[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crs/wpaper/2019-25.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ecological compensation: how much and where?

Author

Listed:
  • Pascal GASTINEAU

    (IFSTTAR, AME, EASE, Bouguenais, France.)

  • Pascal MOSSAY

    (School of Economics and Trade, Kyungpook National University, Korea. CORE, Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium.)

  • Emmanuel TAUGOURDEAU

    (CNRS, CREST, ENSAE, Ecole Polytechnique, ENS Paris-Saclay, Institut Polytechnique de Paris,F-91128 Palaiseau ,France.)

Abstract
We propose a spatial framework to study ecological compensation. The policy-maker implements a No Net Loss policy that meets the No Worse-Off principle as well as a location constraint on the offset. This determines both the location and the level of compensation that minimize the total cost of restoration. We describe the additional ecological cost induced by the No Worse-Off principle and how the spatial distribution of individuals, the environment and land costs affect the compensation location. The location constraint is shown to introduce a trade-off between the compensation cost and inequality.

Suggested Citation

  • Pascal GASTINEAU & Pascal MOSSAY & Emmanuel TAUGOURDEAU, 2019. "Ecological compensation: how much and where?," Working Papers 2019-25, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    • Handle: RePEc:crs:wpaper:2019-25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://crest.science/RePEc/wpstorage/2019-25.pdf
    File Function: CREST working paper version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vaissière, Anne-Charlotte & Quétier, Fabien & Calvet, Coralie & Levrel, Harold & Wunder, Sven, 2020. "Biodiversity offsets and payments for environmental services: Clarifying the family ties," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    2. Michael Burton & Abbie Rogers & Claire Richert, 2017. "Community acceptance of biodiversity offsets: evidence from a choice experiment," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 61(1), pages 95-114, January.
    3. Gastineau, Pascal & Taugourdeau, Emmanuelle, 2014. "Compensating for environmental damages," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 150-161.
    4. Fujita,Masahisa, 1991. "Urban Economic Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521396455.
    5. Anne-Charlotte Vaissière & Léa Tardieu & Fabien Quétier & Sébastien Roussel, 2018. "Corrigendum: Preferences for biodiversity offset contracts on arable land: a choice experiment study with farmers," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 45(4), pages 675-675.
    6. Pascal Gastineau, 2014. "Compensating for environmental damages," Post-Print hal-00968954, HAL.
    7. Nicholas E. Flores & Jennifer Thacher, 2002. "Money, Who Needs It? Natural Resource Damage Assessment," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 20(2), pages 171-178, April.
    8. Laura J. Sonter & Jeremy S. Simmonds & James E. M. Watson & Julia P. G. Jones & Joseph M. Kiesecker & Hugo M. Costa & Leon Bennun & Stephen Edwards & Hedley S. Grantham & Victoria F. Griffiths & Kenda, 2020. "Local conditions and policy design determine whether ecological compensation can achieve No Net Loss goals," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    9. Oliver Taherzadeh & Peter Howley, 2018. "No net loss of what, for whom?: stakeholder perspectives to Biodiversity Offsetting in England," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 1807-1830, August.
    10. Yamaguchi, Rintaro & Shah, Payal, 2020. "Spatial discounting of ecosystem services," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    11. Zafonte, Matthew & Hampton, Steve, 2007. "Exploring welfare implications of resource equivalency analysis in natural resource damage assessments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 134-145, February.
    12. Hannon, Bruce, 1994. "Sense of place: geographic discounting by people, animals and plants," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 157-174, July.
    13. Anne-Charlotte Vaissière & Léa Tardieu & Fabien Quétier & Sébastien Roussel, 2018. "Preferences for biodiversity offset contracts on arable land: a choice experiment study with farmers," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 45(4), pages 553-582.
    14. Richert, Claire & Rogers, Abbie & Burton, Michael, 2015. "Measuring the extent of a Social License to Operate: The influence of marine biodiversity offsets in the oil and gas sector in Western Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 121-129.
    15. 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.
    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. Zhidong Li & Boru Su & Moucheng Liu, 2022. "Research Progress on the Theory and Practice of Grassland Eco-Compensation in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    2. Rebotier, Julien, 2023. "Oil offsets in Esmeraldas (Ecuador) When the promotion of development shores up unequal risk situations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    3. Barral, Stéphanie & Guillet, Fanny, 2023. "Preserving peri-urban land through biodiversity offsets: Between market transactions and planning regulations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    4. Yang, Qiuyue, 2023. "Do vertical ecological compensation policies promote green economic development: A case study of the transfer payments policy for China’s National Key Ecological Function Zones," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 47(4).
    5. Li, Meng & Lu, Shibao & Li, Wei, 2022. "Stakeholders′ ecological-economic compensation of river basin: A multi-stage dynamic game analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    6. Xue, Jibin & Lang, Jiahui & Guan, Yanjun & Lu, Shibao, 2023. "Design and measurement of small-scale regional ecological compensation model," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1392-1405.

    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. Kyriazi, Zacharoula & Lejano, Raul & Maes, Frank & Degraer, Steven, 2015. "Bargaining a net gain compensation agreement between a marine renewable energy developer and a marine protected area manager," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 40-48.
    2. Sponagel, Christian & Bendel, Daniela & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Weber, Tobias Karl David & Gayler, Sebastian & Streck, Thilo & Bahrs, Enno, 2022. "Integrated assessment of regional approaches for biodiversity offsetting in urban-rural areas – A future based case study from Germany using arable land as an example," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    3. Cole, Scott & Hasselström, Linus & Jönsson, K. Ingemar & Lindblom, Erik & Söderqvist, Tore, 2022. "Expert guidance for environmental compensation is consistent with public preferences – Evidence from a choice experiment in Sweden," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Christian Sponagel & Andre Raichle & Martin Maier & Susanne Zhuber-Okrog & Ulrike Greifenhagen-Kauffmann & Elisabeth Angenendt & Enno Bahrs, 2021. "Expert-Based Maps as a Regional Planning Tool Supporting Nature Conservation and Production-Integrated Compensation—A German Case Study on Biodiversity Offsets," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-21, August.
    5. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Defrancesco, Edi & Gatto, Paola & Rosato, Paolo, 2014. "A ‘component-based’ approach to discounting for natural resource damage assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 1-9.
    7. Pascal Gastineau & Emmanuelle Taugourdeau, 2012. "Which compensation for whom?," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 12080, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    8. Vaissière, Anne-Charlotte & Quétier, Fabien & Calvet, Coralie & Levrel, Harold & Wunder, Sven, 2020. "Biodiversity offsets and payments for environmental services: Clarifying the family ties," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    9. Desvousges, William H. & Gard, Nicholas & Michael, Holly J. & Chance, Anne D., 2018. "Habitat and Resource Equivalency Analysis: A Critical Assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 74-89.
    10. Ouvrard, Benjamin & Abildtrup, Jens & Bostedt, Göran & Stenger, Anne, 2019. "Determinants of forest owners attitudes towards wood ash recycling in Sweden - Can the nutrient cycle be closed?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Gastineau, Pascal & Taugourdeau, Emmanuelle, 2014. "Compensating for environmental damages," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 150-161.
    12. Philippe Coent, 2023. "Payment for environmental services related to aquifers: a review of specific issues and existing programmes," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 273-310, December.
    13. Bougherara, Douadia & Lapierre, Margaux & Préget, Raphaële & Sauquet, Alexandre, 2021. "Do farmers prefer increasing, decreasing, or stable payments in Agri-environmental schemes?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    14. Nthambi, Mary & Wätzold, Frank & Markova-Nenova, Nonka, 2018. "Quantifying benefit losses from poor governance of climate change adaptation projects: A discrete choice experiment with farmers in Kenya," MPRA Paper 94678, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    16. Marie Asma Ben-Othmen & Mariia Ostapchuk, 2023. "How diverse are farmers’ preferences for large-scale grassland ecological restoration? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 341-375, December.
    17. Johansson, Per-Olov & Kriström, Bengt, 2012. "On a New Approach to Social Evaluations of Environmental Projects," CERE Working Papers 2012:4, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    18. Romy Greiner, 2023. "Examining Participation in and Supply of Private Land for Voluntary Conservation in Australia’s Tropical Savannas: A Discrete-Continuous Choice Experiment," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Philippe Le Coent & Coralie Calvet, 2016. "Challenges of achieving biodiversity offsetting through agri-environmental schemes: evidence from an empirical study," Working Papers 16-10, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier.
    20. Kontogianni, Areti & Luck, Gary W. & Skourtos, Michalis, 2010. "Valuing ecosystem services on the basis of service-providing units: A potential approach to address the 'endpoint problem' and improve stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1479-1487, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ecological compensation; no net loss policy; welfare; inequality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I3 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • R1 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics

    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:crs:wpaper:2019-25. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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: Secretariat General (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crestfr.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.