IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04745816.html

Distinguishing potential and effective additionality of forest conservation interventions

Author

Listed:
  • Philippe Delacote

    (BETA - Bureau d'Économie Théorique et Appliquée - AgroParisTech - UNISTRA - Université de Strasbourg - Université de Haute-Alsace (UHA) - Université de Haute-Alsace (UHA) Mulhouse - Colmar - UL - Université de Lorraine - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement, CEC - Chaire Economie du Climat - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres)

  • Gwenolé Le Velly

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Gabriela Simonet

    (Independent Researcher)

Abstract

The additionality of forest conservation interventions is frequently questioned. In particular, they are often considered to be located in places where forests are not threatened, which points to the existence of location biases. Revisiting this location bias concept, we conceptually distinguish potential and effective additionality and theoretically consider how the objectives of the implementer affect the siting choice of the forest conservation interventions and their additionality. Our theoretical intuition is that the choices of the implementers are influenced by the quality of institutions. Our results show that (1) the implementer's objective and local institutions may lead the implementer to select a site with low development potential and low forest threat, and (2) the selection of a site with low development potential, which is frequently presented as a location bias, does not necessarily preclude additionality.

Suggested Citation

  • Philippe Delacote & Gwenolé Le Velly & Gabriela Simonet, 2024. "Distinguishing potential and effective additionality of forest conservation interventions," Post-Print hal-04745816, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04745816
    DOI: 10.1017/S1355770X24000202
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04745816v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04745816v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1017/S1355770X24000202?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. H. J. Albers & L. Preonas & T. Capitán & E. J. Z. Robinson & R. Madrigal-Ballestero, 2020. "Optimal Siting, Sizing, and Enforcement of Marine Protected Areas," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(1), pages 229-269, September.
    2. Paula Cordero Salas & Brian E. Roe & Brent Sohngen, 2018. "Additionality When REDD Contracts Must be Self-Enforcing," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(1), pages 195-215, January.
    3. Groom, Ben & Palmer, Charles, 2010. "Cost-effective provision of environmental services: the role of relaxing market constraints," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 219-240, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Philippe Delacote & Gwenolé Le Velly & Gabriela Simonet, 2020. "Distinguishing potential and effective additionality to revisit the location bias of REDD+ project," Working Papers hal-01954923, HAL.
    2. Wolfersberger, Julien & Amacher, Gregory S. & Delacote, Philippe & Dragicevic, Arnaud, 2022. "The dynamics of deforestation and reforestation in a developing economy," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 272-293, June.
    3. Philippe Delacote & Gwenolé Le Velly & Gabriela Simonet, 2018. "A tale of REDD+ projects. How do location and certification impact additionality?," Working Papers 1808, Chaire Economie du climat.
    4. Peng, Hui & Ying, Huanqin & Wang, Xuerui & Lu, Yaobin & Wang, Shouyang, 2025. "Gains or losses: Can grassland ecological compensation policy alleviate the decoupling of welfare from wealth?," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 538-555.
    5. Randrianarison, Henintsoa & Ramiaramanana, Jeannot & Wätzold, Frank, 2017. "When to Pay? Adjusting the Timing of Payments in PES Design to the Needs of Poor Land-users," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 168-177.
    6. Cranford, Matthew & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Credit-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 503-520.
    7. Laing, Timothy & Palmer, Charles, 2015. "Economy-wide impacts of REDD when there is political influence," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 107-126.
    8. Mengmeng Liu & Limin Bai & Hassan Saif Khan & Hua Li, 2023. "The Influence of the Grassland Ecological Compensation Policy on Regional Herdsmen’s Income and Its Gap: Evidence from Six Pastoralist Provinces in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, March.
    9. Perrings, Charles, 2014. "Environment and development economics 20 years on," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 333-366, June.
    10. Carlson, Anna & Palmer, Charles, 2016. "A qualitative meta-synthesis of the benefits of eco-labeling in developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 129-145.
    11. Lykke Andersen & Ugur Bilge & Ben Groom & David Gutierrez & Evan Killick & Juan Carlos Ledezma & Charles Palmer & Diana Weinhold, 2014. "Modelling land use, deforestation, and policy analysis: A hybrid optimization-ABM heterogeneous agent model with application to the Bolivian Amazon," GRI Working Papers 164, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    12. George A Dyer & Robin Matthews & Patrick Meyfroidt, 2012. "Is There an Ideal REDD+ Program? An Analysis of Policy Trade-Offs at the Local Level," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-12, December.
    13. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    14. Engel, Stefanie & Palmer, Charles & Taschini, Luca & Urech, Simon, 2012. "Cost-effective payments for reducing emissions from deforestation under uncertainty," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 44837, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Brusselaers, Jan & Verbeke, Wim & Mettepenningen, Evy & Buysse, Jeroen, 2020. "Unravelling the true drivers for eco-certified wood consumption by introducing scarcity," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    16. Beygi Heidarlou, Hadi & Banj Shafiei, Abbas & Erfanian, Mahdi & Tayyebi, Amin & Alijanpour, Ahmad, 2019. "Effects of preservation policy on land use changes in Iranian Northern Zagros forests," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 76-90.
    17. Palmer, Charles & Taschini, Luca & Laing, Timothy, 2017. "Getting more ‘carbon bang’ for your ‘buck’ in Acre State, Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 214-227.
    18. Andersen, Lykke E. & Groom, Ben & Killick, Evan & Ledezma, Juan Carlos & Palmer, Charles & Weinhold, Diana, 2017. "Modelling Land Use, Deforestation, and Policy: A Hybrid Optimisation-Heterogeneous Agent Model with Application to the Bolivian Amazon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 76-90.
    19. Brusselaers, Jan & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido & Buysse, Jeroen, 2017. "Green Public Procurement of Certified Wood: Spatial Leverage Effect and Welfare Implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 91-102.
    20. Reutemann, Tim & Engel, Stefanie & Pareja, Eliana, 2016. "How (not) to pay — Field experimental evidence on the design of REDD+ payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 220-229.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:hal:journl:hal-04745816. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.