IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/80661.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cost-effectiveness of buying land for conservation versus paying land-users for conservation measures – the case of preserving an oligotrophic lake in a Natura 2000 area in North Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Schöttker, Oliver
  • Wätzold, Frank

Abstract

Cost-effective implementation of measures to conserve biodiversity is often a major target of conservation organisations, and choosing the correct mode of governance can be important in this context. Nature conservation organisations can, in principle, choose between two distinct modes of governance to implement conservation activities: they can (1) buy desired areas of interest and implement conservation measures themselves (buy option), or (2) offer payments to landowners to incentivize them to voluntarily preserve or create habitat on their land (compensation option). In this paper we analyse the cost-effectiveness of these two modes of governance in a case study on a conservation project in a Natura 2000 area in Schleswig-Holstein, Germany. The actual costs of the buying option are compared with the potential costs of implementing the compensation option. We developed a costing framework to compare the costs of both options over time, given they generate the same ecological results on an identical project area. We find that the cost-effective solution depends, among other things, on the conservation timeframe considered and on cost components such as transaction costs, leasehold rent and land prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Schöttker, Oliver & Wätzold, Frank, 2017. "Cost-effectiveness of buying land for conservation versus paying land-users for conservation measures – the case of preserving an oligotrophic lake in a Natura 2000 area in North Germany," MPRA Paper 80661, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:80661
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/80661/1/MPRA_paper_80661.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pavel Ciaian & d’Artis Kancs & Johan Swinnen, 2010. "EU Land Markets and the Common Agricultural Policy," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 1-31.
    2. Mewes, Melanie & Drechsler, Martin & Johst, Karin & Sturm, Astrid & Wätzold, Frank, 2015. "A systematic approach for assessing spatially and temporally differentiated opportunity costs of biodiversity conservation measures in grasslands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 76-88.
    3. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley & Philippe Le Coent & Mathieu Désolé, 2016. "Nudges, Social Norms, and Permanence in Agri-environmental Schemes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(4), pages 641-655.
    4. 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.
    5. McCann, Laura & Easter, K. William, 2000. "Estimates of Public Sector Transaction Costs in NRCS Programs," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(03), pages 555-563, December.
    6. repec:zbw:espost:176544 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Edi Defrancesco & Paola Gatto & Ford Runge & Samuele Trestini, 2008. "Factors Affecting Farmers' Participation in Agri-environmental Measures: A Northern Italian Perspective," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 114-131, February.
    8. Frank Wätzold & Martin Drechsler & Karin Johst & Melanie Mewes & Astrid Sturm, 2016. "A Novel, Spatiotemporally Explicit Ecological-economic Modeling Procedure for the Design of Cost-effective Agri-environment Schemes to Conserve Biodiversity," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(2), pages 489-512.
    9. Franzén, Frida & Dinnétz, Patrik & Hammer, Monica, 2016. "Factors affecting farmers' willingness to participate in eutrophication mitigation — A case study of preferences for wetland creation in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 8-15.
    10. McCann, Laura, 2013. "Transaction costs and environmental policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 253-262.
    11. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    12. Isabel Vanslembrouck & Guido Huylenbroeck & Wim Verbeke, 2002. "Determinants of the Willingness of Belgian Farmers to Participate in Agri-environmental Measures," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 489-511.
    13. Curran, Michael & Kiteme, Boniface & Wünscher, Tobias & Koellner, Thomas & Hellweg, Stefanie, 2016. "Pay the farmer, or buy the land?—Cost-effectiveness of payments for ecosystem services versus land purchases or easements in Central Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 59-67.
    14. 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, , vol. 22(5), pages 667-685, October.
    15. Schöttker, Oliver & Johst, Karin & Drechsler, Martin & Wätzold, Frank, 2016. "Land for biodiversity conservation — To buy or borrow?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 94-103.
    16. repec:eee:ecoser:v:1:y:2012:i:1:p:93-100 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Hily, Emeline & Garcia, Serge & Stenger, Anne & Tu, Gengyang, 2015. "Assessing the cost-effectiveness of a biodiversity conservation policy: A bio-econometric analysis of Natura 2000 contracts in forest," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 197-208.
    18. Romy Greiner, 2016. "Factors influencing farmers’ participation in contractual biodiversity conservation: a choice experiment with northern Australian pastoralists," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 60(1), pages 1-21, January.
    19. Juutinen, Artti & Mantymaa, Erkki & Monkkonen, Mikko & Svento, Rauli, 2008. "Voluntary agreements in protecting privately owned forests in Finland -- To buy or to lease," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 230-239, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    agri-environment scheme; biodiversity; conservation payments; grassland; make-or-buy decision; mode of governance; payments for ecosystem services; conservation costs;

    JEL classification:

    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:80661. 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: (Joachim Winter). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.