Is economic valuation of ecosystem services useful to decision-makers? Lessons learned from Australian coastal and marine management

Economic valuation of ecosystem services is widely advocated as a useful decision-support tool for ecosystem management. However, the extent to which economic valuation of ecosystem services is actually used or considered useful in decision-making is poorly documented. This literature blindspot is explored with an application to coastal and marine ecosystems management in Australia. Based on a nation-wide survey of eighty-eight decision-makers representing a diversity of management organizations, the perceived usefulness and level of use of ecosystem services economic valuation in support of coastal and marine management are examined. A large majority of decision-makers are found to be familiar with economic valuation and consider it useful - even necessary - in decision-making, although this varies across decision-makers groups. However, most decision-makers never or rarely use it. The perceived level of importance and trust in estimated dollar values differ across ecosystem services, and are especially high for values that relate to commercial activities. A number of factors are also found to influence respondent’s use of economic valuation. Such findings concur with conclusions from other existing works, and are instructive to reflect on the issue of the usefulness of ESV in environmental management decision-making. They also confirm that the survey-based approach developed in this application represents a sound strategy to examine this issue at various scales and management levels.

Regulating ride-sharing in the peer economy

This magazine article examines the challenges of digital disruption and the way the struggle for legitimacy is playing out in mainstream and social media. Using ride-sharing as a case study, our team at the QUT Digital media research centre seeks to develop the tools policy-makers need to make evidence-based policy decisions in response to digital disruption.

Is it the economy, stupid? The role of social versus economic factors in people’s support for hosting the Olympic Games: Evidence from 12 democratic countries

Public referenda have gained momentum as a democratic tool to legitimize public mega projects such as hosting the Olympic Games. Interest groups in favour of hosting the Olympics therefore try to influence voters through public campaigns that primarily focus on economic benefits. However, recent studies find no or hardly any economic impact of hosting the Olympics, instead providing evidence for a positive social impact. This raises the question whether citizens consider economic or social factors when deciding on hosting the Olympics. Based on representative survey data from 12 countries, our results suggest that economic factors can influence voting behaviour, although the influence of social factors is stronger.

Paper 1: The disruptive forces of the sharing economy

Overview: - The sharing economy unlocks a previously unused value of goods and labour, and causes disruption in established industries. - The pattern of disruption is similar regardless of the industry that's impacted. While the initial phases of disruption are transformational for many (e.g. lost jobs), often the industries end up stronger than before they were before the disruption. - Due to different in setting, upholding and enforcing standards, it is hard to assess the regulatory trade-offs. Safety, labour relations and social fairness are important factors to consider across the industry.