Shawn Regan, James Huffman, Jonathan Adler, Mark Pennington, Linus Blomqvist, R. David Simpson, Robert K. Fleck, F. Andrew Hanssen, Gregg Simonds
A new volume aims to foster an engaging discussion about the future of environmental policy in this human-dominated era.
If decoupling trends continue, it is possible that human impacts on the environment will peak and decline this century, even as the global population approaches 10 billion
We conserve nature by using less of it—but to do so we must embrace modern technology.
In this policy series, Alison Berry continues her work on the quality of forests that result under different management schemes. She contrasts side-by-side forests in Montana. One is operated by the United States Forest Service under the watchful eye of Congress. The other is run by Indian tribes...
The Forest Service cannot take responsibility for its neighbors
The forests of North America represent enormous natural bounty. Yet, in the United States at least, the benefits of this wealth of nature are not being fully realized. Taxpayers lose money on their public forests, and the forests face severe ecological threats.
Last year, I began investigating forestry outside the United States, seeking innovations. I found strikingly different approaches just north of the border, in Canada.
Although the forests of British Columbia, Canada, are 96 percent government-owned, the management of the forests is far more market-driven than in the U.S. Forest Service, according to a new report by PERC, the Property and Environment Research Center.