There is no all#x2010;encompassing measure of quality of life that adequately reflects the psychological, sociocultural, environmental, and economic components of subsistence. Even if only the material aspects of quality are considered, impact assessment in rural areas of Alaska is complicated because communities have integrated three#x2010;sector economies. Because both state and federal laws give the highest priority to subsistence users of fishery resources, reductions in fish populations may be manifested in reduced commercial and sport harvests rather than the subsistence take. Impact analysis is complicated because the same individuals may participate in each of these economic sectors. Nevertheless, quantifying material returns such as income and subsistence goods can provide useful insights, even though interpretation of values originating in different contexts are necessarily subjective. Furthermore, these measures are inputs to the quality of life rather than measures of it.
展开▼