Sanchirico James N.

No Thumbnail Available
Last Name
Sanchirico
First Name
James N.
ORCID
0000-0002-4863-3136

Filters

2020 - 2024 3
3
3
Reset filters

Settings

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Article
    Political economy of renewable resource federalism
    (Ecological Society of America, 2020-12-15) Sanchirico, James N. ; Blackwood, Julie C. ; Fitzpatrick, Ben ; Kling, David M. ; Lenhart, Suzanne ; Neubert, Michael G. ; Shea, Katriona ; Sims, Charles B. ; Springborn, Michael R.
    The authority to manage natural capital often follows political boundaries rather than ecological. This mismatch can lead to unsustainable outcomes, as spillovers from one management area to the next may create adverse incentives for local decision making, even within a single country. At the same time, one‐size‐fits‐all approaches of federal (centralized) authority can fail to respond to state (decentralized) heterogeneity and can result in inefficient economic or detrimental ecological outcomes. Here we utilize a spatially explicit coupled natural–human system model of a fishery to illuminate trade‐offs posed by the choice between federal vs. state control of renewable resources. We solve for the dynamics of fishing effort and fish stocks that result from different approaches to federal management that vary in terms of flexibility. Adapting numerical methods from engineering, we also solve for the open‐loop Nash equilibrium characterizing state management outcomes, where each state anticipates and responds to the choices of the others. We consider traditional federalism questions (state vs. federal management) as well as more contemporary questions about the economic and ecological impacts of shifting regulatory authority from one level to another. The key mechanisms behind the trade‐offs include whether differences in local conditions are driven by biological or economic mechanisms; degree of flexibility embedded in the federal management; the spatial and temporal distribution of economic returns across states; and the status‐quo management type. While simple rules‐of‐thumb are elusive, our analysis reveals the complex political economy dimensions of renewable resource federalism.
  • Article
    Leveraging federalism for flexible and robust management of social‐ecological systems
    (British Ecological Society, 2023-02-16) Sims, Charles ; Armsworth, Paul R. ; Blackwood, Julie ; Fitzpatrick, Ben ; Kling, David M. ; Lenhart, Suzanne ; Neubert, Michael ; Papeş, Monica ; Sanchirico, James ; Shea, Katriona ; Springborn, Michael
    Managing social‐ecological systems (SES) requires balancing the need to tailor actions to local heterogeneity and the need to work over large areas to accommodate the extent of SES. This balance is particularly challenging for policy since the level of government where the policy is being developed determines the extent and resolution of action.We make the case for a new research agenda focused on ecological federalism that seeks to address this challenge by capitalizing on the flexibility afforded by a federalist system of governance. Ecological federalism synthesizes the environmental federalism literature from law and economics with relevant ecological and biological literature to address a fundamental question: What aspects of SES should be managed by federal governments and which should be allocated to decentralized state governments?This new research agenda considers the bio‐geo‐physical processes that characterize state‐federal management tradeoffs for biodiversity conservation, resource management, infectious disease prevention, and invasive species control.
  • Article
    Expert review of the science underlying nature-based climate solutions
    (Nature Research, 2024-03-21) Buma, Brian ; Gordon, Doria R. ; Kleisner, Kristin M. ; Bartuska, Ann ; Bidlack, Allison ; DeFries, Ruth ; Ellis, Peter W. ; Friedlingstein, Pierre ; Metzger, Stefan ; Morgan, Granger ; Novick, Kimberly ; Sanchirico, James N. ; Collins, James R. ; Eagle, Alison J. ; Fujita, Rod ; Holst, Eric ; Lavallee, Jocelyn M. ; Lubowski, Ruben N. ; Melikov, Cyril ; Moore, Lisa A. ; Oldfield, Emily E. ; Paltseva, Julia ; Raffeld, Anna M. ; Randazzo, Nina A. ; Schneider, Chloe ; Aragon, Nazli Uludere ; Hamburg, Steven P.
    Viable nature-based climate solutions (NbCS) are needed to achieve climate goals expressed in international agreements like the Paris Accord. Many NbCS pathways have strong scientific foundations and can deliver meaningful climate benefits but effective mitigation is undermined by pathways with less scientific certainty. Here we couple an extensive literature review with an expert elicitation on 43 pathways and find that at present the most used pathways, such as tropical forest conservation, have a solid scientific basis for mitigation. However, the experts suggested that some pathways, many with carbon credit eligibility and market activity, remain uncertain in terms of their climate mitigation efficacy. Sources of uncertainty include incomplete GHG measurement and accounting. We recommend focusing on resolving those uncertainties before broadly scaling implementation of those pathways in quantitative emission or sequestration mitigation plans. If appropriate, those pathways should be supported for their cobenefits, such as biodiversity and food security.