i
Environmental Law Journal becomes part of Scielo Chile
The publication edited by the Environmental Law Center will be part of an open access collection of Chilean scientific journals in all areas of knowledge.
The Environmental Law Journal, edited by the Environmental Law Center of the Law School of the University of Chile, was admitted to be part of the SciELO - Chile Scientific Electronic Library.
SciELO - Chile is an open access collection of texts from Chilean scientific journals, from all areas of knowledge, which predominantly publish articles resulting from scientific research, and which uses peer review of the manuscripts they receive, which show a growing performance in the indicators of compliance with the indexing criteria.
"We are very pleased with this recognition, which is the result of an effort of continuous improvement of the editorial processes developed by the editorial team, which has resulted in the growing increase in the quality of the articles published over the years," said the director of the Journal, Prof. Valentina Durán Medina, adding "we are grateful for the support of the Faculty, which through its Dean, Prof. Pablo Ruiz-Tagle, and the Journals Program of the Research Department, headed by Prof. Daniel Álvarez, has provided permanent support to the work of the journal."
"Once the collaboration agreement between the Faculty of Law of the University of Chile and the National Agency for Research and Development (ANID) is signed, the full incorporation of the journal to this collection will take place, starting in 2022" explained the editor Jorge Ossandón Rosales.
This good news is in addition to the admission, in 2020, of the Environmental Law Journal to the SCOPUS database.
As a result, in 2022 the Environmental Law Journal will already be indexed in Scopus, Redib, DOAJ and Latindex, in addition to ScIELO, with the support of SISIB and the Journals Program of the Research Department of the Law School of the Universidad of Chile.
It should be noted that Issue 16 of this biannual journal will be published on December 31.
The National System of Protected Areas: Viability under legal-economic scrutiny
Download
Abstract
The Act 21.600 established the Biodiversity Office and the National System of Protected Areas in Chile. This decentralized service, overseen by the president through the Ministry of the Environment, will manage said national system, which will encompass various categories of environmental protection. These categories range from national parks and natural monuments to protected marine areas. Additionally, new categories such as the Virgin Region Reserve and Indigenous Peoples’ Conservation Areas will be added. The Biodiversity Service will be responsible for developing management plans, enforcing regulations, and sanctioning infringements to the Act. However, the concentration of all environmental protection categories under a single new public office poses challenges, particularly from a legal-economic perspective. The research suggests that the increase in the budget allocated to the new Office (nearly 58%) does not correspond to the actual budget increase (only 2.9% for 2024), which might affect the efficiency of management and the achievement of conservation’s environmental targets.
This research focuses on determining whether the interests protected by the Act, such as biodiversity conservation and protected areas, were adequately valued and whether this influenced budget allocation. Regulatory amendments are proposed to improve efficiency in the use of public resources allocated to conservation. The study highlights the importance of economic efficiency control in environmental governance to prevent loss of biodiversity and ecosystem’s services. It concludes that it is essential for public resources allocation to respond to measurable criteria of utility and efficiency, rather than being unchecked expenditure.
Keywords:
Biodiversity conservation , protected areas , environmental policy , budget allocation , economic efficiency controlReferences
Balvanera, Patricia y Helena Cotler (2009). «Estado y tendencias de los servicios ecosistémicos». En José Sarukhán, Capital natural de México. Volumen 2: Estado de conservación y tendencias de cambio. Ciudad de México: Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad.
Bermúdez Soto, Jorge (2014). Fundamentos de derecho ambiental. 2.ª ed. Valparaíso: Universitarias de Valparaíso.
Carpenter, Daniel, y David A. Moss (2013). Preventing regulatory capture: Special interest influence and how to limit it. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coffey, Brian, Florence L. P. Damiens, Erik Hysing y Nooshin Torabi (2023). «Assessing biodiversity policy designs in Australia, France and Sweden: Comparative lessons for transformative governance of biodiversity?». Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 25 (3): 287-300. DOI: 10.1080/1523908X.2022.2117145.
Dirección de Presupuestos (2014). Informe Financiero: Proyecto de Ley que crea el Servicio de Biodiversidad y Áreas Protegidas y el Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas (Boletín 161-362). I.F. 055/18.06.2014. Ministerio de Hacienda.
—. (2016). Informe Financiero Complementario: Indicaciones al Proyecto de Ley que Crea el Servicio de Biodiversidad y Áreas Protegidas y el Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas (Boletín 9404-12). I.F. 144/07.12.2016. Ministerio de Hacienda.
—. (2022). Informe Financiero Sustitutivo: Indicaciones al Proyecto de Ley que Crea el Servicio de Biodiversidad y Áreas Protegidas y el Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas (Boletín 9404-12). I.F. 252/30.12.2022. Ministerio de Hacienda.
Figueroa, Eugenio (2023). Actualización de las estimaciones de las brechas de financiamiento del sistema nacional de áreas protegidas de Chile. Santiago: Centro de Estudios Públicos. Disponible en https://tipg.link/e8wZ.
Hanley, Nicholas, Jason F. Shogren y Ben White (2013). Introduction to environmental economics. 2.ª ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ladrón de Guevara, Juan (2014). Propuesta de estrategia financiera 2015-2023: Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas. Santiago: Ministerio del Medio Ambiente.
Mashaw, Jerry Louis (2009). «Public law and public choice: A critique and rapprochement ». Yale Law School: Public Law Working Paper, 161, y Yale Law and Economics Research Paper, 366. Disponible https://tipg.link/e8xL.
Mete, Marcos Roberto (2014). «Valor actual neto y tasa de retorno: Su utilidad como herramientas para el análisis y evaluación de proyectos de inversión» Fides et Ratio, 7 (7): 67-85. Disponible en https://tipg.link/e8xR.
Pearce, David W. y R. Kerry Turner (1990). Economics of natural resources and the environment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Simonetti-Grez, Gabriela, Javier A. Simonetti y Guillermo Espinoza (2016). Conservando el patrimonio natural de Chile: El aporte de las áreas protegidas. Santiago: Asociación Kauyeken. Disponible en https://tipg.link/eAWx.
Stiglitz, Joseph Eugene y Jay K. Rosengard (2015). La economía del sector público.
ª ed. Trad. por María Esther Rabasco. Barcelona: Antoni Bosch. Disponible en https://tipg.link/eAX7.
Toledo, Cristopher (2022). Estado actual del financiamiento de las áreas protegidas en Chile. Fundación Terram. Disponible en https://tipg.link/eAXC.
—. (2023). Minuta: Financiamiento áreas protegidas públicas terrestres. Proyecto de Ley de Presupuestos 2024. Fundación Terram. Disponible en https://tipg.link/eAXO.
Vargas Arévalo, Cidar (2007). «Análisis de las políticas públicas». Perspectivas, 19: 127-136. Disponible en https://tipg.link/eAXm.
Waldron, Anthony, Arne O. Mooers, Daniel C. Miller, Nate Nibbelink, David Redding, Tyler S. Kuhn, J. Timmons Roberts y John L. Gittleman (2013). «Targeting global conservation funding to limit immediate biodiversity declines». Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
Twitter