©2009 Dowlatabadi Geoengineering Hadi Dowlatabadi January 29 2007 [email protected].
Linking Scales of Regulation to Scales of Environmental Change Processes By Tim McDaniels and Hadi...
-
date post
21-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of Linking Scales of Regulation to Scales of Environmental Change Processes By Tim McDaniels and Hadi...
Linking Scales of Regulation to Scales of Environmental Change Processes
ByTim McDaniels and Hadi Dowlatabadi
UBC, CMU, CISHDGC
Acknowledgements Thanks to the CISHDGC, supported by the
NSF Thanks to the Centers of Excellence in
Aquaculture Research supported by the Canadian SSHRC and NSERC
Thanks to Sara Stevens, Holly Longstaff, Patricia Keen, Daniel Galland and Kira Gerwing
Basic Message There are scales within regulatory structures for
global change issues, as well as scales in many other dimensions (e.g., space, time, trophic levels, etc)
Effective regulation requires matching scales of regulation to the nature and scales of institutional decisions required for that issue
Mismatches and gaps in scales of regulation can be an underlying of source of conflict or regulatory failure
Outline Multiple Scales in Regulatory Contexts
Aquaculture as a global change process
Salmon Aquaculture in British Columbia : multiple scales and gaps
Implications for linking regulation to scales
Multiple Scales In Global Change Many writers have stressed the importance of
scale in understanding global change issues Concerns for scales range from biological to
human systems, from patterns of leaves to patterns of landscapes, and from local to global levels
Example: Rotmans and Rothman (eds.) 2003
Cash and Moser, 2000: typology of regulatory problems across scales
Problems of Institutional fit Mismatch in scale at which institutions enact regulation and
the scale of environmental problem
Problems of Scale Discordance Mismatch between scale of assessment and scale at which
information is needed for regulation
Problems of Cross-Scale dynamics Regulation proceeds at one scale but problem operates
across many scales
Gaps, but no regulatory framework? There seems to be little writing on the nature
of or ideals for regulatory structures in problems with multiple scales
Some related concepts (federalism, instrument choice) but these do not directly address notions of regulatory tasks in problems with multiple scales
Thoughts on a definition A cross-scale regulatory problem arises when
the impacts of an activity extend beyond the boundaries of initial institutional control for the activity
Hence any externality as defined by economists is a cross-scale problem. The impacts of a transaction extend beyond the parties to the transaction (the market as the institution)
Simple example Emissions from one power plant have
regional impacts and so require regulation beyond the local or plant level
Emissions from all the power plants in a region have impacts on national and international air quality and so require even broader levels of regulation
Scale Problems Everywhere With this definition, scale problems arise in all
kinds of situations (levels and kinds of urban development, siting facilities, fisheries, technology standards, reliability, global change, air, water etc)
What is the nature of regulation across scales for these contexts?
Flows Across Scale Levels From broader to narrower (e.g., regional to
local) Constraints on activities (bounds of operation) to
address the broader level implications of local activities
From narrower to broader (e.g., local to regional) The acceptability and desirability of the bounds of
operation, as seen from the narrower level
Information needed across scales Flows in both directions (up and down)
Values of the interested parties (what is important, their views on tradeoffs)
Alternatives and their impacts Wise, justifiable choices more acceptable
A sense of trust in the process, belief in fairness, needed for acceptance when constraints hurt
Hence effective regulation across scales requires understanding of values, technical information and good decision process
Figure 1. Flows of Constraints, Feedback and Information in Regulatory Structures for Issues with Multiple Scales
INFORMATION
Broader Values and Alternatives
Broader Scale
Narrower Scale
FEEDBACK
Narrower Values and Alternatives
CONSTRAINTS
Constraints on Activities to Operate within Broader Scale
Limits and Goals
Acceptability of Constraints on Activities to Meet Broader
Scale Limits and Goals
Possible Implications When some elements are missing, at one or
more scales, cross-scale problems can arise in regulation
The wider the range of scales, the greater potential for gaps or mismatches
Diagnose gaps and mismatches with an eye to prescriptions for improvement
Aquaculture as global change Earth’s land surface was transformed by
emergence of agriculture
Remote coastlines following this same pattern, only faster Decline of wild fisheries Growth in aquaculture based on property rights
Aquaculture as global change Doubling in volume and value from 1987-97
(Nature, 2000, Naylor et al) Diverse kinds and effects of aquaculture
Herbivores versus carnivores shellfish versus finfish
Substantial ecological implications Farming up the food chain Disease spread, introduced species Substantial habitat loss Major social, cultural, economic implications
Salmon Aquaculture Salmon aquaculture: phenomenal growth in
Norway, Scotland, BC, Chile, NZ Dominated by five multinational corporations
(capital, knowledge, markets, technology) Impacts focused on remote coastlines, small
(Native) communities Major controversies over environmental (fish
disease, escapes, effects on shellfish) and social impacts (effects on neighbors, communities), food and economic benefits
Salmon Aquaculture in BC Remarkable growth since 1985 (large areas
of seascape on Canada’s west coast are altered)
Substantial environmental, social and economic impacts
Multiple scales are apparent, and a good way to examine complexity in the industry
B.C. Salmonid Aquaculture Production (1984-2001)*
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Tonnes
Year
Coho (silver) salmon
Chinook (King) salmon
Atlantic salmon
*Source: FAO Statistical Database
Policy Decisions At Each Scale International scale
What role should salmon aquaculture play in worldwide food production?
National scale What role should salmon aquaculture play in Canada?
Regional Scale What is the best scale and type of salmon
aquaculture? Local Scale
Where should salmon farms be sited?
Policies in place International: fits within trade, food
agreements National: highly encouraged, if
sustainable Provincial: highly encouraged Local: ranges from despised to tolerated
BC Regulatory Mismatches Site-by-site regulation is focus through
permitting (federal and provincial agencies) Cumulative (regional) impacts are profound
Potential for disease spread (sea lice) to wild stocks, escapes (colonizing) all regional
Siting and permits supposed to address cumulative impacts, but have no basis or method
Enormous frustration, direct action against siting farms, particularly in Native communities
Local to regional conflicts Province, Feds regulate the environmental
aspects of aquaculture Local government has control of land use In last two years, three farms with all
provincial and federal permits in place, turned down at the local level due to concerns over environmental impacts
Cause of great dismay among fish farm investors and regulators in senior governments
Diagnosis lack of real attention to cumulative impacts
leads to a major regulatory gap An underlying source of controversy and
frustration because key issues are unaddressed
Local governments try to take up cumulative impacts although beyond their expertise
Problems of institutional fit, scale discordance, cross-scale dynamics all evident
4.) Implications Regulatory gaps at multiple scales are a
subtle yet important source of failure to address global change
Concepts of the nature of and ideals for regulation across scales is a start to understand these gaps
The gaps may be greatest at the global level nations advocate strongly for their economic and
sovereignty interests, with few looking out for global well-being
Adding to the typology of regulatory gaps A competence gap:
the higher level is not able to understand or make use of lower level values, its own values, the alternatives and the impacts in setting constraints on lower level operations (e.g., lack of attention to cumulative impacts)
A legitimacy gap: the higher level is not seen as legitimate or fair in
setting lower level constraints on operations (e.g., Native protests, local refusals)
The distance across the scales A suggestion:
A wider distance between the scale at which driving forces lead to change, and the scale at which impacts are manifest, leads to greater potential for regulatory gaps
Worldwide Salmonid Aquaculture Production (1986-2001)*
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
Tonnes
1986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001
Year
Rainbow Trout
Coho
Chinook
Atlantic salmon
*Source: FAO Statistical Database
Worldwide Salmonid Capture (1950-2001)*
*Source: FAO Statistical Database
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
Tonnes
1950 1954 1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998
Year
Table 2. Summary of Government Regulatory Responsibilities for Salmon Aquaculture in B.C.
Level of Government Regulatory Body Regulatory Responsibilities
Department of Fisheries and OceansProtection of fish and fish habitats.Maintain navigation safety.Regulate transfer of fish and eggs.
Health CanadaRegulate the use of pesticides anddrugs.
Canadian Environmental Assessment AgencyResponsible for environmentalassessments of aquacultureproposals.
Agriculture and Agri-Foods CanadaRegulate the handling, holding,transport, and processing of fish forinterprovincial trade or export.
Responsible for environmentalassessments of aquacultureproposals.
Federal Government
Agriculture and Agri-Foods CanadaRegulate the handling, holding,transport, and processing of fish forinterprovincial trade or export.
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries
Issue and monitor salmonaquaculture operating licences.Monitor ongoing aquacultureoperations.
Land and Water British Columbia Inc.Allocate and administer tenure ofCrown lands.
Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management
Protect the heritage value of objectsand land in BC.Maintain coastal resourceinventories.
Provincial Government
Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection Regulate waste management.Local Government Local or regional governments Regulate local land use via zoning.
Our various papers/theses Multiple scales and regulatory mismatches
(Sara Stevens) Linking objectives and performance measures
(Holly Longstaff) Risk ranking among experts (Patricia) Evolution of siting criteria (Daniel Galland) First Nations values and indicators (Kira
Gerwing) Risk Communication experiment about GM fish
food for salmon aquaculture (Holly again)
Additional Purpose Report to and thank NSF for our support
through the CISHDGC at CMU Results from one of several products
from one of four projects from last year Leveraged support of $80K (Cdn) from
Canada Centers of Excellence in Aquaculture (SSHRC and NSERC)
Purpose Use our research as a basis for
exploring implications of regulatory approaches
Examine concepts regarding regulatory gaps and mismatches across scales
Illustrate with examples from salmon aquaculture
Canada’s Salmonid Capture (1950-2001)*
*Source: FAO Statistical Database
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
Tonnes
1950 1953 1956 1959 1962 1965 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001
Year
Insights from our related projects Using “value-focused thinking” to clarify how
objectives and measures change as scales of decisions increases
Actors and regulatory structures at every major decision scale
Means-ends networks to show how various ends are related to policy choices