Labor markets can shape the impacts of global market developments and local sustainability policies on agricultural outcomes, including changes in production and land use. Yet local labor market outcomes, including agricultural employment, migration and wages, are often overlooked in integrated assessment models (IAMs). The relevance of labor markets has become more important in recent decades, with evidence of diminished labor mobility in the United States (US) and other developed countries. We use the SIMPLE-G (Simplified International Model of agricultural Prices, Land use, and the Environment) modeling framework to investigate the impacts of a global commodity price shock and a local sustainable groundwater use policy in the US. SIMPLE-G is a multi-scale framework designed to allow for integration of economic and biophysical determinants of sustainability, using fine-scale geospatial data and parameters. We use this framework to compare the impacts of the two sets of shocks under two contrasting assumptions: perfect mobility of agricultural labor, as generally implicit in global IAMs, and relatively inelastic labor mobility (‘sticky’ agricultural labor supply response). We supplement the numerical simulations with analytical results from a stylized two-input model to provide further insights into the impacts of local and global shocks on agricultural labor, crop production and resource use. Findings illustrate the key role that labor mobility plays in shaping both local and global agricultural and environmental outcomes. In the perfect labor mobility scenario, the impact of a commodity price boom on crop production, employment and land-use is overestimated compared with the restricted labor mobility case. In the case of the groundwater sustainability policy, the perfect labor mobility scenario overestimates the reduction in crop production and employment in directly targeted grids as well as spillover effects that increase employment in other grids. For both shocks, impacts on agricultural wages are completely overlooked if we ignore rigidities in agricultural labor markets.
The exploitation of ecosystem services, through processes like agricultural production, is associated with myriad negative environmental impacts, which are felt by stakeholders on local, regional, and global scales. The varying type and scale of impacts leads naturally to fragmented and siloed approaches to mitigating externalities by diverse governmental and non-governmental institutions. However, policies designed to address a single impact may worsen other negative impacts. As a result, even when groups have the expertise to design policy solutions in one dimension, policies addressing single issues may conflict and result in less than ideal outcomes in combination. In this paper, we present a conceptual framework and examples of this kind of ‘policy collision,’ where policies produce mutual negative interference so that policies designed independently may fail to achieve their goals. We argue that an integrated systems perspective is needed to overcome this problem and present several positive examples where this has been put into practice. Policy collision provides a useful framework for determining how each colliding policy should be modified in improve outcomes.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10392755
- Publisher / Repository:
- IOP Publishing
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Environmental Research Letters
- Volume:
- 18
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 1748-9326
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- Article No. 025004
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
more » « less
Abstract Background The development of public health policy is inextricably linked with governance structure. In our increasingly globalized world, human migration and infectious diseases often span multiple administrative jurisdictions that might have different systems of government and divergent management objectives. However, few studies have considered how the allocation of regulatory authority among jurisdictions can affect disease management outcomes.
Methods Here we evaluate the relative merits of decentralized and centralized management by developing and numerically analyzing a two-jurisdiction
SIRS model that explicitly incorporates migration. In our model, managers choose between vaccination, isolation, medication, border closure, and a travel ban on infected individuals while aiming to minimize either the number of cases or the number of deaths.Results We consider a variety of scenarios and show how optimal strategies differ for decentralized and centralized management levels. We demonstrate that policies formed in the best interest of individual jurisdictions may not achieve global objectives, and identify situations where locally applied interventions can lead to an overall increase in the numbers of cases and deaths.
Conclusions Our approach underscores the importance of tailoring disease management plans to existing regulatory structures as part of an evidence-based decision framework. Most importantly, we demonstrate that there needs to be a greater consideration of the degree to which governance structure impacts disease outcomes.
-
more » « less
Abstract Over the past two decades, scientific research on the connections between the health and resilience of marine ecosystems and human health, well‐being, and community prosperity has expanded and evolved into a distinct “metadiscipline” known as Oceans and Human Health (OHH), recognized by the scientific community as well as policy makers. OHH goals are diverse and seek to improve public health outcomes, promote sustainable use of aquatic systems and resources, and strengthen community resilience. OHH research has historically included some level of community outreach and partner involvement; however, the increasing disruption of aquatic environments and urgency of public health impacts calls for a more systematic approach to effectively identify and engage with community partners to achieve project goals and outcomes. Herein, we present a strategic framework developed collaboratively by community engagement personnel from the four recently established U.S. Centers for Oceans and Human Health (COHH). This framework supports researchers in defining levels of community engagement and in aligning partners, purpose, activities, and approaches intentionally in their community engagement efforts. Specifically, we describe: (a) a framework for a range of outreach and engagement approaches; (b) the need for identifying partners, purpose, activities, and approaches; and (c) the importance of making intentional alignment among them. Misalignment across these dimensions may lead to wasting time or resources, eroding public trust, or failing to achieve intended outcomes. We illustrate the framework with examples from current COHH case studies and conclude with future directions for strategic community engagement in OHH and other environmental health contexts.
-
more » « less
Abstract Assessments of the climate impacts of energy technologies and other emissions sources can depend strongly on the equivalency metric used to compare short- and long-lived greenhouse gas emissions. However, the consequences of metric design choices are not fully understood, and in practice, a single metric, the global warming potential (GWP), is used almost universally. Many metrics have been proposed and evaluated in recent decades, but questions still remain about which ones perform better and why. Here, we develop new insights on how the design of equivalency metrics can impact the outcomes of climate policies. We distill the equivalency metric problem into a few key design choices that determine the metric values and shapes seen across a wide range of different proposed metrics. We examine outcomes under a hypothetical 1.5 or 2∘C policy target and discuss extensions to other policies. Across policy contexts, the choice of time parameters is particularly important. Metrics that emphasize the immediate impacts of short-lived gases such as methane can reduce rates of climate change but may require more rapid technology changes. Differences in outcomes across metrics are more pronounced when fossil fuels, with or without carbon capture and storage, play a larger role in energy transitions. By identifying a small set of consequential design decisions, these insights can help make metric choices and energy transitions more deliberate and effective at mitigating climate change.
-
null (Ed.)The COVID-19 crisis has revealed weaknesses and placed great stress on the agri-food system in the U.S. Many believe that it could be a catalyst event that leads to structural changes to improve the food system’s resilience. We use a sample of 220 articles published in prominent national newspapers and agricultural trade journals from March to May 2020 to explore the extent to which farmer responses to COVID-19 covered in the media represent examples of resistant, adaptive, or transformative strategies. The pandemic disrupted the U.S. food system and impacted farmers by reducing access to markets, lowering commodity prices, restricting access to farmworker labor, and shifting consumer demand. Media coverage of farmer responses to these stressors were coded into three alternative pathways: (i) reactive or buffering responses, (ii) adaptive responses; and (iii) transformative responses. Most news media coverage focused on the pandemic’s disruptive impacts on the U.S. food system, related negative impacts on farmers, and short-term responses by institutional actors, including policy-makers and food supply chain industry actors. Farmer responses to pandemic stressors were mentioned less frequently than farmer impacts and responses by institutional actors. The most common examples of farmer responses highlighted in the media reflected farmer reactive and buffering behaviors, which were mentioned significantly more frequently than adaptive or transformative responses. National newspapers were more likely to cover farmer responses and present examples of adaptive and transformative strategies compared to agricultural trade journals. Our findings suggest that news media coverage in the early months of the pandemic largely characterized the event as a rapid onset ‘natural’ disaster that created severe negative impacts. Media devoted more attention to short-term policy responses designed to mitigate these impacts than to farmer responses (in general) or to discussion of the deeper structural causes of and potential solutions to the vulnerabilities revealed by the pandemic. In this way, both national newspaper and agricultural trade journal coverage seems to promote frames that reduce the likelihood of the pandemic becoming the seed of a more resilient system.more » « less
