Incentivizing afforestation agreements: Institutional-economic conditions and motivational drivers

Journal of Forest Economics

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 205-222

  Brouwer, Roy ^a   Lienhoop, Nele ^b   Oosterhuis, Frans ^a  

^a INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES   (Netherlands)

^b HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

Afforestation; Choice experiment; Contract design; Motivation; Willingness to accept compensation

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; FINANCE; MOTIVATION; REFORESTATION;

AFFORESTATION; CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; CONTRACT DESIGN; CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS; DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; FINANCIAL COMPENSATION; INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMICS; WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT;

CONTRACTS;

AFFORESTATION; AGRICULTURAL LAND; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPENSATION SYSTEM; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; INCENTIVE; LAND USE CHANGE; NATURE CONSERVATION;

GERMANY; NETHERLANDS;

EID: 84958905904     PISSN: 11046899     EISSN: 16181530     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfe.2015.09.003     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Ben-Akiva M., Lerman S.R. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand 1985, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
2. Bhat C.R. Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of mixed multinomial logit model. Transp. Res., B: Methodological 2001, 35:677-693.
3. BMELV (German Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection) Forest Strategy 2020. Sustainable Forest Management. An Opportunity and a Challenge for Society 2011, BMELV (German Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection), 〈www.bmelv.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/Publications/ForestStrategy2020.pdf;jsessionid=E02AC3AE4BE7D8EC870FAF46EE031A5E.2_cid288?__blob=publicationFile〉 (viewed 11 March 2013).
4. Broch S.W., Strange N., Jacobsen J.B., Wilson K.A. Farmers' willingness to provide ecosystem services and effects of their spatial distribution. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 92:78-86.
5. Christensen T., Pedersen A.S.B., Nielsen H.O., Mørkbak M.R., Hasler B., Denver S. Determinants of farmers' willingness to participate in subsidy schemes for pesticide-free buffer zones. A choice experiment study. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70:1558-1564.
6. Council Regulation Council Regulation on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Council Regulation (EC) no. 1698/2005. Off. J. Eur. Union 2013, L347:487-548. (20.12.2013).
7. Duesberg S., Ní Dhubháin Á., O'Connor D. Assessing policy tools for encouraging farm afforestation in Ireland. Land Use Policy 2014, 38:194-203.
8. Ecorys Midterm Evaluatie POP2 2007-2013 Eindrapport december 2010. Bijlagerapport Evaluatie per maatregel 2010, Ecorys, Rotterdam.
9. EC (European Commission) A new EU forest strategy: for forests and the forest-based sector. COM(2013) 659 Final 2013, EC (European Commission), Brussels, (20.9.2013).
10. Espinosa-Goded M., Barreiro-Hurlé J., Ruto E. What do farmers want from agri-environmental scheme design? A choice experiment approach. J. Agric. Econ. 2010, 61(2):259-273.
11. Farmer J.R., Knapp D., Meretsky V.J., Chancellor C., Fischer B.C. Motivations influencing the adoption of conservation easements. Conserv. Biol. 2011, 25(4):827-834.
12. Ferraro P.J. Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65:810-821.
13. Forest Europe State of Europe's Forests 2011. Status & Trends in Sustainable Forest Management in Europe 2011, Jointly prepared by FOREST EUROPE Liaison Unit Oslo, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
14. García-Amado L.R., Pérez M.R., García S.B. Motivation for conservation: assessing integrated conservation and development projects and payments for environmental services in La Sepultura Biosphere reserve, Mexico, Chiapas. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 89:92-100.
15. Hensher D., Rose J., Greene W.A. Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
16. Horne P. Forest owners' acceptance of incentive based policy instruments in forest biodiversity conservation. A choice experiment based approach. Silva Fenn. 2006, 40(1):169-178.
17. Kilgore M.A., Snyder S., Taff S., Schertz J. Family forest stewardship: do owners need a financial incentive?. J. For. 2008, 106(7):357-362.
18. Krinsky I., Robb A.L. On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1986, 68(4):715-719.
19. Lancaster K. Modern Consumer Theory 1991, Edward Elgar, Aldershot, UK.
20. Layton D.F., Siikamäki J. Payments for ecosystem services programs: predicting landowner enrollment and opportunity cost using a beta-binomial model. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2009, 44:415-439.
21. Lindhjem H., Mitani Y. Forest owners' willingness to accept compensation for voluntary conservation: a contingent valuation approach. J. For. Econ. 2012, 18:290-302.
22. LNV Plattelandsontwikkelingsprogramma (POP2) voor Nederland 2007-2013 2008, Opgesteld onder verantwoordelijkheid van: Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit, Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieu, Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat, Provincies, (Versie 6 juni 2008).
23. Matta J.R., Alavalapati J.R.R., Mercer D.E. Incentives for biodiversity conservation beyond the best management practices: are forestland owners interested?. Land Econ. 2009, 85(1):132-143.
24. McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Frontiers of Econometrics 1974, Academic Press, New York, NY. P. Zarembka (Ed.).
25. Poe G.L., Giraud K.L., Loomis J.B. Computational methods for measuring the difference of empirical distributions. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2005, 87:353-365.
26. Scarpa R., Ferrini S., Willis K.G. Performance of error component models for status-quo effects in choice experiments. Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics 2005, Springer Publisher, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. R. Scarpa, A. Alberini (Eds.).
27. Statistics Netherlands Statline 2012, 〈www.cbs.nl〉.
28. Swait J., Louviere J. The role of the scale parameter in the estimation and comparison of multinomial logit models. J. Marketing Res. 1993, 30(3):305-314.
29. Tesfaye A., Brouwer R. Testing participation constraints in contract design for sustainable soil conservation in Ethiopia. Ecol. Econ. 2012, 73:168-178.
30. Train K. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation 2003, Cambridge University Press, New York, USA.
31. Van Hecken G., Bastiaensen J. Payments for ecosystem services in Nicaragua: do market-based approaches work?. Dev. Change 2010, 41(3):421-444.
32. Vanslembrouck I., Van Huylenbroeck G., Verbeke W. Determinants of the willingness of Belgian farmers to participate in agri-environmental measures. J. Agric. Econ. 2002, 53(3):489-511.
33. Vedel S.E., Jacobsen J.B., Thorsen B.J. Contracts for afforestation and the role of monitoring for landowners' willingness to accept. For. Policy Econ. 2015, 51:29-37.