My Climate Risk Interdisciplinary Learning Group
10 February 2025; 13:00-14:00 GMT
Presenter: Prof. Elizabeth J Z Robinson
Biography
Professor Elizabeth Robinson is Director of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at LSE. She is an environmental economist with over twenty-five years’ experience undertaking applied policy-relevant research, particularly in lower-income countries, including six while living in Tanzania and Ghana. Her research addresses the design of policies and institutions to reduce climate change emissions, protect the environment, and improve the livelihoods of resource-dependent communities. Her recent focus includes climate change and systemic risk; and tracking the co-benefits of climate change mitigation and health, oriented particularly around food security and food systems. From 2004-09 she was coordinating lead author for the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development, sub-Saharan Africa; and a Member of the global and sub-Saharan Africa design teams. She was on the UK Defra Economic Advisory Panel for five years; and in 2019-20, Specialist Advisor to the UK House of Lords Select Committee on Food, Poverty, Health, and Environment. She was Working Group 1 lead for the Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change (2016-2024), that addresses climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability. Before joining the Grantham Research Institute, Elizabeth worked at the University of Reading for ten years, and prior to that she has variously worked at the Boston Consulting Group, the World Bank, Rockefeller Foundation, Natural Resources Institute, and as a tutorial fellow in economics at the University of Oxford. She has a first class degree in Engineering, Economics, and Management from Oxford University, and a PhD in Applied Economics from Stanford University.
.
Paper to be presented
Title: Spatial modeling of extraction and enforcement in developing country protected areas. Resource and Energy Economics, 32(2), pp.165-179.
Author: Albers, H.J., 2010
Link to paper: Spatial modeling of extraction and enforcement in developing country protected areas – ScienceDirect
Additional webpage: Elizabeth Robinson – Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment (lse.ac.uk)
Session Highlights:
Understanding Spatial Regulation and Resource Management
Prof. Robinson highlighted the importance of spatial models in managing natural resources, particularly in the context of protected areas. The session focused on the role of distance, enforcement strategies, and conflict dynamics in shaping conservation policies.
Optimising Resource Allocation in Ecosystems
Conservation strategies must balance enforcement with economic and social incentives to ensure sustainable resource use.
Targeting high-risk zones instead of uniform protection improves efficiency and reduces costs.
Pragmatic vs. Dogmatic Regulation
Dogmatic enforcement (strict bans, heavy monitoring) may deter extraction but risks alienating local communities.
Pragmatic approaches (community-based management) encourage compliance, fostering long-term sustainability.
Distance and the Cost of Regulation
Distance influences enforcement decisions—monitoring deep within forests is costly and can be inefficient.
Spatial separation can deter illegal activity, meaning strict enforcement may not always be necessary.
Conflict as an Overlooked Cost
Many resource management models ignore conflict, yet disputes over extraction rights can increase enforcement costs and weaken conservation efforts.
Potential solutions: Zoning strategies, buffer areas, and controlled access schemes to mitigate tensions, engaging with key stakeholders.
Schematic of Spatial Resource Management Strategies
The session explored different enforcement strategies highlighted in Prof Albers 2010 paper:
- No Regulation – Leads to unchecked resource depletion.
- Homogeneous Monitoring – Costly due to enforcement being spread thinly.
- Boundary and Interior Ring Patrols – More effectual targeting of high-risk zones.
Ignoring distance and spatial factors in resource management can lead to the displacement of illegal activities into unregulated areas, increasing the burden of enforcement in unintended locations. Additionally, monitoring costs can rise significantly without yielding substantial conservation benefits, making regulatory efforts less effective.
Spatial planning plays a crucial role in reducing the costs of conflict in conservation areas. Well-designed buffer zones can help minimise disputes over land use, providing a structured approach that balances resource extraction with ecological preservation. Furthermore, community engagement is key to enhancing compliance, reducing enforcement costs, and fostering long-term sustainability.
In an era dominated by big data and AI-driven decision-making, questions remain regarding the relevance of traditional theory such as spatial modelling. While real-time monitoring tools provide valuable insights, spatial models still have the potential to play a fundamental role in informing conservation strategies and the design of environmental policies. Most likely a hybrid approach that embraces both machine learning and AI and economic modelling can capture complex environmental dynamics and contribute to better environmental policies that account for both nature and nature-dependent livelihoods.
Final Takeaway: Real-world insights and empirical research are crucial for refining spatial models. Conservation strategies must balance enforcement with economic incentives to remain effective.
Q&A Highlights
Can we start with theory rather than mathematical modelling?
Prof. Robinson’s Response: A balance is needed. While models provide structure, grounded insights from fieldwork—such as observing behaviours in Tanzania—help refine theoretical assumptions. Empirical engagement ensures models reflect real-world conditions.
– How does local knowledge influence modelling? Understanding local spaces is more important than ever. Standardised models often miss the nuances of community land-use practices. Incorporating local insights leads to better enforcement strategies and conflict resolution.
–What are the implications for risk adaptation? Spatial zoning is highly relevant for climate adaptation. Resource regulation models can help manage deforestation, flood control, and land degradation risks.
-How do corporations respond to resource management rules?
There is a difference between corporate and individual behaviour. “Shaming” mechanisms—such as public scrutiny of firms—can influence corporate compliance, affecting share prices and reputational risks.
–Has zoning been tested successfully elsewhere? Zoning policies for fisheries and coastal ecosystems provide strong examples. For example, protected breeding grounds within marine protected areas (MPAs), “no-take zones”, help restore fish stocks while allowing sustainable extraction in other parts of the MPA.
–How do externalities reshape conservation models?
Models must be adaptable. Unintended consequences, such as unexpected social or economic reactions to conservation policies, might be anticipated by models, or identified through empirical evidence, suggesting that models should evolve as understanding of behaviour and behaviour change evolves.
Written by Daniel Mardi. Reviewed by Elizabeth Robinson.