IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sss/wpaper/2017-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Designing markets for biodiversity offsets: lessons from tradable pollution permits

Author

Listed:
  • Katherine Simpson

    (University of Edinburgh)

  • Frans P de Vries

    (Economics Division, University of Stirling)

  • Paul Armsworth

    (Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Tennessee)

  • Nick Hanley

    (School of Geography and Sustainable Development, University of St. Andrews)

Abstract

Biodiversity offset markets are one option for managing the trade-offs that exist between conservation targets and the increasing demand on land for urban development and agricultural expansion at local, regional and international scales. Drawing on lessons from the tradable pollution permit market literature, we review the key design parameters for biodiversity offset markets and consider how these have been applied in practice in the U.S., Australia, and the UK. We argue that offset markets should only be applied where the conservation target is a well-defined measure of biodiversity. Efficient offset markets require goods to be simple, measurable units that are fully exchangeable. This allows the market to operate under simple trading rules and engage with the widest number of participants, allowing gains from trade to be realised. We argue that a well-designed and managed offset scheme can be a more cost-effective way of meeting conservation targets than regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Katherine Simpson & Frans P de Vries & Paul Armsworth & Nick Hanley, 2017. "Designing markets for biodiversity offsets: lessons from tradable pollution permits," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2017-04, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
  • Handle: RePEc:sss:wpaper:2017-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/media/dept-of-geography-and-sustainable-development/pdf-s/DP%202017-04%20Simpson%20et%20al.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sullivan, S. & Hannis, M., 2015. "Nets and frames, losses and gains: Value struggles in engagements with biodiversity offsetting policy in England," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 162-173.
    2. Hanley, Nick & Shogren, Jason & White, Ben, 2013. "Introduction to Environmental Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199568734.
    3. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2013. "The SO 2 Allowance Trading System: The Ironic History of a Grand Policy Experiment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 103-122, Winter.
    4. O'Neil, William & David, Martin & Moore, Christina & Joeres, Erhard, 1983. "Transferable discharge permits and economic efficiency: The fox river," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 346-355, December.
    5. Stine Broch & Suzanne Vedel, 2012. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 561-581, April.
    6. Doyle, Martin W. & Yates, Andrew J., 2010. "Stream ecosystem service markets under no-net-loss regulation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 820-827, February.
    7. Lawrence H. Goulder, 2013. "Markets for Pollution Allowances: What Are the (New) Lessons?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 87-102, Winter.
    8. Wainger, Lisa A. & King, Dennis M. & Mack, Richard N. & Price, Elizabeth W. & Maslin, Thomas, 2010. "Can the concept of ecosystem services be practically applied to improve natural resource management decisions?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 978-987, March.
    9. Linda Fernandez & Larry Karp, 1998. "Restoring Wetlands Through Wetlands Mitigation Banks," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(3), pages 323-344, October.
    10. Liski, Matti, 2001. "Thin versus Thick CO2 Market," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 295-311, May.
    11. Robert N. Stavins, 1998. "What Can We Learn from the Grand Policy Experiment? Lessons from SO2 Allowance Trading," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 69-88, Summer.
    12. Jason Shogren, 1998. "A Political Economy in an Ecological Web," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 557-570, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mechtilde M. J. Gorissen & C. Martijn van der Heide & Johannes H.J. Schaminée, 2020. "Habitat Banking and Its Challenges in a Densely Populated Country: The Case of The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-36, May.
    2. Céline Huber & Luc Doyen & Sylvie Ferrari, 2021. "Profitability and conservation goals reconciled through biodiversity offsets," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2021-19, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).

    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. de Perthuis, Christian & Trotignon, Raphael, 2014. "Governance of CO2 markets: Lessons from the EU ETS," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 100-106.
    2. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2019. "Policy Evolution under the Clean Air Act," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(4), pages 27-50, Fall.
    3. Stavins, Robert & Hahn, Robert & Cavanagh, Sheila, 2001. "National Environmental Policy During the Clinton Years," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-38, Resources for the Future.
    4. Robert W. Hahn & Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 267-294.
    5. Peifang Yang & Daniel T. Kaffine, 2016. "Community-Based Tradable Permits for Localized Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 773-788, December.
    6. Baudry, Marc & Faure, Anouk & Quemin, Simon, 2021. "Emissions trading with transaction costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    7. Akyol, Metin & Neugart, Michael & Pichler, Stefan, 2015. "A tradable employment quota," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 48-63.
    8. Simon Quemin, 2016. "Intertemporal abatement decisions under ambiguity aversion in a cap and trade," Working Papers 1604, Chaire Economie du climat.
    9. Endre Tvinnereim, 2014. "The bears are right: Why cap-and-trade yields greater emission reductions than expected, and what that means for climate policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 447-461, December.
    10. Raphaël Trotignon & Pierre-André Jouvet & Boris Solier & Simon Quemin & Jérémy Elbeze, 2015. "European carbon market: lessons on the impact of a market stability reserve using the Zephyr model," Working Papers 1511, Chaire Economie du climat.
    11. Stavins, Robert N., 2019. "The Future of U.S. Carbon-Pricing Policy: Normative Assessment and Positive Prognosis," Working Paper Series rwp19-017, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    12. Koch, Nicolas & Basse Mama, Houdou, 2019. "Does the EU Emissions Trading System induce investment leakage? Evidence from German multinational firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 479-492.
    13. Leard, Benjamin & McConnell, Virginia, 2015. "New Markets for Pollution and Energy Efficiency: Credit Trading under Automobile Greenhouse Gas and Fuel Economy StandardsAbstract: Recent changes to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard," RFF Working Paper Series dp-15-16, Resources for the Future.
    14. Meyer, Andrew G. & Raff, Zach, 2022. "Pass-through of water pollution regulation: Evidence from sewer utility bills and Wisconsin's phosphorus rule," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322444, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    16. Simon Anastasiadis & Suzi Kerr & Marie-Laure Nauleau & Tim Cox & Kit Rutherford, 2014. "Does complex hydrology require complex water quality policy?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(1), pages 130-145, January.
    17. Robert N. Stavins, 2020. "The Future of US Carbon-Pricing Policy," Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 8-64.
    18. Stavins, Robert, 2019. "The Future of United States Carbon-Pricing Policy," RFF Working Paper Series 19-11, Resources for the Future.
    19. Matti Liski & Juha Virrankoski, 2004. "Frictions in Project-Based Supply of Permits," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(3), pages 347-365, July.
    20. Chan, H. Ron & Chupp, B. Andrew & Cropper, Maureen & Muller, Nicholas Z., 2015. "The Net Benefits of the Acid Rain Program: What Can We Learn from the Grand Policy Experiment?," RFF Working Paper Series dp-15-25, Resources for the Future.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Biodiversity; offsets; tradeable pollution permits; transactions costs; conservation planning;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government 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:sss:wpaper:2017-04. 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: Laure Kuhfuss (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eestauk.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.