A revealed preference approach to estimating supply curves for ecosystem services: Use of auctions to set payments for soil erosion control in Indonesia;Un Método de preferencia revelada para la estimacíon de curvas de suministro de servicios del ecosistema: Uso de subastas para fijar pagos por la erosíon de suelos en Indonesia

Conservation Biology

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 359-367

  Jack, B Kelsey ^a   Leimona, Beria ^b   Ferraro, Paul J ^c  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL FORESTRY RESEARCH   (Indonesia)

^c GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Conservation auction; Conservation planning; Payments for ecosystem services; Poverty alleviation; Program design; Revealed preferences; Supply curves

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL LAND; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; CONSERVATION PLANNING; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; EROSION CONTROL; POVERTY ALLEVIATION; SOIL EROSION;

ARTICLE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; INDONESIA; METHODOLOGY; SOIL; STATISTICAL MODEL;

CAPITAL FINANCING; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECOSYSTEM; INDONESIA; MODELS, ECONOMIC; SOIL;

ASIA; EURASIA; INDONESIA; SOUTHEAST ASIA;

EID: 62549124519     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: 15231739     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01086.x     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Adamowicz, W., J. Swait, P. Boxall, J. Louviere, and M. Williams. 1997. Perceptions versus objective measures of environmental quality in combined revealed and stated preference models of environmental valuation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32 : 65 84.
2. Agus, F., A. N. Gintings, and M. Van Noordwijk. 2002. Choices of agroforestry and soil conservation techniques for coffee farming in Sumberjaya, Lampung Barat, Indonesia. World Agroforestry Centre, Bogor, Indonesia (in Indonesian).
3. Agus, F., and M. Van Noordwijk. 2005. Alternatives to slash and burn in Indonesia: facilitating the development of agroforestry systems: phase 3 synthesis and summary report. World Agroforestry Centre - ICRAF, SEA Regional Office, Bogor, Indonesia.
4. Antle, J. M., and R. O. Valdivia. 2006. Modelling the supply of ecosystem services from agriculture: a minimum-data approach. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 50 : 1 15.
5. Armsworth, P. R., K. M. A. Chan, G. C. Daily, P. R. Ehrlich, C. Kremen, T. H. Ricketts, and M. A. Sanjayan. 2007. Ecosystem-service science and the way forward for conservation. Conservation Biology 21 : 1383 1384.
6. Athey, S., and J. Levin. 2001. Information and competition in U.S. Forest Service timber auctions. Journal of Political Economy 109 : 375 417.
7. Athey, S., P. Cramton, and A. Ingraham. 2002. Auction-based timber pricing and complementary market reforms in British Columbia. Market Design and Criterion Auctions, Bethesda, Maryland.
8. Babcock, B. A., P. G. Lakshminarayan, J. Wu, and D. Zilberman. 1997. Targeting tools for the purchase of environmental amenities. Land Economics 73 : 325 339.
9. Carson, R. T., and W. M. Hanemann. 2005. Contingent valuation. Pages 821 936 in K.-G. Mäler and J. Vincent, editors. Handbook of environmental economics. Volume 2. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
10. Cason, T. N., L. Gangadharan, and C. Duke. 2003. A laboratory study of auctions for reducing non-point source pollution. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 46 : 446 471.
11. Cummings, R., C. Holt, and S. Laury. 2004. Using laboratory experiments for policy making: an example from the Georgia irrigation reduction auction. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 23 : 341 363.
12. Ferraro, P. J. 2001. Global habitat protection: limitations of development interventions and a role for conservation performance payments. Conservation Biology 15 : 990 1000.
13. Ferraro, P. J. 2003. Conservation contracting in heterogeneous landscapes: an application to watershed protection with threshold constraints. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 32 : 53 64.
14. Ferraro, P. J. 2004. Targeting conservation investments in heterogeneous landscapes: a distance-function approach and application to watershed management. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86 : 905 918.
15. Ferraro, P. J. 2008. Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 65 : 810 821.
16. Ferraro, P. J., and A. Kiss. 2002. Direct payments to conserve biodiversity. Science 298 : 1718 1719.
17. Hailu, A., and S. Schilizzi. 2004. Are auctions more efficient than fixed price schemes when bidders learn? Australian Journal of Management 29 : 147 168.
18. Harrison, G. W. 2006. Experimental evidence on alternative environmental valuation methods. Environmental and Resource Economics 34 : 125 162.
19. Jack, B. K., C. Kousky, and K. E. Sims. 2008. Designing payments for ecosystem services: lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences of the United States of America 105 : 9465 9470.
20. Kagel, J. H. 1995. Auctions: a survey of experimental research. Pages 501 557 in J. H. Kagel and A. E. Roth, editors. The handbook of experimental economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
21. Latacz-Lohmann, U., and S. Schilizzi. 2005. Auctions for conservation contracts: a review of the theoretical and empirical literature. Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department, Edinburgh.
22. Leimona, B., B. K. Jack, R. Pasha, and S. Suyanto. 2008. A field experiment of direct incentive scheme for provisioning watershed services. Environment and Economy Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), Singapore.
23. Margules, C., and R. Pressey. 2000. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405 : 243 253.
24. Naidoo, R., and W. L. Adamowicz. 2006. Modeling opportunity costs of conservation in transitional landscapes. Conservation Biology 20 : 490 500.
25. Naidoo, R., A. Balmford, P. J. Ferraro, S. Polasky, T. H. Ricketts, and M. Rouget. 2006. Integrating economic costs into conservation planning. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 21 : 681 687.
26. Pagiola, S., A. Arcenas, and G. Platais. 2005. Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An exploration of the issues and the evidence to date from Latin America. World Development 33 : 237 253.
27. Parks, P. J. 1995. Explaining" irrational" land use: risk aversion and marginal agricultural land. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 28 : 34 47.
28. Richards, K. R., R. Moulton, and R. Birdsey. 1993. Costs of creating carbon sinks in the U.S. Energy Conservation and Management 34 : 905 912.
29. Stoneham, G., V. Chaudhri, A. Ha, and L. Strappazzon. 2003. Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trial. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 47 : 477 500.
30. th Session, Montreal, Canada. Available from http://unfccc.int/files/ meetings/cop-13/application/pdf/cp-redd.pdf (accessed May 2008).
31. van Noordwijk, M., C. Cerri, P. L. Woomer, K. Nugroho, and M. Bernoux. 1997. Soil carbon dynamics in the humid tropical forest zone. Geoderma 79 : 187 225.
32. Wunder, S. 2007. The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation. Conservation Biology 21 : 48 58.
33. Wunder, S. 2008. Payments for environmental services and the poor: concepts and preliminary evidence. Environment and Development Economics 13 : 279 297.