IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v77y2017icp268-272.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the impacts of global environmental assessments

Author

Listed:
  • Alcamo, Joseph

Abstract

There are currently no widely accepted procedures for comparing the performance of global environmental assessments (GEAs) and this may be a barrier to improving their methodology. To encourage greater self-reflection within the GEA community, it is proposed to introduce consistent evaluation approaches. Two elements from current evaluation practice are reviewed here that could be particularly useful for evaluating GEAs. The first are logic models which provide a transparent visual mapping of how activities in a GEA are intended to have impacts on policies. The second are performance metrics. It is proposed that GEAs adopt two kinds of metrics: (i) A common generic set for use in all GEAs to provide a basis for comparing the performance of GEAs, and (ii) a specific set of measureable metrics for each particular GEA derived from/linked to the generic set. Although many issues arise in applying these and other elements from evaluation theory and practice to GEAs, the potential benefits are greater comparability of GEA performance and new knowledge about how to improve them. This Short Communication is part of a Special Issue on solution-oriented GEAs.

Suggested Citation

  • Alcamo, Joseph, 2017. "Evaluating the impacts of global environmental assessments," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 268-272.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:77:y:2017:i:c:p:268-272
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2017.03.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901117302551
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.03.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:77:y:2017:i:c:p:268-272. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.