Developing an integrated conceptual framework to understand biodiversity conflicts

Although biodiversity-related conflicts are generally embedded into an ecological, economic and social context, reported studies often focus on only one of these aspects. The practical facilitation of such conflicts typically adopts an equally restricted view. The developing field of biodiversity conflict management is thus fragmented and, due to its generally insular case study approach, lacks theoretical underpinning.     

Natural Areas, the whole countryside approach and sustainable agriculture

Natural Areas are biogeographical zones which reflect the geological foundation, the natural systems and processes, and the wildlife in different parts of England, and provide a framework for setting objectives for nature conservation. This paper argues, with particular reference to agro-ecosystems, that there is a need for an integrated, whole countryside approach to Natural Areas based on the principles of ‘strong’ sustainable development. In practice, this means the delineation of conservation objectives for the whole of each Natural Area and the application of policy instruments designed to address the causes of environmental loss and deterioration. The latter requires, it is argued, a structural analysis of generic environmental issues. A generic issues approach is required in order to avoid the pitfalls of environmental ‘symptom management’ (environmental managerialism), an approach which dominates current environmental and agri-environmental policy. Necessary as such discrete action programmes and measures may be as short-term ‘fire-fighting’ responses to immediate threats, environmental managerialism as a policy framework epitomises a non-holistic and ‘disintegrated’ approach to nature conservation. The paper goes on to discuss the configuration of agri-environmental policy that will be required to address generic agricultural impacts on biodiversity and the constraints and opportunities for its implementation that are likely to arise within the context of further CAP reform and the forthcoming round of WTO negotiations.     

Problems in valuing the benefits of biodiversity protection

This paper considers two problems in valuing the benefits of biodiversity protection. These are, firstly, that preferences for biodiversity protection may be lexicographic rather than utilitarian. The more individuals for whom this is true, the less is cost-benefit analysis validated as a means of decision making for biodiversity protection, since lexicographic preferences are incompatible with the Kaldor-Hicks Compensation Test. Secondly, people may be poorly informed about the meaning of biodiversity, complicating the use of contingent valuation as a means of measuring preservation benefits. This paper first discusses the meaning of biodiversity, and trends in diversity over time. We offer some empirical evidence with regard to lexicographic preferences; consider the implications of having poorly-informed consumers; and then report the results of a contingent valuation study of biodiversity protection with varying levels of information. We find that willingness to pay for biodiversity protection increases with the level of information provided.We thank David Pearce, participants at a seminar at University College London, and two referees for comments on earlier versions of this paper.     

Applying tradable permits to biodiversity conservation: Effects of space-dependent conservation benefits and cost heterogeneity on habitat allocation

This paper is concerned with the cost-effective allocation of habitat for species under spatio-temporally heterogeneous economic development. To address the dynamic dimension of the problem we consider tradable development rights as the instrument of choice. A particular challenge in applying tradable development rights is that the conservation benefit of an individual habitat patch depends on its spatial relationship with other habitat patches and thus is an emergent rather than a fixed property. We analyse with a conceptual model the spatial and temporal dynamics of habitats in a region under a tradable development rights market that takes spatial interaction of habitats explicitly into account. In our analysis two different outcomes may emerge depending on the levels of spatial interaction and cost heterogeneity: an “ordered” structure where habitat patches are clustered in space and are stable over time, and a “disordered” structure where habitat patches are scattered in space and subject to high turnover of destruction and recreation. A high level of spatial interaction or a low level of cost heterogeneity favours an ordered structure while a low level of spatial interaction or a high level of cost heterogeneity favours a disordered structure.     

The EU’s ecological focus areas – How experts explain farmers’ choices in Germany

Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) have recently been introduced as key element in the greening of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. In 2015, farmers across the EU have implemented EFAs for the first time. Data for German federal states indicate a strong variance in EFA decisions with an overall dominance of catch crops, nitrogen fixing crops and fallow land – two of which bear limited benefits for biodiversity conservation. This article explores how experts explain EFA choices. We conducted 35 qualitative, semi-structured interviews with representatives from the Ministry for Agriculture, farm advisory services, and farmers’ associations in each federal state. Applying content analysis we clustered the factors mentioned as determinants for farmers’ EFA choices into the categories administrative considerations, economic considerations, local factors, ecosystem considerations and policy incentives. According to the interviewed experts, farmers have primarily registered measures that already existed on their farms. Administrative considerations dominate the identified determinants for farmers’ EFA decisions, and together with economic considerations appear to function as a negative incentive for EFA options that are beneficial for biodiversity, such as landscape elements and buffer strips. We conclude that conditions for EFA implementation were found to not effectively incentivise a higher share of biodiversity supporting characteristics in German agricultural landscapes. Based on a detailed discussion we extract recommendations on how to improve EFA implementation.     

生物多样性保护制度的构建

目前,全球生物多样性受到严重威胁,中国的生物多样性保护存在种种不足,应进一步构建中国生物多样性保护法律制度。     

The impact of information on landowners’ participation in voluntary conservation programs - Theoretical considerations and empirical evidence from an agri-environment program in Saxony, Germany

The voluntary nature of programs that pay landowners for conservation measures raises the question of what factors favor participation in such programs. This article focuses on the controversial issue of the impact of information on the participation decision. We develop a straightforward model to analyze how information affects this decision, and empirically estimate the impact of information, as well as other factors, on participation in a conservation program in Saxony, Germany. We find in our theoretical analysis that information measures may affect program participation either in a positive or negative way, whereas our estimation results indicate that the influence of the diverse information measures that have been relevant in our empirical analysis is weak. We argue, however, that information measures may nonetheless be warranted, as they allow for better informed participation decisions, thus contributing to a more optimal selection of program participants.     

Patent disclosure requirements and benefit sharing: A counterfactual case of Morocco's argan oil

This article uses the seemingly promising case of Morocco's argan oil to assess the value of patent disclosure requirements (PDRs) as a policy instrument aimed at improving the sharing of biodiversity benefits. After introducing the disclosure requirements debate and discussing relevant features of the argan oil case, I construct a simple counterfactual by asking: “How would PDRs have changed benefit sharing in the argan oil case?” From this case, three practical considerations emerge that shed a realistic, if cautious, light on the marginal value of PDRs as a benefit sharing mechanism: (1) PDRs require an accompanying national biodiversity regime but their relative value is inversely proportional to regime strength (2) PDRs should be assessed based on the additional compliance incentives they provide and median, not blockbuster, patent values and (3) the alternative to no PDRs and no regime is not zero benefits. While these considerations are inherently country-specific, PDRs should generally be assessed at the margin rather than in vague conceptual and aggregate ways.     

Spatial distribution of species populations,relative economic values,and the optimal size and number of reserves

We examine the tradeoff between the number and average size of nature reserves. When the costs of enforcing reserve boundaries are negligible, we find analytically that the relative price of biodiversity has a positive impact on the optimal total reserved area but an ambiguous impact on the optimal number of reserves. Simulation modeling of floral diversity in a tropical timber concession reveals that the resolution of this ambiguity depends on spatial distributions of the populations of tree species: whether or not they are spatially aggregated (clumped). The impact of biodiversity price on optimal reserve number remains analytically ambiguous when enforcement costs are not negligible. Multiple reserves being economically superior to a single reserve now requires, in addition to aggregation, a biodiversity price that is sufficiently high to offset the effects of enforcement costs. Most of our simulation scenarios generate threshold biodiversity prices that do not exceed a leading estimate of the marginal value of a higher plant species in the bioprospecting literature. Several smaller reserves evidently can be economically superior to a single larger one even in the presence of enforcement costs.      

Alternative targets and economic efficiency of selecting protected areas for biodiversity conservation in boreal forest

We examine the relative merits of alternative forest biodiversity targets, which give different weights to species according to their conservation status and abundance. A site selection framework is used for choosing the habitat-protection strategy that maximizes biodiversity subject to an upper bound on funding with six alternative conservation goals. By using Finnish data on old-growth forests, we found that alternative conservation goals yield different benefit-cost tradeoffs. Goals relying on complementarity between protected stands result in great marginal costs at a high conservation level. Therefore, under these conditions it may not be economically efficient to establish a large conservation network to protect all species in a given area. In contrast, a large conservation network is more likely to be justified when the habitat-protection strategy focuses on species abundance. The trade-offs between alternative objectives are explicitly measured by incrementally varying the weights given to the species. We found that the targets for all species representation and species abundance can largely be met simultaneously. Protecting red-listed species reduces overall species coverage and species abundance particularly at low budget levels.