Systems Thinking in Environmental Policy Analysis

There are numerous environmental issues that concern the lives of people each day. An environmental policy that I am concerned about is House Bill 1103, which concerns the transfer of federal land to the state. The proposed bill would be known as the Transfer of Public Lands Act.

If the bill is passed, it would affect everyone in the state of Washington because it would change the way public lands are accessed and managed. In addition, the transfer would have a direct impact on the amount of revenue Washington generates from tourism because people travel from all over the world to visit and take part in a variety of outdoor recreational activities. Overall, this policy is trying to restructure the current system in place because bill supporters believe the system could be improved. However, altering the system could potentially change the function of the system currently set in place in a negative (undesirable) way.

The bill was written by its primary sponsor, Washington State Republican Representative David Taylor. The co-sponsors of the bill include a group of Washington State Representatives: Matt Shea, Bob McCaslin, Mike Volz, Cary Condotta, Shelly Short, and Vincent Buys. The bill was originally introduced and read for the first time on January 11th, 2017 and was referred to the House Judiciary Committee. Then, on January 8th, 2018 by resolution, the bill was reintroduced and retained in the present status at the House Judiciary Committee.

The proposed bill is of great concern to Washington state citizens because it would affect the accessibility of the land. “Washington State is made up of over 40 million acres and the fraction of land that is owned by the federal government is 28. 6 percent (approximately 11. 4 million acres). ”[footnoteRef: 3] This percentage can be viewed in comparison with other ownerships in Figure 1 (Appendix).

Public lands owned by the federal government are used for hiking, hunting, fishing, camping, and other recreational activities. Therefore, the possible change to transfer federal land to the state is causing public attention from a variety of groups. Most of the attention that this bill is receiving is originating from hunters, anglers, and environmentalists. Hunting and fishing in Washington State has been a tradition for years. In a news article, Jes Burns stated that, “Sportsmen and women consider hunting and fishing in these wild places to be their right – one that earlier generations led by President Theodore Roosevelt fought to secure more than a century ago”.

If federal land is transferred to the state, hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities could potentially be restricted or closed. This would impact the immense amount of revenue that recreational activities bring to the state through purchasing of equipment, permits, food, hotels, and numerous other expenses. “Overall, it is estimated that outdoor recreation trip-related related expenditures associated with recreation on public lands in Washington amount to about $10. 7 billion per year (excluding equipment)”.

Thus, changing the access to the land would impact the amount of revenue generated because people visit Washington specifically for its physical features and if the land is inaccessible, people won’t bother visiting.

Illustrating a system using a diagram is key to understanding the entirety of a system. In this analysis, the stock “passing of House Bill 1103” is represented inside a box in Figure 2 (Appendix). This is the foundation of the system because passing the bill is what is being analyzed and why people from both oppositions are concerned. The inflows and outflows of the system in Figure 2 are illustrated using arrows and faucets. The inflow in this system is “proposing House Bill 1103” and the outflow is making the bill a state law. However, there is a discrepancy between the stock (passing of House Bill 1103) and the citizens of Washington state that share the desire to keep the land public. This discrepancy represents the supporters of the bill, which in return, reintroduce the bill to the Washington State Legislature. There is a balancing feedback loop present because the discrepancy showcases who the bill supporters are, who ultimately reintroduce the bill to legislature. The loop is classified as a “balancing feedback loop because it is opposing the direction of change being imposed on the system. ”[footnoteRef: 6] Thus, the balancing feedback loop is stabilizing the stock. A delay that affects the inflow of the system is the legislature response delay because it takes time for legislature to read and respond to all proposed bills.

There is another balancing feedback loop in Figure 2 between passing House Bill 1103, available funding for the bill, voting on the bill, and making it a state law. Both funding and voting ballots (to gain the public’s opinion) will cause delays in the system. If the bill is passed and becomes law, the state would take control of the land. This will cause a lengthy time delay because it takes time to create, implement, and enforce new state laws/regulations. All elements illustrated in the systems diagram in Figure 2 play key roles in understanding the behavior, structure, and key functions of the system. By examining the systems diagram, an analysis of the proposed environmental policy, House Bill 1103, can be conducted. “Systems thinking is a critical tool in addressing environmental, political, social, and economic challenges we face around the world.

A systems approach can help us understand where existing policy is effective by breaking down the elements of the system to identify all parties involved. The elements of a system are usually easily found; however, in a complex environmental issue, there can be an overwhelming number of elements. By drawing a systems diagram, the elements can be visualized, which helps avoid leaving any important players out. A systems approach can also help us understand where existing policy is not effective because it shows where there are discrepancies. Discrepancies amongst elements represent variance and inconsistency, which can slow down a system. The function of the system, House Bill 1103, is to pass policy; thus, the system is trying to bring the discrepancy between passing the bill and people who oppose passing the bill to zero. If this happens, then the bill has a better chance of passing.

“Delays can also contribute to show where existing policy is ineffective because delays in feedback loops are critical determinants of system behavior.

The length of time in each delay varies, which can make it difficult to understand. This can be an issue because “we can’t begin to understand the dynamic behavior of systems unless we know where and how long the delays are.

In addition, “the tragedy of the commons arises from missing (or too long delayed) feedback from the resource to the growth of the users of that resource.

A systems approach can help us identify solutions by understanding the behavior of a system. By analyzing where the system is effective and not effective, one can alter the system. In other words, by realizing where the system is not effective, one can try to make improvements. However, this must be done carefully because “altering the system reduces its resilience and if the hierarchies are changed, it could result in producing a malfunctioning system.

For example, the federal government currently provides funding for fighting wildfires, which are becoming increasingly more frequent; however, if the state takes control, providing enough funding could become an issue (resulting in a malfunctioning system). Another place in the system to look for ineffectiveness is whether bounded rationality is occurring because “we often don’t foresee (or chose to ignore) the impacts of our actions on the whole system.

Therefore, the bill supporters (and creators) could be guilty of bounded rationality because they may not have considered all impacts the bill would have on the land, citizens, tourism, economy, etc.

There are also system traps to avoid. The first trap to avoid in a system is “policy resistance and it occurs when various actors try to pull a system state toward various goals.

The solution to avoid this trap is to bring all parties together to combine forces of energy that seek mutual satisfaction. In the case of House Bill 1103, this would look like bill supporters and non-supporters coming together to try and agree on how the land should be managed. In other words, addressing how efficient the land is currently managed. “The tragedy of the commons is another systems trap, which can be avoided by educating and exhorting the users, so everyone understands the consequences of abusing the resource.

If both parties came together to avoid policy resistance, a large part of the meeting would include discussing how to not abuse the resource because that would result in neither party benefiting (i. e. no recreation and no revenue).