Jump to content

Talk:Environmental policy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


[edit]

Hello to anyone interested in EP. I am seeking to list an external link with out running afoul of WP rules. The site is called Environmentality and consists of a monthly, rigorously screened summary of recent EP related research and news from specialized journals and other sources. The justification for this site is that it would be impossible for anyone to stay informed on all the journals and news sources covered therein.

I believe that this site is extremely useful for everyone in the EP community, but then again I am also its editor and publisher. Apparently this disqualifies me from listing the site as an external link. So I am asking for anyone to have a look and then add the external link. Here is the link html which can be copied and pasted directly into the external link editing window: *Enviromentality.

I appreciate your consideration.

Adam Cherson, MPA, Environmental Science and Policy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.84.246.43 (talk • contribs) 21:38, 29 March 2008

I have removed the link again as obvious self-promotion by the above. If others feel it should be linked, OK - but not by an anon promoter of the site. Vsmith (talk) 22:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up from A. Cherson:Please excuse my misunderstanding of the rules. From my vantage point, I kept seeing external links appearing and reappearing and I believed that this was simply the action of other users such as myself taking matters into their own hands. Plus I did not understand that self-listing even an informational, non-commercial site could be considered self-promotional. This is why I instituted a regular routine of re-inserting my links on the relevant entries. Then when I realized that each article actually has an authorized editor/guardian and that what I was doing was wrong, I tried to adhere to the rules by asking others to approve my site. It appears that by that time my actions had caused me to come under suspicion and I may have been blocked (not sure if this is still the case). In any case what I ask is that you allow me to start from scratch and I will use only acceptable routes for having an external link listed. Your data should show that I have not attempted to insert my site since around the end of March. Thank you.

negative externalities, the free rider problem, and the tragedy of the commons

[edit]

Hi, I stumbled upon the sentence "There are three types of market failure that justify government action: negative externalities, the free rider problem, and the tragedy of the commons. ", and the corresponding section. Although I would agree that these three causes of market failure are worth mentioning in such an article, the sentence as it is at the moment is imprecise and partly misleading.

To my understanding, a free rider problem appears typically when (few) individuals free ride on a public or common good. The tragedy of the commons refers to the problem that many or nearly all individuals using a common good overuse the resource and thereby decrease it to an inefficient level.

However, both the free rider problem and the tragedy of the commons originate from the presence of externalities, i.e. they are special cases of externalities. Moreover, I would strongly disagree that only negative externalities justify intervention. As an example, the ecosystem service approach tries to calculate positive effects of ecosystems (e.g. pollination, filtration). These positive effects are positive externalities which are at the moment unaccounted for and therefore demand correction. Flo tries to help (talk) 19:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed-up that section a bit; I believe it's better now. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 16:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page is too limited in intellectual scope

[edit]

The page has several problems. It appears to be aimed only at the United States while environmental policy has been practiced in many parts of the world and for centurles if not millenia. The page makes several factual errors about when environmental protection began. Environmental Laws in the United States were passed at least as long ago as 1890 with the Rivers and Harbors Act which prohibited dumping in navigable waterways. Early air pollution laws were passed in Britain in the 1950's after the killer smog. The Clean water act was first passed in 1960. Many medieval and renaissance towns also had laws about sewage disposal that are unmistakable acts of creating environmental policy.

The page also gives the impression that environmental policy is only made in relation to ecological questions or ecosystems, and environmental impacts of human activities. These are matters of perception and dogma. Environmental policy is made to internalize the costs of avoiding negative externalities and protect positive externalities in the form of public goods from depletion. These dont necessarily have to relate to impacts on ecosystems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Primacag (talk • contribs) 04:57, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Much room for improvement here. DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 10:39, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is a related need for an additional section of this article (and, ultimately, a new article on its own right), on International environmental policy. Regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 11:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This comparative study of the US & Australia might be a start: Killing the Koala and Poisoning the Prairie: Australia, America, and the Environment by Corey J.A. Bradshaw and Paul R. Ehrlich, 2015, University of Chicago Press Ping: DASonnenfeld & Primacag. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 20:54, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried several times to edit the article. My edits have been consistently redacted by what appears to be masters students with no historical or practical experience. Someone please fix the page so it is not parochial in nature. Avram Primack (talk) 16:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Environmental policy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Environmental policy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Research and Innovation Policy

[edit]

Main focus is on Europe. What about the other countries? Need more information regarding this. B7lam916 (talk) 21:05, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rationale

[edit]

Does the second sentence of this topic coherent with the paragraph? Externality was mentioned, but is that part of market failure? B7lam916 (talk) 21:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Policy Analysis - Summer Session23

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 August 2023 and 8 September 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Abanarsee (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Abanarsee (talk) 05:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some problems with references

[edit]

Many of the references that are used for this article have no URLs which makes it hard for the readers to verify the sources and information. In addition, many statements suffer from WP:OVERCITE, which means there are too many references for one statement. To User:Globalcitizen47: I think some of those references were added by you, together with huge chunks of text (thanks for doing all this work). Are you still around on Wikipedia now and willing to spend a bit more time on this article? EMsmile (talk) 17:30, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. What I have written is based on academic sources, many of which are journal articles or books that are not freely accessible - users would have to pay significant sums of money to access those unless they have access as students or staff via their institutions. Also, I have erred on the side of including more rather than fewer references to strengthen the evidence basis. It would not be too hard for me to delete many of the references (keep only one or two per item?), and insert links with those, but that would in my view weaken the academic quality of the article. Frankly, I am not sure whether Wikipedia aspires to or wants to uphold academic standards - it seems that in many articles comments are inserted after almost every sentence that that does not have references that they are "required here." If you could shed more light on Wikipedia's reference policy I would appreciate that. Globalcitizen47 (talk) 19:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, good to hear from you! (maybe I ask why you had such a short intense burst of editing and then stopped editing since April? I am curious) The style of citing that Wikipedia prefers is a bit different to how it's done in peer-reviewed papers. We tend to focus on just a few, highly "reliable" sources, and where possible they should be "secondary sources". (if they are freely available, not behind a paywall, this is an added bonus and thus preferable). Definitely not so many refs per sentence, which is explained here: WP:OVERCITE. If needed, rather break a long sentence with 4 refs into two sentences with two refs each (if it's two statements in one sentence).
For comparison, maybe look at the article climate change which is a featured article so is very diligent about references. See also WP:SECONDARY, and WP:SCIRS, WP:RS.
Remember we are writing an encyclopedia for the general public, not an academic literature review, essay, peer-reviewed paper or alike. EMsmile (talk) 23:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Environmental_policy&oldid=1260659486"