The hitchhiker's guide to generic ecological-economic modelling of land-use-based biodiversity conservation policies

Gaps in biodiversity conservation management within the Conservation Area that are the responsibility of the central government and outside the Conservation Areas or as the Essential Ecosystems Area (EEA) which are the authority of the Regional Government, have caused various spatial conflicts between wildlife /wild plants and land management activities. Several obstacles faced by the Local Government to conduct its authority to manage (EEA), caused the number and area of EEA determined by the Local Government to be still low. At present only 703,000 ha are determined from the 67 million ha indicated by EEA. This study aims to overview biodiversity conservation policies by local governments and company perceptions in implementing conservation policies and formulate strategies for optimizing the role of Local Governments. From the results of this study, there has not been found any legal umbrella for the implementation of Law number 23/ 2014 related to the conservation of important ecosystems in the regions. This regulatory vacuum leaves the local government in a dilemma for continuing various conservation programs. By using a SWOT to the internal strategic environment and external stratetegic environment of the Environment and Forestry Service, Bengkulu Province , as well as using an analysis of company perceptions of the conservation policies regulatary , this study has been formulated a “survival strategy” through collaboration between the Central Government, Local Governments and the Private Sector to optimize the role of Local Government’s to establish EEA in the regions.Keywords: Management gaps, Essential Ecosystems Area (EEA), Conservation Areas, SWOT analysis and perception analysis

Download Full-text

Conservation and privatization decisions in land reform of New Zealand’s high country

Environmental Conservation ◽

10.1017/s0376892921000126 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-9

Author(s):

Adena R Rissman ◽

Molly C Daniels ◽

Peter Tait ◽

Xiaojing Xing ◽

Ann L Brower

Keyword(s):

Land Use ◽

Economic Development ◽

Biodiversity Conservation ◽

Land Reform ◽

Private Land ◽

Conservation Easement ◽

Land Reforms ◽

Lower Productivity ◽

Ecological Values

Summary Neoliberal land reforms to increase economic development have important implications for biodiversity conservation. This paper investigates land reform in New Zealand’s South Island that divides leased state-owned stations (ranches) with private grazing leases into state-owned conservation land, private land owned by the former leaseholder and private land under protective covenant (similar to conservation easement). Conserved lands had less threatened vegetation, lower productivity, less proximity to towns and steeper slopes than privatized lands. Covenants on private land were more common in intermediate zones with moderate land-use productivity and slope. Lands identified with ecological or recreational ‘significant inherent values’ were more likely to shift into conserved or covenant status. Yet among lands with identified ecological values, higher-threat areas were more likely to be privatized than lower-threat areas. This paper makes two novel contributions: (1) quantitatively examining the role of scientific recommendations about significant inherent values in land reform outcomes; and (2) examining the use of conservation covenants on privatized land. To achieve biodiversity goals, it is critical to avoid or prevent the removal of land-use restrictions beyond protected areas.

Download Full-text

An ecological-economic modelling procedure to design compensation payments for the efficient spatio-temporal allocation of species protection measures

Ecological Economics ◽

10.1016/s0921-8009(02)00019-8 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 41 (1) ◽

pp. 37-49 ◽

Cited By ~ 57

Author(s):

Karin Johst ◽

Martin Drechsler ◽

Frank Wätzold

Keyword(s):

Economic Modelling ◽

Protection Measures ◽

Species Protection ◽

Ecological Economic ◽

Modelling Procedure ◽

Spatio Temporal ◽

Compensation Payments

Download Full-text

Study on the ecological-economic effects of rice-aquatic coculture land use pattern: The case of rice-crayfish coculture in Hubei province

自然资源学报 ◽

10.31497/zrzyxb.20211209 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 36 (12) ◽

pp. 3131

Author(s):

Shu-hao TAN ◽

Qing LIU ◽

Qing-yong ZHANG

Keyword(s):

Land Use ◽

Hubei Province ◽

Economic Effects ◽

Land Use Pattern ◽

Ecological Economic ◽

Use Pattern

Download Full-text

Reviewing the role of habitat banking and tradable development rights in the conservation policy mix

Environmental Conservation ◽

10.1017/s0376892915000089 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 42 (4) ◽

pp. 294-305 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

RUI SANTOS ◽

CHRISTOPH SCHRÖTER-SCHLAACK ◽

PAULA ANTUNES ◽

IRENE RING ◽

PEDRO CLEMENTE

Keyword(s):

Land Use ◽

Biodiversity Conservation ◽

Land Use Planning ◽

Social Impact ◽

Policy Instruments ◽

Conservation Policy ◽

Time Lags ◽

Policy Mix ◽

Biodiversity Offsets ◽

Development Rights

SUMMARYHabitat banking and tradable development rights (TDR) have gained considerable currency as a way of achieving ‘no net loss’ of biodiversity and of reconciling nature conservation with economic development goals. This paper reviews the use of these instruments for biodiversity conservation and assesses their roles in the policy mix. The two instruments are compared in terms of effectiveness, cost effectiveness, social impact, institutional context and legal requirements. The role in the policy mix is discussed highlighting sequential relationships, as well as complementarities or synergies, redundancy and conflicts with other instruments, such as biodiversity offsets and land-use zoning.Habitat banking and TDR have the potential to contribute to biodiversity conservation objectives and attain cost-effective solutions with positive social impacts on local communities and landowners. They can also help to create a new mind-set more favourable to public-private cooperation in biodiversity conservation. At the same time, these policy instruments face a number of theoretical and implementation challenges, such as additionality and equivalence of offsets, endurance of land-use planning regulations, monitoring of offset performance, or time lags between restoration and resulting conservation benefits.A clear, enforceable regulatory approach is a prerequisite for the success of habitat banking and TDR. In return, these schemes provide powerful incentives for compliance with regulatory norms and ensure a more equitable allocation of the benefits and costs of land-use controls and conservation. Environmentally harmful subsidies in other policy sectors as well as alternative offset options, however, reduce the attractiveness and effectiveness of these instruments. Thus, the overall performance of habitat banking and TDR hinges on how they are integrated into the biodiversity conservation policy mix and fine-tuned with other sectoral policies.

Download Full-text