The relevance of the ecosystem services framework for developed countries' environmental policies: A comparative case study of the US and EU

Land Use Policy

Volumn 38, Issue , 2014, Pages 509-521

  Matzdorf, Bettina ^a   Meyer, Claas ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ CENTRE FOR AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPE RESEARCH ZALF   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cross sector cooperation; Ecosystem capacity; Environmental law; Financial incentive instruments; Institutional change; Trade offs

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; EUROPEAN UNION; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; TRADE-OFF;

EUROPE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84892499841     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.12.011     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Baxter P., Jack S. Qualitative case study methodology: study design and implementation for novice researchers. Qualitative Report 2008, 13:544-559.
2. Baylis K., Peplow S., Rausser G., Simon L. Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: a comparison. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:753-764.
3. Bayon R. Making Environmental Markets work: lessons from early experience with sulfur, carbon, wetlands, and other related markets. Forest Trends, Katoomba Group Meeting in Locarno 2004.
4. Boyd J., Banzhaf S. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics 2007, 63:616-626.
5. German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety 2007, BMU, National Strategy on Biodiversity, Berlin.
6. Burton R.J.F., Schwarz G. Result-oriented agri-environmental schemes in Europe and their potential for promoting behavioural change. Land Use Policy 2013, 30:628-641.
7. Claassen R., Cattaneo A., Johansson R. Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs: U.S. experience in theory and practice. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:737-752.
8. Conway M., Rayment M., White A., Berman S. Exploring Potential Demand for and Supply of Habitat Banking in the EU and Appropriate Design Elements for a Habitat Banking Scheme. Final Report Submitted to DG Environment 2013, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/taxation/pdf/Habitat_banking_Report.pdf.
9. Cooper T., Hart K., Baldock D. Provision of Public Goods through Agriculture in the European Union. Report Prepared for DG Agriculture and Rural Development 2009, Institute for European Environmental Policy, London.
10. Costanza R., d'Arge R., de Groot R., Farber S., Grasso M., Hannon B., Limburg K., Naeem S., O'Neill R.V., Paruelo J., Raskin G.R., Sutton P., van der Belt M. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387:253-260.
11. de Groot R.S. Environmental functions as a unifying concept for ecology and economics. Environmentalist 1987, 7:105-109.
12. Dryzek J.S., Hunold C., Schlosberg D., Downes D., Hernes H.K. Environmental transformation of the state: the USA, Norway, Germany and the UK. Political Studies 2002, 50:659-682.
13. Ehrlich P.R., Ehrlich A.H. Extinction: The Causes and Consequences of the Disappearance of Species 1981, Random House, New York.
14. Ekins P., Folke C.E., de Groot R. Identifying critical natural capital. Ecological Economics 2003, 44(2-3):159-163.
15. European Commission Communication From the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Our Life Insurance, Our Natural Capital: an EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 2011, COM(2011) 244 final, Brussels.
16. European Commission Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Support for Rural Development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) 2011, COM(2011) 627 final/2, Brussels.
17. European Commission Communication From the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. The CAP Towards 2020: Meeting the Food, Natural Resources and Territorial Challenges of the Future 2010, COM(2010) 672 final, Brussels.
18. European Parliament and Council Decision No 1600/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 July 2002 Laying Down the Sixth Community Environment Action Programme, Brussels 2002.
19. Farley J. The role of prices in conserving critical natural capital. Conservation Biology 2008, 22:1399-1408.
20. Findley R.W., Farber D.A. Environmental Law in a Nutshell 2008, Thomson West, St. Paul.
21. Fisher B., Turner R.K., Morling P. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics 2009, 68:643-653.
22. Flyberg B. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry 2006, 12:219-245.
23. 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.
24. Hauck J., Gorg C., Varjopuro R., Ratamäki O., Jax K. Benefits and limitations of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy and decision making: some stakeholder perspectives. Environmental Science and Policy 2013, 25:13-21.
25. Hay P. US-Amerikanisches Recht. Ein Studienbuch 2005, C.H. Beck, Munich. 3rd ed.
26. Helliwell D.R. Valuation of wildlife resources. Regional Studies 1969, 3:41-47.
27. Herdegen M. Europarecht 2010, C.H. Beck, Munich. 12th ed.
28. Hey C. EU environmental policies: a short history of the policy strategies. EU Environmental Policy Handbook. A Critical Analysis of EU Environmental Legislation 2005, European Environmental Bureau, Brussels. S. Scheuer (Ed.).
29. Hoornbeek J.A. Policy-making institutions and water policy outputs in the European Union and the United States: a comparative analysis. Journal of European Public Policy 2004, 11:461-496.
30. Jax K., Barton D.N., Chan K.M.A., de Groote R., Doyle U., Eser U., Görg C.H., Gómez-Baggethun E., Griewald Y., Haber W., Haines-Young R., Heinka U., Jahn Th., Joosten H., Kerschbaumer L., Korn H., Luck G.W., Matzdorf B., Muracat B., Neßhöver C., Norton B., Ott K., Potschin M., Rauschmayer F., von Haaren Ch., Wichmann S. Ecosystem services and ethics. Ecological Economics 2013, 93(September):260-268.
31. Keiter R.B. Ecosystems and the law: toward an integrated approach. Ecological Applications 1998, 8:332-341.
32. King R.T. Wildlife and man. Conservationist 1966, 20:8-11.
33. Kramer E.A. Juristische Methodenlehre 2010, Stämpfli Verlag, C.H. Beck, MANZ, Bern/Munich/Zurich. 3rd ed.
34. Lockie S. Market instruments, ecosystem services, and property rights: assumptions and conditions for sustained social and ecological benefits. Land Use Policy 2013, 31:90-98.
35. Ecosystems and Human Well-being. A Framework for Assessment 2003, MA, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Island Press, Washington, Covelo, London.
36. Martin-Ortega J. Economic prescriptions and policy applications in the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive. Environmental Science and Policy 2012, 24:83-91.
37. Meyer C., Thiel A. Institutional change in water management collaboration: implementing the European Water Framework Directive in the German Odra river basin. Water Policy 2012, 14:625-646.
38. Müller F., de Groot R., Willemen L. Ecosystem services at the landscape scale: the need for integrative approaches. Landscape Online 2010, 23:1-11.
39. Nahlik A.M., Kentula M.E., Fennessy M.S., Landers D.H. Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice. Ecological Economics 2012, 77:27-35.
40. The UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Synthesis of the Key Findings 2011, NEA, UK National Ecosystem Assessment., UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.
41. Nitsch H., Manale A., Osterburg B. Agriculture and the conservation of wildlife biodiversity - comparative analysis of policies in the USA and the EU. Handling Global Challenges: Managing Biodiversity/Biosafety in a Global World: EU, US, California and Comparative Perspectives 2009, 348-373. Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, Leuven. J.F.M. Swinnen, D. Vogel, A. Marx, H. Riss, J. Wouters (Eds.).
42. Multifunctionality: Towards an Analytical Framework 2001, OECD., OECD, Paris.
43. PCAST, Executive Office of the President, President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology Report to the President 2011, Sustaining Environmental Capital: Protecting Society and the Economy, Washington, DC.
44. Plieninger T., Schleyer C., Schaich H., Ohnesorge B., Gerdes H., Hernández-Morcillo M., Bieling C. Mainstreaming ecosystem services through reformed European agricultural policies. Conservation Letters 2012, 1-8.
45. Portney P.R. EPA and the evolution of federal regulation. Public Policy for Environmental Protection 2000, 11-30. RFF Press, Washington, DC. P.R. Portney, R.N. Stavins (Eds.).
46. Robertson M.M. The nature that capital can see: science, state, and market in the commodification of ecosystem services. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 2006, 24:367-387.
47. Ruhl J.B. Ecosystem services and the Clean Water Act: strategies for fitting new science into old law. Environmental Law 2011, 40:1381-1399.
48. Ruhl J.B., Kraft S.E., Lant C.L. The Law and Policy of Ecosystem Services 2007, Island Press, Washington/Covelo/London. 1st ed.
49. Rüthers B., Birk A. Rechtstheorie. Begriff, Geltung und Anwendung des Rechtes 2008, C.H. Beck, Munich. 4th ed.
50. Salzman J., Ruhl J.B. The law and policy beginnings of ecosystem services. Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law 2007, 22:157-172.
51. Spangenberg J.H., Settele J. Precisely incorrect? Monetising the value of ecosystem services. Ecological Complexity 2010, 7:327-337.
52. Environmental Report 2012. Responsibility in a Finite World 2012, SRU, German Advisory Council for the Environment, Summary for Policy Makers, Berlin.
53. Tacconi L. Redefining payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 2012, 73:29-36.
54. TEEB The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB 2010.
55. TEEB The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for National and International Policy Makers - Summary: Responding to the Value of Nature 2009.
56. ten Brink P., Badura T., Bassi S., Daly E., Dickie I., Ding H., Gantioler S., Gerdes H., Hart K., Kettunen M., Lago M., Lang S., Markandya A., Mazza L., Nunes P.A.L.D., Pieterse M., Rayment M., Tinch R. Estimating the Overall Economic Value of the Benefits Provided by the Natura 2000 Network. Final Synthesis Report to the European Commission, DG Environment on Contract ENV.B.2/SER/2008/0038 2011, Institute for European Environmental Policy/GHK/Ecologic, Brussels.
57. USDI, US Department of Interior The Department of Interior's Economic Contributions 2011.
58. Uthes S., Matzdorf B. Studies on agri-environmental measures: a survey of the literature. Environmental Management 2013, 51:251-266.
59. van Kersbergen K., Verbeek K.B. Subsidiarity as a principle of governance in the European union. Comparative European Politics 2004, 2:142-162.
60. Weiland S. Politik der Ideen - Nachhaltige Entwicklung in Deutschland, Großbritannien und den USA 2007, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. 1st ed.
61. Westman W.E. How much are nature's services worth?. Science 1977, 197:960-964.
62. Wolfrum R., Farber D.A., Morrison F.L. National policies of environmental law. International, Regional and National Environmental Law 2000, 543-564. Kluwer International Law, The Hague, London/Boston. F.L. Morrison, R. Wolfrum (Eds.).
63. Wunder S., Engel S., Pagiola S. Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecological Economics 2008, 65:834-852.
64. Yin R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods 2003, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. 3rd ed.
65. Zippelius R. Juristische Methodenlehre 2006, C.H. Beck, Munich. 10th ed.