For over two decades, scientists have documented the alarming decline of global Peatland ecosystems, regarded as the planet’s most crucial carbon sinks. The deterioration of these unique wetlands alongside their policy attention presents a puzzle for policy scientists and for students of anticipatory policy design. Two contrasting explanations have emerged. Some argue that pressures from economic globalization compel governments to relax environmental standards, while others point to deficiencies in policy design and implementation. Our paper applies Cashore’s Four Problem Types framework to assess a more nuanced explanation: that failure of global and local policies to curb ecosystem degradation is owing to a misalignment between how the problem is currently conceived of, and what conception is required for, effective environmental management. We find overwhelming evidence that reversing Peatland degradation necessitates a fundamental shift in applied policy analysis—from treating the crisis as a Type 3 (Compromise), Type 2 (Optimization), or even Type 1 (Commons) problem, to conceiving it as a Type 4 (Prioritization) challenge. Achieving this requires undertaking four essential policy design tasks: engaging sequentialist/lexical ordering processes; identifying key features of the problem that any solution would need to incorporate to effectively overcome; applying path dependency analysis to uncover policy mix innovations capable of “locking-in” sustainability trajectories that can fend off pressures for policy conception drift; and organizing multistakeholder “policy design learning” exercises that integrate complex sources of knowledge produced within, and across, the ecological and policy sciences.

中文翻译：

---

生物多样性政策设计：问题概念漂移如何破坏“适合目的”泥炭地保护


二十多年来，科学家们记录了全球泥炭地生态系统惊人的衰退，泥炭地生态系统被视为地球上最重要的碳汇。这些独特湿地的恶化及其政策关注给政策科学家和预期政策设计的学生带来了难题。出现了两种截然不同的解释。一些人认为，经济全球化的压力迫使各国政府放松环境标准，而另一些人则指出政策设计和实施方面的缺陷。我们的论文应用卡肖尔的四种问题类型框架来评估更细致的解释：全球和地方政策在遏制生态系统退化方面的失败是由于当前对问题的看法与有效环境管理所需的概念之间的不一致。 。我们发现压倒性的证据表明，扭转泥炭地退化需要对应用政策分析进行根本性转变——从将危机视为第 3 类（妥协）、第 2 类（优化）甚至第 1 类（公地）问题，到将其视为第 1 类问题。 4（优先级）挑战。实现这一目标需要承担四项基本的政策设计任务：参与顺序/词汇排序过程；确定任何解决方案都需要纳入才能有效克服的问题的关键特征；应用路径依赖分析来发现能够“锁定”可持续发展轨迹的政策组合创新，从而抵御政策理念漂移的压力；组织多利益相关者的“政策设计学习”练习，整合生态和政策科学内部和跨领域产生的复杂知识来源。