Biosecurity in agriculture: an economic analysis of coexistence of professional and hobby production

One component of biosecurity is protection against invasive alien species, which are one of the most important threats worldwide to native biodiversity and economic profitability in various sectors, including agriculture. However, agricultural producers are not homogeneous. They may have different objectives and priorities, use different technologies, and occupy heterogeneous parcels of land. If the producers differ in terms of their attitude towards invasive pests and the damages they cause, there are probably external effects in the form of pest spread impacts and subsequent damages caused. We study such impacts in the case of two producer types: profit-seeking professional producers and utility-seeking hobby producers. We show that the hobby producer, having first set a breeding ground for the pest, under-invests in pest control. We also discuss potential policy instruments to correct this market failure and highlight the importance of considering different stakeholders and their heterogeneous incentives when designing policies to control invasive alien species.

The effects of environmental perturbation and measurement error on estimates of the shape parameter in the theta-logistic model of population regulation

The theta-logistic is a widely used generalisation of the logistic model of regulated biological processes which is used in particular to model population regulation. Then the parameter theta gives the shape of the relationship between per-capita population growth rate and population size. Estimation of theta from population counts is however subject to bias, particularly when there are measurement errors. Here we identify factors disposing towards accurate estimation of theta by simulation of populations regulated according to the theta-logistic model. Factors investigated were measurement error, environmental perturbation and length of time series. Large measurement errors bias estimates of theta towards zero. Where estimated theta is close to zero, the estimated annual return rate may help resolve whether this is due to bias. Environmental perturbations help yield unbiased estimates of theta. Where environmental perturbations are large, estimates of theta are likely to be reliable even when measurement errors are also large. By contrast where the environment is relatively constant, unbiased estimates of theta can only be obtained if populations are counted precisely Our results have practical conclusions for the design of long-term population surveys. Estimation of the precision of population counts would be valuable, and could be achieved in practice by repeating counts in at least some years. Increasing the length of time series beyond ten or 20 years yields only small benefits. if populations are measured with appropriate accuracy, given the level of environmental perturbation, unbiased estimates can be obtained from relatively short censuses. These conclusions are optimistic for estimation of theta. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V All rights reserved.

Forum theorizing in the context of professional practice: The case for middle-range theories

This commentary seeks to complement the contribution of the Building Research & Information special issue on 'Developing Theories for the Built Environment' (2008) by highlighting the important role of middle-range theories within the context of professional practice. Middle-range theories provide a form of theorizing that lies between abstract grand theorizing and atheoretical local descriptions. They are also characterized by the way in which they directly engage with the concerns of practitioners. In the context of professional practice, any commitment to theorizing should habitually be combined with an equivalent commitment to empirical research; rarely is it appropriate to neglect one in favour of the other. Any understanding of the role that theory plays in professional practice must further be informed by Schon's seminal ideas on reflective practice. Practitioners are seen to utilize theories as inputs to a process of continuous reflection, thereby guarding against complacency and routinization. The authors would challenge any assumption that academics alone are responsible for generating theories, thereby limiting the role of practitioners to their application. Such a dichotomized view is contrary to established ideas on Mode 2 knowledge production and current trends towards co-production research in the context of the built environment.