Human settlements: Australia state of the environment report, 2001

Australia’s transition to the 21st century has been marked by an extended period of economic prosperity unmatched for several decades, but one in which a series of question marks are being raised in three principal areas: in relation to the environment, the social well-being of the population, and the future path of economic development. The first concern, which is of primary interest in this report, relates to the physical environment of cities and their surrounding regions, and the range of pressures exerted by population and human activity. The report begins by noting the increasing divergence of the prime indicator of national economic performance—gross domestic product (GDP)—from the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI). GPI is a new experimental measure of sustainable development that accommodates factors currently unaccounted for in GDP, such as income distribution, value of household work, cost of unemployment, and various other social and environmental costs. The divergence of these two indicators in recent decades suggests that Australia’s growth has been heavily dependent on the draw-down of the nation’s stocks of capital assets (its infrastructure), its human and social capital, and its natural capital (Hamilton 1997).

Influences on knowledge of wildlife species on patterns of willingness to pay for their conservation

Examines the influence of respondents’ knowledge of wildlife species on their willingness to pay for conservation of the individual species. It does so by using data generated by surveys of 204 individuals who participated in a structured experiment in which their knowledge of a selected set of wildlife species was increased. The species selected were Australian ones, mostly but not entirely, tropical ones. The species were divided into three taxa for the experiment; reptiles, mammals and birds. Each set of species in the taxa included some species expected to be poorly known initially and some anticipated to be well known. Respondents rated their knowledge of each species on a Likert scale, and changes in their average allocation of funds for the conservation of each species were examined as their knowledge increased. Some general relationships are observed.