98th ESA Annual Meeting (August 4 -- 9, 2013)

COS 101-8 - Interaction effects of multiple conservation and development policies

Thursday, August 8, 2013: 3:40 PM
101J, Minneapolis Convention Center
Wu Yang1, Thomas Dietz2, Junyan Luo1, Wei Liu3, Zhiyun Ouyang4 and Jianguo Liu5, (1)Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, (2)Sociology and Environmental Science and Policy Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, (3)International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria, (4)State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, (5)Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI
Background/Question/Methods

To mitigate the widespread ecosystem degradation, numerous conservation and development policies have been designed and implemented. However, those policies were largely evaluated separately without consideration of their potential interaction effects. In this study, we asked two major questions: (1) are there interaction effects among different conservation and development policies on changes in the amount and structure of rural household income? (2) if yes, what are those interaction effects?

To answer these questions, we used household survey data from a long-term Coupled Human and Natural Systems project at Wolong Nature Reserve in China since 1995. We evaluated two main national conservation policies (i.e., Natural Forest Conservation Program [NFCP] and Grain to Green Program [GTGP]) and development policies (e.g., tourism development policy). These policies affect local livelihood through telecouplings (socioeconomic and environmental interactions over distances, such as subsidies provided by the central government to local communities, whose activities may affect forest outcomes). We constructed econometric models to assess the main and interaction effects of different conservation and development policies.

Results/Conclusions

Our results indicate that there were interaction effects among different conservation and development policies. For example, the NFCP changed the amount and structure of household income jointly with the GTGP or tourism development policy. Our results also suggest that there were trade-offs and synergies not only between conservation policies and development policies, but also among various conservation policies or among different development policies. Such interaction effects even led to unanticipated or unintended consequences. The NFCP or GTGP separately led to a negative impact on the total household income, while jointly they had a positive effect on the total household income. To appropriately evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of policies and account for unintended consequences, conservation and development policies should take the interaction effects into consideration. Various policies should be jointly designed, monitored and evaluated.