IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nzar11/115350.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand

Author

Listed:
  • Bhatta, Arun
  • Bigsby, Hugh R.
  • Cullen, Ross

Abstract

Due to the public goods characteristics of many ecosystem services and their vital importance to human welfare, various mechanisms have been put in place to motivate private landowners in the provision of ecosystem services. A common approach is to try to develop a comprehensive ecosystem services market where landowners can receive payments from beneficiaries of ecosystem services. Much research has been directed at developing methods for valuing the range of ecosystem services so that they can be incorporated into ecosystem services markets. However, valuation methods are difficult, expensive and time consuming. Other approaches to the provision of ecosystem services such as payments for ecosystem services usually focus on a single service like water or biodiversity. However, in the provision of a particular ecosystem service, there are spill-over effects of providing other ecosystem services, and thus studying those spill-over effects may provide a simple and cost-effective way of ensuring the provision of a wide range of ecosystem services. In New Zealand, there are a variety of forestry programs which provide incentives to landowners to plant trees on their lands to meet particular objectives, but which also produce other ES. This research aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the provision of a wide range of ES by these approaches, the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme, the East Coast Forestry Scheme, and the QEII National Trust.

Suggested Citation

  • Bhatta, Arun & Bigsby, Hugh R. & Cullen, Ross, 2011. "Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand," 2011 Conference, August 25-26, 2011, Nelson, New Zealand 115350, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:nzar11:115350
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.115350
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/115350/files/Bhatta%20Paper.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.115350?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. Straton, Anna, 2006. "A complex systems approach to the value of ecological resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 402-411, March.
    2. Robin Naidoo & Taylor H Ricketts, 2006. "Mapping the Economic Costs and Benefits of Conservation," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(11), pages 1-12, October.
    3. Richard T. Woodward & Ronald A. Kaiser, 2002. "Market Structures for U.S. Water Quality Trading," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 366-383.
    4. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    5. Barbier Edward B & Heal Geoffrey M, 2006. "Valuing Ecosystem Services," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-6, February.
    6. Dymond, John R. & Ausseil, Anne-Gaelle E. & Overton, Jacob McC., 2008. "A landscape approach for estimating the conservation value of sites and site-based projects, with examples from New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 275-281, June.
    7. Kumar, Manasi & Kumar, Pushpam, 2008. "Valuation of the ecosystem services: A psycho-cultural perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 808-819, February.
    8. Thomas L. Saaty, 1994. "How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 19-43, December.
    9. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639.
    10. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    11. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2003. "The use of Analytic Hierarchy Process to incorporate stakeholder preferences into regional forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 13-26, January.
    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. Mehmet Yüksel, 2019. "A Model Proposal for the Evaluation of Chemistry Education in the Context of Learning Environment," Asian Journal of Education and Training, Asian Online Journal Publishing Group, vol. 5(3), pages 488-494.
    2. Gerd Lupp & Bernhard Förster & Valerie Kantelberg & Tim Markmann & Johannes Naumann & Carolina Honert & Marc Koch & Stephan Pauleit, 2016. "Assessing the Recreation Value of Urban Woodland Using the Ecosystem Service Approach in Two Forests in the Munich Metropolitan Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
    3. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    4. Jones, Sarah K. & Boundaogo, Mansour & DeClerck, Fabrice A. & Estrada-Carmona, Natalia & Mirumachi, Naho & Mulligan, Mark, 2019. "Insights into the importance of ecosystem services to human well-being in reservoir landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    5. Hartvigsen, David, 2005. "Representing the strengths and directions of pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 357-369, June.
    6. Martínez-Jauregui, María & White, Piran C.L. & Touza, Julia & Soliño, Mario, 2019. "Untangling perceptions around indicators for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Stoeckl, Natalie & Hicks, Christina & Farr, Marina & Grainger, Daniel & Esparon, Michelle & Thomas, Joseph & Larson, Silva, 2018. "The Crowding Out of Complex Social Goods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 65-72.
    8. Ernest H. Forman & Saul I. Gass, 2001. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process---An Exposition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 469-486, August.
    9. Brander, Luke M. & Ghermandi, Andrea & Kuik, Onno & Markandya, Anil & Nunes, Paulo A.L.D. & Schaafsma, Marije & Wagtendonk, Alfred, 2010. "Scaling up Ecosystem Services Values: Methodology, Applicability and a Case Study," Sustainable Development Papers 60689, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    10. Shukui Tan & Haipeng Song & Ghulam Akhmat & Javeed Hussain, 2014. "Governing Harmonious Human Engagement with the Spatial Capital," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-19, March.
    11. Sarkki, Simo & Karjalainen, Timo P., 2015. "Ecosystem service valuation in a governance debate: Practitioners' strategic argumentation on forestry in northern Finland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 13-22.
    12. Muhamad, Dendi & Okubo, Satoru & Harashina, Koji & Parikesit, & Gunawan, Budhi & Takeuchi, Kazuhiko, 2014. "Living close to forests enhances people׳s perception of ecosystem services in a forest–agricultural landscape of West Java, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 197-206.
    13. Danny Campbell & W George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa, 2009. "Using Choice Experiments to Explore the Spatial Distribution of Willingness to Pay for Rural Landscape Improvements," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(1), pages 97-111, January.
    14. Wakita, Kazumi & Shen, Zhonghua & Oishi, Taro & Yagi, Nobuyuki & Kurokura, Hisashi & Furuya, Ken, 2014. "Human utility of marine ecosystem services and behavioural intentions for marine conservation in Japan," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 53-60.
    15. Stoeckl, Natalie & Farr, Marina & Larson, Silva & Adams, Vanessa M. & Kubiszewski, Ida & Esparon, Michelle & Costanza, Robert, 2014. "A new approach to the problem of overlapping values: A case study in Australia׳s Great Barrier Reef," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 61-78.
    16. Sven Overhage & Dominik Birkmeier & Sebastian Schlauderer, 2012. "Quality Marks, Metrics, and Measurement Procedures for Business Process Models," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 4(5), pages 229-246, October.
    17. Song-Kyoo Kim, 2014. "Explicit Design of Innovation Performance Metrics by Using Analytic Hierarchy Process Expansion," International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-7, May.
    18. Virginia Racioppi & Gabriella Marcarelli & Massimo Squillante, 2015. "Modelling a sustainable requalification problem by analytic hierarchy process," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1661-1677, July.
    19. Derya Gul & Ahmet Serhat Uludag, 2016. "Determination of the Most Charismatic Leader Using Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy TOPSIS: An Application in Turkey," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(7), pages 80-97, July.
    20. Ergu, Daji & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Shi, Yong, 2011. "A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 246-259, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nzar11:115350. 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/nzareea.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.