.org/WorkingGroups/ This process was put into > place July > 2007 and all working groups that existed at that time were required > to go > through the steps of authorization. All proposed working groups are > subject > to the same process. > > > > 4. All proposed policy statements must be run through the SCB Policy > Approval Process as outlined here http://www.conbio.org/Activities/ > Policy/ > The proposed statement on economic growth has never been put into > the policy > process--no one has ever submitted it to the process. > > > > 5. Brian says the election process is why we don't have a Government > Representative currently serving on the board. This is not entirely > correct. > Curtis Flather (US Forest Service) was elected to the position but > shortly > after the election the Department of the Interior issued new guidance > regarding employees serving as a board member of non-Federal > organizations > that have a business or potential business relationship with the > Department > or conduct activities regulated by the Department as part of their > official > duties. "The Department has determined that serving in an official > capacity > as a board member of such an organization has the potential to > undermine the > fairness of our acquisition and administrative processes and > possibly call > into question the integrity of the Department." Curtis initiated a > formal > ethics evaluation related to his participation on the BOG for the > Society of > Conservation Biology. After more than six months of back and forth, > he was > told by the ethics officers he could not serve. > > > > AT > > > > _______________________________________________________ > > > > Alan D. Thornhill, Ph.D., Executive Director | athornhill at conbio.org > > > > Society for Conservation Biology > > 1017 O Street NW > > Washington, DC 20001-4229 US > > voice: 1-202-234-4133 x102 > > fax: 1-703-995-4633 > > > www.conbio.org > > > > > > From: eess-bounces at list.conbio.org [mailto:eess- > bounces at list.conbio.org] On > Behalf Of brianczech at juno.com > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:11 PM > To: Eess at list.conbio.org > Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] BOG de-authorization of > WGEESS; > SCB elections > > > > Dear members of the Ex-Working Group for Ecological Economics and > Sustainability Science (WGEESS), > > > > Many of you are probably surprised at my silence since the SCB > Board of > Governors voted "against authorization" of the WGEESS. I can > assure you > that my silence has been the result of an extremely busy schedule, not > indifference. > > > > The BOG's vote, and the language used to relay it to us, was > puzzling if for > no other reason than the WGEESS had already been authorized, having > completed the official process that SCG working groups go through > for such > purposes. It is more accurate to say that the working group was > "de-authorized" in Tennessee. In any event, the formal status of the > working group is being worked on by Mike Larson and Rob Dietz, > WGEESS Chair > and Past Chair at the time of the BOG decision. I trust their > judgments - > with member inputs - with the redrafting of the charter and so forth. > > > > I would like to express a certain sense of regret to the numerous > members > who joined the working group at my urging, many of whom had to join > the SCB > itself in order to do so. Many of you felt that the working group > was a > promising venue in which to work collaboratively on the ecological > economics > of biodiversity conservation, including the ecological macroeconomics > demonstrating the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity > conservation. Many of you were, and are, tired of the win-win > political > rhetoric that "there is no conflict between growing the economy and > protecting the environment," and saw the WGEESS as a refreshing > island of > ecological reality in a sea of political expedience. Most of us - > I think > the vast majority of us - recognized an SCB position on economic > growth as > an important contribution to refuting the fallacious win-win > rhetoric. We > worked hard on developing and advancing such a position for the SCB at > large, including but not limited to its BOG, to consider adopting. > (I'll > attach the position here as a reminder.) The action of the BOG at the > annual conference was a setback because it amounts to a large > "transaction > cost," in a sense, that we must pay to get the draft position and > other > WGEESS initiatives back into the mix. > > > > With that in mind, I have several observations that I think should > be useful > going forward. > > > > Because many of you joined the SCB simply to work with us in the > WGEESS, > some or many of you are probably considering dropping your SCB > membership > for 2009. I would encourage you to remain SCB members, at least at > the $20, > non-journal level. Regarding this economic growth issue, the tide is > clearly turning toward ecological reality in the SCB and will only > continue > to do so as SCB members become more familiar with the overwhelming > theoretical and empirical evidence underpinning our proposed > position on > economic growth, as well as the widespread international support > for the > common-sense ethical dimensions of our proposed position. So > please retain > your membership and, if anything, get more active, more vocal, more > participatory within the various SCB subunits, so we can move more > quickly > on these issues. I think we all realize that our planet's > biodiversity is > plunging precipitously while "leaders" in and out of the SCB belabor > themselves with antiquated political "correctness." > > > > Most of us have heard that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." > Lawbreakers > go to jail, whether they know the law or not. Regarding those SCB > office-holders who conveniently refuse to study and therefore > recognize the > thermodynamic basis for limits to growth and the ecologically > macroeconomic > implications, we might say, "Ignorance of the natural laws is no > excuse." > If they're not going to lead on this issue, they'll need to get out > of the > way because we will. They have had numerous years now since some > of us > began publishing and lecturing on this topic, as applied precisely to > biodiversity conservation, some years back. Some of them have > literally and > even adamantly refused to even consider the topic, yet have > consistently > weighed in against our initiatives! That's not acceptable for > officials who > represent SCB members. > > > > Another thing we should all be aware of is that the "vote" to de- > authorize > the WGEESS was scarcely a vote and barely prevailed. Although I'd > venture > to say that none of us outside the BOG have seen an actual tally - and > perhaps none exists - apparently the vote was 7-5. Some of those > who voted > to de-authorize will themselves be de-authorized from BOG business > as their > terms expire next year (or may have already expired after the > Tennessee > meeting). Although the number of abstentions was a curious feature > of this > vote, we should not be at all discouraged by such a small number of > negative > votes. > > > > I hesitate to enter into the realm of professional society > sociology and > psychology, yet it is also important to realize that there is a > large amount > of political baggage preventing some office-holders from approving > of the > WGEESS. I am personally very aware of some of this baggage, but a > public > listserve is not the place to put it on detailed display. Let me > just say > that some SCB folks, including BOG members, have made hasty > statements in > the past and entrenched themselves into positions that don't square > with the > ecological economics of biodiversity conservation. They may view a > retreat > from such positions as a "loss of face," even though > reconsideration and > admission of error is far more dignified than intransigence. > > > > Of course, there are also territorial interests in any professional > society, > to the effect that any subunit appearing to expand in an unprecedented > fashion (such as the WGEESS did) may appear threatening to the > interests of > others. This too has played a major role in the opposition to the > WGEESS. > > > > None of this should come as a surprise though - this is standard > "fuzz" in > political decision-making. However, it should encourage us that the > opposition to the WGEESS and the proposed position on economic > growth are > founded less on legitimate concerns than on sociological and > psychological > weaknesses. > > > > So, let's not be discouraged and let's continue to fill the niche > we have > filled from the beginning. SCB needs this niche to be filled > properly, and > more importantly we need to succeed, in and out of SCB, if > biodiversity is > to be stabilized at a reasonably strong level. > > > > I would also encourage our members to get involved in the SCB BOG > nominations process. BOG nominations have been an utter travesty of > democratic principle in recent years; recall the oligarchic details > of the > nominations for "Government Representative" in 2007 (noting too > that we have > no Government Representative on the BOG as a result). The nominations > process must be more inclusive, transparent, and representative of SCB > members. Ex-BOG member Tom Fleischer and others have pointed this > out many > times. This need for nominations reform goes for the BOG and some > of the > other SCB subunits as well. > > > > I personally am neutral on accepting a nomination for the BOG. The > only > position in the 2008 round that I would qualify for is SCB > President because > the others are for NGO and academia representatives. (I do have > NGO and > academic roles but, with full-time duties as a Conservation > Biologist in > civil service, surely full-time NGO and academic figures will > prevail for > those positions.) I am exceedingly busy, and I was one of the > victims of > the oligarchical nominations process in 2007. The same outcome > could occur > in 2008, for the reasons outlined above. Probably the only way I > would get > on the ballot is if a very large SCB contingent nominated me. > > > > There should be other options for SCB president nominees who have the > wherewithal to explicitly refute the win-win rhetoric and lead the > conservation biology community into a formal refutation, as aligned > with > other professional natural resources societies that have done > likewise. If > not, we will only redouble our efforts in other SCB subunit arenas and > venues. > > > > Finally, I would like to say that I firmly - now more than ever - > believe in > the prospect and indeed the probability of the professional natural > resource > societies concurring on the trade-off between economic growth and > environmental protection, including biodiversity conservation, and > providing > a foundation for a new, vigorous, effective conservation movement as I > described in Bioscience last year > (http://steadystate.org/Foundation-of-a-New-Conservation- > Movement.pdf) . I > strongly encourage you to revisit this prospect and to participate > to the > fullest feasible extent in making it happen. You can see what > progress has > already been made at http://www.steadystate.org/ > CASSEPositionOnEG.html . > > > > Cheers, Brian > > Brian Czech, Ph.D., President > Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy > The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: > http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new > heights! Click > now! > > > > _____________________________________________________________ > Click here to learn more about nursing jobs. > > _______________________________________________ > 11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, > Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in 北京 > (Beijing), China. > More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 > > Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global > community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation > Biology today! www.conbio.org/join > > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > > > ______________________________________________ > *11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, > Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China. > More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 > *Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global > community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation > Biology today! www.conbio.org/join > __________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess ______________________________________________ *11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China. More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 *Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology today! www.conbio.org/join __________________________________ EESS mailing list EESS at list.conbio.org http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess From brianczech at juno.com Mon Oct 27 10:59:37 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:59:37 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Geography of Globalization - tenure track at UC-SB Message-ID: <20081027.135937.26266.6@webmail21.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- > Dear Colleagues, > > Please forward the job announcement below to potentially interested > folks. Thanks. > > Cheers, > David > > -- > David L. Carr > Associate Professor > Department of Geography > 1832 Ellison Hall > UC Santa Barbara (UCSB) > Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 > > > UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA, Department of Geography, > invites applications for a tenure-track position at the Assistant > Professor level in the Geography of Globalization with an emphasis > on its economic dimensions. Social scientists from disciplines such > as economics, regional science, political science, sociology, > demography, or anthropology are also encouraged to apply. A common > denominator of many of the most pressing issues facing humanity is > the rapid increase in global and regional connectivity that permits > large-scale, cross-boundary socio-economic interaction. The spatial > mobility of people, commodities, disease, pollution, cultural > attitudes, and technological innovations all contribute to complex > multi-scale interactions that give rise to issues as diverse as > national/regional economic insecurity, the economic impacts of > hazardous events, the economics of pollutants and greenhouse gases, > the management of infectious diseases, and the globalization of > commodity and labor markets. The successful candidate will tackle > pioneering research problems associated with these multi-scale > interactions, employing core geographic concepts such as scale, > diffusion, networks, spatial interaction, and regionalization. A > Ph.D. is required by the date of appointment. The Department has > strengths in three broadly defined areas: human-environment > relations; modeling, measurement, and computation; and earth system > science. The position also provides opportunities for interactions > with UCSB?s Spatial Center and the Center for Global & > International Studies. The department is especially interested in > candidates who can contribute to the diversity and excellence of > the academic community through research, teaching, and service. The > application deadline is *December 8, 2008*, the starting date is > July 1, 2009. Qualified applicants should send their complete > curriculum vitae, statement of research and teaching interests, and > names of three referees with addresses preferably by email to > global_search at geog.ucsb.edu, or by mail to Search Committee, > Department of Geography, University of California, Santa Barbara, > CA 93106-4060. To learn more about the department, visit our > website at www.geog.ucsb.edu . An EO/AA > Employer. > Dawn Cassandra Parker Assistant Professor, Department of Computational Social Science, Kransnow Institute for Advanced Study; Affiliate, Departments of Environmental Science and Policy, Geography, and Geoinformation and Earth Systems Science George Mason University 374 Research 1 4400 University Drive, MS 6B2 Fairfax, VA, USA 22030 +1-703-993-4640 (phone) +1-703-993-9290 (fax) dparker3 at gmu dot edu http://mason.gmu.edu/~dparker3 _____________________________________________________________ Compete with the big boys. Click here to find products to benefit your business. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3m7tDue5MEg52ZNmeMAqFmPjkyC6WpqvltmhDOg0mlwxQHDW/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081027/6f01da73/attachment-0001.htm From njs6f at virginia.edu Mon Oct 27 12:01:30 2008 From: njs6f at virginia.edu (Nancy Sherman) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:01:30 -0400 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] =?windows-1252?q?=93Five-Star_G?= =?windows-1252?q?reen_Hypocrisy=3F=94_and_steady_state_economy?= In-Reply-To: References: <20081024.114115.27111.1@webmail05.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: I think that tours of environmentally important and endangered areas for current and potential large donors to a conservation organization is an extremely good idea. Without tours like this, many people never would have a chance to see what is at stake. The tour leaders no doubt include wildlife and plant biologists who can raise awareness not only of the participants, but of their friends, through photographs and word of mouth. The cost in terms of environmental impact may not be a huge price to pay for the long-term benefit. With apologies for adding to your Inbox - Nancy Sherman On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 11:05 AM, McArd Mlotha wrote: > Hello Brian, > > It looks genuine to me. Check the following link: > http://www.worldwildlife.org/travel/2009/Africa/WWFTripitem7467.html > > Joseph > > > *"brianczech at juno.com" on Friday, October 24, 2008 > at 11:41 AM -0500 wrote:* > Does anyone know about the factual merits of this article called "Five-Star > Green Hypocrisy?" The author writes, "carbon charlatanism has come to town > in the form of the World Wildlife Fund's luxury getaway called 'Around the > World: A Private Jet Expedition'? "For a price tag that starts at $64,950 > per person, travelers will meet at the Ritz-Carlton in Orlando, Fla. on > April 6, 2009 and then fly to 'remote corners' of the world on a 'specially > outfitted jet that carries just 88 passengers in business-class comfort'." > (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,435202,00.html ) > > I happened upon this article quite incidentally while reading a different > article describing how, one by one, leading sustainability thinkers are > advocating a steady state economy ( > http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,443755,00.html). The author of the > article was not friendly to this movement, and found as ammunition the > "Green Hypocrisy" link. In other words, he lumped all the conservation > entities into one bunch and used the alleged WWF luxury flights as a > bulls-eye to target us all. > > Someone out there please tell us its' not so! This is just when many of us > were wondering if the WWF-UK, at least, was becoming the heroic conservation > organization we've been looking for to support. Earlier this year WWF-UK > published the groundbreaking "Weathercocks and Signposts" describing how > conservation organizations were missing the boat - and catching the plane? > - by playing into the win-win rhetoric of combining economic growth with > environmental protection. Presumably the WWF luxury jet expeditions are > being conducted by a WWF entity other than the UK version?? > > Anyway, if this is a true report, this is the last thing we needed in the > conservation biology community and in the broader conservation movement. > Especially at this point in economic history! > > > Brian Czech, Ph.D., President > Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy > The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: > http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . > > _____________________________________________________________ > Learn about VA loan programs and benefits. Click now. > ______________________________________________ > *11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: > Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China. > More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 > *Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global > community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology > today! www.conbio.org/join > __________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > McArd Joseph Mlotha > Program Manager > Center for Tropical Ecology & Conservation (CTEC) > Antioch University New England > 40 Avon Street > Keene, NH 03431 > Tel: 603 357 3122 Ext 2348 Cell: 508 373 3819 > Fax: 603 357-0718 Attention ES Dept. > Web page: http://www.centerfortropicalecology.org/students/mlotha.cfm > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ______________________________________________ > *11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: > Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China. > More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 > *Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global > community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology > today! www.conbio.org/join > __________________________________ > EESS mailing list > EESS at list.conbio.org > http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess > -- Nancy J. Sherman Environmental Sciences Department University of Virginia P.O. Box 400123 Charlottesville, VA 22904 434-924-3186 ph 434-982-2137 fax njs6f at virginia.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081027/9c388bc1/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Mon Oct 27 13:08:00 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:08:00 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: PhD opportunities at ASU Message-ID: <20081027.160800.24707.0@webmail05.dca.untd.com> ++++++++ The ecoSERVICES Group at Arizona State University (www.ecoservices.asu.edu) welcomes applications from prospective PhD students interested in the resilience and sustainability of coupled human-ecological systems, the economics of (renewable) natural resource management and decision-theoretic approaches to the management and valuation of ecosystem services. This is an opportunity for students to develop competence across applied ecology, economics, and systems modeling. Funding is available for research in fishery management (Abbott, Fenichel), management of wildlife and zoonotic diseases (Fenichel), international trade and the dispersal of potentially harmful species (Perrings), resilience of urban infrastructures (Perrings), conservation of ecosystem services (Kinzig). Preliminary inquiries may be made to individual faculty, but applications need to be submitted through either the School of Life Sciences (http://sols.asu.edu/grad/index.php) or the School of Sustainability (http://schoolofsustainability.asu.edu/degrees/program_PhD.php). The deadline for applications is 15 December 2008. Preferred qualifications: M.S. in applied ecology, economics or related field, though highly qualified B.S./B.A. students will be considered. Comfort with mathematics, statistics and/or econometrics: students will be expected to develop mathematical and/or statistical models. Strong communication and writing skills, GPA, and GRE scores. _____________________________________________________________ Get everything you need to hook up your own wireless network by clicking now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3npyAkjkhZLdkr7hrsHEllPAjPrLVIr8NUNgsjhGjPZLx4Ko/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081027/5f339eda/attachment.htm From larson.grapids at gmail.com Mon Oct 27 14:39:05 2008 From: larson.grapids at gmail.com (Mike Larson) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:39:05 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] SCB elections [WAS: BOG de-authorization...] Message-ID: <53dd27b60810271439q63e57704x2e4510c45513e4a1@mail.gmail.com> If the problems with SCB nominations and elections that were mentioned by Brian and detailed by Oliver have not been addressed, I agree that a group should gather to formally propose resolutions. The issues, however, are very general, so I think the effort should be broader than the WGEESS. In fact, however unfortunate, I think a perception of the effort being coordinated or even initiated by the WGEESS could negatively influence its success. Mike On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:29 AM, wrote: > Many thanks to Brian for beginning this conversation. So, where does this > leave us? As Oliver states: "The Constitution and Bylaws may be modified > by a majority of the members present and voting at any scheduled general > meeting of the Society (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 24)." How do we get the > membership informed - and must we wait until the next annual meeting for a > vote? Given the location of the next several meetings (i.e., outside of > the U.S.), I suspect very few, if any, U.S. and state government rep's will > be able to attend. We need a strategy and a venue for airing these > issues among the larger membership, and an opportunity for all voices to be > heard. > > ____________________________________ > Carolyn R. Scafidi, Acting Branch Manager > Federal Activities Branch > Western Washington Office > U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service > 510 Desmond Dr. SE, Suite 102 > Lacey, WA 98503 > (360) 753-4068 > carolyn_scafidi at fws.gov > > "History shows clearly that humanity is moved forward not by people who > stop at every moment in an attempt to gauge the ultimate success of their > venture, but by those who think deeply about what is right and put all > their energy into it." -- M. Gell-Mann > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081027/66a016f9/attachment-0001.html From brianczech at juno.com Tue Oct 28 06:06:12 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 13:06:12 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] "Five-Star Green Hypocrisy?" and steady state economy Message-ID: <20081028.090612.14322.6@webmail08.dca.untd.com> Yes Nancy, I think we?d all agree that tours are important. But $69,000 tours boasting luxury accommodations are heavy on the ecological footprint, send the wrong message to colleagues and donors, and, as we?ve witnessed here, subject legitimate conservation efforts to charges of hypocrisy. I believe the net effect for biodiversity conservation is quite negative. Ironically, over the weekend I was reading the Global Footprint Network?s annual report, which mentions several WWF units undertaking efforts to lessen their carbon and general ecological footprint?s and to educate constituents accordingly! Obviously, in a big and confederated organization, the various units don?t necessarily march to the same drum. But how does it look for one to preach sustainability while another practices profligacy? This real or perceived hypocrisy will continue to be a major political issue for the conservation community, and it reflects the broader controversy about the relationship between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. This whole episode brings to mind the ?conservation? cruise where the ?guests were whisked away on a luxury bus to Lilianfels, where more comforts awaited in the form of cocktails, feather beds, gourmet jelly beans, and two types of chocolate mousse.? See "Roll Over Adam Smith:" http://www.steadystate.org/Roll_Over_Adam_Smith.pdf Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . -- "Nancy Sherman" wrote: I think that tours of environmentally important and endangered areas for current and potential large donors to a conservation organization is an extremely good idea. Without tours like this, many people never would have a chance to see what is at stake. The tour leaders no doubt include wildlife and plant biologists who can raise awareness not only of the participants, but of their friends, through photographs and word of mouth. The cost in terms of environmental impact may not be a huge price to pay for the long-term benefit. With apologies for adding to your Inbox - Nancy Sherman On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 11:05 AM, McArd Mlotha wrote: Hello Brian, It looks genuine to me. Check the following link: http://www.worldwildlife.org/travel/2009/Africa/WWFTripitem7467.html Joseph "brianczech at juno.com" on Friday, October 24, 2008 at 11:41 AM -0500 wrote:Does anyone know about the factual merits of this article called "Five-Star Green Hypocrisy?" The author writes, "carbon charlatanism has come to town in the form of the World Wildlife Fund's luxury getaway called 'Around the World: A Private Jet Expedition'? "For a price tag that starts at $64,950 per person, travelers will meet at the Ritz-Carlton in Orlando, Fla. on April 6, 2009 and then fly to 'remote corners' of the world on a 'specially outfitted jet that carries just 88 passengers in business-class comfort'." (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,435202,00.html ) I happened upon this article quite incidentally while reading a different article describing how, one by one, leading sustainability thinkers are advocating a steady state economy (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,443755,00.html). The author of the article was not friendly to this movement, and found as ammunition the "Green Hypocrisy" link. In other words, he lumped all the conservation entities into one bunch and used the alleged WWF luxury flights as a bulls-eye to target us all. Someone out there please tell us its' not so! This is just when many of us were wondering if the WWF-UK, at least, was becoming the heroic conservation organization we've been looking for to support. Earlier this year WWF-UK published the groundbreaking "Weathercocks and Signposts" describing how conservation organizations were missing the boat - and catching the plane? - by playing into the win-win rhetoric of combining economic growth with environmental protection. Presumably the WWF luxury jet expeditions are being conducted by a WWF entity other than the UK version?? Anyway, if this is a true report, this is the last thing we needed in the conservation biology community and in the broader conservation movement. Especially at this point in economic history! Brian Czech, Ph.D., PresidentCenter for the Advancement of the Steady State EconomyThe CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . _____________________________________________________________Learn about VA loan programs and benefits. Click now.______________________________________________*11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China.More information at: www.conbio.org/2009*Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology today! www.conbio.org/join__________________________________EESS mailing listEESS at list.conbio.orghttp://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------McArd Joseph MlothaProgram ManagerCenter for Tropical Ecology & Conservation (CTEC)Antioch University New England40 Avon StreetKeene, NH 03431Tel: 603 357 3122 Ext 2348 Cell: 508 373 3819Fax: 603 357-0718 Attention ES Dept.Web page: http://www.centerfortropicalecology.org/students/mlotha.cfm --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ______________________________________________ *11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China. More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 *Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology today! www.conbio.org/join __________________________________ EESS mailing list EESS at list.conbio.org http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess -- Nancy J. Sherman Environmental Sciences Department University of Virginia P.O. Box 400123 Charlottesville, VA 22904 434-924-3186 ph 434-982-2137 fax njs6f at virginia.edu _____________________________________________________________ Click to make millions by owning your own franchise. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3m6iSFoaBFdkOua924U5gTh8wv3QYRxIZaRBQavZ6J3uYBJK/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081028/b01e212a/attachment.htm From fauna at pngp.it Tue Oct 28 08:50:10 2008 From: fauna at pngp.it (Achaz von Hardenberg) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 16:50:10 +0100 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] =?iso-8859-1?q?=5BSpam=5D_Re=3A?= =?iso-8859-1?q?__=93Five-Star_Green_Hypocrisy=3F=94_and_steady_state_econ?= =?iso-8859-1?q?omy?= In-Reply-To: <20081028.090612.14322.6@webmail08.dca.untd.com> References: <20081028.090612.14322.6@webmail08.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: The greatest of the irony is that on top of the WWF page sponsoring the private jet trip there is a banner with a guy on a bike preaching: "Reduce your Carbon footprint"! Achaz On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 11:05 AM, McArd Mlotha wrote: Hello Brian, It looks genuine to me. Check the following link: http:// www.worldwildlife.org/travel/2009/Africa/WWFTripitem7467.html Joseph Dr. Achaz von Hardenberg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------- Centro Studi Fauna Alpina - Alpine Wildlife Research Centre Servizio Sanitario e della Ricerca Scientifica Parco Nazionale Gran Paradiso, Degioz, 11, 11010-Valsavarenche (Ao), Italy E-mail: achaz.hardenberg at pngp.it fauna at pngp.it Skype: achazhardenberg Tel.: +39.0165.905783 Fax: +39.0165.905506 Mobile: +39.328.8736291 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081028/6bed6d34/attachment-0001.html From btp22 at cam.ac.uk Thu Oct 30 07:28:23 2008 From: btp22 at cam.ac.uk (Ben Phalan) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 14:28:23 +0000 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] "Five-Star Green Hypocrisy?" and steady state economy In-Reply-To: References: <20081028.090612.14322.6@webmail08.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: <4909C487.506@cam.ac.uk> This is a genuine dilemma which no conservationist can ignore, but it's not a black and white issue. I think this issue is a useful microcosm of the dilemma facing conservationists, and the dilemma facing this group. Members of this group and others have done a great job in showing that economic growth is, in general, in inherent contradiction to biodiversity conservation. It does not necessarily follow that the most effective lobbying strategy is oppositional. I suspect that the reluctance of some in SCB to endorse the WGEESS was partly because oppositional tactics risk alienating the conservation movement from the very institutions it most needs to influence. I'm inclined to agree with Nancy that the costs of flying rich donors to experience first-hand some of the biodiversity we stand to lose may well be worth it, if it generates greater support for conservation from those donors. The risk is that it opens up organisations like WWF to charges of hypocrisy, and does little to challenge the faulty priorities of society. However, if organisations like WWF don't work with big industry, they risk having little influence at all. The conservation movement has little power on the world stage. In that context, it may be more effective for it to use what influence it has within the flawed structures which exist than to stand outside throwing stones. Of course, we should work to raise awareness of what's wrong with the global economic system, but if we're too idealistic we risk being ignored and achieving nothing. Does this group have a strategy for how it's going to increase awareness of the problem of economic growth, *without* switching the general public, or companies, or wealthy donors, off the conservation message? Will its efforts conflict with, or complement, efforts to recognise the value of ecosystem services in markets? I'm guessing that those are the sorts of questions which those opposed to recognising the WGEESS are concerned about. On a related note, see a letter by David Gr?millet, "Paradox of flying to meetings to protect the environment", published today (Nature 455, 1175). He points to the contradiction of conservation biologists accumulating enormous carbon footprints flying to field sites in developing countries, and lobbyists doing the same as they commute between conservation meetings on different continents. However, he also quotes a German environmental campaigner: "Industry would be all too pleased if we did not attend distant meetings because we refuse to board aeroplanes." All the best, Ben -- Achaz von Hardenberg wrote: > The greatest of the irony is that on top of the WWF page sponsoring the > private jet trip there is a banner with a guy on a bike preaching: > "Reduce your Carbon footprint"! > > Achaz -- Ben Phalan http://www.zoo.cam.ac.uk/zoostaff/csg/bphalan.html From chuckw at coastrange.org Thu Oct 30 10:44:04 2008 From: chuckw at coastrange.org (Chuck Willer) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:44:04 -0700 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Ehrlich and Gouldner - "Is Current Consumption Excessive". Daly and Farley's texbook Ecological Economics. The financial crisis and taboo. In-Reply-To: <4909C487.506@cam.ac.uk> References: <20081028.090612.14322.6@webmail08.dca.untd.com> <4909C487.506@cam.ac.uk> Message-ID: <20081030174359.6C298C472@mailman.intermedia.net> EESS folks, I just read (re-read?) the Ehrlich and Gouldner article in Conservation Biology (CB) from October, 2007 "Is Current Consumption Excessive, A General Framework and Some Indications for the United States". Later in the same issue of CB, Daly et el critiques the Arrow et el paper in the Journal of Economic Perspectives titled "Are We Consuming Too Much?". To which Arrow and his co-authors respond. The Daly et el critique of the Arrow et el article is an excellent summation of the Dalyist ecological economic perspective. Given these times of global financial crisis I could not help but be struck by the fact that the Ehrlich-Gouldner framework, like almost all of mainstream economics, says nothing about finance, money, debt, and financial capital. Ehrlich and Gouldner do recognize the notion of "capital" in its now fashionable versions of natural, built, and social. Capital in this perspective is viewed as a stock. Interestingly, the authors elevate the notion of investment to a central place in their framework. Yet, there is no mention of money, debt, finance (all of which is implied in "investment"), and the myriad institutions associated with the financial world. To Ehrlich and Gouldner, goods and services are in markets and things are priced wrong. Bad pricing due to externalities, etc. distorts the composition of consumption and the world is on an unsustainable path. To Ehrlich and Gouldner to solution is correct investment. It seems to me that if investment is the key to sustainability then the Ehrlich-Gouldner framework should be built on a reform proposal addressing financial capital and the institutional arrangements surrounding such capital. But such a proposal goes to the heart of capitalist dynamics; a taboo issue in our culture. To the credit of Daly and Farley in their textbook Ecological Economics: Principles and Applications - macroeconomics and finance are addressed in Chapter 16. There they visit the IS-LM model in which Hicks and others melded Keynesian economics with neoclassical production-consumption theory. In Chapter 19, Daly and Farley visit international [financial] flows and macroeconomic policy, including financial crises. Throughout the chapters addressing macro-money-finance issues their emphasis is on policy and not the institutional-societal structures that gives rise to financial outcomes i.e. bad policies and investment decisions. I visit the above in light of today's global financial crisis and perhaps the momentary return to issues of the role of the financial world in shaping growth and the real economy. Post-Keynesian economics, in the tradition of Marx, defines capital as a claim of control. As such, capital's essence lies in its possession by someone to the exclusion of others. I should note that the Daly-Farley textbooks glossary does not contain the word capitalism. It is my opinion that the issues of economic growth and global sustainability are, at bottom, issues solvable only by a thorough revamping of the systems of money-debt, finance, and the institutions that mediate and facilitate their use in the world. I believe that ecological economics has not adequately explored the complex mechanism of economic growth via the structure and function of financial capital, banking, capital investment, etc. It goes without saying that such an exploration will address the issue of equity. Perhaps the ecological economics world is affected by a taboo on what is acceptable to discuss. If nothing else such a taboo is bad science. Chuck Willer -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081030/8c23b394/attachment.html From Wayne.Barstad at dnr.state.mn.us Thu Oct 30 11:01:10 2008 From: Wayne.Barstad at dnr.state.mn.us (Wayne Barstad) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:01:10 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] "Five-Star Green Hypocrisy?"and steady state economy In-Reply-To: <4909C487.506@cam.ac.uk> References: <20081028.090612.14322.6@webmail08.dca.untd.com> <4909C487.506@cam.ac.uk> Message-ID: <4909B016.ABAC.00A5.0@dnr.state.mn.us> If we apply some very basic systems thinking here (extrapolating from Walker and Salt, 2006), the dilemma may go away. In ecosystems, functional diversity is a good thing. Different organisms in functional groups respond differently to the ecosystem and disturbances to that system. For example, some grazers may thrive in cool conditions while others require warmth. Their respective populations rise and fall with changes in climate, but the service provided by the functional group is sustained. Similarly, conservation organizations are different organisms that form a functional group that promotes conservation within an economic system. Each organization responds differently to the challenge. The World Wildlife Fund jets off to raise money and influence decision-makers while the Neighborhood Energy Consortium provides opportunities for local folks to drive less and insulate their homes. If the WWF falters and loses its support, the local groups continue on, maintaining the conservation function. This response diversity is critical to the conservation movement's resilience. What's important is that we in the functional group not allow FOX and the anti-conservationists to define conservationists as being "hypocritical." There is a need for different and diverse approaches to conserving the Earth's vast resources. ..wayne >>> Ben Phalan 10/30/2008 9:28 AM >>> This is a genuine dilemma which no conservationist can ignore, but it's not a black and white issue. I think this issue is a useful microcosm of the dilemma facing conservationists, and the dilemma facing this group. Members of this group and others have done a great job in showing that economic growth is, in general, in inherent contradiction to biodiversity conservation. It does not necessarily follow that the most effective lobbying strategy is oppositional. I suspect that the reluctance of some in SCB to endorse the WGEESS was partly because oppositional tactics risk alienating the conservation movement from the very institutions it most needs to influence. I'm inclined to agree with Nancy that the costs of flying rich donors to experience first-hand some of the biodiversity we stand to lose may well be worth it, if it generates greater support for conservation from those donors. The risk is that it opens up organisations like WWF to charges of hypocrisy, and does little to challenge the faulty priorities of society. However, if organisations like WWF don't work with big industry, they risk having little influence at all. The conservation movement has little power on the world stage. In that context, it may be more effective for it to use what influence it has within the flawed structures which exist than to stand outside throwing stones. Of course, we should work to raise awareness of what's wrong with the global economic system, but if we're too idealistic we risk being ignored and achieving nothing. Does this group have a strategy for how it's going to increase awareness of the problem of economic growth, *without* switching the general public, or companies, or wealthy donors, off the conservation message? Will its efforts conflict with, or complement, efforts to recognise the value of ecosystem services in markets? I'm guessing that those are the sorts of questions which those opposed to recognising the WGEESS are concerned about. On a related note, see a letter by David Gr?millet, "Paradox of flying to meetings to protect the environment", published today (Nature 455, 1175). He points to the contradiction of conservation biologists accumulating enormous carbon footprints flying to field sites in developing countries, and lobbyists doing the same as they commute between conservation meetings on different continents. However, he also quotes a German environmental campaigner: "Industry would be all too pleased if we did not attend distant meetings because we refuse to board aeroplanes." All the best, Ben -- Achaz von Hardenberg wrote: > The greatest of the irony is that on top of the WWF page sponsoring the > private jet trip there is a banner with a guy on a bike preaching: > "Reduce your Carbon footprint"! > > Achaz -- Ben Phalan http://www.zoo.cam.ac.uk/zoostaff/csg/bphalan.html ______________________________________________ *11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China. More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 *Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology today! www.conbio.org/join __________________________________ EESS mailing list EESS at list.conbio.org http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess From pergams at uic.edu Sat Nov 1 17:14:57 2008 From: pergams at uic.edu (Pergams, Oliver Robert) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 19:14:57 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] more transparent & democratic SCB electoral processes Message-ID: <4834.67.174.12.96.1225584897.squirrel@webmail.uic.edu> There has been substantial discussion of my post below on the EESS listserv. The catalyst for the discussion was the SCB BOG de-authorization of WGEESS, but I hope my post is relevant on its own merits as well. ***************** One thing that seems clear (at least to me) is that the SCB electoral process should be more transparent and democratic. Here are some ideas to go in that direction: 1. I don't think there is currently a formal Nominating Committee, rather Board nominations are part of the duty of the Governance Committee. The Governance Committee consists of "...the three most immediate past presidents and any other members appointed by the Chair" (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 3) and one of their duties is to "...prepare slates of nominees for elected offices of the Board of Governors" (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 4). 2. Perhaps a new Nominating Committee should be peeled off from the Governance Committee. This new committee might still include the President-Elect and a couple of Board members he/she appoints (for guidance and continuity), but it might also include a few new, non-Board members. The new committee members would also be selected by membership vote at the Board election. This is the way many other societies work. 3. If I understand correctly, currently the Governance Committee reduces each ballot to two candidates no matter how many were nominated by membership. I do not think two candidates should be a firm limit. I think a new Nominating Committee should slate all qualified candidates and let the membership decide. 4. I don't think that SCB provides the actual vote count after an election. If this is correct, I'm guessing it may be because voter turnout is sometimes embarrassing. If poor turnout is the reason maybe knowledge of it and embarrassment among the membership would improve it. In any case, if this is current procedure it is highly opaque and should stop. Not only candidates but the membership should be made aware of the vote totals immediately after the election. The Constitution and Bylaws may be modified by a majority of the members present and voting at any scheduled general meeting of the Society (SCB Cons. & Bylaws, Sec. 24). _____________________ Oliver Pergams, Ph.D. Dept. of Biological Sciences (MC 066) University of Illinois at Chicago 845 W. Taylor St. Chicago, IL 60607-7060 USA 1.312.996.5446 www.pergams.com www.videophilia.org From luisgutierrez at peoplepc.com Sun Nov 2 20:51:35 2008 From: luisgutierrez at peoplepc.com (Luis Gutierrez) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 23:51:35 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Community Dimension of Sustainable Development Message-ID: <490E8357.80107@peoplepc.com> E-Journal of Solidarity, Sustainability, and Nonviolence * Global news and interdisciplinary analysis of human relations, human development, new technologies, emerging social and environmental issues, .... * Free subscription via Google Groups, monthly email notice with link to posted journal, free access to archive, free access to a 2000+ links directory .... The November 2008 issue has been posted: Community Dimension of Sustainable Development http://www.pelicanweb.org/solisustv04n11.html A series of articles on "dimensions of sustainable development" is being published. Please post and/or forward this notice to friends and colleagues who might be interested in the complex issues of personal development, human solidarity, and environmental sustainability. See the archive for links to previously posted issues (annotated with content outlines): May 2005 to October 2008 http://www.pelicanweb.org/solisust.html Any feedback is deeply appreciated. Sincerely, Luis ________________________ Luis T. Gutierrez, Ph.D. The Pelican Web Editor, Solidarity, Sustainability, and Nonviolence http://www.pelicanweb.org/solisust.html P.S. Do you need a good information researcher-writer? From brianczech at juno.com Tue Nov 4 06:41:14 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 14:41:14 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Position/Fisheries Economist at Seafish-UK Message-ID: <20081104.094114.10840.0@webmail17.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Job Opportunity Economist Salary range c.?30K - ?37K, depending on skills and experience SEAFISH Seafish is a UK body providing research and promotional support to the seafood industry. The organisation has an innovative, 'can do' approach which delivers a broad range of services and projects to stakeholders, including industry members and government. This is an opportunity for an experienced economist to join our economics department and contribute to the economics research and consulting programme which assists all elements of the seafood industry. The Role - Design, plan and conduct a fisheries economics research programme, to fulfil the current and future needs of industry and fisheries managers at UK and EU level. - Manage and undertake economic research projects, to deliver high quality, relevant outputs to external and internal customers. - Prepare and deliver government and industry briefings to deliver pertinent economic advice in support of policy decision making. - Secure, manage, plan and carry out consulting projects on behalf of the fish industry, local or national government clients to produce economic reports and to generate income. - Provide economic and strategic input for various UK and EU strategic and economic initiatives to ensure that the expertise of Seafish Economics is included in findings that support policy decisions. This post offers the opportunity to build on project management, modelling and business analysis skills, research and report writing, and build up profile within the industry and government through presenting research findings. You will work closely with members of industry in every type of seafood business, but with emphasis on the fishing fleet. There is scope to have a great deal of input into which projects you work on and how far you take them. Our involvement in research and analysis for the European Commission is increasing and work throughout the EU is likely to be required. This post is based in our Edinburgh office. Travel throughout the UK, Europe and occasionally world wide will be required. Driving licence required. The Candidate: - First degree in economics, business management or other numerate degree. - Post graduate degree in economics or MBA an advantage. - Experience of research design, data collection, analysis, report writing, preparing and delivering presentations, working in project teams and working with industry customers. Preferable to have professional experience of the seafood industry. - Excellent communication skills, written and verbal. Report writing, chairing research groups and giving presentations are key parts of role. - Strong report writing skills are required, together with advanced skills in the use of software packages for project planning, financial and statistical analysis, economic modelling and presentations. Knowledge and experience of econometric software would be advantageous. - Data collection and statistical data analysis experience required. - Fisheries experience not required but this or natural resource economics would an advantage. - Applicants from EU and EEA countries welcome, fluent written and spoken English required. Application forms and further details are available from our website (http://www.seafish.org/about/vacancies.asp?p=bj). Closing date 21 November 2008. For an informal chat, please contact Hazel Curtis, Chief Economist, +44 (0)131 524 8664. E-mail: h_curtis at seafish.co.uk Sea Fish Industry Authority 18 Logie Mill Logie Green Road Edinburgh EH7 4HS Telephone: +44 (0)131 524 8664 Fax No: +44 (0)131 524 8696 Seafish - supporting the seafood industry for a sustainable, profitable future Telephone (Edinburgh): 0131 558 3331 (Humberside): 01472 252 300 On the Web: www.seafish.org The industry's most comprehensive information source: http://sin.seafish.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "American Fisheries Society" group. To post to this group, send email to afs-fisheries at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to afs-fisheries-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/afs-fisheries?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- _____________________________________________________________ Save for the future with great IRA Funds. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3nIaFfrp7aZM3ewBmArVAbasOn6EgpSnSAbSmoKuL9p9vDHG/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081104/c2599ceb/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Nov 6 06:56:31 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 14:56:31 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Obamanomics and Biodiversity Conservation Message-ID: <20081106.095631.23587.0@webmail21.dca.untd.com> Barack Obama has the knowledge to put an end to the erosion of common sense that plagued the landscape of our political economy ? not to mention our landscape per se! - for the past couple of decades. The bipartisan rhetoric from the highest positions that ?there is no conflict between growing the economy and protecting the environment? led citizens to believe it, corporations to hide behind it, and shenanigans all over academia and the civil service. Obama might be the one to tell it like it is, based upon the excerpt (pasted below) from the article ?Obamanomics.? Of course, no presidential candidate is yet in a position to be a viable contender without putting forth a pro-growth agenda. Obama did that and will attempt to follow through. The best we can realistically hope for is some explicit, educational leadership on the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection (etc.), even while the growth is being facilitated via macroeconomic policy. It is still going to take a ground-up movement, which I believe is best founded upon the professional society position statement, to empower politicians of any party to provide real leadership on this topic; i.e., leadership that will temper consumer behavior and reform macroeconomic policies. Excerpt from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/magazine/24Obamanomics-t.html?pagewanted=print: ?Shortly after I boarded Obama?s campaign plane this month, one of his press aides warned me that the conversation might not last long. She explained that he was exhausted from two days of campaigning in Florida and might decide to nap as soon as he got on the plane. But a few minutes later he summoned me to the plane?s first-class section, evidently choosing an economics discussion over a DVD of ?Mad Men,? which was sitting on his side table. His eyes were tired, and he looked a good deal older than he had only four years ago, on the night that he became famous at the 2004 Democratic convention. But we ended up talking for an hour. After I returned to my seat, the press aide walked back to tell me that Obama had more to say. ?Two things,? he said, as we were standing outside the first-class bathroom. ?One, just because I think it really captures where I was going with the whole issue of balancing market sensibilities with moral sentiment. One of my favorite quotes is ? you know that famous Robert F. Kennedy quote about the measure of our G.D.P.?? I didn?t, I said. ?Well, I?ll send it to you, because it?s one of the most beautiful of his speeches,? Obama said. In it, Kennedy argues that a country?s health can?t be measured simply by its economic output. That output, he said, ?counts special locks for our doors and the jails for those who break them? but not ?the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play.? The second point Obama wanted to make was about sustainability. The current concerns about the state of the planet, he said, required something of a paradigm shift for economics. If we don?t make serious changes soon, probably in the next 10 or 15 years, we may find that it?s too late. Both of these points, I realized later, were close cousins of two of the weaker arguments that liberals have made in recent decades. Liberals have at times dismissed the enormous benefits that come with prosperity. And for decades some liberals have been wrongly predicting that economic growth was sure to leave the world without enough food or enough oil or enough something. Obama acknowledged as much, saying that technology had thus far always overcome any concerns about sustainability and that Kennedy?s notion had to be tempered with an appreciation of prosperity. What?s new about the current moment, however, is that both of these arguments are actually starting to look relevant. Based on the collective wisdom of scientists, global warming really does seem to be different from any previous environmental crisis. For the first time on record, meanwhile, economic growth has not translated into better living standards for most Americans. These are two enormous challenges that are part of the legacy of the Reagan Age. They will be waiting for the next president, whether he is Obama or McCain, and they?ll probably be around for another couple of presidents too.? Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . _____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3miigv9c3XK0kt7LWlKtAN2uJ8XL9dfHsG3RMqLNuSM7LCN2/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081106/79d49f98/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Fri Nov 7 05:39:33 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:39:33 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Announcement of a Call for Evidence by TEEB Message-ID: <20081107.083933.7439.0@webmail01.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- The project "The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity" (TEEB) has launched a Call for Evidence (CfE) on the website of the EU DG Environment. TEEB was launched as a consequence of the G8+5 Environmental Ministers meeting in March 2007 in Potsdam, Germany. Further background information on TEEB can be found here. The CfE for Phase Two of TEEB welcomes theoretical insights, but is particularly interested in empirical evidence and practical experience. It covers a range of topics, broadly ranging from the valuation of ecosystems, to national policy and local administration issues, to helping business and consumers understand the problem of biodiversity loss. The CfE is directed at a broad audience of scientists, policy-makers, NGO?s and anyone who has hands-on experience with the management of ecosystems and biodiversity. The Call for Evidence for TEEB can be found here. The link above will take you to a website where you will find preliminary Tables of Content for the various TEEB end reports. You can submit your evidence (literature, report, website, ?) via email or via a questionnaire, where you can provide your evidence in more detail. Your contributions are most welcome. For the foreseeable future, the CfE will remain open and be updated as necessary. Evidence submitted after a future closing date may still be considered. -- TEEB Scientific Coordination: teeb at ufz.deTEEB Background Information:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/index_en.htmTEEB Call for Evidence:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/call_evidence.htm _____________________________________________________________ Go the extra mile with a new pair of running shoes. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3nx7WJKa40VVqqGD999Agqt36fqeZRssf9WnxlIwVQYint0I/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081107/d78b916d/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Wed Nov 12 09:07:28 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 17:07:28 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Fisheries Extension/Economics Position at LSU - Postdoc or R.A. Message-ID: <20081112.120728.3313.10@webmail20.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- All, Please see the announcement below. We appreciate your assistance in getting this announcement to any qualified applicants. http://www.laseagrant.org/opps/employ.htm#researcher Thanks, Rex Caffey LSU CNREP/Louisiana Sea Grant Title: Postdoctoral Researcher/Research Associate 4 or 5 (Fisheries Extension Enhancement/50% Extension/50% Research) Location: Office of Sea Grant Development through Department of Agricultural Economics & Agribusiness/Center for Natural Resource Economics & Policy (CNREP) Funding for the position is provided by the Louisiana Sea Grant College Program through a Fisheries Extension Enhancement grant from the National Sea Grant College Program. The incumbent will work in conjunction with CNREP researchers (www.cnrep.lsu.edu) in support of the Louisiana Sea Grant Marine Extension Program (www.seagrantfish.lsu.edu). Required Qualifications: (Postdoctoral Researcher) Ph.D. in Resource Economics, Agricultural Economics, Fisheries Science, or a closely related field from an accredited college or university; (Research Assoc. 4 or 5) Master?s degree in Resource Economics, Agricultural Economics, Fisheries Science, or a closely related field from an accredited college or university with two years of related experience; (Research Assoc. 5) one additional year of related experience; (All Levels) ability to communicate and work effectively with a variety of audiences; possess a demonstrable record of expository writing for print media communications with technical, scientific, and lay audiences. Additional Qualifications Desired: Experience in survey work, statistics, and/or geographic information systems. Special Requirements: Ability and willingness to travel overnight and use personal vehicle. Responsibilities: formulates and conducts applied research and outreach activities that address socioeconomic aspects of coastal and marine resource policies with a major emphasis on Louisiana?s coastal fisheries; develops communications to inform coastal stakeholders about programs, policies, and activities of federal, state, and local resource managers; analyzes economic information and develops alternative scenarios for coastal fisheries management in Louisiana and the northern Gulf of Mexico; initiates effective educational programs and materials on the relationships between coastal habitats and fisheries production for youth and adult audiences; works collaboratively with Sea Grant marine extension faculty, other academic faculty, and other relevant public and private interests. Salary & Benefits: Salary will be commensurate with qualifications and experience. Louisiana State University has an attractive benefits package with a wide variety of benefit options. Benefits offered include retirement, multiple medical insurance options, supplemental insurances (dental, life, long-term disability, accident, vision, long-term care, etc.), Tax Saver Flexible Benefits Plan (saves tax dollars on some child care and medical expenses), university holidays (14 per year, typically includes a week off at Christmas), generous annual (vacation) and sick leave benefits, Employee Assistance Program, and possible educational leave and tuition exemption for coursework at campuses of the LSU System. Specific benefits depend on job category, percent effort and length of employment. An offer of employment is contingent on a satisfactory pre-employment background check. Application Deadline: (EXTENDED) September 15, 2008 or until a candidate is selected. Submit a letter of application, contact information, detailed curriculum vitae (including e-mail address), university transcripts, and the names and addresses of three professional references to: Dr. Rex H. Caffey, Professor and Director Center for Natural Resource Economics & Policy Department of Agricultural Economics & Agribusiness 101 Agricultural Administration Building Louisiana State University Ref: Log #1180 Baton Rouge, LA 70803 Phone: (225) 578-2393 Fax: (225) 578-2716 LSU IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER. _____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3miigdfElwJCqsSIAFlEphTeXBZFl6oGm0198gwYCHgEGN8w/?count=1234567890 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081112/061542b1/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Nov 13 08:59:28 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:59:28 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Faculty Positions in the Sustainability of Rural Landscapes Message-ID: <20081113.115928.7760.0@webmail02.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Two Faculty Positions in the Sustainability of Rural Landscapes Assistant and Associate/Full Professor W.K. Kellogg Biological Station and Dept of Sociology Michigan State University Michigan State University (MSU) seeks to fill two tenure-track faculty positions (one Assistant Professor and one Associate/Full Professor) in the area of Sustainability of Rural Landscapes. We seek individuals with expertise in environmental science and the relationships among ecology, technology, social change, and policy. These positions will enhance interdepartmental research in the Department of Sociology and at MSU, with particular focus on strengthening social science research at MSU's Kellogg Biological Station (KBS). Both positions will be joint between KBS and the Department of Sociology (SOC) with a tenure home in SOC and a possible affiliation with the Environmental Science and Policy Program (ESPP) at MSU. The positions will have appointments with the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station to support research. At least one of these positions is expected to be resident at KBS, a biological field station of Michigan State University (www.kbs.msu.edu) with a year-round resident faculty located ~65 miles from East Lansing. KBS hosts an NSF-supported LTER program on the ecology of row-crop systems (www.kbs.msu.edu/lter), a DOE-funded Great Lakes BioEnergy Research Center (GLBRC; www.glbrc.org) on the sustainability of biofuels, and is establishing a pasture-based dairy with support from the WK Kellogg Foundation. These facilities all support research on the sustainability of agricultural landscapes and the vitality of rural communities that involve KBS and campus-based faculty and other institutions, and are expected to provide research opportunities for both positions. The scholarly focus is environmental science and the relationships among ecology, technology, social change and policy; areas of emphasis include, but are not limited to, socio-ecological issues of agricultural landscapes and production systems, policy issues relevant to ecosystem services (biodiversity and introduced species), coupled human and natural systems, and the sustainability of bio-based economies, including alternative energy. These positions will complement existing strengths in ecology, environmental and agricultural science at KBS, the Department of Sociology, and social science across the University. The faculty candidates will teach undergraduate and graduate courses in sociology that contribute to educational programs at KBS and to one of the five focal research areas of the Department of Sociology (www.sociology.msu.edu). These are academic year appointments with a 60% research 40% teaching responsibility split. Applicants must have a Ph.D. and show evidence of the capacity to establish an extramurally-funded and interdisciplinary research program. Preference will be given to individuals with interdisciplinary research experience that can strengthen the research programs in both KBS and Sociology. International experience or demonstrated interest in international regions is an advantage. Questions and applications should be sent to sustainability at kbs.msu.edu, addressed to the Sustainability Search Committee, Department of Sociology, Michigan State University, with in the subject line. Applications should include a curriculum vita, statements of research and teaching interests (including current and long-term goals), and names and contact information for three references, sent electronically as a single pdf. Review of applications will begin on 15 December 2008 and will continue until an appropriate candidate is identified. Further information about KBS and SOC can be found at www.kbs.msu.edu and www.sociology.msu.edu. MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution; women and minorities are particularly welcome to apply. Date position is available: August 16, 2009 Organization: Michigan State University Departmental Representatives: Dr. Nan Johnson, Search Committee Co-Chair, Department of Sociology (johnsonn at msu.edu) Dr. G. Philip Robertson, Search Committee Co-Chair, Kellogg Biological Station (robertson at kbs.msu.edu) ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3miigzKeOj2fWWC8ZMLZRvmIdabx1LlrHVBDt315aRDPiMDS/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081113/d1b86f83/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Thu Nov 13 09:04:22 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:04:22 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Co-sign LETTER TO OBAMA FROM ONE OF EARTH'S LEADING ECOLOGISTS (St ephen R. Carpenter) Message-ID: <20081113.120422.7760.1@webmail02.dca.untd.com> EESS members may be interested in parallel paths in the Ecological Society of America... ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- The letter to Obama is a great idea, and hopefully will have some effect, short-term at least. Meanwhile, a professional society position statement carries more weight and is relatively timeless in effect, so this ECOLOG discussion is probably a good context for revisiting the proposed ESA position on economic growth. Policy Statement on Economic Growth Proposed for Adoption by the Ecological Society of America on July 12, 2007 List of Proposers Updated March 20, 2008 Proposed by ESA Members Warren Aney, Paul Angermeier, Robert Baldwin, Randy Bangert, Alice Bard, Terry Bowyer, Mark Boyce, Cara Lin Bridgman, Jim Brown, Joel Brown, Peter Brussard, David Bryant, John Cairns, Joseph Cech, Jameson Chace, Dana Coelho, Christopher Craft, Brian Czech, Dominick DellaSala, David Ehrenfeld, Elmer Finck, Dan Fiscus, Curt Flather, Edward Gates, Joseph Gathman, Brian Halstead, Rod Heitschmidt, Jeff Houlahan, Nancy Johnson, Evan Kane, Rick Knight, Nicola Koper, Erika Latty, Josh Lawler, Chris Lepczyk, Karin Limburg, Richard Lindroth, Michael Lowe, Michael Marsh, Carl McDaniel, Eliot McIntire, Guy McPherson, David Mech, Chris Papouchis, Andrew Park, Mary Price, Kenneth Raedeke, Heather Reynolds, Todd Rinaldi, Winston Smith, Nicholas Stowe, Teresa Tibbets, Stephen Trombulak, Gerald Van Amburg, Skip Van Bloem, Ashwani Vasishth, Robert Wagner, Mohan Wali, David Walls, Nick Waser, Jake Weltzin, John Yunger, Richard York, and Patricia Zaradic. Background Economic growth is an increase in the production and consumption of goods and services. It requires increasing population and/or per capita production and consumption. It is indicated by measures of production, income, and expenditure, most notably gross domestic product (GDP). Economic growth is a function of land, labor, and capital. Capital may be real or financial. Real capital includes natural capital, manufactured capital, and human capital. Natural capital may take the form of raw materials (e.g., oil, timber, fish) or services (e.g., solar radiation, water filtration, climate regulation). Manufactured capital includes the infrastructure, plant, and machinery that are used in the production of consumer goods or additional manufactured capital, or in the performance of services. Human capital refers to various aspects of the human condition that allow for higher productivity; for example, education, information, and health. The economic production process entails the conversion of natural capital into manufactured capital (including service facilities) and consumer goods and services by the application of labor, manufactured capital, and human capital. Some services may be performed with little manufactured capital, but natural capital in the form of energy and/or agricultural commodities are nevertheless required for such performance. Essentially, the human economy has a sectoral structure that reflects the trophic structure of the ecosystem. The ecosystem comprises an economy of nature that is founded upon the producers, or plants, which produce their own food in the process of photosynthesis. Among the animals, primary consumers eat plants, secondary consumers eat primary consumers, etc. In some ecosystems more than five distinct trophic levels may be identified. Omnivores consume in more than one trophic level, and many species are omnivorous to some extent. Some species, such as pollinators, detritivores, and scavengers, are aptly characterized as service providers in the economy of nature. The human economy is also founded upon producers, most notably the agricultural and extractive sectors. Surplus production in these sectors is what allows for the division of labor. Laborers and other individuals consume products from the agricultural sectors for sustenance, and manufacturing sectors transform energy and raw materials from the extractive sectors into consumer goods and manufactured capital. Service sectors, such as janitorial, transportation, and financial services, are an integral component of the full economy, as with the service providers in the economy of nature. Macroeconomic Policy and the Environment Of primary concern to the Ecological Society of America is the relationship of economic growth to the functional integrity and sustainability of the ecosystem, which in turn has implications for the sustainability of the economy itself. The Ecological Society of America is also concerned with the lack of public policy dialog on the implications of macroeconomic policy to ecological integrity and economic sustainability. Furthermore, in the limited dialog that does occur, there appears to be confusion about limits to economic growth and the tradeoffs between economic growth and environmental protection. The Ecological Society of America believes ecologists have a unique conceptual toolkit, as a result of their training and research, for helping to build understanding and awareness about the ecological effects of economic growth and for identifying policy tools conducive to ecological integrity and economic sustainability. To wit, the Ecological Society of America takes th! e position that: * There is a limit to economic growth, based upon the laws of thermodynamics and principles of ecology. The availability of matter and energy are limited in accordance with the first law of thermodynamics. The efficiency with which matter and energy may be converted into goods and services is limited in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics. Just as energy and biomass is lost in the economy of nature from one trophic level to the next, energy and materials are lost in the human economy from one sector to the next. For example, it takes more than 100 kilotons of vegetation to produce 100 kilotons of rabbits, and it takes many more kilotons to produce (via rabbits and other prey) 100 kilotons of foxes. This ecological principle is grounded in the second law of thermodynamics and is referred to as "ecological efficiency." Likewise, it takes more than 100 kilotons of iron ore to produce 100 kilotons of steel, and more yet to produce 100 kilotons of auto chassis.! The efficiency with which consumer goods and services are produced from natural capital is called "productive efficiency." * Assessing the limits to growth at local, regional, and national levels is complicated by the prospects for importing labor and capital. The ultimate limit to economic growth on Earth manifests at the global level because all labor and capital is accounted for at the global level. * The human economy grows as an integrated whole. Although particular processes and sectors may wax and wane as a function of technological progress, the basic collection of agricultural, extractive, manufacturing, and service sectors tend to grow and recede in unison. Furthermore, there is a limit to the proportion of services that comprise the human economy because of the land, capital, and consumption requirements of the service providers. Additionally, most services are used by or with other economic sectors such that growth in those service sectors requires growth in the other economic sectors. * Economic growth ultimately requires more agricultural and extractive surplus, resulting in the liquidation of natural capital. Increased productive efficiency may allow some economic growth to occur with less environmental impact per unit production, but efficiency is limited to less than 100% pursuant to the second law of thermodynamics. * Regarding the size of an economy, the basic alternative trends are growth, recession, and steady state. Because an economy may neither grow without limit nor recede into negative production, only a steady state economy is sustainable in the long run. * There is a fundamental tradeoff between economic growth and environmental protection, where environmental protection refers to the maintenance of ecosystem characteristics conducive to human welfare. These characteristics include but are not limited to: purity of air and water, soil productivity; naturally occurring biological diversity; capacity to buffer communities from natural disasters such as hurricanes, and composition of atmospheric gases associated with climates that humans and other species have adapted to and evolved with. This tradeoff is practically irrelevant for economies with abundant natural capital and ecological integrity, but becomes more policy-relevant as the economy grows, natural capital is liquidated, and ecological integrity is compromised. * Because of the tradeoff between economic growth and environmental protection, which is necessary for human welfare including economic sustainability, continued economic growth is certain to exceed a socially optimum level. The fact that such a level may be difficult to ascertain precisely, or may fluctuate as a matter of natural cycles or events, does not render the concept of optimum size less relevant to public policy. Given an adequate understanding of the tradeoff between economic growth and environmental protection, most citizens and policy makers will be capable of recognizing if an economy is far beyond the socially optimum size. Moving toward the optimum size or an acceptable range of an economy's size should be a policy goal of the polity. * The economies of some localities, regions, and nations may have already surpassed optimum size. Ecological evidence for this exists in the form of water shortages, soil erosion and degradation, high levels of biodiversity loss, and lack of wild areas and "green space," among other things. Broader evidence, including but not limited to ecological parameters, is found by using various indicators of human welfare, such as the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare and the Genuine Progress Indicator, which in some nations have been declining while GDP has been increasing. It behooves nations and other political units to adopt alternative indices of welfare and monitor them along with GDP, attempting to parse out the net effects of economic growth, whether beneficial or detrimental. * In nations for which it is apparent that economic growth has proceeded beyond the optimum, in which case the expanding production process may more accurately be designated "uneconomic growth," various policy tools should be carefully and gradually applied toward the goal of a more optimally sized economy. Many of these tools already exist, including fiscal, monetary, and trade policies. Although these policy tools have most often been used to stimulate growth or increase the growth rate, they may instead be used to lower the growth rate or stabilize the economy. Additional policy tools for achieving a stabilized (mildly fluctuating) steady state economy may be used to supplement the existing policy tools, including cap-and-trade systems in the energy and extractive sectors, graduated consumption taxes, and banking reforms that entail less debt (and therefore less pressure for economic growth) than the current fractional reserve system. For more information about this policy statement, please contact Brian Czech at czech at vt.edu or 703-901-7190. Brian Czech, Visiting Assistant Professor Natural Resources Program Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University National Capital Region, Northern Virginia Center 7054 Haycock Road, Room 411 Falls Church, Virginia 22043 ________________________________ From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of Chalfant, Brian Sent: Thu 2008-11-13 09:17 To: ECOLOG-L at LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Co-sign LETTER TO OBAMA FROM ONE OF EARTH'S LEADING ECOLOGISTS (Stephen R. Carpenter) Just a thought on this letter: is there really a need for the United States of America to have a "population policy?" Why not a "consumption policy?" As noted in the population paragraph, the majorly skewed part of the (population * per capita consumption) term in the U.S.A. is the per capita consumption part. I don't have numbers to back this up, but have heard anecdotally that population growth in most "developed"/materially rich countries is decreasing and/or has leveled off already. I have also heard that the U.S.A., compared to other "developed" nations does have a higher growth rate, but I would venture that much of this can be attributed to immigration (?) especially in recent years/decades. I would love to see some links/facts from someone who knows more about this than I do. Globally, sure there are parts of the world where exploding populations and availability resources to meet the needs of those population concentrations are of great concern, but I - personally - don't think that an administrative "population policy" from Obama (or any of our "leaders") is the most appropriate way to address population growth in other nations that are situated outside our national jurisdiction (if anything is outside of that). To me - when you say "population policy," that will translate to "can't have babies" in a lot of people's minds, which is a political bomb. That is not to say I think it isn't a concern at all for the U.S.A., we definitely need to educate women (as well as the men who fertilize those women) in general and also specifically as to reproductive matters, while working with other nations to address population growth globally, but I think couching that kind of policy in (or introducing that paragraph as) a national population-control sort o! f argument is self-defeating, in political terms. I - personally - think we'd be better off focusing our limited (moreso by the day) resources on the per capita part of our impact term. Also, I think any federally-mandated/presidential policy type of effort will have limited efficacy in any arena without local action, so go hand out condoms, but don't buy as many! ;) Discussion? -----Original Message----- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L at LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Chase D. Mendenhall Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 6:11 PM To: ECOLOG-L at LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Co-sign LETTER TO OBAMA FROM ONE OF EARTH'S LEADING ECOLOGISTS (Stephen R. Carpenter) SIGN This Letter: http://www.gopetition.com/online/23266.html This letter was sent and thought to be received by President-Elect Barack Obama from leading ecologist Stephen R. Carpenter. This petition is simply to support the gravity of Dr. Carpenter's advice to save our life support systems. Please sign and forward on to demonstrate your support for these basic, but necessary national priorities for Brack Obama's presidency. The objective of this petitions is to organize citizens who support Stephen R. Carpenter's position of saving human life support systems, emphasize the urgency of the situation to the Obama administration and draw attention to the seemingly unnoticed 1,300 leading scientists' consensus report. Used with permission of Stephen R. Carpenter. http://www.gopetition.com/online/23266.html November 2008-- Dear President-Elect Obama, Congratulations on your election, which has created a sense of optimism in America that has never occurred before in my lifetime. Yet earth's life support systems have deteriorated more in our lifetimes than in any other era of human history. With earth's population increasing, and consumption per person growing much faster than population, humans are heating the climate, polluting air and water, degrading landscapes and turning coastal oceans to dead zones. America's food supply depends on a few fragile crops, grown using practices that degrade soil, air and water to yield foods of low nutritional value that harm our health. The U.S. is not investing in the education and innovation needed to create agriculture and energy technologies that can get us through the 21st century. Details are found in a consensus report of more than 1300 leading scientists from more than 90 nations including the U.S. (http://www.MAweb.org ). These findings support the following priorities for your presidency. Decrease America's dependency on coal and oil and increase the supply of energy from non-polluting technologies: We must decrease emission of greenhouse gases, and the era of cheap oil is over. We must accelerate development of clean energy technologies using wind, sun and tides. These investments must be based on scientific information to avoid bogus remedies, such as grain biofuels, that sound good but do not in fact solve the problem. We must increase conservation through better buildings, efficient transportation, and renewal of industry. We must improve agriculture and forestry practices to reduce energy consumption and increase carbon storage in soil. Stop subsidizing agriculture that destroys land, water and health. Create incentives for agriculture that maintains land and water resources and yields healthy food: Agriculture must shift to practices that use less energy for tillage and transport of food, produce healthy food for local consumption, train more people in diverse farming practices, build soil instead of degrading and eroding it, and maintain clean water and air. These reforms can be accomplished by reforming federal subsidies. Have a population policy: In global impact, the U.S. is the world's most overpopulated nation, mainly because of our high per-capita consumption. Our population is growing rapidly. Global population growth is a key driver of degraded land, water, air and climate. Education of women is a powerful lever to restrain population growth. If all the world's women are educated to high-school level, human impact on our life-support system will be more than 30% lower by 2050. As a father of daughters, it is especially appropriate for you to support education for all of the world's women. Invest in the education and innovation needed to create a society that could thrive in the 21st century and beyond: Even though our universities and research centers are the envy of the world, science education of the general population of the U.S. is weak and must be made stronger. Education must be reformed to encourage creativity. There are enormous opportunities for innovations in agriculture, energy, and infrastructure that will lead to a moderate climate, rich landscapes, and clean air and water into the future. These technological opportunities are being seized by other nations while the U.S. lags behind. We must restore American leadership in creating technology that maintains our life support system while providing the energy, food and shelter that people need. Sincerely yours, Steve Carpenter Stephen Alfred Forbes Professor of Zoology Center for Limnology University of Wisconsin Madison, Wisconsin 53706 USA SIGN THIS LETTER: http://www.gopetition.com/online/23266.html ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3miigleTNXkkg9FYnnaxUNZ6wVPW6aoqo4wcaGCyurFtqkfK/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081113/4c16160a/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Mon Nov 17 06:02:38 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:02:38 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Blue Green Alliance Hiring 2 positions (DC) Message-ID: <20081117.090238.23573.0@webmail03.dca.untd.com> ******************************************************************* Job Opening: Climate Change Director Washington DC BLUE GREEN ALLIANCE BGA is an innovative national partnership of unions and environmental organizations, including the United Steelworkers, Communications Workers of America, Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club. It is focused on promoting programs and policies that result in the development of the green economy with a special emphasis on: * global warming solutions that create stable jobs; * international trade reform; * union rights; and * the promotion of green chemistry to substitute for toxics in the work place and community. JOB SUMMARY BGA is seeking a dynamic and experienced person to join our team as Climate Change Policy Director to guide our efforts in Washington DC. The Climate Change Director will work in close coordination with BGA's Executive Director, BGA's Legislative Director and BGA member groups to develop and implement BGA's overall policy and legislative agenda on climate change and green economic development. The Climate Change Policy Director is a senior staff position and reports to the Executive Director. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: Responsibilities include, but are not limited, to: * Develop and execute an overall policy and legislative plan on climate change and green economic development for the BGA, in cooperation with the Executive Director, Legislative Director, Senior Staff and all BGA partner organizations, * Staff and coordinate a Climate Change Policy Working Group of BGA member groups; * Track priority legislation on climate change and related issues and organize BGA partner organizations to take action through Congressional visits, letters, testimony, and joint media work; * Develop legislative analysis and materials on BGA's positions on climate change and green economic development; * Represent BGA on climate change and related issues to Congress and the Administration and develop relationships with key staff and regulators * Develop a legislative media plan on climate change and green economic development in coordination with BGA's Communications Director and BGA partner staff; * Participate in developing a legislative field plan on climate change in coordination with BGA's Project Director and BGA partner staff; * Ensure regular communications and updates on our climate change work to BGA staff and BGA partner organizations; * Develop relationships and help coordinate legislative efforts on climate change and green economic development with the broader labor and environmental community in Washington DC; * Serve as a member of the BGA Leadership Team. SKILLS AND QUALIFICATIONS: Bachelors' or Masters' Degree in an appropriate field. Minimum five years of prior legislative job experience. Experience with or knowledge of the labor movement is a plus. The individual should also have high competency in the following areas: * Experience working either directly on Capitol Hill or closely with legislative offices; * Ability to plan, coordinate and implement federal legislative strategies that involve mobilizing a broad coalition of partner groups; * Experience developing policy proposals, writing persuasive educational materials, lobbying legislators and legislative staff, mobilizing voters and key constituents, and engaging the media; * Superior knowledge of climate change policy and legislative efforts; * Working knowledge of relevant federal policy (energy, workers' rights, toxics and trade); * Exceptional written and oral communications skills; * Ability to work collaboratively, internally and with organizational partners; * Willingness and ability to live in DC area and to travel periodically; * A deep commitment to the mission of the Blue Green Alliance Salary: Commensurate with experience How to Apply Please submit a cover letter, resume, writing sample and three references by November 21, 2008 to stephaniez at bluegreenalliance.org or mail to: Blue Green Alliance Attn: Stephanie Zawistowski 2929 University Ave. SE #150 Minneapolis, MN 55414 The Blue Green Alliance is an equal opportunity employer committed to a diverse workforce. No phone calls please. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Job Opening: Legislative Director Washington DC BLUE GREEN ALLIANCE BGA is an innovative national partnership of the United Steelworkers, Communications Workers of America, Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club--two of North America's largest private sector manufacturing unions and two of the nation's largest environmental organizations. It is focused on promoting programs and policies that result in the development of the green economy with a special emphasis on: * global warming solutions that create stable jobs; * international trade reform; * union rights; and * the promotion of green chemistry to substitute for toxics in the work place and community. JOB SUMMARY BGA is seeking a dynamic and experienced person to join our team as Legislative Director to guide our efforts in Washington DC. The Legislative Director will work in close coordination with BGA's Executive Director, BGA's Climate Change Policy Director and BGA member groups to develop and implement BGA's overall legislative agenda. The Legislative Director is a senior staff position. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: Responsibilities include, but are not limited, to: ??? Develop and execute an overall legislative plan for the BGA, in cooperation with the Executive Director, Climate Change Policy Director, Senior Staff and BGA partner organizations, ??? Staff and coordinate a Legislative Working Group of BGA member groups; ??? Overall responsibility to track priority legislation on workers' rights issues, climate change, toxics, trade, and green economic development and organize BGA partner organizations to take action through Congressional visits, letters, testimony, and joint media work; ??? Represent BGA to Congress and the Administration and develop relationships with key staff and regulators ??? Develop a legislative media plan in coordination with BGA's Communications Director and BGA partner staff; ??? Develop a legislative field plan in coordination with BGA's Project Director and BGA partner staff; ??? Ensure regular communications and updates on our legislative work to BGA staff and BGA partner organizations; ??? Develop relationships and help coordinate legislative efforts with the broader labor and environmental community in Washington DC; ??? Serve as a member of the BGA Leadership Team. SKILLS AND QUALIFICATIONS: Bachelors' or Masters' Degree in an appropriate field. Minimum seven to ten years of prior legislative job experience. Experience with or knowledge about the environmental and labor movements is a significant plus. The individual should also have high competency in the following areas: ??? Experience working either directly on Capitol Hill or closely with legislative offices; ??? Ability to plan, coordinate and implement federal legislative strategies that involve mobilizing a broad coalition of partner groups; ??? Experience developing policy proposals, writing persuasive educational materials, lobbying legislators and legislative staff, mobilizing voters and key constituents, and engaging the media; ??? Working knowledge of relevant federal policy (climate, energy, workers' rights, and trade); ??? Exceptional written and oral communications skills; ??? Ability to work collaboratively, internally and with organizational partners; ??? Willingness and ability to live in DC area and to travel periodically; ??? A deep commitment to the mission of the Blue Green Alliance Salary: Commensurate with experience How to Apply Please submit a cover letter, resume, writing sample and three references by November 21, 2008 to stephaniez at bluegreenalliance.org or mail to: Blue Green Alliance Attn: Stephanie Zawistowski 2929 University Ave. SE #150 Minneapolis, MN 55414 The Blue Green Alliance is an equal opportunity employer committed to a diverse workforce. No phone calls please. ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw15ID1JC5id9dZRrTE2hVAbryuPoSdw8dctXZs9xsuH5v1Zi/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081117/0cb6dc8f/attachment.htm From rob_dietz at steadystate.org Mon Nov 17 14:58:38 2008 From: rob_dietz at steadystate.org (Rob Dietz) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:58:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Call for Papers, U.S. Society for Ecological Economics Message-ID: <17091191.440581226962718196.JavaMail.root@mbs8.homesteadmail.com> The deadline is approaching to submit abstracts for papers and proposals for symposia at the 2009 conference of the U.S. Society for Ecological Economics. See this website for details: http://www.ussee.org/conference09/callforpapers.php Thanks, Rob -- Robert Dietz, Executive Director Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy www.steadystate.org From brianczech at juno.com Mon Nov 17 17:28:46 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:28:46 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: NZ opportunity for Resource Economist / Policy Analyst Message-ID: <20081117.202846.26617.0@webmail04.dca.untd.com> -------------------------------------------------- Cawthron's Sustainable Business group, based in beautiful Nelson, New Zealand, is looking for a resource economist/policy analyst to help us meet the demand for research and consulting advice that integrates science, economics and policy, especially in freshwater, coastal and fisheries management. Please forward the attached advert to anyone who might be interested in this position. We are open to applications from new graduates as well as those who have a strong track record. We are seeking applications by Monday 1 December. Thanks. Jim SinnerSustainable Business Group ManagerCawthron Instituteph +64 3 539 3208www.cawthron.org.nz ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw15IDuLz1KIAn1Ruhjm1HsTPLcmVXizDgRcvdyUQyT275VOc/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081118/f2667bc2/attachment-0001.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Resource Economist Policy Analyst Opportunity.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 79809 bytes Desc: Resource Economist Policy Analyst Opportunity.pdf Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081118/f2667bc2/attachment-0001.obj From brianczech at juno.com Tue Nov 18 10:02:36 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:02:36 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] With all these job announcements... Message-ID: <20081118.130236.18460.6@webmail02.dca.untd.com> some of our cons. bio students might consider going into ecological economics as a route to effecting biodiversity conservation... here's one from CSU... ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Hi All: A job announcement from Colorado State University...please distribute as widely as possible. See http://dare.colostate.edu/dept/jobannounce.aspx for the announcement on the web. Assistant/Associate Professor Position Available Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO POSITION: Assistant/Associate Professor of Agricultural and Resource Economics Specialization in Regional Economics DESCRIPTION: 9-month, regular academic faculty appointment in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Funding for this position is approximately 30% teaching, 60% research, and 10% service. If hired at the Associate level, the funding will be approximately 40% teaching, 50% research, and 10% service, with up to 20% of teaching effort to be in the area of outreach programs. RESPONSIBILITIES: Research responsibilities include developing a dynamic, externally funded research program applying state-of the-art quantitative methods (such as spatial econometrics, CGE) and theory (such as IO, game theory) to real world issues in regional economics. Issues of interest may include, but are not limited to: ? development policy and planning for strengthening rural, suburban, and ex-urban communities ? public finance and alternative mechanisms for funding regional economic development ? agricultural or natural resource industry analysis, business development policy, and/or growth of industry clusters ? rural development through alternative agricultural and resource enterprises (value-added, biofuels, tourism) ? public and private interests in land and water use. Initial teaching effort will include three courses per academic year (two if hired as an Associate Professor), with the incumbent contributing to the graduate and undergraduate curriculum in regional and development economics and other topics of specific research interest or departmental need. Other duties include recruiting, supervising, and advising graduate students, collaborating with faculty and others where appropriate, supporting outreach programs in regional development, and service to the department, college, and university. The incumbent?s primary focus will fall within the state of Colorado, but should extend into the western US and internationally as the successful applicant engages in development issues with relevant stakeholders. The successful candidate should be enthusiastic about developing a comprehensive program in regional economics and have a willingness to be a team member in the department, across the CSU campus, and within the state of Colorado. If hired at the Associate level, this same leadership role and programming emphasis would be complemented with additional outreach activities, such as enhancing relations with public and private sector development and natural resource agencies, as well as the rural banking sector. REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS: ? Ph.D. in economics, agricultural economics, or closely related field by June 30, 2009. ? Primary field of study and/or substantial professional experience in regional or community development economics. ? Evidence of proficiency in quantitative applied economic theory and analytical methods. ? At Associate level, five years of professional experience in regional or community development economics. DESIRED QUALIFICATIONS: ? Demonstrated ability in higher education. ? Demonstrated success in obtaining extramural funding. ? Evidence of applied research productivity. ? Evidence of successful interdisciplinary research. ? Research interest or experience in domestic and international rural development issues. ? Research interest or experience in local government, public finance, and policy. ? At Associate level, interest in intellectual leadership for a new Center for Rural Development. TO APPLY: All interested and qualified individuals are encouraged to apply. Applications received by January 10, 2009 are guaranteed full consideration. Applications received after that date will be considered until the position is filled by a suitable candidate. To apply (by U.S. mail or in one pdf file by email), please submit a cover letter detailing your qualifications; resume or vita; three professional letters of reference; evidence of teaching and research quality (in a separate file); and a copy of your graduate transcript(s) (unofficial transcripts are acceptable), to: Dr. Dawn Thilmany, Search Committee Chair Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado, 80523-1172 T: 970-491-7220 E: Dawn.Thilmany at colostate.edu BACKGROUND CHECKS: Colorado State University is committed to providing a safe and productive learning and living community. To achieve that goal, we conduct background investigations for all final candidates being considered for employment. Background checks may include, but are not limited to, criminal history, national sex offender search and motor vehicle history. ABOUT CSU AND FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Colorado State University is one of our nation's leading research universities with world-class research in infectious disease, atmospheric science, clean energy technologies, and environmental science. It was founded in 1870 as the Colorado Agricultural College, six years before the Colorado Territory became a state. Last year, CSU awarded degrees to more than 5,000 graduates, and this year, it attracted over $300 million in research funding. Colorado State is a land-grant institution and a Carnegie Doctoral/Research University-Extensive. Colorado State University is the ?university of choice? for Colorado residents ? 30 percent of all of Colorado's science, math, engineering and technology majors pursue degrees at CSU. In addition to its excellent programs in those areas, CSU offers among the very best professional programs in the United States in veterinary medicine, occupational therapy, journalism, agriculture, and construction management. USDA, CDC and Division of Wildlife research centers round out the research collaboration and job opportunities in this region of about 250,000 residents. Fort Collins is an award-winning city located on the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains with the foothills and 14,000-foot peaks visible to residents. Rocky Mountain National Park is located in the same county as CSU. Easy access to hiking, skiing, rafting and other outdoor sports is a great advantage to CSU students, faculty and staff. Located north of the Denver metro area, CSU is less than an hour away from one of the nation's leading airports. Colorado State University is an equal opportunity affirmative action employer and complies with all federal and Colorado state laws, regulations, and executive orders regarding affirmative action requirements. The Office of Equal Opportunity is located in Room 101, Student Services Building. In order to assist Colorado State University in meeting its affirmative action responsibilities, ethnic minorities, women and other protected class members are encouraged to apply and to so identify themselves. -- Craig A. Bond, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523 970-491-6951 (office) 970-217-1182 (cell) ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw15IDLjuwVvpvRRrwEL1rEJjGfQUP0nblzCLZRcwFB5PmFVy/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081118/d278cd85/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Tue Nov 18 11:08:54 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 19:08:54 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: one more - IUCN in Sri Lanka Message-ID: <20081118.140854.18460.14@webmail02.dca.untd.com> Please note: forwarded message attached FYI Andrew F. Seidl Associate Professor & Graduate Coordinator Extension Specialist--Public Policy Colorado State University--Dept of Agricultural & Resource Economics T: 970-491-7071; E: Andrew.Seidl at colostate.edu; Skype: afseidl 'To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift.' Steve Prefontaine "If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, then what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw15IDzarlfs8OfBbvXQoMKPaaeSOtlecNjGzZa8nbUw6xQL6/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081118/437fb5c2/attachment-0001.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: VA -Coordinator REEP.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 22271 bytes Desc: VA -Coordinator REEP.pdf Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081118/437fb5c2/attachment-0001.pdf From brianczech at juno.com Thu Nov 20 07:52:50 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:52:50 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Energy NR/Env Economist Position IUCN-SUR Message-ID: <20081120.105250.27373.2@webmail20.dca.untd.com> ------------------------------------------- Please note: forwarded message attached Folks: This position is located at the IUCN South American Regional Office in Ecuador. Please find the announcement attached and note that I am not the contact person for the position. Regards, Andy Seidl Andrew F. Seidl Associate Professor & Graduate Coordinator Extension Specialist--Public Policy Colorado State University--Dept of Agricultural & Resource Economics T: 970-491-7071; E: Andrew.Seidl at colostate.edu; Skype: afseidl 'To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift.' Steve Prefontaine "If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, then what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw15IDl5HttFAYfzhJHpiZMJ0kLYS9bk2OnHTqqvK3O2HZrNC/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081120/0b3bf95e/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: VA -Coordinator REEP.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 22271 bytes Desc: VA -Coordinator REEP.pdf Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081120/0b3bf95e/attachment-0001.pdf From brianczech at juno.com Thu Nov 20 07:55:18 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:55:18 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Correction - this is the announcement for the Ecuador position Message-ID: <20081120.105518.27373.3@webmail20.dca.untd.com> -----------------------------------------------From: Seidl,Andrew Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 7:35 AM To: RESECON at LSV.UKY.EDU Subject: Energy NR/Env Economist Position IUCN-SUR Folks: This position is located at the IUCN South American Regional Office in Ecuador. Please find the announcement attached and note that I am not the contact person for the position. Regards, Andy Seidl Andrew F. Seidl Associate Professor & Graduate Coordinator Extension Specialist--Public Policy Colorado State University--Dept of Agricultural & Resource Economics T: 970-491-7071; E: Andrew.Seidl at colostate.edu; Skype: afseidl 'To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift.' Steve Prefontaine "If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, then what am I? And if not now, when?" Hillel ____________________________________________________________ Click for online loan, fast & no lender fee, approval today http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2P5sgb39cKNAOsTpmMr3zydcY4KzUSbttvnu5f0zO79a32s/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081120/a5285aee/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2008-11 Vacante Oficial Sr de Programa-Economia y Energia.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 74749 bytes Desc: 2008-11 Vacante Oficial Sr de Programa-Economia y Energia.pdf Url : http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081120/a5285aee/attachment-0001.pdf From brianczech at juno.com Fri Nov 21 12:34:09 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:34:09 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] good position open at GWU Message-ID: <20081121.153409.17174.16@webmail21.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Dear Colleagues, The School of International Affairs at George Washington University has an open rank, tenurable position for an individual with interests in sustainable development and environmental policy. Further details are provided below. Applications will be accepted until the end of December. Questions regarding the position are best directed to my colleague Nicholas Vonortas at vonortas at gwu.edu . Best, Arun Arun S. Malik Department of Economics George Washington University Washington, DC 20052 Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy The George Washington University?s Elliott School of International Affairs invites applications for a regular, full-time faculty position in the area of Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy, to begin in fall 2009. Preferred areas of expertise include: sustainable development challenges and policies in the developing and developed world; energy and resource policies; climate change; and/or national and international environmental policies. Appointment may be tenure-eligible, at any rank; or may be as a non-tenure-eligible Professor or Associate Professor of the Practice of International Affairs. Basic qualifications: For a tenure-track appointment, a PhD in a relevant discipline is required, along with promise for a productive scholarly career evidenced by publications, scholarly presentations, or works in progress. For a tenured appointment, a Ph.D. in a relevant discipline with an outstanding national and international reputation for high-quality research through publications and scholarly presentations is required. For appointment as Professor of the Practice of International Affairs, a graduate degree in a relevant discipline is required (PhD preferred), along with substantial professional experience in the areas of development and environmental policy and a demonstrated commitment to policy-related publication. In all cases, we seek applicants who are also dedicated educators with an interest in policy issues that will complement the mission of the Elliott School, and who will be active contributors to the degree programs (BA and MA) of the School. The University seeks to attract a culturally diverse faculty of the highest caliber; women and persons of color are particularly encouraged to apply. Application procedure: Applicants should submit a letter of application, a vita, three letters of recommendation (or the names and contact information for three references, for applicants who already have tenure), and samples of written work to: Chair, Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy Search Committee, The Elliott School of International Affairs, The George Washington University, 1957 E St., NW, Suite 401, Washington, DC 20052. Only complete applications will be reviewed. Review of applications will begin on November 7 and continue until the position is filled. The George Washington University is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer. ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw15ID7UgwoPV5sQQefJsIebWxtm7hobeqmkz0fDKDh9cbBTW/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081121/c7ae959c/attachment.htm From folababs2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 05:20:09 2008 From: folababs2000 at yahoo.com (Fola Babalola) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 05:20:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Need your vote as Education and Science Officer of Africa BOD In-Reply-To: <20081121.153409.17174.16@webmail21.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: <893052.77279.qm@web31406.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Greeting to you all, I am Fola Babalola, an active member of EESS. I am contesting for the post of Education and Science Officer under the Africa Section Board of Director. Log into your SCB Web page and you will find the ballot paper of which my information is provided. ? If elected for the post, I wish to use the medium to reach out to African on the position of EESS and?create awareness of the Group. ? Looking forward to your vote. Regards ? Babalola, Fola ________________________ Babalola, Fola. D.? Ph.D. Candidate?[Forest Economics] University of Ibadan, Nigeria? Phone: +2348025487802; Skype: folababs2000 ................................................... Director of African Operartions, Center for the Advancement of Steady State Economy (CASSE), USA www.steadystate.org --- On Fri, 11/21/08, brianczech at juno.com wrote: From: brianczech at juno.com Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] good position open at GWU To: Eess at list.conbio.org Date: Friday, November 21, 2008, 12:34 PM ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Dear Colleagues, ? The School of International Affairs at George Washington University has an open rank, tenurable position for an individual with interests in sustainable development and environmental policy. ?Further details are provided below.? Applications will be accepted until the end of December. ? Questions regarding the position are best directed to my colleague Nicholas Vonortas at vonortas at gwu.edu . ? Best, ? Arun ? Arun S. Malik Department of Economics George Washington University Washington , DC 20052 ? ? Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy ? The George Washington University ?s Elliott School of International Affairs invites applications for a regular, full-time faculty position in the area of Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy, to begin in fall 2009. Preferred areas of expertise include: sustainable development challenges and policies in the developing and developed world; energy and resource policies; climate change; and/or national and international environmental policies. Appointment may be tenure-eligible, at any rank; or may be as a non-tenure-eligible Professor or Associate Professor of the Practice of International Affairs. ? ? Basic qualifications:? For a tenure-track appointment, a PhD in a relevant discipline is required, along with promise for a productive scholarly career evidenced by publications, scholarly presentations, or works in progress.? For a tenured appointment, a Ph.D. in a relevant discipline with an outstanding national and international reputation for high-quality research through publications and scholarly presentations is required.? For appointment as Professor of the Practice of International Affairs, a graduate degree in a relevant discipline is required (PhD preferred), along with substantial professional experience in the areas of development and environmental policy and a demonstrated commitment to policy-related publication.? In all cases, we seek applicants who are also dedicated educators with an interest in policy issues that will complement the mission of the Elliott School , and who will be active contributors to the degree programs (BA and MA) of the School. The University seeks to attract a culturally diverse faculty of the highest caliber; women and persons of color are particularly encouraged to apply.? ? Application procedure:? Applicants should submit a letter of application, a vita, three letters of recommendation (or the names and contact information for three references, for applicants who already have tenure), and samples of written work to:? Chair, Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy Search Committee, The Elliott School of International Affairs, The George Washington University, 1957 E St., NW, Suite 401 , Washington , DC ? 20052 .? Only complete applications will be reviewed.? Review of applications will begin on November 7 and continue until the position is filled.? The George Washington University is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer. ? ? ____________________________________________________________ Find the apartment of your dreams by clicking here now! ______________________________________________ *11-16 July 2009, join us at the 23rd SCB Annual Meeting, Conservation: Harmony for Nature and Society in Beijing, China. More information at: www.conbio.org/2009 *Do you like what you have seen on this listserv? Join the global community by becoming a member of the Society for Conservation Biology today! www.conbio.org/join __________________________________ EESS mailing list EESS at list.conbio.org http://list.conbio.org/mailman/listinfo/eess -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081124/b2d507c5/attachment.html From mark at responsivemanagement.com Fri Dec 5 08:40:09 2008 From: mark at responsivemanagement.com (Mark Damian Duda, Responsive Management) Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 10:40:09 -0600 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Attitudes Toward Wildlife: News From Responsive Management Message-ID: To view this email online, paste this link into your browser: http://e2ma.net/map/view=CampaignPublic/id=28088.1546015458/rid=d27e35c921609343b1ffa6752c9b619d ___________________________________ NEWS FROM RESPONSIVE MANAGEMENT Specializing in Survey Research on Natural Resource and Outdoor Recreation Issues Public Attitudes Toward Grizzly Bears, Black Bears, Cougars, and Marine Mammals Successful wildlife management and conservation depend on three elements: wildlife populations, wildlife habitat, and the human population. Scientific principles and data are used to understand and manage wildlife populations and habitat, so it makes sense to use scientific principles and data to understand and manage the third element: people. Responsive Management has recently completed several surveys and needs assessments on a range of wildlife topics, where the human dimension is vital to program success. In this issue of our online newsletter, studies on public attitudes toward grizzly bears, black bears, cougars, and marine mammals are highlighted. Full reports for the grizzly bear, cougar, and manatee studies can be found on our website at http://www.responsivemanagement.com; the Pennsylvania black bear and marine mammal stranding studies are in progress. For information on other studies conducted by Responsive Management, or if you have any questions, feel free to contact me at mark at responsivemanagement.com. Mark Damian Duda Executive Director *** In This Issue: Public Opinion and Knowledge Regarding Grizzly Bears in Montana's Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem Public Knowledge Regarding Black Bears in Pennsylvania Washington State Residents' Knowledge of and Attitudes Toward Cougars Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program Study Florida Manatee Education and Outreach Needs Assessment *** Public Opinion and Knowledge Regarding Grizzly Bears in Montana's Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem Responsive Management recently assisted researchers in the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem of Montana and Idaho in determining local residents'knowledge and attitudes regarding grizzly bears and grizzly bear recovery efforts. The survey was conducted by Responsive Management for a partnership group consisting of citizens, state and federal wildlife managers, and conservation organizations. The researchers note that the results of the survey "offer wildlife managers a way to identify future information and education needs" for the residents of the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem. The study included a telephone survey as well as numerous cross-tabulations of results by age, gender, family dependency on forests and forestry, awareness of road restrictions, awareness of the grizzly bear recovery program, and respondent knowledge about grizzly bears. Over the past 200 years, the grizzly bear has experienced a precipitous decline in population, from around 50,000 in the lower 48 states in the early 19th century to about 1,400 today, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In 1975, the grizzly bear was listed as a threatened species in the lower 48 states under the Endangered Species Act. Grizzly bear recovery efforts are focused on six recovery zones in the northwestern United States and southwestern Canada. The Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem, one of the six Grizzly Bear Recovery Zones, is home to at least 40 grizzly bears. Respondents to the survey were residents of Lincoln and Sanders Counties, Montana, ages 18 and older. Major findings of the survey include the following: -- Most respondents think of the grizzly bear as an important icon of the American frontier: 76% of respondents agree that grizzly bears are a symbol of the American frontier and should be preserved as part of our national heritage. -- Although most respondents indicate that grizzly bears should be preserved, they are, at the same time, wary of them: 54% agree that grizzly bears are very dangerous to humans, while 38% disagree. -- Most commonly, respondents indicate that the most likely reasons that a grizzly bear would attack a person are to protect a bear cub during an encounter (39% gave this answer), a surprise encounter with a bear in the backcountry (38%), or seeking or protecting a food source (31%). -- It appears that most respondents know that humans can prevent most conflicts with grizzly bears by taking a few precautions: the overwhelming majority of respondents (90%)agree that this is true. -- When asked directly whether they support or oppose having grizzly bears in the Cabinet Mountains and Yaak Valley, the large majority of respondents (64%) support having grizzly bears there, but 24% oppose. -- When asked directly about whether they support or oppose grizzly bear recovery efforts, 57% of respondents support grizzly bear recovery in the Cabinet Mountains and Yaak Valley, but the level of support decreased to 44% when respondents were asked about achieving a grizzly bear population goal of 100 bears. -- Wildlife biologists and managers recommend augmentation as one of the strategies necessary to effectively recover the Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bear population. However, the survey showed that residents' level of support for grizzly bear population recovery efforts in the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem increased from 57% to almost 75% if recovery could be done without using augmentation. A full report, including background information on grizzly bears in the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem and analysis and discussion of the cross-tabulation results, is available at: http://www.igbconline.org/Cabinet_Yaak_Survey_Final_101708.pdf(5.05MB PDF) *** Public Knowledge Regarding Black Bears in Pennsylvania Responsive Management is conducting a major study to measure public knowledge of and attitudes toward black bears to help the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) meet its goals for successfully managing the species in Pennsylvania. Areas of inquiry include general knowledge about black bears, satisfaction with bear population levels, opinions about bear management, experience with human-bear conflicts, and sources of information on black bears. Pennsylvania's black bear population has increased substantially in recent decades and bears are now near record numbers in many areas of the state, according to the PGC. At the same time, more people are moving into areas of the state occupied by bears, resulting in more human-bear encounters. Public education on species management, the habits of bears, and how to handle bear encounters has therefore become more important than ever, as has the need to integrate the biological and human aspects of black bear management. Responsive Management's research staff is integrating geographic information system (GIS) data with census block group data so that the study sample can be drawn based on Pennsylvania's wildlife management units. This methodology will help state wildlife professionals to more effectively manage the species by integrating findings regarding public opinion and knowledge with the goals of the state's Black Bear Management Plan on a per-wildlife-management-unit basis. Responsive Management has conducted several other studies on public attitudes toward black bears, including a recent study of public attitudes toward black bear management in West Virginia conducted for the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, as well as another for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. The full report on the Maryland study is available at: http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/reports /MD_Black_Bear_Report.pdf(340K PDF) *** Washington State Residents' Knowledge of and Attitudes Toward Cougars To help Washington State wildlife professionals develop outreach programs based on a solid foundation of fact, Responsive Management conducted a major study on behalf of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and Insight Wildlife Management, a private wildlife consulting firm, to determine Washington residents' knowledge of and attitudes toward cougars. The study included a telephone survey as well as cross-tabulations of the results by county, residential area, hunters and non-hunters, and cougar management unit. The results will be used to assess outreach education needs on cougar ecology, behavior, safety, and management in Washington State and guide the Cougar Outreach and Education Project as it is developed by Insight Wildlife Management and the WDFW. "The increasing need to educate the public on cougar issues . . . has resulted in part from a growing human population and the residential development that accompanies it," says Jim Harmon, a consultant with Insight Wildlife Management and planning coordinator for the Cougar Outreach and Education Project. "Basically, more Washington residents are living and recreating in cougar country while cougar habitat is shrinking and becoming more fragmented." Respondents to the survey were Washington State residents ages 18 and older. Topics explored included general knowledge of and attitudes toward cougars, knowledge of cougar populations and behavior, attitudes toward cougar encounters, opinions on cougar management, and sources of information on cougars. The questionnaire was developed cooperatively by Responsive Management, WDFW, and Insight Wildlife Management. Major findings of the study include the following: -- Just over a fifth of respondents (22%) say they know a moderate amount about cougars in the state; 75% say they know a little or nothing at all. -- The majority of respondents (68%) believe it is unlikely that a cougar will attack in a human-cougar encounter, and 34% believe it to be very unlikely (the correct answer). -- A majority of respondents (68%) disagree with the following statement: "Cougars are a threat to public safety in Washington State." -- Respondents who have heard about cougars in the past five years most commonly receive information about cougars from television (35%), followed by newspapers (22%), and personal experience (16%). -- Washington residents most commonly think that the number of cougars in the state has decreased in the past 30 years (42%), while 30% believe (correctly) that the number has increased. -- A majority of respondents (59%) say that cougar populations in Washington State should be managed to maintain the current number of cougars. The results of this study will help managers of the Cougar Outreach and Education Project determine knowledge gaps, valuation of cougars, and perceptions of threat among Washington residents. Cross-tabulations will also reveal specific audiences in different locales and point out differences among those audiences so that messaging and delivery of outreach information can be customized. Finally, the survey can be readministered at a later date to measure changes in public knowledge and perception as a result of Project efforts. The planning phase for the Project started in January 2008; formal recommendations for cougar outreach campaigns and education are expected in March 2009. Harmon says that, beyond the planning phase, the goals of the outreach campaign include reducing cougar-human conflicts through education about cougar behavior and ecology and managing the human dimensions of cougar issues by mitigating inflated perceptions of the risk posed by cougars. The complete report, including analysis of the cross-tabulations, is available at: http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/reports/WA_Cougar_Report.pdf (2.1MB PDF) *** Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program Study Responsive Management is conducting a major evaluation for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The study will help the NMFS evaluate programs of its National Marine Fisheries Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program (MMHSRP) Southeast and Southwest Stranding Networks. According to the NMFS, from 1994 through 1998, a total of 19,130 marine mammal strandings were reported in the United States -- an average of 3,826 per year. An important component of the study is to gather input regarding the Southeast and Southwest Stranding Networks' current performance, organizational structure, objectives, and needs to help determine future program directions and to enhance program management and implementation. The regional stranding networks are part of the overall MMHSRP program, which includes stranding networks, responses/investigations of mortality events, biomonitoring, tissue/serum banking, and analytical quality assurance. The volunteer-staffed stranding networks receive direction and training from the NMFS. There are a total of six U.S. regional stranding networks. Responsive Management was also recently awarded a contract to perform similar evaluations for the MMHSRP's Northeast and Northwest Stranding Networks. More studies conducted by Responsive Management related to coastal resources can be found at: http://www.responsivemanagement.com/coastalresources.php *** Florida Manatee Education and Outreach Needs Assessment To assess education and public awareness materials and outreach programs related to the Florida manatee, Responsive Management recently completed a comprehensive needs assessment for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Florida Manatee Recovery Implementation Team's Education Working Group. Manatees are protected under both the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act, and educating the public about issues related to habitat and human-manatee interactions is critical to their survival. The Education Working Group was a subcommittee of the Florida Manatee Recovery and Implementation Team, which was active from 2003 until its dissolution in September 2007. Its members served in an advisory role supporting U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manatee recovery and conservation programs and activities. Responsive Management conducts needs assessments by coupling internal assessments, an "inside-out" approach, with external assessments, an "outside-in" approach. This study used two separate questionnaires to assess specific needs for manatee education and outreach efforts: one administered to Education Working Group members to determine priorities for education and outreach (the needs assessment, or inside-out approach), and one administered to education/outreach providers to inventory available educational materials (the market inventory, or outside-in approach). The study had three major areas of inquiry regarding manatee education and outreach: topic areas, target audiences, and formats. When comparing the results of the needs assessment with those of the market inventory, deficits and additional needs for manatee education and outreach emerged. Topic areas were evaluated by comparing the topic areas rated by the Education Working Group members as extremely high or high priorities with the topic areas on which education/outreach providers focus a great deal. This analysis showed an overabundance of focus on manatee natural history; how to report an injured, dead, harassed, or orphaned manatee; ways to help manatees; manatee research, rescue, and rehabilitation; and manatee population issues. It also showed deficits in the degree of focus given to 11 topic areas: protecting aquatic ecosystems; warm water issues; harassment definition and impacts; the effects of pollution on water quality; the effects of littering; boating regulations, waterway signs, and manatee protection zones; how to safely observe manatees in the wild; legislation for manatee protection; manatee habitat needs; fundraising; and manatee mortality. Current groups targeted by education/outreach providers were then evaluated by comparing the groups currently targeted a great deal by education/outreach providers to groups rated by Education Working Group members as extremely high priorities for education. Three groups show a likely overabundance in current education and outreach efforts: senior citizens ages 65 or older; "everyone" (in other words, the ubiquitous "general public"); and children ages 12 or younger. Eighteen groups -- half the total number of target markets/audiences defined in the study -- currently show deficits in the amount of manatee education and outreach that Education Working Group members would like them to receive: dock/marina permit applicants; vessel/vehicle registrants; boaters/jet ski operators using public ramps; private marinas; the marine industry; public marinas; law enforcement; legislators/local and state governments; developers; shoreline/coastal property owners; property/land managers; the media; the tourism industry; divers, snorkelers, and swimmers; the business community; current license plate holders; Florida residents; and libraries. Formats for manatee education and outreach produced by education/outreach providers were then compared with the formats rated as effective by Education Working Group members. Twelve formats viewed by Education Working Group members as being effective are either underused or not currently used by education/outreach providers: loaner resource boxes for educators; TV (e.g., video segments, programs, or ads/commercials); billboards; radio; virtual or electronic field trips; training/programs for educators; books and magazines; postcard campaigns; nature centers/preserves; Internet/website, e-mail, PDF documents; newspapers (e.g., news articles, ads); and mail packets and utility bill inserts. The full report, including more results of the needs assessment and recommendations for action made by Responsive Management, can be found at: http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/reports/FL_Manatee_Ed_Report.pdf (481K PDF) ******************************************************* Over the past 18 years, Responsive Management has conducted more than 50 major studies on public attitudes toward wildlife, including studies on wolf management, reintroduction, and recovery in Wyoming, New York, Arizona, and New Mexico; grizzly bear management, reintroduction, and recovery in Wyoming, Washington, Idaho, and Montana; black bear management in Maryland and West Virginia; the California condor in Arizona, California, and Utah; mountain lions in Arizona, California, and Washington; and Florida panther habitat and panther-related issues in Florida. To see more studies conducted by Responsive Management, including full reports in downloadable PDF form, visit us online at http://www.responsivemanagement.com. A listing of Responsive Management's recent and current projects can be found at http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/newsletters/RM_Projects.pdf (372K PDF) 130 Franklin Street | Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801 Phone: 540-432-1888 | Fax: 540-432-1892 mark at responsivemanagement.com | www.responsivemanagement.com ___________________________________ forward this email to a friend http://e2ma.net/map/view=Forward/ID=28088.1546015458/rid=d27e35c921609343b1ffa6752c9b619d/send_to_friend This email was sent to eess at list.conbio.org. To ensure that you continue receiving our emails, please add us to your address book or safe list. manage your preferences ( http://e2ma.net/map/view=Manage/signupId=47712/id=28088.1546015458/rid=d27e35c921609343b1ffa6752c9b619d ) opt out ( http://e2ma.net/map/view=OptOut/signupId=47712/ID=28088.1546015458/rid=d27e35c921609343b1ffa6752c9b619d ) using TrueRemove(r). Got this as a forward? Sign up ( http://e2ma.net/map/view=Join/signupId=47712/mailingId=1408782 ) to receive our future emails. powered by emma -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081205/4ea2160c/attachment-0001.htm From KStade at cspinet.org Fri Dec 5 11:38:21 2008 From: KStade at cspinet.org (Kirsten Stade) Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 14:38:21 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] What Politicians Dare Not Say Message-ID: URL: http://www.precaution.org/lib/08/what_politicians_dare_not_say.081018.htm From: New Scientist (pg. 42), Oct. 18, 2008 WHAT POLITICIANS DARE NOT SAY [Rachel's introduction: "This is the logic of free-market capitalism: the economy must grow continuously or face an unpalatable collapse. With the environmental situation reaching crisis point, however, it is time to stop pretending that mindlessly chasing economic growth is compatible with sustainability."] By Tim Jackson Scratch the surface of free-market capitalism and you discover something close to visceral fear. Recent events provide a good example: the US treasury's extraordinary $800 billion rescue package was an enormous comfort blanket designed to restore confidence in the ailing financial markets. By forcing the taxpayer to pick up the "toxic debts" that plunged the system into crisis, it aims to protect our ability to go on behaving similarly in the future. This is a short-term and deeply regressive solution, but economic growth must be protected at all costs. As economics commissioner on the UK's Sustainable Development Commission, I found this response depressingly familiar. At the launch last year of our "Redefining Prosperity" project (which attempts to instil some environmental and social caution into the relentless pursuit of economic growth), a UK treasury official stood up and accused my colleagues and I of wanting to "go back and live in caves". After a recent meeting convened to explore how the UK treasury's financial policies might be made more sustainable, a high- ranking official was heard to mutter: "Well, that is all very interesting, perhaps now we can get back to the real job of growing the economy." "A UK treasury official accused me of wanting to go back to cave living" The message from all this is clear: any alternative to growth remains unthinkable, even 40 years after the American ecologists Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren made some blindingly obvious points about the arithmetic of relentless consumption. The Ehrlich equation, I = PAT, says simply that the impact (I) of human activity on the planet is the product of three factors: the size of the population (P), its level of affluence (A) expressed as income per person, and a technology factor (T), which is a measure of the impact on the planet associated with each dollar we spend. Take climate change, for example. The global population is just under 7 billion and the average level of affluence is around $8000 per person. The T factor is just over 0.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide per thousand dollars of GDP -- in other words, every $1000 worth of goods and services produced using today's technology releases 0.5 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere. So today's global CO2 emissions work out at 7 billion ? 8 ? 0.5 = 28 billion tonnes per year. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has stated that to stabilise greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere at a reasonably safe 450 parts per million, we need to reduce annual global CO2 emissions to less than 5 billion tonnes by 2050. With a global population of 9 billion thought inevitable by the middle of this century, that works out at an average carbon footprint of less than 0.6 tonnes per person -- considerably lower than in India today. The conventional view is that we will achieve this by increasing energy efficiency and developing green technology without economic growth taking a serious hit. Can this really work? With today's global income, achieving the necessary carbon footprint would mean getting the T factor for CO2 down to 0.1 tonnes of CO2 per thousand US dollars -- a fivefold improvement. While that is no walk in the park, it is probably doable with state-of-the-art technology and a robust policy commitment. There is one big thing missing from this picture, however: economic growth. Factor it in, and the idea that technological ingenuity can save us from climate disaster looks an awful lot more challenging. First, let us suppose that the world economy carries on as usual. GDP per capita will grow at a steady 2 or 3 per cent per year in developed countries, while the rest of the world tries to catch up -- China and India leaping ahead at 5 to 10 per cent per year, at least for a while, with Africa languishing in the doldrums for decades to come. In this (deeply inequitable) world, to meet the IPCC target we would have to push the carbon content of consumption down to less than 0.03 tonnes for every thousand US dollars spent -- a daunting 11- fold reduction on the current western European average. Now, let's suppose we are serious about eradicating global poverty. Imagine a world whose 9 billion people can all aspire to a level of income compatible with a 2.5 per cent growth in European income between now and 2050. In this scenario, the carbon content of economic output must be reduced to just 2 per cent of the best currently achieved anywhere in the European Union. In short, if we insist on growing the economy endlessly, then we will have to reduce the carbon intensity of our spending to a tiny fraction of what it is now. If growth is to continue beyond 2050, so must improvements in efficiency. Growth at 2.5 per cent per year from 2050 to the end of the century would more than triple the global economy beyond the 2050 level, requiring almost complete decarbonisation of every last dollar. The potential for technological improvements, renewable energy, carbon sequestration and, ultimately perhaps, a hydrogen-based economy has not been exhausted. But what politicians will not admit is that we have no idea if such a radical transformation is even possible, or if so what it would look like. Where will the investment and resources come from? Where will the wastes and the emissions go? What might it feel like to live in a world with 10 times as much economic activity as we have today? Instead, they bombard us with adverts cajoling us to insulate our homes, turn down our thermostats, drive a little less, walk a little more. The one piece of advice you will not see on a government list is "buy less stuff". Buying an energy-efficient TV is to be applauded; not buying one at all is a crime against society. Agreeing reluctantly to advertising standards is the sign of a mature society; banning advertising altogether (even to children) is condemned as "culture jamming". Consuming less may be the single biggest thing you can do to save carbon emissions, and yet no one dares to mention it. Because if we did, it would threaten economic growth, the very thing that is causing the problem in the first place. Visceral fear is not without foundation. If we do not go out shopping, then factories stop producing, and if factories stop producing then people get laid off. If people get laid off, then they do not have any money. And if they don't have any money they cannot go shopping. A falling economy has no money in the public purse and no way to service public debt. It struggles to maintain competitiveness and it puts people's jobs at risk. A government that fails to respond appropriately will soon find itself out of office. This is the logic of free-market capitalism: the economy must grow continuously or face an unpalatable collapse. With the environmental situation reaching crisis point, however, it is time to stop pretending that mindlessly chasing economic growth is compatible with sustainability. We need something more robust than a comfort blanket to protect us from the damage we are wreaking on the planet. Figuring out an alternative to this doomed model is now a priority before a global recession, an unstable climate, or a combination of the two forces itself upon us. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081205/574ab424/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Sat Dec 6 10:26:57 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 18:26:57 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Chesapeake Bay and the Myth of Endless Growth Message-ID: <20081206.132657.16803.2@webmail09.dca.untd.com> Tom Horton is a veteran environmental journalist from the Baltimore Sun - a good sign... ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Thanks to Tom Horton for this press release about his latest paper. The full paper can be downloaded from http://www.abell.org/publications/detail.asp?ID=139. For information: Tom Horton 1-410-726-7282 twh at intercom.net For Immediate Release ?Restoration of the Bay a failure and will remain so,? argues environmental writer Tom Horton ?The restoration of the Chesapeake Bay is a failure after 25 years and will remain so until political and environmental leaders stop embracing rapid, unending growth,? says environmental writer Tom Horton. In his study he argues: ?A fatal blind spot remains in the best strategies to save the Bay. The blind spot is our allegiance--some would say addiction--to perpetual economic growth, and to encouraging an ever-expanding population of human consumers to support it. ?This is our mantra: Growth is good, or necessary, or at least inevitable. So unchallenged is this premise that we discuss it little more than the gravitational force that holds us to the planet." In the study the longtime Baltimore Sun environmental reporter and columnist details how both government and environmentalists focus ?only on the impacts of our lifestyles, acting as if it does not matter how many of us are living around the Bay.? He makes the point that this approach, though it is vital to the Bay's restoration, is a half-measure, doomed to fail so long as rapid growth continues. He challenges the myth that growth is inevitable, or necessary to achieve economic prosperity, and talks candidly about foreign immigration, the largest source of population growth. "By an end to growth," Horton writes, "we do not mean an end to capitalism, stock markets, innovation, or even greed and corruption, but rather a shift to economic development to better serve those already here versus making endless and expensive accommodations for all who might be induced to come. ?Ending growth is a debate needing to happen. Once we begin to shift the lens, to dare to consider alternatives to the current, growth-is-good mentality, many ?goods? will become ?bads.? ?Spending on wider roads, more power plants, bigger sewage treatment plants, now seen as necessary investments to accommodate growth, will look like taxpayer subsidies to a few sectors of the economy that are growth's only real beneficiaries.? Horton argues: ?It will be virtually impossible to reclaim our numerous environmental messes as population continues rising from the current 304 million Americans to a projected half billion shortly after 2050; the Bay watershed, currently with 17 million people, is adding 1.7 million every decade.? A stable population and a steady state economy will not guarantee environmental or social Utopia, he argues, "but it will give us breathing room, leave us options we will not otherwise have. "There is scarcely a problem facing us that can't be solved easier in the absence of rapid growth." The report has been prepared on a grant from The Abell Foundation and can be downloaded from www at abell.org. 2 -- End -- Best wishes, Bill --- William N. Ryerson President Population Media Center 145 Pine Haven Shores Road, Suite 2011 P.O. Box 547 Shelburne, Vermont 05482 U.S.A. Tel. 1-802-985-8156 Extension 204 Mobile: 1-802-578-4286 Fax 1-802-985-8119 Email: ryerson at populationmedia.org Web site: www.populationmedia.org Skype name: billryerson We want to hear from you! Check out our blog, www.populationmedia.org/pmc-blog, where you can read and comment on the articles distributed via my daily population email listserv. *Please note that it may take up to 48 hours for this article to appear on the website. ____________________________________________________________ Save up to 20%-80% on the perfect gift. Click Now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw3beBSvNlx2QG8ZiZ3etxKy7puacGtxONQ543PA2Y14XWNa8/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081206/a7b5ec53/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Sun Dec 7 11:49:23 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 19:49:23 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Fisheries economist position at NMFS Message-ID: <20081207.144923.29543.2@webmail07.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Colleagues, I am forwarding a job opening announcement from NMFS. For questions about the job, please contact Judy Cardenas at Judy.Cardenas at noaa.gov. Apologies for cross-postings. Nori ------------ Nori Tarui Assistant Professor Department of Economics, University of Hawaii at Manoa -----Original Message----- Job Opening (NMFS Economist) The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has two Economist positions with the Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center, Fisheries Monitoring and Socio-Economics Division, located in Honolulu, Hawaii. The positions will be open from November 21, 2008 through January 7, 2009, and the salary range is 48,148.00 - 105,420.00 USD per year, plus 25% cost of living allowance. The incumbents coordinate, conduct, and report results of economic research and analyses, and serve as marine Economists on Western Pacific Fisheries Management Plan scientific teams in support of fisheries management in U.S. Pacific Islands areas. Please visit the website to fill out the application at http://jobsearch.usajobs.gov/. The vacancy announcements are # NMF-PIC-2009-0001 and NMF-PIC-2009-0002. DOC/NOAA is an Equal Opportunity Employer For questions about this job: Judy Cardenas, Phone: 206-526-6420, Email: Judy.Cardenas at noaa.gov ____________________________________________________________ Stay hydrated on the go with high quality hydration packs. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw1k4wnsYShLIN48r1mHNJNMvgqGfPRdBBZhEElHE9UrySyqY/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081207/756fc997/attachment.htm From KStade at cspinet.org Tue Dec 9 10:40:03 2008 From: KStade at cspinet.org (Kirsten Stade) Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 13:40:03 -0500 Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Scientist says only a "planned economic recession" might be enough to avert climate catastrophe Message-ID: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/dec/09/poznan-copenhagen-global-warming-targets-climate-change Too late? Why scientists say we should expect the worst As ministers and officials gather in Poznan one year ahead of the Copenhagen summit on global warming, the second part of a major series looks at the crucial issue of targets David Adam The Guardian, Tuesday December 9 2008 Article history At a high-level academic conference on global warming at Exeter University this summer, climate scientist Kevin Anderson stood before his expert audience and contemplated a strange feeling. He wanted to be wrong. Many of those in the room who knew what he was about to say felt the same. His conclusions had already caused a stir in scientific and political circles. Even committed green campaigners said the implications left them terrified. Anderson, an expert at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at Manchester University, was about to send the gloomiest dispatch yet from the frontline of the war against climate change. Despite the political rhetoric, the scientific warnings, the media headlines and the corporate promises, he would say, carbon emissions were soaring way out of control - far above even the bleak scenarios considered by last year's report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Stern review. The battle against dangerous climate change had been lost, and the world needed to prepare for things to get very, very bad. "As an academic I wanted to be told that it was a very good piece of work and that the conclusions were sound," Anderson said. "But as a human being I desperately wanted someone to point out a mistake, and to tell me we had got it completely wrong." Nobody did. The cream of the UK climate science community sat in stunned silence as Anderson pointed out that carbon emissions since 2000 have risen much faster than anyone thought possible, driven mainly by the coal-fuelled economic boom in the developing world. So much extra pollution is being pumped out, he said, that most of the climate targets debated by politicians and campaigners are fanciful at best, and "dangerously misguided" at worst. In the jargon used to count the steady accumulation of carbon dioxide in the Earth's thin layer of atmosphere, he said it was "improbable" that levels could now be restricted to 650 parts per million (ppm). The CO2 level is currently over 380ppm, up from 280ppm at the time of the industrial revolution, and it rises by more than 2ppm each year. The government's official position is that the world should aim to cap this rise at 450ppm. The science is fuzzy, but experts say that could offer an even-money chance of limiting the eventual temperature rise above pre-industrial times to 2C, which the EU defines as dangerous. (We have had 0.7C of that already and an estimated extra 0.5C is guaranteed because of emissions to date.) The graphs on the large screens behind Anderson's head at Exeter told a different story. Line after line, representing the fumes that belch from chimneys, exhausts and jet engines, that should have bent in a rapid curve towards the ground, were heading for the ceiling instead. At 650ppm, the same fuzzy science says the world would face a catastrophic 4C average rise. And even that bleak future, Anderson said, could only be achieved if rich countries adopted "draconian emission reductions within a decade". Only an unprecedented "planned economic recession" might be enough. The current financial woes would not come close. Lost cause Anderson is not the only expert to voice concerns that current targets are hopelessly optimistic. Many scientists, politicians and campaigners privately admit that 2C is a lost cause. Ask for projections around the dinner table after a few bottles of wine and more vote for 650ppm than 450ppm as the more likely outcome. Bob Watson, chief scientist at the Environment Department and a former head of the IPCC, warned this year that the world needed to prepare for a 4C rise, which would wipe out hundreds of species, bring extreme food and water shortages in vulnerable countries and cause floods that would displace hundreds of millions of people. Warming would be much more severe towards the poles, which could accelerate melting of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets. Watson said: "We must alert everybody that at the moment we're at the very top end of the worst case [emissions] scenario. I think we should be striving for 450 [ppm] but I think we should be prepared that 550 [ppm] is a more likely outcome." Hitting the 450ppm target, he said, would be "unbelievably difficult". A report for the Australian government this autumn suggested that the 450ppm goal is so ambitious that it could wreck attempts to agree a new global deal on global warming at Copenhagen next year. The report, from economist Ross Garnaut and dubbed the Australian Stern review, says nations must accept that a greater amount of warming is inevitable, or risk a failure to agree that "would haunt humanity until the end of time". It says developed nations including Britain, the US and Australia, would have to slash carbon dioxide emissions by 5% each year over the next decade to hit the 450ppm target. Britain's Climate Change Act 2008, the most ambitious legislation of its kind in the world, calls for reductions of about 3% each year to 2050. Garnaut, a professorial fellow in economics at Melbourne University, said: "Achieving the objective of 450ppm would require tighter constraints on emissions than now seem likely in the period to 2020 ... The only alternative would be to impose even tighter constraints on developing countries from 2013, and that does not appear to be realistic at this time." The report adds: "The awful arithmetic means that exclusively focusing on a 450ppm outcome, at this moment, could end up providing another reason for not reaching an international agreement to reduce emissions. In the meantime, the cost of excessive focus on an unlikely goal could consign to history any opportunity to lock in an agreement for stabilising at 550ppm - a more modest, but still difficult, international outcome. An effective agreement around 550ppm would be vastly superior to continuation of business as usual." Henry Derwent, former head of the UK's international climate negotiating team and now president of the International Emissions Trading Association, said a new climate treaty was unlikely to include a stabilisation goal - either 450ppm or 550ppm. "You've got to avoid talking and thinking in those terms because otherwise the politics reaches a dead end," he said. Many small island states are predicted to be swamped by rising seas with global warming triggered by carbon levels as low as 400ppm. "It's really difficult for countries to sign up to something that loses them half their territory. It's not going to work." A new agreement in Copenhagen should concentrate instead on shorter term targets, such as firm emission reductions by 2020, he said. Worst time The escalating scale of human emissions could not have come at a worst time, as scientists have discovered that the Earth's forests and oceans could be losing their ability to soak up carbon pollution. Most climate projections assume that about half of all carbon emissions are reabsorbed in these natural sinks. Computer models predict that this effect will weaken as the world warms, and a string of recent studies suggests this is happening already. The Southern Ocean's ability to absorb carbon dioxide has weakened by about 15% a decade since 1981, while in the North Atlantic, scientists at the University of East Anglia also found a dramatic decline in the CO2 sink between the mid-1990s and mid-2000s. A separate study published this year showed the ability of forests to soak up anthropogenic carbon dioxide - that caused by human activity - was weakening, because the changing length of the seasons alters the time when trees switch from being a sink of carbon to a source. Soils could also be giving up their carbon stores: evidence emerged in 2005 that a vast expanse of western Siberia was undergoing an unprecedented thaw. The region, the largest frozen peat bog in the world, had begun to melt for the first time since it formed 11,000 years ago. Scientists believe the bog could begin to release billions of tonnes of methane locked up in the soils, a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide. The World Meteorological Organisation recently reported the largest annual rise of methane levels in the atmosphere for a decade. Some experts argue that the grave nature of recent studies, combined with the unexpected boom in carbon emissions, demands an urgent reassessment of the situation. In an article published this month in the journal Climatic Change, Peter Sheehan, an economist at Victoria University, Australia, says the scale of recent emissions means the carbon cuts suggested by the IPCC to stabilise levels in the atmosphere "cannot be taken as a reliable guide for immediate policy determination". The cuts, he says, will need to be bigger and in more places. Earlier this year, Jim Hansen, senior climate scientist with Nasa, published a paper that said the world's carbon targets needed to be urgently revised because of the risk of feedbacks in the climate system. He used reconstructions of the Earth's past climate to show that a target of 350ppm, significantly below where we are today, is needed to "preserve a planet similar to that on which civilisation developed and to which life on Earth is adapted". Hansen has suggested a joint review by Britain's Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences of all research findings since the IPCC report. Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the IPCC, argues that suggestions the IPCC report is out of date is "not a valid position at all". He said: "What the IPCC produces is not based on two years of literature, but 30 or 40 years of literature. We're not dealing with short-term weather changes, we're talking about major changes in our climate system. I refuse to accept that a few papers are in any way going to influence the long-term projections the IPCC has come up with." At Defra, Watson said: "Even without the new information there was enough to make most policy makers think that urgent action was absolutely essential. The new information only strengthens that and pushes it even harder. It was already very urgent to start with. It's now become very, very urgent." Kirsten Stade Program Manager, Integrity in Science Center for Science in the Public Interest http://cspinet.org/integrity/watch/index.html Tel. (202) 777-8348 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081209/9d66808a/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Thu Dec 11 15:11:44 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 23:11:44 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Lessons on the politics of growth from NCSE conf. Message-ID: <20081211.181144.11286.6@webmail05.dca.untd.com> Colleagues, I'd like to share some valuable lessons about the politics of economic growth that I learned at the National Council for Science and the Environment conference this week in Washington, DC. First, the relationship between economic growth and biodiversity conservation (and environmental protection in general) is looking like the "next big issue," as some folks called it. There is a good chance it will be a featured topic at the next NCSE conference, and certainly many sub-events within the conference will be conducive to addressing the topic. A few years ago, you couldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole in such a venue, not without getting beat up, but at the NCSE conference it seemed to be everywhere this year. That includes the major political panel discussion, where each of the three congressmen (Moran, Holt, Inslee) and to a lesser extent the one senator (Whitehouse) either explicitly or clearly implicitly discussed the topic. All except one seemed to recognize the trade-off between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. The one exception called the relationship a "symbiotic" one. I spoke with him afterward and it was clear he had conflated economic growth with economic continuance (such as a steady state economy). That was one problem with his analysis, plus he was thinking of a microeconomic sector, namely the auto industry (an odd choice, come to think of it), rather than the macro-economy. So I gave him a paper on the topic and he insisted he would read it because he wants to understand the topic more thoroughly. We'll see if that makes a difference. I also learned a tougher lesson. I consciously attempted to optimize my own input to the conference on the subject, neither inputting too much nor too little. I chose two primary venues: a plenary panel on the first day and Tom Friedman's keynote lecture on the second. After the plenary panel, I took a calculated risk by asking one of the panelists a brief question. The panelist was a social entrepreneur, in the stated business of helping clients bring about "positive social and environmental change." I've learned you can get yourself into the conference doghouse by providing too much context in a Q/A session; i.e., you have to get straight to the question. So I eschewed the context in this case and simply asked, "Given the fundamental conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation, what advice can you give environmental scientists for educating the public and policy makers on this conflict and for moving the polity away from the unsustainable goal of growth and toward the goal of a steady state economy?" I lost the gamble, and I won't be eschewing the context any time soon! Her response was (and all these "quotes" are by memory), "I disagree with the assumption that there is such a conflict... etc. etc. etc." Part of her response was that we could reinvent the phrase "economic growth" to mean something different than it does. That shows us how some folks can keep a straight face while propagating the old fallacy that "there is no conflict between economic growth and environmental protection." They just reinvent the terms in their own minds - not much science there! Meanwhile, the public and policy makers go on recognizing economic growth for what it is: increasing production and consumption of goods and services (in the aggregate), as indicated by increasing GDP. So after Friedman's keynote, which he concluded by quoting a eulogy to Dana Meadows, I used some context: "Dana Meadows recognized limits to economic growth and the trade-off between economic growth and environmental protection. So I have a question about the 'flow of electrons' you mentioned as related to biodiversity conservation. [The "flow of electrons" was Friedman's phrase for describing the cheap, clean energy he advises we seek). When we look at the causes of species endangerment in the United States, they read like a Who's Who of the American economy, so all that additional energy in the service of economic growth would tend to eliminate more biodiversity. Yet corporations and Wall Street have been claiming for decades that 'there is no conflict between growing the economy and conserving biodiversity.' Now a number of professional natural resources societies have studied this issue intensively, including the ecological and economic theory, evidence, and models, and have concluded, not assumed, that there is conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation, and that this conflict is fundamental because it is based on laws of thermodynamics and principles of ecology, especially the principle of competitive exclusion. So, in addition to the market reforms you have recommended for 'getting the prices right,' don't we also need to be thinking about macroeconomic policy reform, moving with fiscal, monetary, and trade policies away from the goal of growth and toward the goal of a steady state economy?" Friedman's answer was just what the doctor ordered. First, it was a long and thoughtful answer. He said at least three times (maybe 4-5) that this is a "very important issue" to think about and deal with, consistent with the "next big thing" theme. He noted that, when he thinks about the steady state economy, he thinks about the impoverished countries he has visited and recognizes - as do we all - that we can't expect them to move toward a steady state any time soon. In fact, this is an underlying message of his book, Hot, Flat, and Crowded. And he does hold out some hope for increasing efficiencies, accompanied with new energy sources, to play out for some time. Yet, and this is the big one, he acknowledged that, ultimately, and perhaps very soon, we will have reached the end of that efficiency pathway (the macroeconomic manifestation of the second law of thermodynamics, as I described it in my paper on technological progress), and that we will have to think seriously about how to accomplish a steady state. In my estimation, a few things can be learned from these exchanges. The "win-win" entrepreneurial panelist shot me right out of the political saddle. Nevertheless, I couldn't help but thinking that many in the audience must have been wondering, "What's she talking about?" After all, already by that point in the conference, several speakers had spoken about how increasing populations and "economic activity" (a much more policy-relevant phrase than the old "human activity," thankfully) were dooming species into the Sixth Great Extinction. So even that exchange wasn't a total loss. But the exchange with Friedman eclipsed by an order of magnitude any political loss from the first day. So I think the lesson is that, when we broach this topic in public forums, we have to provide just enough context to ask the question in a way that it cannot be mis-portrayed as "assuming" that there is a conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. Finally, Friedman's answer was a nice validation of ecological economics, because it blended the three themes of ecological economics: scale, distribution of wealth, and allocation of resources. Friedman acknowledged that each of these are significant issues that must be handled with public policies to halt the erosion of biodiversity. Cheers, Brian Brian Czech, Ph.D., President Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy The CASSE position on economic growth may be e-signed at: http://www.steadystate.org/CASSEPositionOnEG.html . ____________________________________________________________ Save $15 on Flowers and Gifts from FTD! Shop now at http://offers.juno.com/TGL1141/?u=http://www.ftd.com/17007 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081211/89a93ebc/attachment.htm From brianczech at juno.com Thu Dec 18 07:57:10 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 15:57:10 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: 45 days left - EAERE/2009 - Call for papers and registration Message-ID: <20081218.105710.29776.2@webmail21.dca.untd.com> good opportunity to get some ecological economics and conservation biology - with input on macroeconomic policy reform - introduced to economists in Europe... ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- There are only 45 days left in which to submit your paper for this event: 17th Annual Conference of the EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMISTS (EAERE) 24-27 June 2009, Amsterdam, The Netherlands www.eaere2009.org Deadline for paper submissions: 1 February 2009 Deadline for early registrations: 1 May 2009 Dear colleagues, We are very pleased to invite you to Amsterdam for the 17th Annual Conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists. EAERE 2009 will be organized by the Department of Spatial Economics of the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, in cooperation with the Institute for Environmental Studies, both of the Vrije Universiteit (VU University Amsterdam). This university was established in 1880. VU University Amsterdam is located close to Schiphol, Amsterdam?s international airport. Amsterdam?s excellent public transportation system enables participants to reach the famous historical city centre of Amsterdam in 15-20 minutes. Amsterdam is one of the greatest small cities in the world. It?s a youthful, cultural city that provides stimulus for creativity, but it is seldom very formal. Amsterdam is home to some of the best art in the world, has more canals than Venice, more bridges than Paris and around 7000 national monuments in the city center. Amsterdam is also a city of tolerance and diversity. It has all the advantages of a big city: culture, nightlife, international restaurants, good transport - but is quiet, and largely thanks to its canals, has little road traffic. The programme of the conference will cover all areas of environmental and natural resource economics and we expect around 600 participants from all over the world, international researchers, scholars, economists and students. It is an invaluable opportunity for meeting, exchanging, and debating current topics in environmental and resource economics. We are looking forward to welcoming you in Amsterdam for a successful and unforgettable event! Harmen Verbruggen Chair of the Local Organizing Committee of EAERE 2009 CALL FOR PAPERS You are invited to submit theoretical and applied papers in all areas of environmental and natural resource economics for presentation at the EAERE's annual conference to be held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 24-27, 2009. All papers will undergo the regular peer review process regardless of the session in which they will be presented. Papers can only be submitted electronically through the conference website at www.eaere2009.org from November 17, 2008, onwards. Deadline for submission of papers is February 1, 2009. Notification of acceptance will be sent by April 17, 2009. Focus: The conference is a general conference and all topics are welcome. However, some special sessions will be organized; for instance, a special session on Food, Feed, Fuel and Fibres, sponsored by SOW - Centre for World Food Studies, and a special session organized by the research programme Vulnerability, Mitigation and Adaption from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research. Traditionally, a special policy session will be included in the program. Furthermore, a special session on Discounting will be organized and there will be special attention for Water Economics through a preconference held on the first day. Form: We will have a few plenary sessions, in which our keynote speakers will be given the floor. The parallel sessions will offer the opportunity to participants to present their papers and, in addition to these plenaries and regular sessions, a poster session will be organized. These posters can be conveniently displayed around the coffee and lunch area. KEYNOTE SPEAKERS Kirk Hamilton, Billy Pizer (t.b.c.), Rick van der Ploeg, M. Scott Taylor SOCIAL ACTIVITIES We believe that a conference should also be a social occasion which makes it easy for people from different countries, generations and subdisciplines to meet and have fun. We will have some social activity every evening. The conference will end on Saturday afternoon after which we will give participants the opportunity to discover Amsterdam on their own. Amsterdam is an international tourist attraction and its lifestyle is widely emulated everywhere. The Dutch are multilingual and so, not surprisingly, visitors to Amsterdam feel very welcome and almost immediately at home. Amsterdam possesses the largest historical inner city in Europe. It is especially famous for its sparkling crescent of canals where wealthy merchants built elegant homes and sturdy warehouses during Holland's Golden Age, the 17th century, when Amsterdam was the richest city in the world. The best introduction to these waterways is via a canal cruise, aboard one of the comfortable glass-topped boats. Among the favorite tourist attractions are Amsterdam's 40 museums. At least three of them are world-renowned. LOCAL ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Harmen Verbruggen, Dean of the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Frans Berkhout, Director of the Institute for Environmental Studies Marjan Hofkes, Professor of Environmental Economics (IVM) Cees Withagen, Professor of Environmental Economics (FEWEB) Hadewijch van Delft, Conference Coordinator SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMME COMMITTEE Co-chairs: Cees Withagen (Professor of Environmental Economics, VU University Amsterdam) Geir Asheim (Professor of Economics, University of Oslo) IMPORTANT DATES November 17, 2008: Paper submission and registration begins February 1, 2009: Deadline for submission of papers April 17, 2009: Notification of paper acceptance May 1, 2009: Deadline early registration FURTHER INFORMATION Further information is available at the conference website: www.eaere2009.org * Please accept our apologies for any crossed e-mails. ____________________________________________________________ European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists (EAERE)Castello, 5252, I-30122 Venice, Italytel. +39 041 2711458; fax +39 041 2711461;e-mail: eaere at eaere.orgURL: http://www.eaere.org ____________________________________________________________ Click for the hottest computer games. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw1MkysFa0lBRtTPHMwUgwDGURdo1Tyt4UxLyg6gYmKvhb5EI/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081218/a825dd61/attachment.html From brianczech at juno.com Fri Dec 19 07:54:26 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:54:26 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Conference: Ecosystem Services - Mar 12-13, 2009 - Charlottesville, VA Message-ID: <20081219.105426.2248.1@webmail03.dca.untd.com> ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Ecosystem Services: Marketing Environmental Solutions http://www.cpe.vt.edu/esmes/index.html Industry, government, non-governmental organizations, academia, and landowners will all benefit from the information presented by knowledgable leaders on the opportunities and challenges of carbon, nutrient, water, biodiversity, and other ecosystem service markets. - Michael J. Bean, Chair of the Wildlife Program for the Environmental Defense Fund - Allan Brockenbrough, water quality modeling coordinator for the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality - Sandra Brown, senior scientist in the Ecosystems Services Unit of Winrock International - Rob Doudrick, National Ecosystem Services Coordinator for the US Forest Service - Pamela F. Faggert, Vice President and Chief Environmental Officer for Dominion Resources, Inc. - William M. Ferretti, Vice President with Chicago Climate Exchange - Brent Fults, Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust, LLC - Steve Jones, Riverine Division Director for Environmental Services, Inc. - Will McDow, Southeast Regional Director of Environmental Defense Fund's Center for Conservation Incentives - Janice McMahon, Forest Management Division Director for Environmental Services, Inc. - Chris Pomeroy, President AquaLaw PLC - Janet Ranganathan, Vice President for Science and Research at World Resources Institute - Jim Salzman, Samuel Fox Mordecai Professor of Law at Duke University - David Shoch, Director of Forestry and Technical Services for TerraCarbon LLC - Matthew Smith, Director of Ecosystem Services for Forecon EcoMarket Solutions, LLC - Dan Spethmann, Managing Partner with Working Lands Investment Partners, LLC. - Randy Wynne, Professor of Forest Biometrics and Geomatics at Virginia Tech Sponsored by: Dominion http://www.dom.com/ American Forest Foundation http://www.affoundation.org/ Forecon - Ecomarket Solutions, LLC http://www.foreconinc.com/EcoMarket/ Environmenal Services, Inc. http://www.esinc.cc/ EarthSource Solutions, Inc. http://esswetlands.com/ Wetland Studies and Solutions, Inc. http://www.wetlandstudies.com/ Virginia Tech College of Natural Resources http://www.cnr.vt.edu/ Virginia Forestry Association http://www.vaforestry.org/ ____________________________________________________________ Hotel pics, info and virtual tours. Click here to book a hotel online. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2iLsGxEkYUA4tRz4U7Upqq6Qk4I0beOpRpNLi6bOPoSlxuc/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081219/daa107d9/attachment-0001.htm From brianczech at juno.com Tue Dec 23 13:11:00 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 21:11:00 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: Energy Economics Position at Portland State University Message-ID: <20081223.161100.4139.0@webmail01.dca.untd.com> Announcement attached... ____________________________________________________________ Save $15 on Flowers and Gifts from FTD! Shop now at http://offers.juno.com/TGL1141/?u=http://www.ftd.com/17007 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081223/1389f0a3/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Randy Bluffstone Subject: [RESECON] Energy Economics Position at Portland State University Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 12:55:20 -0800 Size: 24821 Url: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081223/1389f0a3/attachment.mht From brianczech at juno.com Tue Dec 30 08:35:05 2008 From: brianczech at juno.com (brianczech at juno.com) Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:35:05 GMT Subject: [Ecological Economics Discussion] Fw: National Ecosystem Services Research Partnership Opportunity Message-ID: <20081230.113505.2058.2@webmail21.dca.untd.com> http://www.epa.gov/osp/ftta/ESRP_CRADA_Broch.pdf (pdf of announcement below) _____________________________________________ National Ecosystem Services Research Partnership Opportunity The Ecosystem Services Research Program (ESRP) at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking partners for a National Ecosystem Services Research Partnership. The Partnership goals are to: 1. establish ecosystem service standards, indicators, and measurement protocols that support environmental accounting systems and markets; 2. advance ecosystem service valuation techniques; 3. create institutional capacity for investments in natural capital that provides sustainable flows of ecosystems services; and 4. improve the ability to perform ecosystem service assessments across institutional, spatial, and temporal scales. One possible action for the Partnership is to establish multiple Centers of Excellence that can host long-term inquiry in particular geographic areas with unique challenges and implementation opportunities, such as large metropolitan centers, coastal areas, or other biogeographically or politically-defined regions. The participants, organizational structure, responsibilities, and funding opportunities will be determined in collaboration with interested parties through future communications, including meetings, telephone conferences, and correspondence. The purpose of this announcement is to identify interested parties from the governmental, nongovernmental, and private sectors interested in pursuing a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional, national research partnership. Overview Ecosystem services are vital for public health and the well-being of human communities. Improved understanding of ecosystem services across institutional, spatial, and temporal scales is crucial for designing management strategies and institutional and governmental policies intended to increase and sustain the value of ecosystem services. The ESRP is focused on understanding the present and future ecological dynamics of ecosystem services to create a solid scientific foundation for environmental decision-making. Approximately 200 EPA scientists with an annual in-house budget of $62 million are associated with this program and will participate in the Partnership; EPA funding will primarily support this in-house research effort. For more information on the ESRP, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/ecology/. The Partnership will join not only ecology and economics, but also law, public policy, and business, among other disciplines. The ESRP proposes a three-part framework to understand ecosystem services research: (1) the ecology frame; (2) the economic-ecologic frame; and, (3) the institutional frame. The ecology frame focuses on the biophysical characterization of ecosystem functions and services, seeking to make multidimensional, multi-scalar phenomena quantifiable using methods that are replicable across contexts. The economic-ecologic frame is intended to advance and extend research at the interface between ecology and economics, often using joint economic-ecological models to characterize production relationships between ecosystem status and the delivery of economically valuable services. The institutional frame emphasizes law, policy, and business research to enable routine, operational investments in ecosystem services. The ESRP???s core strength is in the ecology frame. ESRP research products (e.g., ecological methods, data, maps, and models) will be EPA???s primary contribution to the Partnership. We seek feedback from all potential partners on ways to make our research products more valuable for decision-making within the public and private sectors. We encourage others to use this Partnership to critique, refine, extend, and apply ESRP research in novel ways, including branding, investment standards, marketing, or other approaches that can create revenue streams from ecosystem service investments. The ESRP is also using strategic partnerships to advance its work within the economic-ecologic frame. Establishing a research focus within the institutional frame is of the utmost importance to the ESRP, and we especially seek partners to advance this area. Institutional approaches will necessarily draw upon research from the ecology and economic-ecologic frames. They must also respond to a different set of challenges related to the design of institutional policies and instruments required to enable significant private, public, and municipal sector investments in the protection and restoration of ecosystem services. Invitation We invite interested organizations, public or private, to participate in this exciting research and development venture with EPA through a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) or other appropriate instrument (e.g., Memoranda of Understanding or Interagency Agreements). For more information on CRADAs, the most probable instrument, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/osp/ftta.htm. To Indicate Interest Please reply in an email to Alexander Macpherson ( macpherson.alex at epa.gov) by February 15, 2009, if you are interested in pursuing participation in this research partnership. In your response, please provide the following information: 1. Name and address of your organization 2. Name, address, telephone number, and email address of organization???s contact person 3. Area(s) of research that most interest your organization Next Steps Early in 2009, the ESRP will convene the first of a series of meetings that will include key respondents to this announcement to refine the vision, objectives, and next steps for the Partnership. Meeting participants will discuss issues such as: (1) membership and organization of the Partnership; (2) participants and their responsibilities; (3) developing a multi-year research strategy; and, (4) developing a funding strategy that leverages EPA???s in-house investment. We will incorporate the perspectives and insights from this meeting to refine and formalize the Partnership, its representatives, their responsibilities, and its research and funding strategy. EPA Technical Contacts Iris Goodman goodman.iris at epa.gov 202-343-9854 Alexander Macpherson macpherson.alex at epa.gov 919-541-9770 ____________________________________________________________ Make all systems go with these great constipation treatments! Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw3DmVIga2rS2YFO4J1nNHzLUONubelmJZ2KNdyhhs6lHLRnO/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.conbio.org/mailman/private/eess/attachments/20081230/1f17f1ee/attachment.htm