Fiscal transfers for biodiversity conservation: The Portuguese Local Finances Law

Land Use Policy

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 261-273

  Santos Rui, R ^a   Ring, Irene ^b   Antunes, Paula ^a   Clemente, Pedro ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDADE NOVA DE LISBOA   (Portugal)

^b HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

Biodiversity conservation; Economic instruments; Intergovernmental fiscal transfers; Local Finances Law; Portugal

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; ECOLOGICAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; FINANCE; FISCAL POLICY;

PORTUGAL;

EID: 80054043097     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.06.001     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Adger W.N., Brown K., Hulme M. Redefining global environmental change. Global Environmental Change 2005, 15:1-4.
2. Decentralization of forest administration in Indonesia: implications for forest sustainability, economic development and community livelihoods 2006, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia. C. Barr, I.A.P. Resosudarmo, A. Dermawan, J.F. McCarthy, M. Moeliono, B. Setiono (Eds.).
3. Intergovernmental fiscal transfers: principles and practices 2007, The World Bank, Washington, D.C. R. Boadway, A. Shah (Eds.).
4. CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity), 2010. Strategic plan for biodiversity 2011-2020. UNEP/CBD/COP/10/27/Add.1, Nagoya.
5. CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity), 2010. Plan of Action on Subnational Governments, Cities and Other Local Authorities for Biodiversity. UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/22, Nagoya.
6. Faith D. Global biodiversity assessment: integrating global and local values and human dimensions. Global Environmental Change 2005, 15:5-8.
7. Gómez-Baggethun E., de Groot R., Lomas P., Montes C. The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1209-1218.
8. Grieg-Gran, M., 2000. Fiscal incentives for biodiversity conservation: The ICMS Ecológico in Brazil. Discussion Paper 00-01. International Institute for Environment and Development, London.
9. Irawan S., Tacconi L. Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) and decentralized forest management. International Forestry Review 2009, 11:427-438.
10. Kettunen M., Berghöfer A., Bruner A., Conner N., Dudley N., Gidda S.B., Mulongoy K.J., Pabon-Zamora L., Vakrou A., Bouamrane M., ten Brink P., Chape S., Morling P., Seidl A., Stolton S. Recognising the value of protected areas. TEEB - The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity in National and International Policy Making 2011, 345-399. Earthscan, London. P. ten Brink (Ed.).
11. Köllner T., Schelske O., Seidl I. Integrating biodiversity into intergovernmental fiscal transfers based on cantonal benchmarking: a Swiss case study. Basic and Applied Ecology 2002, 3:381-391.
12. Kumar S., Managi S. Compensation for environmental services and intergovernmental fiscal transfers: the case of India. Ecological Economics 2009, 68:3052-3059.
13. Loureiro W. Contribuição do ICMS Ecológico à Conservação da Biodiversidade no Estado do Paraná 2002, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba.
14. Loureiro W. ICMS Ecológico, uma experiência brasileira de pagamentos por serviços ambientais. RPPN Mata Atlântica, No. 3. Conservação Internacional, Fundação SOS Mata Atlântica 2008, The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Belo Horizonte.
15. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis 2005, Island Press, Washington, D.C.
16. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis 2005, World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.
17. May P.H., Veiga Neto F., Denardin V., Loureiro W. Using fiscal instruments to encourage conservation: Municipal responses to the 'ecological' value-added tax in Paraná and Minas Gerais, Brazil. Selling Forest Environmental Services: Market-based Mechanisms for Conservation and Development 2002, 173-199. Earthscan, London. S. Pagiola, J. Bishop, N. Landell-Mills (Eds.).
18. Mumbunan, S., 2011. Ecological fiscal transfers in Indonesia. PhD Dissertation 2/2011. Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung, UFZ and Universität Leipzig, Leipzig.
19. Mumbunan S., Ring I., Lenk T. Ecological fiscal transfers at the provincial level in Indonesia. Paper presented at the 11th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Ecological Economics 2010.
20. Norwegian Department of Finance, 2009. Global environmental challenges - Norwegian policy: How sustainable development and climate can be better taken into account in public decision-making processes. A Norwegian Public Study. Government of Norway, Oslo.
21. OECD Handbook on Incentive Measures for Biodiversity 1999, OECD, Paris.
22. OECD Environmental Fiscal Reform for Poverty Reduction 2005, OECD, Paris.
23. Perner, A., Thöne, M., 2005. Naturschutz im Finanzausgleich. Erweiterung des naturschutzpolitischen Instrumentariums um finanzielle Anreize für Gebietskörperschaften. In: FiFo-Berichte. Finanzwissenschaftliches Forschungsinstitut an der Universität zu Köln, Köln p. 500.
24. Perrings C., Gadgil M. Conserving biodiversity: Reconciling local and global public benefits. Providing Global Public Goods: Managing Globalization 2003, 532-556. Oxford University Press, Oxford. I. Kaul, P. Conceição, K. le Goulven, R.U. Mendoza (Eds.).
25. Ring I. Ecological public functions and fiscal equalisation at the local level in Germany. Ecological Economics 2002, 42:415-427.
26. Ring I. Integrating local ecological services into intergovernmental fiscal transfers: the case of the ecological ICMS in Brazil. Land Use Policy 2008, 25:485-497.
27. Ring I. Compensating municipalities for protected areas: fiscal transfers for biodiversity conservation in Saxony, Germany. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society 2008, 17:143-151.
28. Ring, I., Schröter-Schlaack, C. (Eds.), 2011. Instrument Mixes for Biodiversity Policies. Policymix Report No. 2/2011. Available at http://policymix.nina.no/.
29. Ring I., Drechsler M., van Teeffelen A.J.A., Irawan S., Venter O. Biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation: what role can economic instruments play?. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2010, 2:50-58.
30. SRU (Der Rat von Sachverständigen für Umweltfragen), 1996. Konzepte einer dauerhaft-umweltgerechten Nutzung ländlicher Räume. Sondergutachten. Metzler-Poeschel, Stuttgart.
31. Stoll-Kleemann S. Opposition to the designation of protected areas in Germany. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2001, 44:109-128.
32. TEEB The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations 2010, Earthscan, London. P. Kumar (Ed.).
33. TEEB The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity in National and International Policy Making 2011, Earthscan, London. P. ten Brink (Ed.).
34. ten Brink P., Bassi S., Bishop J., Harvey C.A., Ruhweza A., Verma M., Wertz-Kanounnikoff S., Karousakis K., Vakrou A., van der Esch S., Ring I., Markandya A., Nunes P., McConville A.J., et al. Rewarding benefits through payments and markets. TEEB - The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity in National and International Policy Making 2011, 177-257. Earthscan, London. P. ten Brink (Ed.).
35. TNC (The Nature Conservancy), 2010. ICMS Ecológico. Accessed 17 June, 2010, from http://www.icmsecologico.org.br/.
36. Wunder, S., Engel, S., Pagiola, S., (Eds.), 2008. Payments for Environmental Services in Developing and Developed Countries. Ecological Economics, Special Issue, 65, 663-852.