IEA Training Manual - Module 5 - Exercises

Exercise 5.6.6.1

In groups of five, carry out the following tasks in relation to one driver-pressure-state-impact chain used in the previous exercises:

Characterizing the policy mix

  • Copy the descriptions of your drivers-pressures-state-impacts chain from the previous exercise to the first row of the policy mix matrix.
  • Using shorthand or code, transfer policies influencing the driver, pressure, state and impact from previous table to the appropriate cell in the policy mix matrix. Can you think of any additional policies to add to the table that you did not identify previously?
  • Use the examples of policy types described previously in Table 8 as possible categories, but you may also create new categories, if necessary.

Estimating the policy effect

  • Working with the results of the table just completed, indicate your perceived effect of the policy on the given environmental issue, based on existing information, by placing the appropriate symbol in the cell representing the policy. You could use a scale similar to the following:
    • Highly positive effect: +++
    • Moderately positive: ++
    • Slightly positive: +
    • Neutral: 0
    • Slightly negative effect: -
    • Moderately negative: - -
    • Highly negative: - - -
    • Policy effect unclear: ?

In plenary, carry out the following analysis of policy gaps:

  • Identify policy types that appear to be over- or under-represented.
  • Note if there are policies directed at each part of the issue chain (driver, pressure, state and impact).
  • Identify policy types and/or specific policies that are currently absent, but might have significant potential for positive effect.
  • Discuss opportunities and barriers for optimizing the policy mix, either by adding new or discontinuing existing policies or policy types.

Time: 45 minutes group, 30 minutes plenary.
 
There are certainly policy gaps other than those identified above. For example:

  • Policy developed, but not implemented or enforced.
  • Policy not functioning properly (e.g., relevant actors ignored, policy theory not accurate, etc.).
  • Policy effect reduced or negated because of the effects of another policy.

The first two of these gaps require additional analysis, which is not within the scope of this module and resource book. The last one, policy effect negated because of the effects of another policy, is the focus of the next section.

Comments/Feedback


Write comment:

Posted by:
- - 31 Oct 2012
hIz7b6 , [url=http://waannvnebbof.com/]waannvnebbof[/url], [link=http://ckoqicqtdvfx.com/]ckoqicqtdvfx[/link], http://idvuudbqyfjw.com/
- - 30 Oct 2012
wrZIEb , [url=http://cqicreyrjojh.com/]cqicreyrjojh[/url], [link=http://vrvitlmvahwn.com/]vrvitlmvahwn[/link], http://kscltiqamwmp.com/
- - 28 Oct 2012
I've seen many circumstances where ppeloe exhaust the lifetime maximum on their policy.$ 1M sounds like a lot of money. However, it would be easy to go through a $ 1M lifetime maximum for a burn victim, a cancer patient, serious major trauma, etc.Which policy you should buy depends upon the level of risk you're willing to take.
Module 5 - Integrated analysis of environmental trends and policies