IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sss/wpaper/2017-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Designing markets for biodiversity offsets: lessons from tradable pollution permits

Author

Listed:
  • Katherine Simpson

    (University of Edinburgh)

  • Frans P de Vries

    (Economics Division, University of Stirling)

  • Paul Armsworth

    (Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Tennessee)

  • Nick Hanley

    (School of Geography and Sustainable Development, University of St. Andrews)

Abstract

Biodiversity offset markets are one option for managing the trade-offs that exist between conservation targets and the increasing demand on land for urban development and agricultural expansion at local, regional and international scales. Drawing on lessons from the tradable pollution permit market literature, we review the key design parameters for biodiversity offset markets and consider how these have been applied in practice in the U.S., Australia, and the UK. We argue that offset markets should only be applied where the conservation target is a well-defined measure of biodiversity. Efficient offset markets require goods to be simple, measurable units that are fully exchangeable. This allows the market to operate under simple trading rules and engage with the widest number of participants, allowing gains from trade to be realised. We argue that a well-designed and managed offset scheme can be a more cost-effective way of meeting conservation targets than regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Katherine Simpson & Frans P de Vries & Paul Armsworth & Nick Hanley, 2017. "Designing markets for biodiversity offsets: lessons from tradable pollution permits," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2017-04, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
  • Handle: RePEc:sss:wpaper:2017-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/media/dept-of-geography-and-sustainable-development/pdf-s/DP%202017-04%20Simpson%20et%20al.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hanley, Nick & Shogren, Jason & White, Ben, 2013. "Introduction to Environmental Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199568734.
    2. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2013. "The SO 2 Allowance Trading System: The Ironic History of a Grand Policy Experiment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 103-122, Winter.
    3. O'Neil, William & David, Martin & Moore, Christina & Joeres, Erhard, 1983. "Transferable discharge permits and economic efficiency: The fox river," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 346-355, December.
    4. Stine Broch & Suzanne Vedel, 2012. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 561-581, April.
    5. Doyle, Martin W. & Yates, Andrew J., 2010. "Stream ecosystem service markets under no-net-loss regulation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 820-827, February.
    6. Lawrence H. Goulder, 2013. "Markets for Pollution Allowances: What Are the (New) Lessons?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 87-102, Winter.
    7. Wainger, Lisa A. & King, Dennis M. & Mack, Richard N. & Price, Elizabeth W. & Maslin, Thomas, 2010. "Can the concept of ecosystem services be practically applied to improve natural resource management decisions?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 978-987, March.
    8. Linda Fernandez & Larry Karp, 1998. "Restoring Wetlands Through Wetlands Mitigation Banks," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(3), pages 323-344, October.
    9. Liski, Matti, 2001. "Thin versus Thick CO2 Market," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 295-311, May.
    10. Robert N. Stavins, 1998. "What Can We Learn from the Grand Policy Experiment? Lessons from SO2 Allowance Trading," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 69-88, Summer.
    11. Jason Shogren, 1998. "A Political Economy in an Ecological Web," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 557-570, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mechtilde M. J. Gorissen & C. Martijn van der Heide & Johannes H.J. Schaminée, 2020. "Habitat Banking and Its Challenges in a Densely Populated Country: The Case of The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(9), pages 1-36, May.

    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. de Perthuis, Christian & Trotignon, Raphael, 2014. "Governance of CO2 markets: Lessons from the EU ETS," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 100-106.
    2. Robert W. Hahn & Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 267-294.
    3. Baudry, Marc & Faure, Anouk & Quemin, Simon, 2021. "Emissions trading with transaction costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    4. Simon Quemin, 2016. "Intertemporal abatement decisions under ambiguity aversion in a cap and trade," Working Papers 1604, Chaire Economie du climat.
    5. Endre Tvinnereim, 2014. "The bears are right: Why cap-and-trade yields greater emission reductions than expected, and what that means for climate policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 447-461, December.
    6. Koch, Nicolas & Basse Mama, Houdou, 2019. "Does the EU Emissions Trading System induce investment leakage? Evidence from German multinational firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 479-492.
    7. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2019. "Policy Evolution under the Clean Air Act," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(4), pages 27-50, Fall.
    8. Matti Liski & Juha Virrankoski, 2004. "Frictions in Project-Based Supply of Permits," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(3), pages 347-365, July.
    9. Chan, H. Ron & Chupp, B. Andrew & Cropper, Maureen L. & Muller, Nicholas Z., 2018. "The impact of trading on the costs and benefits of the Acid Rain Program," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 180-209.
    10. Mitchell, David M. & Willett, Keith, 2012. "Modeling Transactions Costs in a Regional Transferable Discharge Permit System for Phosphorus Runoff," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 42(2), pages 1-13.
    11. Kangas, Johanna & Ollikainen, Markku, 2019. "Economic Insights in Ecological Compensations: Market Analysis With an Empirical Application to the Finnish Economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 54-67.
    12. Böhringer, Christoph & Garcia-Muros, Xaquin & Gonzalez-Eguino, Mikel & Rey, Luis, 2017. "US climate policy: A critical assessment of intensity standards," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(S1), pages 125-135.
    13. Coria, Jessica & Sterner, Thomas, 2008. "Tradable Permits in Developing Countries: Evidence from Air Pollution in Santiago, Chile," Discussion Papers dp-08-51, Resources For the Future.
    14. Park, Hojeong & Hong, Won Kyung, 2014. "Korea׳s emission trading scheme and policy design issues to achieve market-efficiency and abatement targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 73-83.
    15. Jonathan M. Lee, 2015. "The Impact of Heterogeneous NOx Regulations on Distributed Electricity Generation in U.S. Manufacturing," Working Papers 15-12, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    16. Joseph E. Aldy & William A. Pizer, 2009. "Issues in Designing U.S. Climate Change Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 179-210.
    17. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Coria, Jessica & Löfgren, Åsa & Sterner, Thomas, 2009. "To Trade or Not to Trade: Firm-Level Analysis of Emissions Trading in Santiago, Chile," Discussion Papers dp-09-25-efd, Resources For the Future.
    19. Jayson Lusk, 2011. "The market for animal welfare," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(4), pages 561-575, December.
    20. Alessandra Casella & Adam B. Cox, 2018. "A Property Rights Approach to Temporary Work Visas," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(S1), pages 195-227.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Biodiversity; offsets; tradeable pollution permits; transactions costs; conservation planning;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • 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

    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:sss:wpaper:2017-04. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eestauk.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 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: Laure Kuhfuss The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Laure Kuhfuss to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eestauk.html .

    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.