Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 8
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Whitten, Stuart M. Reeson, Andrew Windle, Jill and Rolfe, John 2013. Designing conservation tenders to support landholder participation: A framework and case study assessment. Ecosystem Services, Vol. 6, p. 82.


    Dörschner, T. and Musshoff, O. 2015. How do incentive-based environmental policies affect environment protection initiatives of farmers? An experimental economic analysis using the example of species richness. Ecological Economics, Vol. 114, p. 90.


    Hasund, Knut Per and Johansson, Maria 2016. Paying for Environmental Results is WTO Compliant. EuroChoices, p. n/a.


    Prager, Katrin 2015. Agri-environmental collaboratives for landscape management in Europe. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 12, p. 59.


    Dale, Virginia H. Kline, Keith L. Kaffka, Stephen R. and Langeveld, J. W. A. 2013. A landscape perspective on sustainability of agricultural systems. Landscape Ecology, Vol. 28, Issue. 6, p. 1111.


    Schroeder, Lilli A. Isselstein, Johannes Chaplin, Stephen and Peel, Stephen 2013. Agri-environment schemes: Farmers’ acceptance and perception of potential ‘Payment by Results’ in grassland—A case study in England. Land Use Policy, Vol. 32, p. 134.


    Pant, Krishna Prasad 2015. Uniform-Price Reverse Auction for Estimating the Costs of Reducing Open-Field Burning of Rice Residue in Nepal. Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol. 62, Issue. 3, p. 567.


    Galler, Carolin von Haaren, Christina and Albert, Christian 2015. Optimizing environmental measures for landscape multifunctionality: Effectiveness, efficiency and recommendations for agri-environmental programs. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 151, p. 243.


    ×

Implementing and evaluating the effectiveness of a payment scheme for environmental services from agricultural land

  • LENA ULBER (a1), SEBASTIAN KLIMEK (a2), HORST-HENNING STEINMANN (a1), JOHANNES ISSELSTEIN (a3) and MARKUS GROTH (a4)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0376892911000385
  • Published online: 03 August 2011
Abstract
SUMMARY

The current rapid decline in biodiversity in human-dominated agricultural landscapes, both in Europe and worldwide, impacts on the provision of environmental services essential to human well-being. There is, therefore, a pressing need to develop and implement incentive-based conservation policies to counteract the ongoing loss of biodiversity. This paper presents results of a regionally-scaled conservation procurement auction, a type of incentive-based payments for environmental services (PES), targeted at the conservation of arable plant diversity. By matching arable fields that were participating in the PES scheme to control fields that were not enrolled in the PES scheme, two critical key characteristics were addressed, namely additionality and bid prices. Additionality was addressed by evaluating whether fields for which PES were issued had significantly higher arable plant diversity than the matched control fields. The cost-effectiveness of a conservation auction increases if payments compensate just farmers’ opportunity costs (in terms of forgone production); bid prices of participating farmers were thus also evaluated to determine whether they were related to their individual opportunity costs. The PES scheme proved to be highly effective in ensuring environmental services delivery through enhanced arable plant diversity on participating fields. In contrast, the potential of the proposed conservation auction design to raise cost-effectiveness has to be questioned, because bid prices submitted in this scheme substantially exceeded individual farmers’ opportunity costs. Therefore, bid prices were most likely influenced by socioeconomic factors other than opportunity costs. This case study illustrates potentials and pitfalls associated with the implementation of a PES scheme and, by evaluating the effectiveness of the scheme, contributes to an improved understanding of incentive-based mechanisms for both policymakers and practitioners involved in PES scheme design and implementation.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*Correspondence: Lena Ulber, Institute for Plant Protection in Field Crops and Grassland, Julius Kühn-Institut (JKI), Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants, Messeweg 11-12, 38104 Braunschweig, Germany Tel: +49 531 299 3903 e-mail: lena.ulber@jki.bund.de
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

T. Aavik & J. Liiraa (2009) Agrotolerant and high nature-value species. Plant biodiversity indicator groups in agroecosystems. Ecological Indicators 9: 892901.

N.L. Carreck & I.H. Williams (2002) Food for insect pollinators on farmland: insect visits to flowers of annual seed mixtures. Journal of Insect Conservation 6: 1323.

T. Cason & L. Gangadharan (2005) A laboratory comparison of uniform and discriminative price auctions for reducing non-point source pollution. Land Economics 81: 5570.

R. G Cummings , C. A. Holt & S. K. Laury (2004) Using laboratory experiments for policymaking: an example from the Georgia Irrigation Reduction Auction. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 23: 341363.

P. J. Ferraro (2008) Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 65: 810821.

P. J. Ferraro & S. K. Pattanayak (2006) Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. PLoS Biology 4: e105.

B. Gerowitt , E. Bertke , S. K. Hespelt & C. Tute (2003) Towards multifunctional agriculture: weeds as ecological goods? Weed Research 43: 227235.

A. Hailu & S. Thoyer (2006) Multi-unit auction format design. Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination 1: 129146.

B.K. Jack , C. Kouskya & K.R.E. Sims (2008) Designing payments for ecosystem services: lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105: 94659470.

B.K. Jack , B. Leimona & P.J. Ferraro (2009) A revealed preference approach to estimating supply curves for ecosystem services: use of auctions to set payments for soil erosion control in Indonesia. Conservation Biology 23: 359367.

B. Kirwan , R.N. Lubowski & M.J. Roberts (2005) How cost-effective are land-retirement auctions? Estimating the difference between payments and willingness to accept in the Conservation Reserve Program. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87: 12391247.

S. Klimek , A. Richter gen. Kemmermann , H.-H. Steinmann , J. Freese & J. Isselstein (2008) Rewarding farmers for delivering vascular plant diversity in managed grasslands: a transdisciplinary case-study approach. Biological Conservation 141: 28882897.

T. Kroeger & F. Casey (2007) An assessment of market-based approaches to providing ecosystem services on agricultural lands. Ecological Economics 64: 321332.

U. Latacz-Lohmann & S. Schilizzi (2007) Quantifying the benefits of conservation auctions. EuroChoices 6: 3239.

U. Latacz-Lohmann & C. Van der Hamsvoort (1997) Auctioning conservation contracts: a theoretical analysis and an application. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79: 407418.

M. McKee & R. P. Berrens (2001) Balancing army and endangered species concerns: green vs. green. Environmental Management 27: 123133.

E. Mettepenningen , A. Verspecht & G. van Huylenbroeck (2009) Measuring private transaction costs of European agri-environmental schemes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 52: 649667.

R. Naidoo , A. Balmford , P.J. Ferraro , S. Polasky , T.H. Ricketts & M. Rouget (2006) Integrating economic costs into conservation planning. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21: 681687.

J. Rolfe , J. Windle & J. McCosker (2009) Testing and implementing the use of multiple bidding rounds in conservation auctions: a case study application. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 57: 287303.

S. Schilizzi & U. Latacz-Lohmann (2007) Assessing the performance of conservation auctions: an experimental study. Land Economics 83: 497515.

J. A. Sinden (2004) Estimating the costs of biodiversity protection in the Brigalow belt, New South Wales. Journal of Environmental Management 70: 351362.

G. Stoneham , V. Chaudhri , A. Ha & L. Strappazzon (2003) Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trial. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 47: 477500.

L. Ulber , H.-H. Steinmann , S. Klimek & J. Isselstein (2009) An on-farm approach to investigate the impact of diversified crop rotations on weed species richness and composition in winter wheat. Weed Research 49: 534543.

F. Wätzold & K. Schwerdtner (2005) Why be wasteful when preserving a valuable resource? A review article on the cost-effectiveness of European biodiversity conservation policy. Biological Conservation 123: 327338.

J. Windle & J. Rolfe (2008) Exploring the efficiencies of using competitive tenders over fixed price grants to protect biodiversity in Australian rangelands. Land Use Policy 25: 388398.

S. Wunder (2007) The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation. Conservation Biology 21: 4858.

S. Wunder , S. Engel & S. Pagiola (2008) Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecological Economics 65: 834852.

A. Zabel & B. Roe (2009) Optimal design of pro-conservation incentives. Ecological Economics 69: 126134.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Environmental Conservation
  • ISSN: 0376-8929
  • EISSN: 1469-4387
  • URL: /core/journals/environmental-conservation
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords: