The role of market-based instruments for biodiversity conservation in Central and Eastern Europe
This paper analyses the development and emergence of market based instruments for biodiversity conservation in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. The development of market-based instruments for biodiversity conservation has been receiving increased attention as a possible cheaper and more effective alternative to the global regulatory approach. The implementation of such instruments is particularly challenging in post-socialist countries, where the former state command-and-control economy disturbed the normal functioning of markets. Our analysis indicates that market-based instruments can increase the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation, but are not always suitable and appropriate. The following preconditions for the effective design of market-based instruments in CEE countries have been identified: clear property rights and decision making structure, transparent rules for information dissemination, and monitoring responsibilities. Our results show that the successful implementation of market-based instruments for biodiversity conservation in CEE countries is furthermore influenced by pre-existing formal and informal institutions, in which reputation and trust may play a role. However, market-based instruments should complement rather than substitute regulatory approaches, and in combination with traditional regulation, such can become critical in achieving the objectives of biodiversity conservation.
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.:
- Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
- Csaki, Csaba & Lerman, Zvi, 2001. "Land And Farm Structure In Poland," Discussion Papers 14998, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Department of Agricultural Economics and Management.
- Twan Huybers & Jeff Bennett, 2003. "Environmental Management and the Competitiveness of Nature-Based Tourism Destinations," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(3), pages 213-233, March.
- Geoffrey Hodgson, 2002. "The Evolution of Institutions: An Agenda for Future Theoretical Research," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 111-127, June.
- Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 1998. "The Approach of Institutional Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 166-192, March.
- Bartczak, Anna & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle & Zandersen, Marianne & Zylicz, Tomasz, 2008.
"Valuing forest recreation on the national level in a transition economy: The case of Poland,"
Forest Policy and Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 10(7-8), pages 467-472, October.
- Bartczak, Anna & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle & Zandersen, Marianne & Zylicz, Tomasz, 2008. "Valuing forest recreation on the national level in a transition economy: The case of Poland," MPRA Paper 11483, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Regina Birner & Heidi Wittmer, 2004. "On the 'efficient boundaries of the state': the contribution of transaction-costs economics to the analysis of decentralization and devolution in natural resource management," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 22(5), pages 667-685, October.
- Vatn, Arild, 2010. "An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1245-1252, April.
- Claassen, Roger & Cattaneo, Andrea & Johansson, Robert, 2008. "Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs: U.S. experience in theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 737-752, May.
- Hurrelmann, Annette, 2008. "Analysing agricultural land markets as organisations: An empirical study in Poland," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 338-349, July.
- Tatiana Kluvánková-Oravská & Veronika Chobotová & Eva Smolková, 2013. "The challenges of policy convergence: the Europeanization of biodiversity governance in an enlarging EU," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 31(3), pages 401-413, June.
- Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
- Daniel Bromley, 1992. "The commons, common property, and environmental policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 1-17, January.
- Pagiola, Stefano & Arcenas, Agustin & Platais, Gunars, 2005. "Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-253, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:95:y:2013:i:c:p:41-50. 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.