IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/endeec/v1y1996i2p241-257_7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Paying for the conservation of endangered ecosystems: a comparison of direct and indirect approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Simpson, R. David
  • Sedjo, Roger A.

Abstract

A number of international conservation donors support efforts to encourage conservation indirectly by subsidizing commercial activities. Such plans beg two questions. First, if commercial ventures are expected to be profitable, why is external financing necessary for their initiation? Second, if commercial ventures are not expected to be profitable, could not greater incentives for conservation be generated by making direct payments? We examine these questions in detail. While we find that the practical impediments to instituting a direct payment programme may be substantial, the practical impediments to instituting any effective conservation programme may be substantial. On balance, there is a strong case to be made for greater experimentation with direct payment schemes than heretofore.

Suggested Citation

  • Simpson, R. David & Sedjo, Roger A., 1996. "Paying for the conservation of endangered ecosystems: a comparison of direct and indirect approaches," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 241-257, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:endeec:v:1:y:1996:i:2:p:241-257_7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1355770X00000607/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    2. Paul J. Ferraro & R. David Simpson, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Conservation Payments," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 339-353.
    3. FOUDI Sebastien, 2006. "Agriculture and Resource Exploitation: A Dynamic Bioeconomic Model of Agricultural Effort and Land Use Determination," LERNA Working Papers 06.25.218, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    4. Heidi Gjertsen & Theodore Groves & David A Miller & Eduard Niesten & Dale Squires & Joel Watson, 2021. "Conservation Agreements: Relational Contracts with Endogenous Monitoring [“Toward a Theory of Discounted Repeated Games with Imperfect Monitoring]," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 1-40.
    5. Heidi Gjertsen & Theodore Groves & David A. Miller & Eduard Niesten & Dale Squires & Joel Watson, 2014. "A Contract-theoretic Model of Conservation Agreements," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kaddour Hadri & William Mikhail (ed.), Econometric Methods and Their Applications in Finance, Macro and Related Fields, chapter 15, pages 425-455, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Robert Innes & George Frisvold, 2009. "The Economics of Endangered Species," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 485-512, September.
    7. Rico García-Amado, Luis & Ruiz Pérez, Manuel & Barrasa García, Sara, 2013. "Motivation for conservation: Assessing integrated conservation and development projects and payments for environmental services in La Sepultura Biosphere Reserve, Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 92-100.
    8. Ingram, Jane Carter & Wilkie, David & Clements, Tom & McNab, Roan Balas & Nelson, Fred & Baur, Erick Hogan & Sachedina, Hassanali T. & Peterson, David Dean & Foley, Charles Andrew Harold, 2014. "Evidence of Payments for Ecosystem Services as a mechanism for supporting biodiversity conservation and rural livelihoods," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 10-21.
    9. van Soest,Daan & Adjognon,Guigonan Serge & van der Heijden,Eline, 2021. "Incentivizing Conservation of de facto Community-Owned Forests," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9693, The World Bank.

    More about this item

    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:cup:endeec:v:1:y:1996:i:2:p:241-257_7. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ede .

    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.