/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 7 Yellowstone National Park is in ... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Yellowstone National Park is in bear country. The National Park Service, at its Yellowstone Web site, states the following about camping and hiking in bear country: Do not leave packs containing food unattended, even for a few minutes. Allowing a bear to obtain human food even once often results in the bear becoming aggressive about obtaining such food in the future. Aggressive bears present a threat to human safety and eventually must be destroyed or removed from the park. Please obey the law and do not allow bears or other wildlife to obtain human food. What negative externality does obtaining human food pose for bears? What negative externality do bears obtaining human food pose for future campers and hikers?

Short Answer

Expert verified
Obtaining human food poses a negative externality for bears as it changes their behavior and makes them aggressive, thus increasing the risk to their lives as they may be removed or destroyed. For future campers and hikers, the negative externality of bears obtaining human food is the increased risk to their safety due to potential attacks by aggressive bears.

Step by step solution

01

Defining externality

An externality refers to the cost or benefit that affects a party who didn't choose to incur that cost or benefit. It can have either positive or negative impact. In this context, we are discussing negative externalities.
02

Identifying Negative Externality for Bears

When bears obtain human food, it may initially seem beneficial for them as they get an easy meal. However, this experience can make the bear aggressive about obtaining such food in the future. This change in behavior can become a threat to their lives because aggressive bears are often seen as a threat to human safety and therefore may have to be removed or destroyed. So the negative externality for bears is the risk to their lives posed by the change in behaviour caused by obtaining human food.
03

Identifying Negative Externality for Future Campers and Hikers

As for the future campers and hikers, when bears obtain human food and become aggressive, this creates a safety threat for these individuals. They could be attacked by these bears while camping or hiking. So the negative externality for future campers and hikers is the increased risk to their safety.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Externality
In environmental economics, the concept of an externality is crucial to understanding how individual actions can have unintended consequences on others. An externality occurs when a third party is affected by an economic activity but doesn't have a choice about being involved. It's like being in a room where someone decides to play loud music; if you enjoy it, it's a positive externality, but if it gives you a headache, that's a negative externality.

Negative externalities can pose a significant challenge in public policy because correcting them often requires incentives or regulations to align private incentives with social well-being. The Yellowstone National Park scenario is an example of a negative externality. Bears obtaining human food might benefit from the easy meal initially, but once they're associated with aggressive behavior in their quest for more, they face the dire consequences - including potential harm or removal from their habitat. Here we see a ripple effect; the bears' altered behavior poses a new set of risks for future campers and hikers who might face dangerous encounters. These inadvertent interactions showcase how negative externalities can have broader implications on both the wildlife and human communities.
Environmental Economics
The field of environmental economics deals with the economic effects of the environment and how economic processes affect that environment. This discipline merges ecological concerns with economic analysis to understand the cause and effect relationship of human activity on our surroundings. It's particularly interested in how economic incentives can create environmental problems and what regulatory or market-based tools can address them.

Environmental economists study issues like pollution, resource degradation, and loss of biodiversity, often through the lens of externalities. In the Yellowstone example, the environmental economists would look at the broader impact of food-conditioned bears on the ecosystem and the park's economy. They would weigh the cost of managing and educating campers against the ecological and social consequences of displaced or destroyed wildlife. This balancing act is at the core of sustainable environmental management and helps inform better public policy decisions.
Public Policy
When it comes to public policy, it's about government actions designed to address public issues and guide actions towards desired outcomes. Negative externalities like bears becoming accustomed to human food pose complex challenges for policymakers at Yellowstone National Park. They are compelled to develop strategies that protect both the bears' natural behavior and park visitors. This might involve creating laws against feeding wildlife, implementing stringent food storage regulations, and developing educational programs for visitors.

Effective public policy hinges on the understanding that interventional strategies must consider long-term sustainability and the well-being of all stakeholders. In this case, policies that encourage responsible human behavior can significantly reduce the risk of negative externalities, such as human-bear conflicts. Occasionally, policies also require enforcement mechanisms, such as fines or legal action, to ensure compliance and protect the park's ecological integrity for years to come.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

A neighbor's barking dog can be both a positive externality and a negative externality. Under what circumstances would a dog's bark be a positive externality? Under what circumstances would a dog's bark be a negative externality?

(Related to the Chapter Opener on page 146) In a letter to the New York Times, Suzanne McCarron, an executive at ExxonMobil, argued that a carbon tax would "allow market forces to drive solutions." a. According to McCarron, what problem would a carbon tax solve? b. How would a carbon tax allow market forces to "drive solutions"?

In 2017, President Donald Trump was considering a major increase on federal government spending on infrastructure, including building and repairing bridges, highways, rail lines, and subways. An article in the Economist argued, "Just as economists talk of 'negative externalities' (from, say, pollution), infrastructure can have positive externalities that are not captured by investors but will benefit society." a. Explain what positive externalities infrastructure spending might generate. b. If infrastructure spending generates a positive externality, what effect should this have on government policy?

A columnist for the Wall Street Journal argued that highspeed Internet connections are now a public good: "We're going to have to transition to the building of public infrastructure and away from the revolution being the domain of private enterprise. It's not enough for Google to roll out high- speed fiber to a handful of cities." a. In what ways is the infrastructure for high-speed Internet connections like automobile highways? In what ways is it different from highways? b. As of 2017 , private firms have constructed most of the infrastructure for high-speed Internet connections, while governments have constructed most highways. Is it still possible that the infrastructure for high-speed Internet connections is a public good despite this fact? Briefly explain. c. Do you agree with the columnist that we should think of the infrastructure for high-speed Internet connections as being like a public good? Is there any information you would need to know before deciding?

William Easterly in The White Man's Burden shared the following account by New York University Professor Leonard Wantchekon of how Professor Wantchekon's village in Benin, Africa, managed the local fishing pond when he was growing up: To open the fishing season, elders performed ritual tests at Amlé, a lake fifteen kilometers from the village. If the fish were large enough, fishing was allowed for two or three days. If they were too small, all fishing was forbidden, and anyone who secretly fished the lake at this time was outcast, excluded from the formal and informal groups that formed the village's social structure. Those who committed this breach of trust were often shunned by the whole community; no one would speak to the offender, or even acknowledge his existence for a year or more. What economic problem were the village elders trying to prevent? Do you think their solution was effective?

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.