IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea06/21177.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reserve Selection in the presence of Economic Feedback Effects

Author

Listed:
  • Harpankar, Kshama

Abstract

Targeting land for conservation has always been an important question. Studies so far have mostly assumed that biological and economic worlds operate in isolation from each other. This paper initiates the economic feedback effects into the reserve selection mechanism. With the help of heuristics, this paper shows that ignoring economic feedback effects can lead to sub-optimal conservation outcome and biased conservation estimates when we consider the biological value of land outside of nature reserves. The informed heuristic includes the amenity value effect in conservation planning process where as the informed-spatial heuristic adds spatial externalities to the model.

Suggested Citation

  • Harpankar, Kshama, 2006. "Reserve Selection in the presence of Economic Feedback Effects," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21177, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea06:21177
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.21177
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/21177/files/sp06ha02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.21177?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Turner, Matthew A., 2005. "Landscape preferences and patterns of residential development," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 19-54, January.
    2. Smith, Rodney B. W. & Shogren, Jason F., 2002. "Voluntary Incentive Design for Endangered Species Protection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 169-187, March.
    3. Paul Thorsnes, 2002. "The Value of a Suburban Forest Preserve: Estimates from Sales of Vacant Residential Building Lots," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 426-441.
    4. Irwin, Elena G. & Bockstael, Nancy E., 2004. "Land use externalities, open space preservation, and urban sprawl," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 705-725, November.
    5. Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Shogren, Jason F. & Bastian, Chris & Kivi, Paul & Donner, Jennifer & Smith, Rodney B. W., 2002. "Agglomeration bonus: an incentive mechanism to reunite fragmented habitat for biodiversity conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 305-328, May.
    6. Costello, Christopher & Polasky, Stephen, 2004. "Dynamic reserve site selection," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 157-174, June.
    7. Stephen Polasky & Jeffrey D. Camm & Brian Garber-Yonts, 2001. "Selecting Biological Reserves Cost-Effectively: An Application to Terrestrial Vertebrate Conservation in Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 68-78.
    8. Albers, Heidi J., 1996. "Modeling Ecological Constraints on Tropical Forest Management: Spatial Interdependence, Irreversibility, and Uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 73-94, January.
    9. Adina M. Merenlender, 2006. "Habitat and Open Space at Risk of Land-Use Conversion: Targeting Strategies for Land Conservation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(1), pages 28-42.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lewis, David J. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Nelson, Erik & Polasky, Stephen, 2011. "The efficiency of voluntary incentive policies for preventing biodiversity loss," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 192-211, January.
    2. Albers, Heidi J. & Ando, Amy W. & Batz, Michael, 2008. "Patterns of multi-agent land conservation: Crowding in/out, agglomeration, and policy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 492-508, December.
    3. Sándor F. Tóth & Robert G. Haight & Luke W. Rogers, 2011. "Dynamic Reserve Selection: Optimal Land Retention with Land-Price Feedbacks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(5), pages 1059-1078, October.
    4. Smith, Martin D. & Sanchirico, James N. & Wilen, James E., 2009. "The economics of spatial-dynamic processes: Applications to renewable resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 104-121, January.
    5. Gren, Ing-Marie & Carlsson, Mattias, 2011. "Estimation of cost functions for preserving biodiversity in Swedish forests," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114596, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Caruso, Geoffrey & Peeters, Dominique & Cavailhes, Jean & Rounsevell, Mark, 2007. "Spatial configurations in a periurban city. A cellular automata-based microeconomic model," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 542-567, September.
    7. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    8. Guillaume POUYANNE & Frederic GASCHET, 2013. "The Effect Of Current And Future Land Use On House Prices," ERSA conference papers ersa13p249, European Regional Science Association.
    9. Robert Innes & George Frisvold, 2009. "The Economics of Endangered Species," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 485-512, September.
    10. Lewis, David J., 2010. "An economic framework for forecasting land-use and ecosystem change," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 98-116, April.
    11. Jiang, Yong & Swallow, Stephen K., 2017. "Impact Fees Coupled With Conservation Payments to Sustain Ecosystem Structure: A Conceptual and Numerical Application at the Urban-Rural Fringe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 136-147.
    12. Susan Stratton Sayre, 2019. "Pay for the Option to Pay? The Impact of Improved Scientific Information on Payments for Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(2), pages 591-625, June.
    13. Boyd, James & Epanchin-Niell, Rebecca & Siikamaki, Juha, 2012. "Conservation Return on Investment Analysis: A Review of Results, Methods, and New Directions," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-01, Resources for the Future.
    14. Wu, Jian & Gong, Yazhen & Wu, JunJie, 2018. "Spatial distribution of nature reserves in China: Driving forces in the past and conservation challenges in the future," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 31-42.
    15. Lewis, David J. & Polasky, Stephen, 2018. "An auction mechanism for the optimal provision of ecosystem services under climate change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 20-34.
    16. Conrad, Jon M. & Gomes, Carla P. & van Hoeve, Willem-Jan & Sabharwal, Ashish & Suter, Jordan F., 2012. "Wildlife corridors as a connected subgraph problem," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-18.
    17. Lewis, David J. & Wu, JunJie, 2005. "Optimal Economic Landscapes with Habitat Fragmentation Effects," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19425, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    18. Juutinen, Artti & Mönkkönen, Mikko & Ylisirniö, Anna-Liisa, 2009. "Does a voluntary conservation program result in a representative protected area network?: The case of Finnish privately owned forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2974-2984, October.
    19. Arora, Gaurav & Feng, Hongli & Hennessy, David A. & Loesch, Charles R. & Kvas, Susan, 2021. "The impact of production network economies on spatially-contiguous conservation– Theoretical model with evidence from the U.S. Prairie Pothole Region," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    20. Salvati, Luca & Sateriano, Adele & Grigoriadis, Efstathios & Carlucci, Margherita, 2017. "New wine in old bottles: The (changing) socioeconomic attributes of sprawl during building boom and stagnation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 361-372.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea06:21177. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.