Climate + Environment
Climate change and the environment are hot topics among policy-makers and the public. In this issue of Search + Discover, University of Minnesota faculty members address climate and environmental issues, including:
Plus, you can explore further reading and related links.
Why aren't lawmakers doing more to support mass transit as a way to help the environment?
“It has been up to a small professional class of urban and regional planners, working with various environmental groups, to promote environmental protection issues,” says John Adams, professor of geography at the University of Minnesota. ”To date, their efforts have not had much impact, partly because many people, businesses and elected officials get caught up in short-term thinking and behavior.”
According to Adams, this tendency to focus on the short term is the result of several factors:
- Perceived high cost of start-up. “Public transportation takes many forms, with buses dominant and rail still a minor player except in a few metro areas. Bus transit pollutes, but involves low-cost capital investment (for the buses) with high operating costs (wages and benefits for personnel; maintenance of vehicles). Rail systems pollute less and are relatively low-cost to operate, but are exceptionally expensive on the capital investment side. Many lawmakers don’t want to pay the up-front capital cost and don’t want to go into debt to pay for the up-front investment, because that would mean many years of annual cost to service the debt.”
- Low population densities. “Rail-based systems are clean, but require high population densities to make them feasible. Most modern automobile-based metro areas in the United States have few places that can supply many riders within convenient distances from rail stations. The fewer riders per mile of track, the higher the subsidy per rider.”
- Shifting support for public goods. “Some believe it makes more sense to pay for transportation services as private goods through licenses, excise taxes and user fees, rather than for government to underwrite costs of transportation services as a public good. They believe those who benefit should pay and will receive “price signals” guiding them to use resources more efficiently. Again, environmental concerns are pushed into background as a minor issue.”
- Differing views of the environment. ”Often, voters and legislators don’t view nature as an asset that can be drawn down, so short-term financial concerns dominate their thinking.”
- Desire for government efficiency and reduced spending. “Many believe there is waste in government—that the state doesn’t get full value for money appropriated. Lawmakers want to keep a lid on spending in order to satisfy voters. Education and transportation dominate state spending, and environmental concerns take a back seat.”
- Historic connotations of planning. “During the Cold War, planning had a bad name linked to the defects of the Soviet Union and other centrally planned state socialist systems.”
“People in this country have generally not been educated about how our country and its urban areas work,” Adams says. ”As a result, issues of the environment, land development, transportation and the way metro economies work are poorly understood. Each of these things works against comprehensive planning and environmental protection.”
Geography professor John Adams also serves as a core faculty member in the Master of Urban and Regional Planning program in the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs and codirects the University Metropolitan Consortium.
Back to top
Can we repair the damage we're doing to the global ecosystem?
“There are many ways that human activities impact global ecosystems. One way to think about the question is to look at how human activities have changed the amount of two gases in our atmosphere in ways that affect every ecosystem on Earth.
“In the first case, chlorofluorcarbons (CFCs) were found to be destroying the atmospheric ozone layer, which protects plants, animals and people from the effects of harmful UV radiation. Scientists were alarmed to discover an “ozone hole” over Antarctica in the early 1980s. To address this problem an international treaty, the Montreal Protocol was signed in 1987 to phase out the production and consumption of all CFCs by the middle of this century. The protocol has since been ratified by 180 nations.
“Alternative substances were developed to fill the needs that used to be provided by CFCs such as refrigerants, solvents and blowing foams. As a result of global action, the amount of CFCs in the atmosphere began to fall in the 1990s. By about 2050, the amount of CFCs will fall to the level present before the ozone hole began to form, provided that nations continue to follow the Montreal Protocol.
“In the second case, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been increasing since the industrial revolution. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that causes global warming and other climate changes. Human activities, mostly the use of fossil fuels, affect the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere. Thus far, international efforts to regulate the amount of carbon dioxide released have been unsuccessful.
“So, it is possible to repair some of the major types of damage human activities have done to global ecosystems, but experience shows that it requires all nations of the world to work together and that the longer we wait to act, the more difficult it will be.”
Joe McFadden
Assistant Professor
Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior
Back to top
Is it better to manage wilderness areas or to leave them alone?
“Wilderness areas need management. They are no longer able to respond naturally to climate change and disturbances such as wind and fire. The invasion of exotic plant species has displaced native species, the invasion of exotic tree diseases has removed native tree species from the forest, and the invasion of exotic ecosystem engineers, such as European earthworms, has changed the soil and water and nutrient cycles. Increasing deer populations threaten native plants and trees, and global warming does not recognize wilderness boundaries, making it impossible for wilderness areas to maintain themselves.”
Lee Frelich,
Research Associate
Department of Forest Resources
Back to top
What can an average citizen do to stop the extinction of endangered species (e.g., tigers)?
“The easy answer is donate money to a large international conservation organization. It may not be satisfying to a small donor, however, to watch his or her gift disappear into an amorphous pool of donations. Our tiger research lab at the U of M, consisting of myself and Ph.D. students, decided to turn this question around and ask, ‘What can we do to help people save species like the tiger?’
“The challenge is to come up with a meaningful strategy for people, no matter the size of their donation. A schoolgirl giving $10 or a doctor donating $5,000 both want to make a difference.
“The answer may lie in a Web technology called ‘wiki,’ where people come together in a social network to address an issue. What if a Web site were established that described ongoing tiger projects throughout Asia? People could explore funding options on the site and select a project to support. Schoolchildren, for example, might pool funds to donate a GPS ($150) to help with a tiger survey. The wiki Web site could have a picture of a ranger in Thailand using the GPS and include the names of the children who made the donation. Another group might donate a satellite collar for a project in Bangladesh. An individual might purchase a solar panel system to power a park radio in Cambodia.
“I thank the person who wrote this question. You challenged us to address two important questions: how to make donations for conservation meaningful and how to link citizens in the United States with people undertaking conservation in Asia. Motivated by your question, we will develop a Web site for tiger conservation. If you want to help us start, contact me at jlds@umn.edu.”
James L. David Smith
Professor
Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology
Back to top
Will we ever run out of clean water?
“The scarcity of a clean freshwater resource is a regional problem, not a worldwide crisis. Clean freshwater resources are diminishing in only parts of the world. The scarcity of water resources occurs when there is a gap between water demand (due to overpopulation and the development of industrial and agricultural sectors) and water supply.
“However, even in areas where water resources are most scarce, water is often underpriced, which gives rise to inefficient use. As observed by the economist Adam Smith, 'although water is vital to life, it costs almost nothing, whereas diamonds, which are useless for survival, cost a fortune.'
“The loss of a freshwater resource base can be slowed through effective water resource management. Water polices should be made to increase the real price of water to users, which should provide users with incentives to increase water-use efficiency, to adopt water-saving technologies and to explore new sources of freshwater. Policies should also be made to facilitate changes in water-managing institutions and better organization of water use.”
Qiuqiong Huang
Assistant Professor
Department of Applied Economics
Back to top
Return to: 
Last modified on June 13, 2008