IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/6502.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Addressing additionality in REDD contracts when formal enforcement is absent

Author

Listed:
  • Cordero Salas, Paula
  • Roe, Brian
  • Sohngen, Brent

Abstract

The success of reducing carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation depends on the design of an effective financial mechanism that provides landholders sufficient incentives to participate and provide additional and permanent carbon offsets. This paper proposes self-enforcing contracts as a potential solution for the constraints in formal contract enforcement derived from the stylized facts of reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation implementation in developing countries. It characterizes the optimal self-enforcing contract and provides the parameters under which private enforcement is sustainable when the seller type that is, the opportunity cost of the land, is private information. The optimal contract suggests that the seller with low opportunity cost receives a positive enforceable payment equivalent to the information rents required for self-selection, in contrast to when the buyer knows the seller type in which case all payments should be made contingent on additional forest conservation. When the buyer does not know the seller type, a first-best self-enforcing contract can be implemented if forest conservation is sufficiently productive. If the gains from forest conservation are small, self-enforcing contracts may induce some carbon sequestration by some or all seller types, depending on the value of the shared gains of the relationship.

Suggested Citation

  • Cordero Salas, Paula & Roe, Brian & Sohngen, Brent, 2013. "Addressing additionality in REDD contracts when formal enforcement is absent," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6502, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:6502
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2013/06/25/000158349_20130625104538/Rendered/PDF/WPS6502.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan Levin, 2003. "Relational Incentive Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 835-857, June.
    2. Rob Fraser, 2009. "Land Heterogeneity, Agricultural Income Forgone and Environmental Benefit: An Assessment of Incentive Compatibility Problems in Environmental Stewardship Schemes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 190-201.
    3. 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.
    4. Spulber, Daniel F., 1988. "Optimal environmental regulation under asymmetric information," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 163-181, March.
    5. Charles Palmer & Markus Ohndorf & Ian A. MacKenzie, 2009. "Life’s a breach! Ensuring ‘permanence’ in forest carbon sinks under incomplete contract enforcement," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 09/113, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    6. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    7. Andrew Moxey & Ben White & Adam Ozanne, 1999. "Efficient Contract Design for Agri-Environment Policy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 187-202.
    8. MacLeod, W Bentley & Malcomson, James M, 1989. "Implicit Contracts, Incentive Compatibility, and Involuntary Unemployment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 447-480, March.
    9. W. Bentley MacLeod, 2006. "Reputations, Relationships and the Enforcement of Incomplete Contracts," CESifo Working Paper Series 1730, CESifo Group Munich.
    10. JunJie Wu & Bruce A. Babcock, 1996. "Contract Design for the Purchase of Environmental Goods from Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 935-945.
    11. Paula Cordero Salas & Brian E. Roe, 2012. "The Role of Cooperation and Reciprocity in Structuring Carbon Sequestration Contracts in Developing Countries," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(2), pages 411-418.
    12. Robalino, Juan & Pfaff, Alexander & Sanchez-Azofefia, G. Arturo & Alpizar, Francisco & Leon, Carlos & Rodriguez, Carlos Manuel, 2008. "Deforestation Impacts of Environmental Services Payments: Costa Rica’s PSA Program 2000–2005," Discussion Papers dp-08-24-efd, Resources For the Future.
    13. Jeffrey M. Peterson & Richard N. Boisvert, 2004. "Incentive-Compatible Pollution Control Policies under Asymmetric Information on Both Risk Preferences and Technology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 291-306.
    14. 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.
    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. Strand, Jon, 2016. "Mitigation incentives with climate finance and treaty options," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 166-174.
    2. Gren, Ing-Marie & Zeleke, Abenezer Aklilu, 2016. "Policy design for forest carbon sequestration: A review of the literature," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 128-136.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Climate Change Mitigation and Green House Gases; Contract Law; Debt Markets; Common Property Resource Development; Forestry;

    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:wbk:wbrwps:6502. 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: (Roula I. Yazigi) or (Marina Grazioli). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.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.