On the cost-effective temporal allocation of credits in conservation offsets when habitat restoration takes takes time and is uncertain

Drechsler, Martin (2021): On the cost-effective temporal allocation of credits in conservation offsets when habitat restoration takes takes time and is uncertain.

Abstract

Tradable permits or offsetting schemes are increasingly used as an instrument for the conservation of biodiversity on private lands. Since the restoration of degraded land often involves uncertainties and time lags, conservation biologists have strongly recommended that credits in conservation offset schemes should awarded only with the completion of the restoration process. Otherwise, as is claimed, is the instrument likely to fail on the objective of no net loss in species habitat and biodiversity. What is ignored in these arguments, however, is that such a scheme design may incur higher economic costs than a design in which credits are already awarded at the initiation of the restoration process. In the present paper a generic agent-based ecological-economic simulation model is developed to explore different pros and cons of the two scheme designs, in particular their cost-effectiveness. The model considers spatially heterogeneous and dynamic conservation costs, risk aversion and time preferences in the landowners, as well as uncertainty in the duration and the success of restoration process. It turns out that, especially under fast change of the conservation costs, awarding credits at the initiation of restoration can be more cost-effective than awarding them with completion of restoration.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: agent-based modelling, conservation offsets, ecological-economic modelling, habitat restoration, uncertainty
• Subjects: Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture > Q15 - Land Ownership and Tenure ; Land Reform ; Land Use ; Irrigation ; Agriculture and Environment; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q57 - Ecological Economics: Ecosystem Services ; Biodiversity Conservation ; Bioeconomics ; Industrial Ecology

References

Ando, A., Camm, J., Polasky, S., Solow, A., 1998. Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation. Science 279, 2126–8.

Begon, M., Townsend, C.R., Harper, J.L., 2005. Ecology: From Individuals to Ecosystems. Wiley-Blackwell, 4th ed.

Bekessy, S.A., Wintle, B.A., Lindenmayer, D.B., Mccarthy, M.A., Colyvan, M., Burgman, M.A., Possingham, H.P., 2010. The biodiversity bank cannot be a lending bank. Conservation Letters 3, 151–158.

Bull, J.W., Brownlie, S., 2015. The transition from No Net Loss to a Net Gain of biodiversity is far from trivial. Oryx 51, 53–59.

Bull, J.W., Lloyd, S.P., Strange, N., 2017. Implementation gap between the theory and practice of biodiversity offset multipliers. Conservation Letters 10, 656–669.

Bull, J.W., Strange, N., 2018. The global extent of biodiversity offset implementation under no net loss policies. Nature Sustainability 1, 790–798.

Chomitz, K.M., 2004. Transferable development rights and forest protection: An exploratory analysis. International Regional Science Review 27, 348–73.

Cohen, C., 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Taylor & Francis, 2nd ed.

Derissen, S., Quaas, M.F., 2013. Combining performance-based and action-based payments to provide environmental goods under uncertainty. Ecological Economics 85, 77–84.

de Vries, F.P., Hanley, N., 2016. Incentive-based policy design for pollution control and biodiversity conservation: A review. Environmental and Resource Economics 63, 687–702.

DeWoody, Y. D., Feng, Z. L. & Swihart, R. K. 2005. Merging spatial and temporal structure within a metapopulation model. The American Naturalist 166, 42–55.

Drechsler, M., Hartig, F., 2011. Conserving biodiversity with tradable permits under changing conservation costs and habitat restoration time lags. Ecological Economics 70, 533–541.

Drechsler, M., Johst, K., 2010. Rapid viability analysis for metapopulations in dynamic habitat networks. Proceedings of the Royal Society B – Biological Sciences 277, 1889–1897.

Drechsler, M., Wätzold, F., 2009. Applying tradable permits to biodiversity conservation: Effects of space-dependent conservation benefits and cost heterogeneity on habitat allocation. Ecological Economics 68, 1083–92.

Eeckhoudt, L., Schlesinger, H., Gollier, C., 2005. Economic and Financial Decisions Under Risk. Princeton University Press.

Engel, S., Pagiola, S., Wunder, S., 2008. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecological Economics 65, 663–674.

Fell, H., MacKenzie, I.A., Pizer, W.A., 2012. Prices versus quantities versus bankable quantities. Resource and Energy Economics 34, 607–623.

Hanski, I., 1999. Metapopulation Ecology. Oxford University Press.

Hartig, F., Drechsler, M., 2009. Smart spatial incentives for market-based conservation. Biological Conservation 142 (4), 779–788.

Innes, R., 2003. Stochastic pollution, costly sanctions, and optimality of emission permit banking. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 45, 546–568.

Kangas, J., Ollikainen, M., 2019. Economic insights in ecological compensations: Market analysis with an empirical application to the Finnish economy. Ecological Economics 159, 54–67.

Levrel, H., Scemama, P., Vaissère, A.-C., 2017. Should we be wary of mitigation banking? Evidence regarding the risks associated with this wetland offset arrangement in Florida. Ecological Economics 135, 136–149.

Maron, M., Hobbs, R.J., Moilanen, A., Matthews, J.W., Christie, K., Gardner, T.A., Keith, D.A., Lindenmayer, D.B., McAlpine, C.A., 2012. Faustian bargains? Restoration realities in the context of biodiversity offset policies. Biological Conservation 155, 141–148.

Moilanen, A., van Teeffelen, A.J.A., Ben-Haim, Y., Ferrier, S., 2009. How much compensation is enough? A framework for incorporating uncertainty and time discounting when calculating offset ratios for impacted habitat. Restoration Ecology 17, 470–478.

Needham, K., Dallimer, M., de Vries, F., Armsworth, P., Hanley, N., 2020. Understanding the performance of biodiversity offset markets: evidence from an integrated ecological-economic model. Paper presented at the annual EAERE conference 2020. URL: https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/Media_713841_smxx.pdf.

Panayotou, T. 1994. Conservation of biodiversity and economic development: The concept of transferable development rights. Environmental and Resource Economics 4, 91–110.

Parkhurst, G.M., Shogren, J.F., Crocker, T., 2016. Tradable set-aside requirements (TSARs): Conserving spatially dependent environmental amenities. Environmental and Resource Economics 63, 719–44.

Polasky, S., Nelson, E., Camm, J., Csuti, B., Fackler, P., Lonsdorff, E., Montgomery, C., White, D., Arthur, J., Garber-Yonts, B., Haight, R., Kagan, J., Starfield, A., Tobalske, C., 2008. Where to put things? Spatial land management to sustain biodiversity and economic returns. Biological Conservation 141, 1505–1524.

Saltelli, A., Ratto, M., Andres, T., Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., Gatelli, D., Saisana, M., Tarantola, S., 2008. Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer. John Wiley & Sons.

Tietenberg, T.H., 2006. Emissions Trading: Principles and Practice. Routledge, 2nd ed.

Xu, L., Deng, S.-J., Thomas, V.M., 2016. Carbon emission permit price volatility reduction through financial options. Energy Economics 53, 248–260.

zu Ermgassen, S.O.S.E., Maron, M., Walker, C.M.C., Gordon, A., Simmonds, J.S., Strange, N., Robertson, M., Bull, J.W., 2020. The hidden biodiversity risks of increasing flexibility in biodiversity offset trades. Biological Conservation 252, 108861.