"System change is now inevitable. Either because we do something about it, or because we will be hit by climate change. '...

"We need to develop economic models that are fit for purpose. The current economic frameworks, the ones that dominate our governments, these frameworks... the current economic frameworks, the neoclassical, the market frameworks, can deal with small changes. It can tell you the difference, if a sock company puts up the price of socks, what the demand for socks will be. It cannot tell you about the sorts of system level changes we are talking about here. We would not use an understanding of laminar flow in fluid dynamics to understand turbulent flow. So why is it we are using marginal economics, small incremental change economics, to understand system level changes?"

Monday, August 9, 2010

Whitehouse Speaks on Necessity of Scientist-Advocates

No, not that Whitehouse, this one:


via Why Sharks Matter on Southern Fried Science.

The link leads on to three nice related articles, of which this one is my favorite. John Fleck will probably like it too, since it mentions John as exceptional, something I agree with.

It argues against the Pielkian point of view,
Ultimately, politicians are useful [to conservation] because only they can make the important policy changes required to make the conservation movement’s goals a reality. However, they won’t do this unless there is overwhelming support from the public- the kind of support that merely publishing papers and speaking at conferences cannot possibly generate.
as does Senator Whitehouse:


No comments: