Developing Activity Lists, Considering 'Aspects/Impacts'

Economists have a long, tortured history with 'impact' assessment, sometimes called'effects' assessment. Of course economists have long, tortured history with pretty much everything they touch. Still, we might gain some insight into both "environmental aspects" and "environmental impacts" viewed under the EMS microscope by looking into what economist have learned. Since we seem to be focusing our attention on activities that have environmental impacts as a means to get to a list of activities that have an environmental aspect, I believe the time is ripe to delve further into impacts. First, though, let's look at aspects.

Aspects

A common idea in economics is that there are no economic problems, but there are many problems that have economic aspects. That is, almost all social problems have economic, along with political, and other social aspects.

What does it mean for a problem to have an economic aspect? It means we can look at the problem through the lens of economics. Alfred Marshall defined the lens like this: "Political Economy or Economics is a study of mankind in the ordinary business of life. It examines that part of individual & social action which is most closely connected with the attainment & with the use of material requisites of well-being". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_definition

So what might it mean for a problem (or an activity, good or service) to have an environmental aspect? It might mean that the problem can be examined by looking at parts most closely connected with impacts on the environment. If there are no impacts, there are no aspects, therefore no entry in EMS activity lists. Does that make sense?

Impacts

If we can get this far, and admit that it is by identifying impacts that we begin to understand aspects, then we have to begin to think about which categories of impacts we allow to draw us into the realm of "environmental aspects." Some economists cluster impacts (or effects) into three categories: direct, indirect, induced. In my hasty look into this narrow-niche literature, I came up with this distinction between the three, cast up in an environmental frame:

Direct effect: effect derived from a direct relationship between an agent (or an activity, etc.) and the environment. And, it happens within the problem area under consideration. For example, environmetnal effects from a hiker trammeling a sensitive site.

Indirect effect: effect derived from a second-order (one step removed) relationship between an agent (or activity, etc.) and the environment. These too happen within the area under consideration, albeit a wider area than the particular site. For example, that portion of the environmental effects produced by 'inn-keeping' of a inn-keeper that can be attributed to the keeping of the hiker to allow the visit to the site.

Induced effect: effect derived from third- and higher-order relationships between agents and the environment, outside the area under consideration but still tied to the initial agent. For example, that portion of the environmental effects of all other related suppliers, etc., outside the direct area, in provisionoing either the hiker or the inn-keeper to aid the hiker to effect the 'trammeling.'

Note that we can begin to get a glimpse here of the problematic nature of this line of reasoning . Note further that the whole study of 'causation' is fraught with difficulty, ambiguity, and equivicality (defined as multiple interpretations of the same thing). John Muir stated the problem well when he said, "When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe." For more on this difficulty, see Wikipedia on causality.

Attempting to Narrow Activity Lists by Aspects/Impacts

We are now to a point where we might begin to sort out which activities have what kind of impacts, so that we can begin to narrow our activity sets (assuming that we stay with our focus on listing certain activities that have environmental impacts—all according to EMS definitions.) {We are also to the point where some will scream: Iverson has once-again wandered beyond the edge of the cliff, having not only daring to peer into the abyss, but leaping off the cliff as well.}

For simplicity, let's assume that we can ignore what I've called "induced impacts." So we are left with direct and indirect. Let's throw away indirect impacts as well, at least for now, and we can pare down our activity list substantially. How much more lucky are we than the hapless economists. Likely we'll end up with activity lists as short as those seen in Region 1 to date. Or maybe only 10 or 20 times as long.

Noxious Weed Management
  Herbicide spraying
  Biological controls
  Mechanical methods

Range Management
  Allotment mgt plans
  Permit issuance
  Improvements

{Note that strikeouts above are in keeping with notion that planning, education, regulation activites are 'operational controls.' More here.}

Timber Management
  Timber harvest
  Disaster relief - incl. salvage
  Free use of timber
  Forest products
  Reforestation
  TSI - thinning,etc.

Transportation System
  Road Construction
  Road Reconstruction
  Road Maintenance
  Road Decommission
  Trail Construction
  Trail Reconstruction
  Bridges and Structures
  Access Management

I cross-walked R1 stuff with my list of "Systems" and think we have to think more about activities (and impacts, operation controls, etc.) within at least the following categories, if the categories make any sense:

• Potable Water Systems (e.g for campgrounds, etc.)
• Irrigation Water Systems (including Dams)
• Sewage Treatment Systems
• Fire Suppression Systems
• Fuels Treatment Systems (to reduce fuel-loading)
• OHV Management and Control Systems
• Scenery Management Systems
• Recreation Visitors Use ('Ecological Footprint' Management) Systems {Maybe?}
• Wilderness Management Systems
• Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Systems
• T & E Habitat Conservation Systems
• Species of Concern/Interest Conservation Systems
• Biology Diversity Conservation/Enhancement Systems
• Environmental Management (Solid Wastes, Pesticide use, Hazardous Materials, Energy)
• Engineering Operations (Fleet management, Buildings and others structures, etc.)
• Hard Rock Minerals Exploration/Development Management Systems
• Oil and Gas Management Systems
• Energy and Power Corridor Management Systems

Forest Plan Tie?

I have no clear idea yet how we might integrate all this with forest plan revision documents, forest plan evaluation and monitoring stuff, etc. I do have a couple of possible routes that we might take. This is to be the stuff of my next post.