Policy options for afforestation in Flanders
This paper analyses current and alternative afforestation policy instruments in Flanders. First we select forest sites that maximize net social benefits given a constraint on the total area of new forests and then we select policy instruments that yield this optimal combination of sites. For each policy option, we calculate the associated costs for landowners and government as well as net social benefits for society. Our empirical illustration shows that the welfare gain is considerable if the afforestation subsidy is conditioned on an objective criterion rather than a case-by-case approach. Our results also show that it is worthwhile to consider alternative policy instruments, such as auctions, not previously used in Belgian legislation.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Tassone, Valentina C. & Wesseler, Justus & Nesci, Francesco S., 2004. "Diverging incentives for afforestation from carbon sequestration: an economic analysis of the EU afforestation program in the south of Italy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(6), pages 567-578, October.
- Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Carel Van der Hamsvoort, 1997. "Auctioning Conservation Contracts: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(2), pages 407-418.
- Jorgensen, Rune Mork & Thomsen, Hans & Vidal, ReneVictor Valqui, 1992. "The afforestation problem: A heuristic method based on simulated annealing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 184-191, January.
- Jonathan D. Kaplan & Robert C. Johansson & Mark Peters, 2004. "The Manure Hits the Land: Economic and Environmental Implications When Land Application of Nutrients Is Constrained," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 688-700.
- Arrow, Kenneth J & Fisher, Anthony C, 1974. "Environmental Preservation, Uncertainty, and Irreversibility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 88(2), pages 312-19, May.
- Siobhan McCarthy & Alan Matthews & Brendan Riordan, 2002. "Determinants of Private Afforestation in the Republic of Ireland," Trinity Economics Papers 20023, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
- Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Hodge, Ian D., 2003.
"European agri-environmental policy for the 21st century,"
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics,
Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(1), March.
- Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Ian Hodge, 2003. "European agri-environmental policy for the 21st century," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(1), pages 123-139, 03.
- Sandmo, Agnar, 2000. "The Public Economics of the Environment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198297987, March.
- Mette Termansen & Colin J McClean & Hans Skov-Petersen, 2004. "Recreational site choice modelling using high-resolution spatial data," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 36(6), pages 1085-1099, June.
- Raffaella Castagnini & Martina Menon & Federico Perali, 2004. "Extended and Full Incomes at the Household and Individual Level: An Application to Farm Households," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 730-736.
- Garrod, G. D. & Willis, K. G., 1997. "The non-use benefits of enhancing forest biodiversity: A contingent ranking study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 45-61, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:64:y:2007:i:1:p:194-203. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.