Create a culture of experiments in environmental programs.

Organizations need a better "learning by doing" approach.

Data on donation behavior towards the conservation of migratory species.

The data contains 716 individual decisions and responses from a lab-in-field experiment and an exit questionnaire that were conducted in Denmark, Spain, and Ghana. Individuals were initially asked to perform a small effort task (i.e., correctly counting the number of 1's and 0's in a page) to earn money and subsequently asked how much of their earnings they were willing to donate to BirdLife International to conserve Danish, Spanish, and Ghanaian habitats of the Montagu's Harrier, a migratory bird. The data is useful in understanding individual willingness-to-pay to conserve the habitats of the Montagu's Harrier along its flyway and could aid policymakers in having a clearer and more complete idea of support for international conservation. Among other things, the data can be used to look at the effect of individual socio-demographic characteristics and environmental and donation preferences on actual donation behavior.

Physical distancing versus testing with self-isolation for controlling an emerging epidemic.

Two distinct strategies for controlling an emerging epidemic are physical distancing and regular testing with self-isolation. These strategies are especially important before effective vaccines or treatments become widely available. The testing strategy has been promoted frequently but used less often than physical distancing to mitigate COVID-19. We compared the performance of these strategies in an integrated epidemiological and economic model that includes a simple representation of transmission by "superspreading," wherein a relatively small fraction of infected individuals cause a large share of infections. We examined the economic benefits of distancing and testing over a wide range of conditions, including variations in the transmissibility and lethality of the disease meant to encompass the most prominent variants of COVID-19 encountered so far. In a head-to-head comparison using our primary parameter values, both with and without superspreading and a declining marginal value of mortality risk reductions, an optimized testing strategy outperformed an optimized distancing strategy. In a Monte Carlo uncertainty analysis, an optimized policy that combined the two strategies performed better than either one alone in more than 25% of random parameter draws. Insofar as diagnostic tests are sensitive to viral loads, and individuals with high viral loads are more likely to contribute to superspreading events, superspreading enhances the relative performance of testing over distancing in our model. Both strategies performed best at moderate levels of transmissibility, somewhat lower than the transmissibility of the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2.

Challenges of integrating economics into epidemiological analysis of and policy responses to emerging infectious diseases.

COVID-19 has shown that the consequences of a pandemic are wider-reaching than cases and deaths. Morbidity and mortality are important direct costs, but infectious diseases generate other direct and indirect benefits and costs as the economy responds to these shocks: some people lose, others gain and people modify their behaviours in ways that redistribute these benefits and costs. These additional effects feedback on health outcomes to create a complicated interdependent system of health and non-health outcomes. As a result, interventions primarily intended to reduce the burden of disease can have wider societal and economic effects and more complicated and unintended, but possibly not anticipable, system-level influences on the epidemiological dynamics themselves. Capturing these effects requires a systems approach that encompasses more direct health outcomes. Towards this end, in this article we discuss the importance of integrating epidemiology and economic models, setting out the key challenges which such a merging of epidemiology and economics presents. We conclude that understanding people's behaviour in the context of interventions is key to developing a more complete and integrated economic-epidemiological approach; and a wider perspective on the benefits and costs of interventions (and who these fall upon) will help society better understand how to respond to future pandemics.

Earth stewardship: Shaping a sustainable future through interacting policy and norm shifts.

Transformation toward a sustainable future requires an earth stewardship approach to shift society from its current goal of increasing material wealth to a vision of sustaining built, natural, human, and social capital-equitably distributed across society, within and among nations. Widespread concern about earth's current trajectory and support for actions that would foster more sustainable pathways suggests potential social tipping points in public demand for an earth stewardship vision. Here, we draw on empirical studies and theory to show that movement toward a stewardship vision can be facilitated by changes in either policy incentives or social norms. Our novel contribution is to point out that both norms and incentives must change and can do so interactively. This can be facilitated through leverage points and complementarities across policy areas, based on values, system design, and agency. Potential catalysts include novel democratic institutions and engagement of non-governmental actors, such as businesses, civic leaders, and social movements as agents for redistribution of power. Because no single intervention will transform the world, a key challenge is to align actions to be synergistic, persistent, and scalable.

Can We Commit Future Managers to Honesty?

In a competitive business environment, dishonesty can pay. Self-interested executives and managers can have incentive to shade the truth for personal gain. In response, the business community has considered how to commit these executives and managers to a higher ethical standard. The MBA Oath and the Dutch Bankers Oath are examples of such a commitment device. The question we test herein is whether the oath can be used as an effective form of ethics management for future executives/managers-who for our experiment we recruited from a leading French business school-by actually improving their honesty. Using a classic Sender-Receiver strategic game experiment, we reinforce professional identity by pre-selecting the group to which Receivers belong. This allows us to determine whether taking the oath deters lying among future managers. Our results suggest "yes and no." We observe that these future executives/managers who took a solemn honesty oath as a Sender were (a) significantly more likely to tell the truth when the lie was detrimental to the Receiver, but (b) were not more likely to tell the truth when the lie was mutually beneficial to both the Sender and Receiver. A joint product of our design is our ability to measure in-group bias in lying behavior in our population of subjects (comparing behavior of subjects in the same and different business schools). The experiment provides clear evidence of a lack of such bias.

Correction: Do truth-telling oaths improve honesty in crowd-working?

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244958.].

Do truth-telling oaths improve honesty in crowd-working?

This study explores whether an oath to honesty can reduce both shirking and lying among crowd-sourced internet workers. Using a classic coin-flip experiment, we first confirm that a substantial majority of Mechanical Turk workers both shirk and lie when reporting the number of heads flipped. We then demonstrate that lying can be reduced by first asking each worker to swear voluntarily on his or her honor to tell the truth in subsequent economic decisions. Even in this online, purely anonymous environment, the oath significantly reduced the percent of subjects telling "big" lies (by roughly 27%), but did not affect shirking. We also explore whether a truth-telling oath can be used as a screening device if implemented after decisions have been made. Conditional on flipping response, MTurk shirkers and workers who lied were significantly less likely to agree to an ex-post honesty oath. Our results suggest oaths may help elicit more truthful behavior, even in online crowd-sourced environments.

Do the Benefits of COVID-19 Policies Exceed the Costs? Exploring Uncertainties in the Age-VSL Relationship.

Numerous analyses of the benefits and costs of COVID-19 policies have been completed quickly as the crisis has unfolded. The results often largely depend on the approach used to value mortality risk reductions, typically expressed as the value per statistical life (VSL). Many analyses rely on a population-average VSL estimate; some adjust VSL for life expectancy at the age of death. We explore the implications of theory and empirical studies, which suggest that the relationship between age and VSL is uncertain. We compare the effects of three approaches: (1) an invariant population-average VSL; (2) a constant value per statistical life-year (VSLY); and (3) a VSL that follows an inverse-U pattern, peaking in middle age. We find that when applied to the U.S. age distribution of COVID-19 deaths, these approaches result in average VSL estimates of $10.63 million, $4.47 million, and $8.31 million. We explore the extent to which applying these estimates alters the conclusions of frequently cited analyses of social distancing, finding that they significantly affect the findings. However, these analyses do not address other characteristics of COVID-19 deaths that may increase or decrease the VSL estimates. Examples include the health status and income level of those affected, the size of the risk change, and the extent to which the risk is dreaded, uncertain, involuntarily incurred, and outside of one's control. The effects of these characteristics and their correlation with age are uncertain; it is unclear whether they amplify or diminish the effects of age on VSL.

Corridors of Clarity: Four Principles to Overcome Uncertainty Paralysis in the Anthropocene.

Global environmental change challenges humanity because of its broad scale, long-lasting, and potentially irreversible consequences. Key to an effective response is to use an appropriate scientific lens to peer through the mist of uncertainty that threatens timely and appropriate decisions surrounding these complex issues. Identifying such corridors of clarity could help understanding critical phenomena or causal pathways sufficiently well to justify taking policy action. To this end, we suggest four principles: Follow the strongest and most direct path between policy decisions on outcomes, focus on finding sufficient evidence for policy purpose, prioritize no-regrets policies by avoiding options with controversial, uncertain, or immeasurable benefits, aim for getting the big picture roughly right rather than focusing on details.

Effects of Physical Distancing to Control COVID-19 on Public Health, the Economy, and the Environment.

Physical distancing measures are important tools to control disease spread, especially in the absence of treatments and vaccines. While distancing measures can safeguard public health, they also can profoundly impact the economy and may have important indirect effects on the environment. The extent to which physical distancing measures should be applied therefore depends on the trade-offs between their health benefits and their economic costs. We develop an epidemiological-economic model to examine the optimal duration and intensity of physical distancing measures aimed to control the spread of COVID-19. In an application to the United States, our model considers the trade-off between the lives saved by physical distancing-both directly from stemming the spread of the virus and indirectly from reductions in air pollution during the period of physical distancing-and the short- and long-run economic costs that ensue from such measures. We examine the effect of air pollution co-benefits on the optimal physical distancing policy and conduct sensitivity analyses to gauge the influence of several key parameters and uncertain model assumptions. Using recent estimates of the association between airborne particulate matter and the virulence of COVID-19, we find that accounting for air pollution co-benefits can significantly increase the intensity and duration of the optimal physical distancing policy. To conclude, we broaden our discussion to consider the possibility of durable changes in peoples' behavior that could alter local markets, the global economy, and our relationship to nature for years to come.

Catastrophic Risk: Waking Up to the Reality of a Pandemic?

Will a major shock awaken the US citizens to the threat of catastrophic pandemic risk? Using a natural experiment administered both before and after the 2014 West African Ebola Outbreak, our evidence suggests "no." Our results show that prior to the Ebola scare, the US citizens were relatively complacent and placed a low relative priority on public spending to prepare for a pandemic disease outbreak relative to an environmental disaster risk (e.g., Fukushima) or a terrorist attack (e.g., 9/11). After the Ebola scare, the average citizen did not over-react to the risk. This flat reaction was unexpected given the well-known availability heuristic-people tend to over-weigh judgments of events more heavily toward more recent information. In contrast, the average citizen continued to value pandemic risk less relative to terrorism or environmental risk.

Do parents counter-balance the carbon emissions of their children?

It is well understood that adding to the population increases CO2 emissions. At the same time, having children is a transformative experience, such that it might profoundly change adult (i.e., parents') preferences and consumption. How it might change is, however, unknown. Depending on if becoming a parent makes a person "greener" or "browner," parents may either balance or exacerbate the added CO2 emissions from their children. Parents might think more about the future, compared to childless adults, including risks posed to their children from environmental events like climate change. But parenthood also adds needs and more intensive competition on your scarce time. Carbon-intensive goods can add convenience and help save time, e.g., driving may facilitate being in more places in one day, compared to public transportation or biking. Pre-prepared food that contain red meat may save time and satisfy more household preferences, relative to vegetarian food. We provide the first rigorous test of whether parents are greener or browner than other adults. We create a unique dataset by combining detailed micro data on household expenditures of all expenditure groups particularly important for CO2 emissions (transportation, food, and heating/electricity) with CO2 emissions, and compare emissions from Swedish adults with and without children. We find that parents emit more CO2 than childless adults. Only a small fraction of adults permanently choose not to have children, which means any meaningful self-selection into parenthood based on green preferences is unlikely. Our findings suggest that having children might increase CO2 emissions both by adding to the population and by increasing CO2 emissions from those choosing to have children.

The IPBES Global Assessment: Pathways to Action.

The first Global Assessment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) found widespread, accelerating declines in Earth's biodiversity and associated benefits to people from nature. Addressing these trends will require science-based policy responses to reduce impacts, especially at national to local scales. Effective scaling of science-policy efforts, driven by global and national assessments, is a major challenge for turning assessment into action and will require unprecedented commitment by scientists to engage with communities of policy and practice. Fulfillment of science's social contract with society, and with nature, will require strong institutional support for scientists' participation in activities that transcend conventional research and publication.

The Economic Case for a Pandemic Fund.

The rapid urban spread of Ebola virus in West Africa in 2014 and consequent breakdown of control measures led to a significant economic impact as well as the burden on public health and wellbeing. The US government appropriated $5.4 Billion for FY2015 and WHO proposed a $100 Million emergency fund largely to curtail the threat of future outbreaks. Using epidemiological analyses and economic modeling, we propose that the best use of these and similar funds would be to serve as global insurance against the continued threat of emerging infectious diseases. An effective strategy would involve the initial investment in strengthening mobile and adaptable capacity to deal with the threat and reality of disease emergence, coupled with repeated investment to maintain what is effectively a 'national guard' for pandemic prevention and response. This investment would create a capital stock that could also provide access to safe treatment during and between crises in developing countries, lowering risk to developed countries.

Managing Wildlife Faced with Pathogen Risks Involving Multi-Stable Outcomes.

Most models designed to understand how to manage infected wildlife systems with bioeconomic multi-stability take the initial conditions as given, thereby treating pathogen invasion as unanticipated. We examine how ex ante management is an opportunity to influence the ex post conditions, which in turn affect the ex post optimal outcome. To capture these ex ante management choices, we extend the Poisson "collapse" model of Reed and Heras (Bull Math Biol 54:185-207, 1992) to allow for endogenous initial conditions and ex post multi-stability. We account for two uncertain processes: the introduction and establishment of the pathogen. Introduction is conditional on anthropogenic investments in prevention, and both random processes are conditional on how we manage the native population to provide natural prevention of invasion and natural insurance against establishment placing the system in an undesirable basin of attraction. We find that both multi-stability of the invaded system and these uncertainty processes can create economic non-convexities that yield multiple candidate solutions to the ex ante optimization problem. Additionally, we illustrate how the nature of natural protection against introduction and establishment risks can play an important role in the allocation of anthropogenic investments.

Managing the Endogenous Risk of Disease Outbreaks with Non-Constant Background Risk.

There is a growing concern that risks of disease outbreak and pandemics are increasing over time. We consider optimal investments in prevention before an outbreak using an endogenous risk approach within an optimal control setting. Using the threat of pandemic influenza as an illustrative example, we demonstrate that prevention expenditures are relatively small in comparison to the potential losses facing the USA, and these expenditures need to be flexible and responsive to changes in background risk. Failure to adjust these expenditures to changes in background risk poses a significant threat to social welfare into the future.