scholarly journals Photosynthesis research: a model to bridge fundamental science, translational products, and socio-economic considerations in agriculture

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (7) ◽  
pp. 2281-2298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajay Kohli ◽  
Berta Miro ◽  
Jean Balié ◽  
Jacqueline d’A Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Economic Impact ◽  
Gap Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Preliminary Evidence ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Transformative Power ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Product Acceptability ◽  
Socio Economic Impact

Abstract Despite impressive success in molecular physiological understanding of photosynthesis, and preliminary evidence on its potential for quantum shifts in agricultural productivity, the question remains of whether increased photosynthesis, without parallel fine-tuning of the associated processes, is enough. There is a distinct lack of formal socio-economic impact studies that address the critical questions of product profiling, cost–benefit analysis, environmental trade-offs, and technological and market forces in product acceptability. When a relatively well understood process gains enough traction for translational value, its broader scientific and technical gap assessment, in conjunction with its socio-economic impact assessment for success, should be a prerequisite. The successes in the upstream basic understanding of photosynthesis should be integrated with a gap analysis for downstream translational applications to impact the farmers’ and customers’ lifestyles and livelihoods. The purpose of this review is to assess how the laboratory, the field, and the societal demands from photosynthesis could generate a transformative product. Two crucial recommendations from the analysis of the state of knowledge and potential ways forward are (i) the formulation of integrative mega-projects, which span the multistakeholder spectrum, to ensure rapid success in harnessing the transformative power of photosynthesis; and (ii) stipulating spatiotemporal, labour, and economic criteria to stage-gate deliverables.

scholarly journals Availability of Non-Market Values to Inform Decision-Making in Australian Fisheries and Aquaculture: An Audit and Gap Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 920
Author(s):  
Louisa Coglan ◽  
Sean Pascoe ◽  
Gabriela Scheufele
Keyword(s):  
Gap Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Market Values ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Aquaculture Management ◽  
Stakeholder Workshop ◽  
Non Market Valuation ◽  
Inform Decision Making

Fisheries and aquaculture management can have impacts on economic, social and environmental outcomes. Assessing alternative management options requires an understanding of the different trade-offs between these outcomes. Cost–benefit analysis provides a framework in which these trade-offs can be assessed, but requires all costs and benefits to be enumerated in monetary terms. However, some impacts associated with fisheries and aquaculture, particularly environmental, have no explicit monetary value, so they require non-market values to be derived. In this study, we identify and prioritize, through a stakeholder workshop, non-market values that are of the most relevance to Australian fisheries and aquaculture managers. We assess the potential of existing studies to provide appropriate values for use by managers through a detailed review of available studies. We found a deficiency in the number of recent studies across all priority areas. Non-market valuation of recreational fishing has attracted the most attention previously in Australia, but studies in the last five years were found in only half of the states. Other priority non-market values have been estimated in only one or two states, and most have no estimates within the last five years. The results of the study highlight the need for further research in this area.

scholarly journals Digital Service Taxes and Their Application

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megersa Kelbesa
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Economic Impact ◽  
Developing Economies ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Digital Economy ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Digital Service

Many developing economies have seen a rise in e-commerce activity within their borders, and a decline in income from traditional industries as a result of COVID-19, meaning the digital economy offers a potentially unexploited source of tax revenue. . As a result, more developing countries may soon begin adopting some sort of digital tax. The economic activities which may be subject to the Digital Services Tax (DST) may vary from country to country. It will, therefore, be necessary for businesses operating in multiple jurisdictions across developing countries to keep up with the changes in digital taxes. Before implementing a DST scheme, developing countries are advised to perform an in-depth cost-benefit analysis and due considerations. Some developing (and several developed) countries have already unilaterally implemented a “provisional” DST system. Other developing countries are on the process of implementing DST or have simply announced that they will implement a DST soon. Although most of the countries so far actively working on DST (are rich countries, a growing list of developing countries are joining the process. Some examples include the following: Malaysia, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, Argentina and, Chile. It is important to mention that the literature on DST is very limited – although growing, and the evidence base around the economic impacts is particularly scarce. This is partly due to the quite recent nature of DST implementation. The evidence is even scarcer for developing countries – Due to these limitations, this rapid evidence review looks at different types of available literature – including reports and blogs issued by international financial institutions and development agencies. The rest of the report will give an overview of key proposed approaches to tax the digital economy, provide a very brief account of the economic impact of DST, provide a brief mapping of the implementation of digital service taxes in developing countries, provide a brief description of each DST system and about the economic impact of the DST, finally a brief account or attributes of a “good” DST system.

scholarly journals COVID-19: Rethinking the Lockdown Groupthink

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ari R. Joffe
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Herd Immunity ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
School Closures ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Care Systems

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide pandemic in 2020. In response, most countries in the world implemented lockdowns, restricting their population's movements, work, education, gatherings, and general activities in attempt to “flatten the curve” of COVID-19 cases. The public health goal of lockdowns was to save the population from COVID-19 cases and deaths, and to prevent overwhelming health care systems with COVID-19 patients. In this narrative review I explain why I changed my mind about supporting lockdowns. The initial modeling predictions induced fear and crowd-effects (i.e., groupthink). Over time, important information emerged relevant to the modeling, including the lower infection fatality rate (median 0.23%), clarification of high-risk groups (specifically, those 70 years of age and older), lower herd immunity thresholds (likely 20–40% population immunity), and the difficult exit strategies. In addition, information emerged on significant collateral damage due to the response to the pandemic, adversely affecting many millions of people with poverty, food insecurity, loneliness, unemployment, school closures, and interrupted healthcare. Raw numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths were difficult to interpret, and may be tempered by information placing the number of COVID-19 deaths in proper context and perspective relative to background rates. Considering this information, a cost-benefit analysis of the response to COVID-19 finds that lockdowns are far more harmful to public health (at least 5–10 times so in terms of wellbeing years) than COVID-19 can be. Controversies and objections about the main points made are considered and addressed. Progress in the response to COVID-19 depends on considering the trade-offs discussed here that determine the wellbeing of populations. I close with some suggestions for moving forward, including focused protection of those truly at high risk, opening of schools, and building back better with a economy.

Economic Impact Assessment

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Getz
Keyword(s):  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Economic Impact ◽  
Computable General Equilibrium ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Economic Impacts ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Equity Issues ◽  
Cge Modelling ◽  
Economic Impact Assessment ◽  
Event Tourism

Concepts for understanding economic impacts, and valid methods of assessment are well developed. In fact, there is so much information available that this is the largest chapter in the book – not the most important. A thorough and accessible reference on the subject is the book Tourism Economics and Policy by Dwyer, Forsyth and Dwyer (2010) as it contains a full chapter on events. Event Tourism (Getz, 2013) also covers economic impact assessment in detail. There have been well-documented problems with economic impact assessments for tourism and events (Matheson, 2002; Matheson and Baade, 2003; Crompton and McKay, 2004; Tyrell & Ismail, 2005; Crompton, 2006; Davies et al., 2013), pertaining to both how they are done and the purposes they serve. Dwyer and Jago (2014, p.130) identified three main types of criticisms associated with the assessment of the economic impacts of events, commencing with the exaggeration of benefits owing to either deliberate manipulation or faulty methods. Attention has often focused on the use of Input-Output tables to formulate ‘multipliers’, a practice which leads to exaggerated benefits, with a number of scholars preferring Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) modelling. Most fundamental is the frequent failure to consider all costs and benefits, leading to calls for more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Most economic IAs have utilized only a narrow range of metrics, but even more unfortunate is the continued reliance on multipliers and econometric models, as these ‘black-box’ approaches tend to exaggerate imputed benefits while ignoring costs and equity issues. This is certainly not in keeping with principles of social responsibility and sustainability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document