Course:ECON371/UBCO2024WT1/Reflections/AashiShrivastava

Reflection 1

ECON 371: Environmental Economics has allowed me to explore the relationships between various economic concepts that I have been taught over the last two years of my degree and the extent to which they interact with my everyday environment. The intersection between economic analysis and the environment has expanded my perspective on how these systems operate hand-in hand. However, I have also realized that while economics provides valuable insights into trade-offs and harsh-judgements needed to be made, it often falls short in addressing the more complex and realistic aspects of our everyday economy.

One of the central ideas that resonated with me is the concept of safety standards and how it is, to an extent, a trade off with efficiency. This forms the backbone of many economic analyses. The idea that human decisions—whether they pertain to resource use, environmental policy, or economic development—are essentially choices between competing alternatives, either prioritizing a politically “safe” level or efficient level is compelling. These trade-offs, however, are often simplified in economic models. For example, This framing feels incomplete when trying to capture the long-term and sometimes irreversible impacts of human activity on the environment. It also does sometimes seem quite sad and unfortunate that the poor receive less benefits than the rich, even though a lot of programs do target rural, poorer areas, not just in Canada, but also in countries like my home of India.

One of the limitations that I do enjoy learning about is economic framing’s tendency to focus on quantifiable outcomes—whether in terms of GDP growth, profit maximization, or cost-benefit analysis. While these metrics are useful for making decisions, they often fail to capture the qualitative aspects such as cultural impacts, or the existence value of nature. These factors, though difficult to quantify, it does become important to acknowledge. A connection comes to my mind; I am currently in MGMT 401 which is intermediate managerial accounting, and in this class we often find ourselves talking about how qualitative information sometimes becomes more important than quantitative information. This course further solidifies my understanding of that and how economic analysis sometimes sidesteps the moral and ethical dimensions of environmental stewardship.

Furthermore, the reliance on mathematical models and graphical tools, while useful, can create an illusion of precision. The environment, as we’ve discussed, is part of a complex adaptive system, one with uncertainties and shifting circumstances. I often find myself under paralysis by analysis, especially as someone who’s courses often revolve on a lot of mathematical analysis. This course provides some balance in that aspect, especially in the division and weightage of marks, letting us know that while definitions and theoretical knowledge and math with graphs are important, ultimately if we cannot perform analyses of current events, our knowledge isn't being put to its best use. Economic models, which are often built on assumptions of rational behavior and equilibrium, sometimes oversimplify the chaotic and non-linear dynamics of environmental systems, which is something we are able to see in our current event analyses, expanding our general knowledge about the world around us.

I think a concept that had a very profound impact on me was the concept of valuing a human life. In my opinion, valuing a human life becomes a very inhumane thing to do. While the textbook acknowledges the fact that people would ultimately pay anything and everything they have to save the life of a loved one, the concept of a statistical life definitely is scary. The hedonic regression method values the life of a poor person much less than that of a rich one of any age simply because the former has a vastly lower income. The highlight of the desperation faced by low income individuals is something that ethically just seems wrong.

What became increasingly clear to me throughout the course is that while economics provides a useful lens for understanding the shape of human-environment relationships, it cannot be the only lens. This realization has reinforced my belief in the need for a more interdisciplinary approach to environmental issues—one that incorporates not only economics but also ecology, sociology, and ethics.

In conclusion, this course has made me more aware of the ways in which economic analyses, while valuable, often fall short in addressing the full scope of human-environment interactions. The incomplete nature of this framing has become more evident to me as we’ve explored the efficient, ethical, and ecological dimensions of environmental decision-making. As we continue to confront more concepts in this course, I believe it is crucial to adopt a very open minded approach—one that goes beyond the norm to embrace a more holistic understanding of the world we live in.

Reflection 2

As I progress through ECON 371: Environmental Economics, I find myself reflecting on how the course has expanded my understanding of both the theoretical and practical aspects of environmental decision-making. Initially, I viewed economics as a primarily quantitative field—focused on numbers, efficiency, and trade-offs. However, delving deeper into topics such as clean technology, global environmental agreements, and the economics of pollution control, I’ve developed a more balanced perspective that includes both the limitations and opportunities of economic analysis in addressing environmental challenges.

A key area of growth for me has been understanding the role of clean technology in balancing economic growth and environmental sustainability. Previously, I saw technological innovation primarily through the lens of its economic benefits—creating jobs, increasing productivity, especially as a management student that focusses on such things. Now, I appreciate the transformative potential of clean technology as a tool to reduce carbon emissions and promote circular economies. The implementation is often hindered by high initial costs and unequal access across regions, particularly in developing countries like India, where I come from.

This realization ties into our discussions on global environmental agreements, which emphasize the importance of international collaboration. Concepts like the tragedy of the commons and the prisoner’s dilemma resonated deeply with me, as they explain why countries struggle to cooperate on issues like climate change. For example, the failure of some nations to meet their commitments under agreements such as the Paris Accord highlights the challenges of aligning diverse economic priorities. At the same time, I’ve found hope in mechanisms like carbon trading and technology transfer, which illustrate how economic incentives can foster collaboration and accountability.

Additionally, the course has broadened my perspective on the limits of traditional economic metrics like GDP in measuring progress. The idea that sustainable development requires going beyond GDP to consider indicators like the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) have made a lasting impression on me. This shift in focus feels particularly relevant as we grapple with the dual crises of environmental degradation and economic inequality.

One of the most impactful realizations I’ve had is the importance in driving sustainable change. While policies and technologies are critical, the role of individual and collective behavior cannot be overlooked. For instance, understanding the factors that influence consumer choices—such as framing effects, social norms, and cognitive biases—can help design more effective interventions to promote environmentally friendly behaviors. This ties back to my learning in other management courses, where we often discuss how qualitative insights can complement quantitative analyses in decision-making. This concept has made me more attuned to the ethical dimensions of environmental economics and the need for policies that balance immediate needs with intergenerational equity.

In conclusion, ECON 371 has helped me move beyond a simplistic view of economics as a tool for optimization to a more holistic understanding of its role in addressing complex global challenges. By exploring topics like clean technology, global agreements, and environmental externalities, I’ve come to see economics as part of a larger, interdisciplinary effort to build a sustainable future. This course has not only deepened my academic knowledge but also reinforced my commitment to applying these insights to real-world issues, particularly in contexts like India, where the stakes for balancing economic growth and environmental sustainability are especially high.

Prof: Thanks for your reflection, and connecting it to your experience as someone from India. I have had the pleasure to visit India - mostly in north-east Karnataka - and hope to return again some day. A country with many challenges, but also much potential.