Olaf Jensen is an Associate Professor in the Department of Marine and Coastal Sciences and Graduate Director for the Ecology & Evolution graduate program. His research interests include meta-analysis of fish population dynamics and fishery management strategies as well as place-based research focused on the social-ecological dynamics of individual fisheries. Jensen’s work has explored the ways in which traditional population models used to manage fisheries fail to adequately capture the impacts of environmental change on the productivity of fish populations. However, some fishery management strategies are more robust to the uncertainty that climate change has introduced in our population models. Comparative analysis of fishery performance can identify these more successful strategies.
In Mongolia, where temperatures have risen at three times the global average rate, Jensen is studying both the direct impacts of climate change on aquatic ecosystems as well as the indirect impacts that result from the human response to climate change. This human response includes heavier reliance on fishing as pastoral livelihoods are threatened by shifting rainfall patterns, as well as a push for hydropower development. Both of these responses represent a greater threat, in the short term, to Mongolia’s lakes and rivers than does climate change. Read more about Professor Jensen here.
-it has shut itself out of global capital markets: trade policy failure
-it lost foreign consumers during the depression in part because of its high import tarriffs
-it had closed borders when the world was returning to free trade. share of trade as % of GDP fell
-poor military and defense leadership, instability led to economic failure
-it never industrialized but remained agriculturally based so it became too specialized and left out of modern markets
-poor investment into human capital, the portsmen were illetarte comepared to Chicagoans.
-lack of education created a sturggle to make competitive industries
-no real investment or real saving
-the country's specialization and main income was agriculture so the economy wasnt broad based
-unevolved political apparatus which didnt balance sparate interests, lack of insitution to
develop long term state policis
Argentina, in the decades before the first world war, had a quickly growing economy and
held great promise for the future. In part because of frequent and intermittent civil
unrest in the years after 1930, Argentina's economy began to deteriorate and today, it
would be among the wealthiest nations in the world had it not been for certain issues
that stemmed from its inefficient and unstable government.
Argentina once led the world in agricultural exports; it had earned a comparative advantage
in the international trade arena, and the agricultural industry became a strong influential force
in a competitive market. Unlike other countries which began to industrialize and shift towards
urbanization, Argentina's economy remained based on agriculture. When Argentina lost its advantage
in the international agriculture market, it suffered great losses and could not recover because it
had never made real investments like outher countries had in human capital.
Competing interests within Argetina prevented an establishment of successful trade policies.
Poor trade policies account additionally for Argentina's economic downfall. Argentina
implemented high import tariffs at a time when foreign markets were becoming more free.
It closed its doors, For example, during
the Depression, Agrentina implemented higher import tarriffs which crushed
At the base of Argentina's economical health problems, was its inefficient government.
Its leadership failed to institute long term state policies regarding international
trade and government spending and saving. As a result, competing interests held
no bounds and were subjected more to political influences than free market forces.
Argentina's government was inefficient mostly because it was instable from years of
civil unrest after 1930.
The three main results of the inefficient government were a failure to industrialize,
a failure to establish sccessful trade policies, and a lack of leadership.
A victim to the governmental inefficiecy was the education
was deprived of investment. No investment in human capital caused Argetinga to keep
up with global shifts rather than drive progress through innovation.