1. Daly and Farley, Chapters 4-6
GEOG 352: Day 6
Daly and Farley, Chapters 4-6

2. Housekeeping Items
Reminder that project outline is due a week from today.
The deadline for WDCAG abstracts has been extended until February 1st, 2012 at midnight. Check out  for more information!
Jino Distasio from U. Winnipeg will be speaking on homelessness in Matt’s class in 243 at noon. All are welcome.
What points did you write down from The Economics of Happiness that you felt were worthy of discussion?
Because of the film we are a little behind, but after the discussion we’ll start in on Chapters 4-6 of Daly and Farley and finish up next week.

3. Daly and Farley: Chapters 4-6
The authors argue that markets function best when goods are exclusively owned,
They note that many economists (and politicians) argue that improvements in environmental quality are only possible with more economic growth, and they cite the fact that developed countries have better environmental quality. What do you make of this [see discussion point on p. 62]?
On p. 63, they note that, if the human population were to increase at a rate of 1% per year, in 3000 years it would have a mass greater than the entire planet. They also note that if it were to grow by the same rate over the next 7 million years, as predicted would be possible by Julian Simon, there would be more people than atoms in the universe!

4. Daly and Farley: Chapters 4-6
What is your answer to the questions posed on p. 64?
The first law deals with quantity of energy, the second (the entropy law) with quality – i.e. down.
They note that the law of entropy also applies to matter and that entropy is a “one-way street.” While the law of probability does not forbid a dissolved sugar cube from re-assembling itself, we shouldn’t hold our breath.
How do they address the seeming contradiction between the law of entropy and the fact that the Earth at least has seen the emergence of ever more complex living systems (i.e. pockets of highly organized matter)?

5. Daly and Farley: Chapters 4-6
They cite the physicist Schrodinger as saying that that life is a system in steady-state thermodynamic disequilibrium that exchanges low-entropy inputs for high-entropy outputs, and all of this is made possible by the constant flow of solar energy to our planet.
They make an important distinction between stock-flow resources and fund-service resources. Stock flow resources get used up in the final products (they use the example of ingredients for making pizzas) and, as long as they can be preserved, the rate at which they are used up can be controlled. Fund-service resources get gradually worn out (e.g. people and machinery). Oil is a stock-flow resource; topsoil is a fund-service resource.

6. Excludable vs. Non-Excludable Resources
An excludable resource is one where one person’s use of something excludes another (as in private property rights). The excludability of resources is usually enforced by institutions. Water rights are often a manifestation of excludability.
A non-excludable resource is one that everyone can share and that cannot be monopolized (e.g. streetlamps, air, the ozone shield), though there are situations in nature where if too many trees are competing for sunlight then one may crowd out another. [This reminds me of an episode of The Simpson involving a scheme by Mr. Burns.]

7. Rival vs. Non-Rival Resources
A rival resource is one where my use of something excludes you from using it, at least at the same time, and if you are able to use it later – like a bike – it is a little the worse for wear. Rivalness is in an intrinsic characteristic of resources.
A non-rival resource is one that everyone can share and that does not get depleted through use; there is still just as much to share.
The authors note, however, that institutions can seek to make non-rival resources excludable, as with the patenting or copyrighting of information or techno-logy, or even products of nature and culture, some of which are thousands of years old (e.g. Basmati rice).