General questions

13. I would approach the public in any and all issues within an inclusive strategy. Although there may be some limited scientific understanding, there can always be a way to translate the significanc of an issue. The key would be to be revealing and poignant, and by no means be untruhful nor misleading. Easy to say, obviously, but there should be a a measure to at least create awareness whether the public supports or negates the issue, and or policy. The choices must inlcude their values, it does not necessarily need to convey the policy decision, but at least it should provide a perpective of what the public knows, feels, and understands about the issue. Which in turn helps position the decisons that lay ahead. A perspective that aids health issues, and teens related issues, is public service announcements and youth awareness campaigns. This increase in visual, written, and word of mouth awareness creates value and support, and or negates it, but it puts forth the issues in striking, relevant, and powefully conveyed messages.

14 & 15.

Contingent valuation provides a necessary scope of public inclusion. I really feel that this approach is very inclusive of the public. I feel it could be effective, but how many of us truly like to fill out surveys? Other fields and issues try to survey people and get their opinions and perspectives, it creates privacy issues and it can be time consuming, and creates excess paper work. Don't get me wrong, I want to be informed and want to give my values, especially within environmental concerns that would harm our society, globally and locally. I feel that locally would be the best fit scenario, on a national scale it seems like it would be another census? So within communities, cities, towns, local air, water, and polltuion concerns could bear great perspective from the local poeple attaining to the issue. And really provide their concern and how they feel it should be addressed within that community they participate in. Then, as local water, air, and environmental issues garner effect and are being resolved the the contingent model could be increasedin breadth, until ultimately it captures the largest venue it can, incrementally it will be effective.

Where it seems troublesome would be on private firm actions, like within the cap/trade system. A public individual is and can be affeted by the emmissions from a private firm, but he/she has no legal authority to decide the scope and policy maneuvering the firm can make and does within its emmission standards. Although public value could be effective in raising awareness and concern that could help the firm evaluate its actions, it would merit little effect on the steps the firm is willing to take, economically, to reduce or buy permits to pollute.

anyways just my two cents in answering these questions for assignment 3.
Fabian