Combining auctions and performance-based payments in a forest enrichment field trial in Western Kenya

Conservation Biology

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 861-866

  Khalumba, Mercelyne ^a   Wünscher, Tobias ^b   Wunder, Sven ^c   Büdenbender, Mirjam ^b   Holm Müller, Karin ^d  

^a Kenyan Forest Service Headquarters Forest Economic Section Karura Forest   (Kenya)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

^c CIFOR Rua do Russel   (Brazil)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Contracting; Cost effectiveness; Kakamega; PES; Procurement; Tender

Indexed keywords

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY POLICY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SURVIVORSHIP; TRANSACTION COST;

KENYA;

COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FORESTRY; KENYA; PROCEDURES;

CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FORESTRY; KENYA;

EID: 84900395921     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: 15231739     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12278     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Cason, T. N., and L. Gangadharan. 2005. A laboratory comparison of uniform and discriminative price auctions for reducing non-point source pollution. Land Economics 81:51-70.
2. Fashing, P., A. Forrestel, C. Scully, and M. Cords. 2004. Long-term tree population dynamics and their implications for the conservation of the Kakamega Forest, Kenya. Biodiversity and Conservation 13:753-771.
3. Ferraro, P. J. 2008. Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 65:810-821.
4. Ferraro, P. J., and R. D. Simpson. 2002. The cost-effectiveness of conservation payments. Land Economics 78:339-353.
5. Glenday, J. 2006. Carbon storage and emissions offset potential in an East African tropical rainforest. Forest Ecology and Management 235:72-83.
6. Jack, B. K. 2010. Allocation in environmental markets: a field experiment with tree planting contracts. Discussion Paper 2010-14, Harvard Environmental Economics Program, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A. Available from http://www.hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/heep/papers/HEEP%20DP%20Jack%2014.pdf (accessed March 2013).
7. Jack, B. K., B. Leimona, and P. J. Ferraro. 2009. A revealed preference approach to estimating supply curves for ecosystem services: use of auctions to set payments for soil erosion control in Indonesia. Conservation Biology 23:359-367.
8. Jindal, R., J. M. Kerr, P. J. Ferraro, and B. M. Swallow. 2013. Social dimensions of procurement auctions for environmental service contracts: evaluating tradeoffs between cost-effectiveness and participation by the poor in rural Tanzania. Land Use Policy 31:71-80.
9. Matzdorf, B., and J. Lorenz. 2010. How cost-effective are result-oriented agri-environmental measures?-An empirical analysis in Germany. Land Use Policy 27:535-544.
10. Pattanayak, S. K., S. Wunder, and P. J. Ferraro. 2010. Show me the money: Do payments supply environmental services in developing countries? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 4:254-274.
11. Wünscher, T., S. Engel, and S. Wunder. 2008. Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: a tool for boosting conservation benefits. Ecological Economics 65:822-833.
12. Zabel, A., and K. Holm-Müller. 2008. Conservation performance payments for carnivore conservation in Sweden. Conservation Biology 22:247-251.