Balancing society's multiple and sometimes competing objectives regarding forests calls for information describing the direct and indirect benefits resulting from forest policy and management, whether to address wildfire, loss of open space, unmanaged recreation, ecosystem restoration, or other objectives. The USDA Forest Service recently has proposed the concept of ecosystem services as a framework for (1) describing the many benefits provided by public and private forests, (2), evaluating the effects of policy and management decisions involving public and private forest lands, and (3) advocating the use of economic and market-based incentives to protect private forest lands from development. The concept extends traditional economic theory regarding multiple forest benefits and the use of economic incentives to enhance their provision, by emphasizing ecosystems as an organizing structure for benefits. Although the emphasis on ecosystems is new, challenges in evaluating ecosystem services are similar to those long faced by economists tasked with evaluating forest benefits: (1) defining a typology of ecosystem services, (2) describing and measuring ecosystem services units or outputs, and (3) describing and measuring ecosystem services per unit of values or social weights. Progress within the Forest Service in applying the ecosystem services concept to forest policy and management will depend on knowing what information will suffice, working across disciplines, deciding on appropriate analytical frameworks, defining the appropriate role of economic and market-based incentives, and adequately funding economics research.

Assessing impacts of public investments has long captured the interest and attention of the development community. This paper presents the evolution of different methods and approaches used for ex ante appraisal, monitoring, project evaluation, and impact assessment over the last five decades. Among these tools, impact assessment (IA) conducted retrospectively comes closest to providing the proof of development effectiveness. It is defined as the systematic analysis of the significant or lasting changes in people's lives brought about by a given action or series of actions in relation to a counterfactual. There are three basic types of retrospective IAs: macro-level IAs that focus on the contribution of developmental efforts to an impact goal aggregated at a sector or a system level; micro-level impact evaluations (IEs) concerned with estimating the average effect of an intervention on outcomes at the beneficiary level; and micro-level ex post impact analysis concerned with total effects of a development effort after the outputs are scaled-up. Ex post IAs have evolved and expanded over the decades in both breadth and depth of analysis in response to evolving development themes and methodological advancements. The increased emphasis on learning from evaluations has also seen responses from both quantitative and qualitative camps of the evaluation community. The paper argues that generation of robust knowledge that feeds into making developmental policies and investment decisions requires a hierarchical and cumulative approach to "improving the proof" through rigorous and a variety of impact assessment methods applied incrementally at the project, program and system level. Subjecting as many development interventions as resources allow to rigorous impact assessment based on a common framework can help build a critical body of evidence on impacts of development interventions, which can then be subjected to meta-analyses to help assimilate results across different studies and build a knowledge base on what works and what does not.

This report makes recommendations for good practice bringing the results of economic appraisals and environmental assessments before decision makers in the transport sector on the basis of reviews of recent experience in infrastructure planning and policy development in seven countries.

This report reviews recent trends in agricultural innovation systems (AIS) and discusses the impact of a wide range of policies on the creation and diffusion of innovation in the agricultural and agrifood sector. It suggests a framework for ...

The pressure to be seen to be making cuts across the public sector is threatening to undermine both the Government's good record on investment in science and the economic recovery. Whilst the contribution of a strong domestic science base is widely acknowledged, methodological problems with quantifying its precise value to the economy mean that it is in danger of losing out in Whitehall negotiations. Scientists are under increasing pressure to demonstrate the impact of their work and there is concern that areas without immediate technology applications are being undervalued. The Committee believes the Government faced a strategic choice: invest in areas with the greatest potential to influence and improve other areas of spending, or make cuts of little significance now, but that will have a devastating effect upon British science and the economy in the years to come.

The European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship has been running now for 16 years. This event has been held in Italy, Northern Ireland, France, Belgium, Portugal, and Finland to mention some of the countries who have hosted it. The conference is generally attended by participants from more than 40 countries and attracts an interesting combination of academic scholars, practitioners and individuals who are engaged in various aspects of innovation and entrepreneurship teaching and research. The 16th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship will be hosted by Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE), Portugal and the Conference Chair will be Florinda Matos

In legislation appropriating funds for DOE's fiscal year (FY) 2000 energy R&D budget, the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee directed an evaluation of the benefits that have accrued to the nation from the R&D conducted since 1978 in DOE's energy efficiency and fossil energy programs. In response to the congressional charge, the National Research Council formed the Committee on Benefits of DOE R&D on Energy Efficiency and Fossil Energy. From its inception, DOE's energy R&D program has been the subject of many outside evaluations. The present evaluation asks whether the benefits of the program have justified the considerable expenditure of public funds since DOE's formation in 1977, and, unlike earlier evaluations, it takes a comprehensive look at the actual outcomes of DOE's research over two decades.

Reviews key trends in science, technology and innovation in OECD countries and a number of major non-member economies including Brazil, Chile, China, Israel, Russia and South Africa.