13)Should public managers and environmental planners engage the public when they know that the public knowledge is limited about the science of an environmental issue? If so, how would you go about doing that? If not, what are the consequences of not including them?
Public managers and environmental planners should engage the public in the decision making process even if the public’s knowledge is limited about the “science” of an environmental issue. Public engagement should be done through public hearings, media pamphlets, door-to-door interaction, and mailings. It’s important to remember although the public may not be knowledgeable about a certain subject, they are not stupid and have the capability to understand and comprehend the information presented to them, if it is presented in a clear and concise manner, without a lot of technical jargon. There have been numerous cases sited, in the readings, as well as other scholastic journals (not just in environmental policy, but in other policy arenas as well) where public engagement has helped to facilitate a much less expensive project that runs smoothly. Public policy implementation must be presented in a transparent manner in order for the public to perceive the government agencies as having their best interests at heart and to be viewed as competent.
14)Describe 2-3 environmental problems that you think might be particularly conducive to using contingent valuation. Briefly describe why CV would be appropriate in this case.
An environmental problem that would be conducive to using CV is the impact of mining natural resources and the damage done to the environment. A survey could be developed to measure a person’s willingness-to-pay in order to rebuild the portion of the environment which was destroyed.
Another environmental problem that would be conducive to using CV is water quality. CV would be an appropriate case because the survey generated would give public administrators a general idea of what the public was willing to pay in regards to such policy measures.
15.Describe 2-3 environmental problems that you think would definitely not be conducive to using CV. Briefly describe why CV would not be appropriate in this case.
An environmental problem which would not be conducive to using CV would be lowering greenhouse emissions. This is a policy which should be mandated by the Federal government and I don’t think a willingness-to-pay approach is one that will help the environment in reaching sustainable goals. This is a policy area which much be mandated and using a CV may create a “free-rider” problem.
Another environmental problem which is not conducive to using a CV survey is an individual’s impact to the environment. A market value cannot be placed on an individual’s impact to the environment (such as an oil spill or contaminating the water supply by dumping something toxic down the drain). A CV survey could be biased by the sampled population and wouldn’t take into account income restraints by the individual; and a quantitative assessment of the damages may not be accurate.