Policyscape-A Spatially Explicit Evaluation of Voluntary Conservation in a Policy Mix for Biodiversity Conservation in Norway

Society and Natural Resources

Volumn 26, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 1185-1201

  Barton, David N ^a   Blumentrath, Stefan ^a   Rusch, Graciela ^a  

^a NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE FOR NATURE RESEARCH   (Norway)

Author keywords

biodiversity conservation; cost effectiveness; economic instruments; functional role; payments for ecosystem services; policy mix; policyscape

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC INSTRUMENT; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL MODELING; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; NATURE CONSERVATION; POLICY APPROACH;

NORWAY;

EID: 84885028713     PISSN: 08941920     EISSN: 15210723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2013.799727     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Ando, A., J. Camm, S. Polasky, and A. Solow. 1998. Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation. Science 279 (5359): 2126 - 2128.
2. Ando, A., and M. Mallory. 2012. Optimal portfolio design to reduce climate-related conservation uncertainty in the Prairie Pothole Region. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109 (17): 6484 - 6489.
3. Bennear, L. S., and R. N. Stavins. 2007. Second-best theory and the use of multiple policy instruments. Environ. Resource Econ. 37 (1): 111 - 129.
4. Blom, H. H., and M. Sætersdal. 2003. Betydningen av forundersøkelser i økonomiske nullområder for miljøregistreringer i skog-undersøkelser i Luster kommune, Sogn og Fjordane. Oppdragsrapport 7/03 [The importance of preliminary mapping of economic zero areas for environmental registration in forests-Mapping in Luster municipality, Sogn og Fjordane. Consultant Report 7/03]. Norsk institutt for Skogforskning.
5. Bollandsås, O. M., H. F. Hoen, and A. Lunnan. 2004. Nullområder i skogbruket - vurdering av driftskostnader og miljøverdier. Rapport fra skogforskningen 5/04, 23 [Zero economic return areas in forestry-An appraisal of operating costs and environmental values. Report for forest research 5/04, 23].
6. Börner, J., S. Wunder, S. Wertz-Kanounnikoff, G. Hymen, and N. Nascimento. 2011. REDD sticks and carrots in the Brazilian Amazon. Assessing costs and livelihood implications. Working paper no. 8, CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS).
7. Certain, G., O. Skarpaas, J.-W. Bjerke, E. Framstad, et al. 2011. The Nature Index: A general framework for synthesizing knowledge on the state of biodiversity. PloS One 6 (4): e18930. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018930
8. DN. 1988. Forslag til retningslinjer for barskovern [Proposal for guidelines for coniferous forest conservation]. DN Rapport nr. 3-1988. Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management.
9. Engel, S., S. Pagiola, and S. Wunder. 2008. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecol. Econ. 65: 668 - 674.
10. Entem, A. 2012. Cost-effective conservation planning for species at risk in Saskatchewans Milk River Watershed: The efficiency gains of a multi-species approach. MSc thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton.
11. Framstad, E., and T. Blindheim. 2010. Naturfaglig evaluering av Frivillig vern-områder [Assessment of voluntary forest protection sites based on natural science criteria]. NINA Rapport 534, 108s. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research. www.nina.no/archive/nina/PppBasePdf/rapport/2010/534.pdf
12. Framstad, E., T. Blindheim, L. Erikstad, P. G. Thingstad, and S.-E. Sloreid. 2010. Naturfaglig evaluaering av norske verneområder [Assessment of natural variation and qualities of Norwegian conservation sites]. NINA Rapport 535. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research. www.nina.no/archive/nina/PppBasePdf/rapport/2010/535.pdf
13. Goulder, L. H., and I. W. H. Parry. 2008. Instrument choice in environmental policy. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 2 (2): 152 - 174.
14. Gregersen, H., H. El Lakany, A. Karsenty, and A. White. 2011. Does the opportunity cost approach indicate the real cost of REDD+? Rights and realities of paying for REDD+. Washington, DC: Rights + Resources Initiative.
15. Hauer, G., S. Cumming, F. Schmiegelow, W. L. Adamowicz, M. Weber, and R. Jagodzinski. 2009. Tradeoffs between forestry resource and conservation values under alternate forest policy regimes: A spatial analysis of the western Canadian boreal plains. Ecol. Model. 221: 2590 - 2603.
16. Hepburn, C. 2006. Regulation by prices, quantities, or both: A review of instrument choice. Oxford Rev. Econ. Policy 22 (2): 226 - 247.
17. Hågvar, S., and B. Berntsen, eds. 2011. Norsk urskog og gammelskog [Norwegian primary and old forests] (Unipub) 335.
18. Joppa, L. N., and A. Pfaff. 2009. High and far: Biases in the location of protected areas. PloS One 4 (12): e8273. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008273
19. Joppa, L., and A. Pfaff. 2010. Reassessing the forest impacts of protection The challenge of nonrandom location and a corrective method. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 1185: 135 - 149.
20. Joppa, L. N., and A. Pfaff. 2011. Global protected area impacts. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 278 (1712): 1633 - 1638.
21. Muradian, R., E. Corbera, U. Pascual, N. Kosoy, and P. H. May. 2010. Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecol. Econ. 69: 1202 - 1208.
22. Murdoch, W., J. Ranganathan, S. Polasky, and J. Regetz. 2007. Maximizing return on investment in conservation. Biol. Conserv. 139 (3-4): 375 - 388.
23. Naidoo, R., and W. L. Adamowicz. 2006. Modeling opportunity costs of conservation in transitional landscapes. Conserv. Biol. 20 (2): 490 - 500.
24. Naidoo, R., and T. H. Ricketts. 2006. Mapping the economic costs and benefits of conservation. PloS Biol. 4 (11): 2153 - 2164.
25. Naidoo, R., A. Balmford, P. J. Ferraro, S. Polasky, T. H. Ricketts, and M. Rougett. 2006. Integrating economic costs into conservation planning. Trends Ecol. Evolution 21 (12): 681 - 687.
26. Nybø, S., G. Certain, and O. Skarpaas. 2012. The Norwegian Nature Index-State and trends of biodiversity in Norway. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift [Norwegian J. Geogr.] 5(66):241-249.
27. Pagiola, S. 2005. Assessing the efficiency of payments for environmental services programs: A framework for analysis. Washington, DC: World Bank.
28. Pagiola, S. 2008. Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecol. Econ. 65, 712 - 724.
29. 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 Dev. 33 (2): 237 - 253.
30. Pannell, D. J. 2008. Public benefits, private benefits, and policy mechanism choice for land-use change for environmental benefits. Land Econ. 84 (2): 225 - 240.
31. Pattanayak, S. K., S. Wunder, and P. J. Ferraro. 2010. Show me the money: Do payments supply environmental services in developing countries? Symposium: Environmental quality and economic development. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 4 (2): 254 - 274.
32. Pfaff, A., and A. Robalino. 2012. Protecting forests, biodiversity, and the climate: Predicting policy impact to improve policy choice. Oxford Rev. Econ. Policy 28 (1): 164 - 179.
33. Pfaff, A., J. Robalino, G. A. Sanchez-Azofeifa, K. S. Andam, and P. J. Ferraro. 2009. Park location affects forest protection: Land Characteristics cause differences in park impacts across Costa Rica. B. E. J. Econ. Anal. Policy 9 (2): Article 5.
34. Polasky, S., E. Nelson, E. Lonsdorf, P. Fackler, and A. Starfield. 2005. Conserving species in a working landscape: Land use with biological and economic-objectives. Ecol. Appl. 15 (4): 1387 - 1401.
35. Ring, I., and C. Schröter-Schlaack, eds. 2011a. Instrument mixes for biodiversity policies. POLICYMIX report, issue no. 2/2011, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Leipzig. http://policymix.nina.no
36. Ring, I., and C. Schröter-Schlaack. 2011b. Justifying and assessing policy mixes for biodiversity and ecosystem governance. In Instrument mixes for biodiversity policies, ed. I. Ring, and C. Schröter-Schlaack. POLICYMIX report, issue no. 2/2011, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Leipzig. http://policymix.nina.no
37. Schneider, R. R., G. Hauer, D. Farr, W. L. Adamowicz, and S. Boutin. 2011. Achieving conservation when opportunity costs are high: Optimizing reserve design in Alberta's oil sands region. PloS One 6 (8): e23254. doi: 10.1371.journal.pone.0023254
38. Skarpaas, O., G. Certain, and S. Nybø. 2012. The Norwegian Nature Index-Conceptual framework and methodology. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift [Norwegian J. Geogr.] 5 (66): 250 - 256.
39. Skjeggedal, T., et al. 2010. Frivillig vern av skog-Evaluering av arbeidsformen [Voluntary forest conservation-An evaluation of the approach]. NIBR/NINA. http://www.nibr.no/filer/samarb-rapportNIBR-NINA.pdf
40. Storaunet, K. O., and I. Gjerde. 2010. Skog I: Nybø S. (red.). Naturindeks for Norge [Nature Index for Norway]. http://www.miljødirektoratet.no/no/Publikasjoner/Publikasjoner-fra-DirNat/DN-utredninger/Naturindeks-for-Norge-2010/
41. Tietenberg, T. H. 1973. Controlling pollution by price and standard systems: A general equilibrium analysis. Swed. J. Econ. 75 (3): 193 - 203.
42. Tietenberg, T. 2003. The tradable-permits approach to protecting the commons: Lessons for climate change. Oxford Rev. Econ. Policy 19 (3): 400 - 419.
43. Tietenberg, T. 2010. Cap-and-trade: The evolution of an economic idea. Agric. Resource Econ. Rev. 39 (3): 359 - 367.
44. Tinbergen, J. 1956. Economic policy: Principles and design. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: North-Holland.
45. Turner, E. R. 2005. On the cusp of restoration: Science and society. Restoration Ecol. 13 (1): 165 - 173.
46. Vatn, A. 2010. Payments for environmental services: An institutional analysis. Ecol. Econ. 69: 1245 - 1252.
47. Watts, M. E., I. R. Ball, R. S. Stewart, C. J. Klein, K. Wilson, C. Steinback, R. Lourival, L. Kircher, and H. P. Possingham. 2009. Marxan with zones: Software for optimal conservation based land- and sea-use zoning. Environ. Model. Software 24:1513-1521.
48. Wunder, S. 2008. Necessary conditions for ecosystem service payments. Presented at Economics and conservation in the tropics: A strategic dialogue, January 31-February 1, 2008. Resources for the Future. http://www.rff.org/Documents/08_Tropics_Conference/Tropics_Conference_Papers/Tropics_Conference_Wunder_PES_markets.pdf
49. Wunder, S., S. Engel, and S. Pagiola. 2008. Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecol. Econ. 65 (4): 834 - 852.
50. Young, O. R. 2002. The Institutional dimensions of environmental change. Fit, interplay, and scale. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.