Considerations in environmental science and management for the design of natural asset checks in public policy appraisal
Considerations in environmental science and management for the design of natural asset checks in public policy appraisal
复制标题
公共政策评估中自然资产检查设计的环境科学和管理考虑
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Haines
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
B. Howard;R. Hails;A. Watt;M. Potschin;R. Haines
2010年，《政府经济事务处可持续发展经济学评论》建议，应调查自然资产检查，以用于评估公共政策选项。环境科学和管理方面的考虑有助于确保在任何自然资产检查中适当处理生态阈值、累积影响、适当核算单位的选择和风险等问题。本文在对英国国家生态系统评估（UK NEA）和其他工作的贡献进行评估的基础上，提出了一系列与自然资产核查设计有关的建议：
1.虽然英国国家环境局汇集了设计自然资产检查所需的大量信息，但为了进行检查，需要制定这一框架。
2.某种核算模式作为自然资产检查的基础可能比生态系统评估所用的框架更有用。
3.将生态系统服务与作为其基础的自然资产联系起来的分类方法，可能比基于更抽象和通用的资产分类的方法更有效地捕捉政策方面的重要内容。
4.有足够的数据资源可供对自然资产进行初步审计。
5.虽然重点关注自然系统中的非边际或不可逆转的变化很重要，但如果将其作为任何自然资产检查的唯一关注点，则限制性太大。
6.随着知识的发展或环境的变化，可被视为关键自然资产的内容可能会发生变化。因此，“一次性”的自然资产检查对于长期政策分析来说不太可能可靠。定期审计是必要的。
In 2010, the Government Economic Service Review of the Economics of Sustainable Development recommended that a natural asset check should be investigated for use in the appraisal of public policy options. Considerations in environmental science and management can help to ensure that issues such as the ecological thresholds, cumulative impacts, the selection of appropriate accounting units and risk are handled appropriately in any natural asset check. Based on assessment of the contribution of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (UK NEA) and other work, this paper makes a series of propositions in relation to the design of a natural asset check:
1. While the UK NEA draws together much of the information needed to design a natural asset check, a development of this framework will be required in order to perform the check.
2. Some kind of accounting model is likely to be more useful as a basis for a natural asset check than the frameworks used for ecosystem assessments.
3. A classification approach that links ecosystem services to the natural assets that underpin them is probably more efficient in capturing what is important in policy terms, than one that is based on a more abstract and generic classification of assets.
4. There are sufficient data resources available for a preliminary audit of natural assets to be made.
5. While a focus on non-marginal or irreversible changes in natural systems is important, it would be too restrictive to make this the exclusive concern of any natural asset check.
6. What might be considered critical natural assets may change as knowledge develops or circumstances change. Therefore, a ‘one-off’ natural asset check is unlikely to be reliable for policy analysis in the long term. Periodic audit will be necessary.