Market instruments, ecosystem services, and property rights: Assumptions and conditions for sustained social and ecological benefits

Land Use Policy

Volumn 31, Issue , 2013, Pages 90-98

  Lockie, Stewart ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Environmental policy; Market based incentives; Market based instruments; Payments for ecosystem services; Property rights

Indexed keywords

COMMUNITY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; DECISION MAKING; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; INCENTIVE; LAND MARKET; PROPERTY RIGHTS; SERVICE PROVISION;

EID: 84871774567     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.08.010     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Bardsely P., Chaudhri V., Stoneham G., Strappazzon L. New directions in environmental policy. Agenda 2002, 9:211-221.
2. Bjornlund H. Farmer participation in markets for temporary and permanent water in southeastern Australia. Agricultural Water Management 2003, 63:57-76.
3. Börner J., Wunder S., Wertz-Kanounnikoff S., Tito M., Pereira L., Nascimento N. Direct conservation payments in the Brazilian Amazon: scope and equity implications. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1272-1282.
4. Bromley D. Entitlements, missing markets, and environmental uncertainty. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1989, 17:181-194.
5. Bromley D. Rethinking markets. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1997, 5:1383-1393.
6. Bromley D. Environmental regulations and the problem of sustainability: moving beyond 'market failure'. Ecological Economics 2007, 63:676-683.
7. Bromley D., Hodge I. Private property rights and presumptive policy entitlements: reconsidering the premises of rural policy. European Review of Agricultural Economics 1990, 17:197-214.
8. Clements T., John A., Nielsen K., An D., Tan S., Milner-Gulland E. Payments for biodiversity conservation in the context of weak institutions: comparison or three programs in Cambodia. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1283-1291.
9. Commonwealth Treasury, no date. Public good conservation and the impact of environmental measures imposed on landholders. Treasury Economic Roundup Centenary Edition, pp. 93-103.
10. Courtney, P. Socio-economic impacts and benefits of agri-environment schemes in England. Land Use Policy, forthcoming.
11. Dargusch P., Griffiths A. Introduction to special issue: a typology of environmental markets. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management 2008, 15:70-75.
12. Drechsler M., Hartig F. Conserving biodiversity with tradable permits under changing conservation costs and habitat restoration timelages. Ecological Economics 2011, 70:533-541.
13. Earl G., Curtis A., Allan C. Towards a duty of care for biodiversity. Environmental Management 2010, 45:682-696.
14. Engel S., Pagiola S., Wunder S. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:663-674.
15. Engel S., Palmer C. Payments for environmental services as an alternative to logging under weak property rights: the case of Indonesia. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:799-809.
16. Ferraro P. Assymetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:810-821.
17. Gong Y., Bull G., Baylis K. Participation in the world/s first Clean Development Mechanism forest project: the role of property rights, social capital and contractual rules. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1292-1302.
18. Gómez-Baggethun E., de Groot R., Lomas P.L., 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.
19. Hartig F., Drechsler M. Smart spatial incentives for market-based conservation. Biological Conservation 2009, 142:779-788.
20. Hatanaka M., Busch L. Third-party certification in the global agrifood system: an objective or socially mediated governance mechanism?. Sociologia Ruralis 2008, 48:73-91.
21. Henderson B., Norris K. Experiences with market-based instruments for environmental policy. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management 2008, 15:113-120.
22. Hoang, M.H. Can REDD payment alone protect the forest? Land Use Policy, forthcoming.
23. Kosoy N., Corbera E. Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1228-1236.
24. Kroeger T., Casey F. An assessment of market-based approaches to providing ecosystem services on agricultural lands. Ecological Economics 2007, 64:321-332.
25. Lockie S. Networks of agri-environmental action: temporality, spatiality and identity within agricultural environments. Sociologia Ruralis 2006, 46:22-39.
26. Lockie S. Agricultural biodiversity and neoliberal regimes of agri-environmental governance in Australia. Current Sociology 2009, 57:407-426.
27. Lockie S. Neoliberal regimes of environmental governance: climate change, biodiversity and agriculture in Australia. The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology 2010, Edward Elgar, London. second ed. M. Redclift, G. Woodgate (Eds.).
28. Lockie S., Higgins V. Roll-out neoliberalism and hybrid practices of regulation in Australian agri-environmental governance. Journal of Rural Studies 2007, 23:1-11.
29. Lockie S., Tennent R. Market instruments and collective obligations for on-farm biodiversity conservation. Agriculture, Biodiversity and Markets: Livelihoods and Agroecology in Comparative Perspective 2010, 287-301. Earthscan, London. S. Lockie, D. Carpenter (Eds.).
30. Matthews M. Fostering creativity and innovation in cooperative federalism: the uncertainty and risk dimensions. Critical Reflections on Australian Public Policy: Selected Essays 2009, 59-70. ANU E Press, Canberra. J. Wanna (Ed.).
31. Muradian R., Corbera E., Pascual U., Kosoy N., May P. Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1202-1208.
32. Mutersbaugh T., Klooster D. Environmental certification: standardization for diversity. Agriculture, Biodiversity and Markets: Livelihoods and Agroecology in Comparative Perspective 2010, 155-174. Earthscan, London. S. Lockie, D. Carpenter (Eds.).
33. NMBIWG (National Market Based Instruments Working Group) Interim Report on the National Market Based Instrument Pilot Program Round One 2005, National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality, Canberra.
34. Norgaard R. Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1219-1227.
35. Omer A., Pascual U., Russell N. The contribution of biodiversity to modern intensive farming systems. Agriculture, Biodiversity and Markets: Livelihoods and Agroecology in Comparative Perspective 2010, 117-135. Earthscan, London. S. Lockie, D. Carpenter (Eds.).
36. Pascual U., Muradian R., Rodríguez L., Duraiappah A. Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: a conceptual approach. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1237-1244.
37. Reeve I. Property and participation: an institutional analysis of rural resource management and landcare in Australia. Critical Landcare 1997, 83-95. Centre for Rural Social Research, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga. S. Lockie, F. Vanclay (Eds.).
38. Reeve I. Property rights and natural resource management: tiptoeing round the slumbering dragon. Rurality Bites: The Social and Environmental Transformation of Rural Australia 2001, 257-269. Pluto Press, Sydney. S. Lockie, L. Bourke (Eds.).
39. Ring I., Dreschler M., van Teeffelen 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.
40. Scherr S., Milder J., Shames S. Paying for biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes. Agriculture, Biodiversity and Markets: Livelihoods and Agroecology in Comparative Perspective 2010, 229-252. Earthscan, London. S. Lockie, D. Carpenter (Eds.).
41. Scott F. Market-based approaches for sustainability. Sustainability in a Commercial Context: Market-Based Approaches 1998, 33-59. Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra. F. Scott, G. Kaine, R. Stringer, K. Anderson (Eds.).
42. Sommerville M., Jones J., Rahajaharison M., Milner-Gulland E. The role of fairness and benefit distribution in community-based Payment for Environmental Services interventions: a case study from Menabe, Madagascar. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1262-1271.
43. Stone E., Wu J. Targeting payments for ecological services. Agriculture, Biodiversity and Markets: Livelihoods and Agroecology in Comparative Perspective 2010, 253-268. Earthscan, London. S. Lockie, D. Carpenter (Eds.).
44. Swift M., Izac A., van Noordwijk M. Biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes: are we asking the right questions?. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 2004, 104:113-134.
45. Van Hecken G., Bastiaensen J. Payments for ecosystem services: justified or not? A political view. Environmental Science and Policy 2010, 13:785-792.
46. Vatn A. An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:1245-1252.
47. Whitten S., Shelton D. Markets for Ecosystem Services in Australia: Practical Design and Case Studies 2005, CSIRO, Canberra, Australia.
48. Wunder S., Engel S., Pagiola S. Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services in developed and developing countries. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:834-852.
49. Wünscher T., Engel S., Wunder S. Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: a tool for boosting conservation benefits. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:822-833.
50. Zhang W., Ricketts T., Kremen C., Carney K., Swinton S. Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture. Ecological Economics 2007, 64:253-260.