IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpot/0105001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cost Sharing for Biodiversity Conservation: A Conceptual Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Barbara Aretino

    (Productivity Commission)

  • Paula Holland

    (Productivity Commission)

  • Anna Matysek

    (Prodcutivity Commission)

  • Deborah Peterson

    (Productivity Commission)

Abstract

„h Many resource users undertake actions that conserve biodiversity. If, however, there were public demand for more conservation than would be provided voluntarily by the private sector alone, there are two broad principles for determining who should bear the costs ¡X ¡¥impacter pays¡¦ or ¡¥beneficiary pays¡¦. The two principles have different efficiency and distributional effects. „h A fundamental step in determining which cost sharing principle to apply is the clarification of the rights and responsibilities implied by existing property rights. This is an important issue that requires further work. „h If property rights effectively require resource users to meet an environmental standard, resource users who fail to achieve this may be considered to generate external costs. In these circumstances, on efficiency grounds, the impacter pays principle should generally be adopted to internalise external costs. This effectively amounts to enforcement of an individual¡¦s existing legal responsibilities. However, if the costs of implementing the impacter pays principle were to outweigh its efficiency advantages, the beneficiary pays principle may be considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Barbara Aretino & Paula Holland & Anna Matysek & Deborah Peterson, 2001. "Cost Sharing for Biodiversity Conservation: A Conceptual Framework," Others 0105001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpot:0105001
    Note: Type of Document - PDF; prepared on IBM PC; to print on HP;
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/othr/papers/0105/0105001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wiebe, Keith & Tegene, Abebayehu & Kuhn, Betsey, 1996. "Partial Interests in Land: Policy Tools for Resource Use and Conservation," Agricultural Economic Reports 262040, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    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. Joël Houdet & Charlotte Pavageau & Michel Trommetter & Jacques Weber, 2009. "Accounting for changes in biodiversity and ecosystem services from a business perspective," Working Papers hal-00434450, HAL.
    2. Byron, Neil Holland & Holland, Paula & Schuele, Michael, 2001. "Constraints on Private Conservation: Some Challenges in Managing Australia's Tropical Rainforests," Conference Workshop Proceedings 31910, Productivity Commission.
    3. Joël Houdet & Michel Trommetter & Jacques Weber, 2009. "Changing business perceptions regarding biodiversity: from impact mitigation towards new strategies and practices," Working Papers hal-00412875, HAL.
    4. Martin, Paul V., 2018. "Managing the risks of ecosystem services markets," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 404-410.
    5. Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Fischer, Richard & Tamayo, Fabian & Navarrete, Bolier Torres & Günter, Sven, 2022. "Analyzing forest policy mixes based on the coherence of policies and the consistency of legislative policy instruments: A case study from Ecuador," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    6. Yang, Wanhong & Bryan, Brett A. & MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Ward, John R. & Wells, Geoff & Crossman, Neville D. & Connor, Jeffrey D., 2010. "A conservation industry for sustaining natural capital and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 680-689, February.
    7. Hatfield-Dodds, Steve, 2006. "The catchment care principle: A new equity principle for environmental policy, with advantages for efficiency and adaptive governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 373-385, March.
    8. Houdet, Joël & Trommetter, Michel & Weber, Jacques, 2012. "Understanding changes in business strategies regarding biodiversity and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 37-46.

    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. Abebayehu Tegene & Keith Wiebe & Betsey Kuhn, 1999. "Irreversible Investment Under Uncertainty: Conservation Easements and the Option to Develop Agricultural Land," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 203-219, May.
    2. 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.
    3. Park, William M., 2001. "Searching For The Heart Of Agricultural Economics With 20/20 Vision," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-15, August.
    4. Aretino, Barbara & Holland, Paula & Matysek, Anna & Peterson, Deborah C., 2001. "Cost Sharing for Biodiversity Conservation: A Conceptual Framework," Staff Research Papers 31915, Productivity Commission.
    5. Plato, Gerald E., 2001. "The Soybean Processing Decision: Exercising A Real Option On Processing Margins," Technical Bulletins 33567, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Lovell, Sabrina J. & Lynch, Lori, 2002. "Hedonic Price Analysis Of Easement Payments In Agricultural Land Preservation Programs," Working Papers 28564, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    7. Segerson, Kathleen & Wu, JunJie, 2006. "Nonpoint pollution control: Inducing first-best outcomes through the use of threats," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 165-184, March.
    8. Walls, Margaret & McConnell, Virginia & Kopits, Elizabeth, 2003. "How Well Can Markets for Development Rights Work? Evaluating a Farmland Preservation Program," RFF Working Paper Series dp-03-08, Resources for the Future.
    9. Walsh, Randy, 2007. "Endogenous open space amenities in a locational equilibrium," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 319-344, March.
    10. Stoneham, Gary & Chaudhri, Vivek & Ha, Arthur & Strappazzon, Loris, 2003. "Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria’s BushTender trial," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-24.
    11. Hellerstein, Daniel & Nickerson, Cynthia J. & Cooper, Joseph C. & Feather, Peter & Gadsby, Dwight M. & Mullarkey, Daniel J. & Tegene, Abebayehu & Barnard, Charles H., 2002. "Farmland Protection: The Role Of Public Preferences For Rural Amenities," Agricultural Economic Reports 33963, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    12. Poe, Gregory, 1997. ""Maximizing the Environmental Benefits per Dollar Expended" An Economic Interpretation and Review of Agricultural Environmental Benefits and Costs," EB Series 186405, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    13. Heimlich, Ralph E. & Wiebe, Keith D. & Claassen, Roger & Gadsby, Dwight M. & House, Robert M., 1998. "Wetlands and Agriculture: Private Interests and Public Benefits," Agricultural Economic Reports 34043, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. Gary Stoneham & Vivek Chaudhri & Arthur Ha & Loris Strappazzon, 2003. "Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trial," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 477-500, December.
    15. Murtough, Greg & Aretino, Barbara & Matysek, Anna, 2002. "Creating Markets for Ecosystem Services," Staff Research Papers 31912, Productivity Commission.
    16. Keith Wiebe & Abebayehu Tegene & Betsey Kuhn, 1997. "Managing Public And Private Land Through Partial Interests," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(2), pages 35-43, April.
    17. Colyer, Dale, 1998. "Farmland Preservation Programs," Conference Papers 19102, West Virginia University, Department of Agricultural Resource Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    environment; conservation; biodiversity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • P - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems
    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Z - Other Special Topics

    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:wpa:wuwpot:0105001. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.