E-109: Environmental Politics Section Meeting 5 October 28, 2008

Midterm OFFERED BETWEEN 11:00 AM WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 29 AND 11:00 AM FRIDAY, OCTOBER 31 Midterm Tools/Help: Extension School exam simulation link ESPP 78 Midterm from last year “Midterm Survival Guide” Discussion Board for questions – ask AND answer Other Teaching Staff grading exams

Administrative Group Project Guidelines Posted Group Preference Form Group Assignments will be ed October 6 th video problem resolved Professor Jasanoff’s Section Visit Final Paper NO SECTION NEXT WEEK (NOVEMBER 4 TH ); NO SECTION ASSIGNMENT (NOVEMBER 2 ND )

Schedule Midterm Opens 11:00 AM Midterm Closes 11:00 AM NO Assignment Due NO Section Project Bibliography Due Section Assignment Due Paper Abstract Due

Key Concepts Economics as a Model Economics as “Normative” v. “Descriptive” Tragedy of the Commons Common Pool Resources Degrees of Valuation “Absolute Values” Methods of Valuation Benefit-Cost Analysis Contingent Valuation Benefits of using economic model AND problems using economic model

Topic #1: Hardin v. Ostrom Hardin and Ostrom et al. present very different ideas about the fate, underlying assumptions, and nature of “the commons”. How do Hardin and Ostrom et al. differ in their assessments of the fate of “the commons”? How do Hardin and Ostrom et al. differ in their assumptions of human behavior? Which, in your opinion, presents a more accurate portrayal of human behavior in modern-day society? What other assumptions does each author make, and what factors influenced the choice of assumptions or ultimate conclusions of each?

Topic #1: Hardin v. Ostrom How might Hardin have responded to Ostrom et al.’s assertions about common pool resources and the importance of indigenous property traditions? Would he take the sustainability of CPR’s as a negation of his “tragedy” thesis?

Topic #2: Ethical Economic Evaluation? In light of the valuation problems pointed out by Diamond and Hausman, should cost-benefit analysis (or economic methods in general) be used as widely as it is? What are some of these problems? Is there a way to account for ethical or moral concerns in cost-benefit analysis? How do the difficulties of valuation affect your position on Sagoff’s argument that ethical and moral considerations should be the primary motivator for environmental protection, and Daly’s critique of that argument?

Topic #3: Science or art? Arrow et al. suggest that the methods used to validate science— including peer review, developing common standards and assumptions, and quantifying possible outcomes—should be applied to cost-benefit analyses. Drawing on the discussions by Arrow et al, Sagoff, and Diamond and Hausman, consider the following: Can we apply “scientific” procedures to guarantee the “soundness” of economic analyses? Or is the nature of economics fundamentally different from the natural sciences?

Wrap-Up Questions? Comments?