Distributional Considerations for Transboundary Risk Governance of Environmental Threats

Abstract

Most policy analyses of both short-term and long-term disasters focus on aggregate impacts of their costs and the benefits of policy remedies. Distributional considerations relating to the costs of these disasters and the benefits of their risk management, however, are very important in many cases. This article examines two broad categories of cases in terms of distributional considerations. The first category is where transboundary considerations strongly affect risk governance, as in the case of climate change. The second relates to ordinary, short-term disasters, which include fewer, but still important, transboundary issues. Climate change policy requires information regarding the distribution of impacts and policy responses across countries because it is a global problem. Conventional disasters involve transboundary considerations much less frequently, so the attention typically shifts to the distribution of benefits and costs within a jurisdiction. In both cases distributional information is needed to evaluate the equity of policies and to provide information for public participation in the policy process. This article offers modeling and policy approaches to address these issues.

Keywords

Climate change / Disasters / Distributional effects / Policy analysis / Risk governance / Transboundary impacts

References

[1] Andresen S. International climate negotiations: Top-down, bottom-up or a combination of both?. The International Spectator, 2015, 50(1): 15-30

[2] Averchenkova A, Bassi S. Beyond the targets: Assessing the political credibility of pledges for the Paris agreement, 2016, London: Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment

[3] Bretschger, L. 2016. Presentation for the Panel on Climate and Energy Policy after the Paris Agreement, Annual Conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, Zürich, Switzerland, 24 June 2016.

[4] Cutter S. The landscape of disaster resilience indicators in the USA. Natural Hazards, 2016, 80(2): 741-758

[5] Ellerman AD, Buchner B. The European Union emissions trading scheme: Origins, allocation, and early results. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2007, 1(1): 66-87

[6] Girgerenzer G, Selten R. Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox, 2002, Cambridge: MIT Press

[7] Godschalk D, Brody S, Burby R. Public participation in natural hazard mitigation policy formation: Challenges for comprehensive planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 2003, 46(5): 733-754

[8] Holling C. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1973, 4(November): 1-23

[9] IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Fifth assessment report (AR5), 2014, Geneva: IPCC

[10] Okada, N. ed. 2009. International Workshop on Risk Governance of the Maritime Global Critical Infrastructure: Straits of Malacca and Singapore exposed to extreme hazards. Maritime GCI summary workshop report, Kyoto University and International Risk Governance Council (IRGC).

[11] Oladosu G, Rose A. Income distribution impacts of climate change mitigation policy in the Susquehanna River Basin. Energy Economics, 2007, 29(4): 520-544

[12] Pimm S. The complexity and stability of ecosystems. Nature, 1984, 307(5949): 321-326

[13] Rayner S. How to eat an elephant: A bottom-up approach to climate policy. Climate Policy, 2010, 10(6): 615-621

[14] Renn O, Schweizer P. Inclusive risk governance: Concepts and application to environmental policy making. Environmental Policy and Governance, 2009, 19(3): 174-185

[15] Rose A. Reducing conflict in global warming policy: Equity as a unifying principle. Energy Policy, 1990, 18(1): 927-935

[16] Rose A. Defining and measuring economic resilience to disasters. Disaster Prevention and Management, 2004, 13(4): 307-314

[17] Rose A. Economic resilience to natural and man-made disasters: Multidisciplinary origins and contextual dimensions. Environmental Hazards, 2007, 7(4): 383-395

[18] Rose A. Defining and measuring economic resilience from a societal, environmental and security perspective, 2017, Heidelberg: Springer

[19] Rose A, Kustra T. Economic considerations in designing emergency management institutions and policies for transboundary disasters. Public Management Review, 2013, 159(3): 446-464

[20] Rose A, Stevens BK. Meyers A. Policy instruments for mitigating carbon dioxide emissions. Encyclopedia of sustainability science and technology, 2017, Heidelberg: Springer 1-20.

[21] Rose A, Davis G, Stevens BK. Who gains and who loses from natural resource policy: Distributional information and the public participation process. Resources Policy, 1989, 15(4): 282-291

[22] Rose A, Stevens BK, Davis G. Natural resource policy and income distribution, 1988, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press

[23] Rose A, Stevens BK, Edmonds J, Wise M. International equity and differentiation in global warming policy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 1998, 12(1): 25-51

[24] Rose A, Wei D, Prager F. Distributional impacts of greenhouse gas emissions trading: Alternative allocation and recycling strategies in California. Contemporary Economic Policy, 2012, 30(4): 603-617

[25] Rose A, Wei D, Miller N, Vandyck T. Equity, emissions allowance trading and the Paris agreement on climate change. Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, 2017, 1(3): 203-232

[26] Rose A, Wei D, Miller N, Vandyck T, Flachsland C. Meeting COP 21 goals through G20 country leadership on greenhouse gas emissions allowance trading systems. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2018, 12(1): 170-182

[27] Surminski S, Tanner T. Realising the resilience triple dividend: A new business case for disaster risk management, 2016, Heidelberg: Springer

[28] Tierney K. Rodriguez H, Quarantelli E, Dynes R. Businesses and disasters: Vulnerability, impacts, and recovery. Handbook of disaster research, 2007, Heidelberg: Springer 275-296

[29] UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change). 2016. Report of the conference of the parties on its twenty-first session. Addendum part two: Action taken by the conference of the parties, and decisions adopted by the conference of the parties. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/10a01.pdf. Accessed December 6, 2018.