2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2009.11.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An agglomeration payment for cost-effective biodiversity conservation in spatially structured landscapes

Abstract: Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
63
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 130 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
4
63
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Agglomeration bonuses (Parkhurst et al, 2002;Warziniack et al, 2007) may ensure coordinated management but do not necessarily require land manager cooperation or buy-in for the joint contribution, since applications can be prepared by consultants without the need for individuals to ever meet and talk. In one case study, Drechsler et al (2010) found that agglomeration bonuses led to cost savings of up to 70% compared to homogeneous payments where payment rates were not linked to the way in which habitats were configured across the landscape. However, Windle et al (2009) and Reeson et al (2011) warned that, where such systems operate via auctions, they may be exploited by land owners, located in strategic positions, who may be able to demand high payments for their involvement, reducing the efficiency of the scheme.…”
Section: Overcoming Challenges To Collaborationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Agglomeration bonuses (Parkhurst et al, 2002;Warziniack et al, 2007) may ensure coordinated management but do not necessarily require land manager cooperation or buy-in for the joint contribution, since applications can be prepared by consultants without the need for individuals to ever meet and talk. In one case study, Drechsler et al (2010) found that agglomeration bonuses led to cost savings of up to 70% compared to homogeneous payments where payment rates were not linked to the way in which habitats were configured across the landscape. However, Windle et al (2009) and Reeson et al (2011) warned that, where such systems operate via auctions, they may be exploited by land owners, located in strategic positions, who may be able to demand high payments for their involvement, reducing the efficiency of the scheme.…”
Section: Overcoming Challenges To Collaborationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This generates context dependent responses of management interventions (Tscharntke et al, 2012). For example, populations of serviceproviding units may only maintain viable sizes given that enough habitats are preserved across multiple land-owners (Drechsler et al, 2010). Hence, to optimize ecosystem service provision at larger spatial scales, the identification of conditions under which land-owners benefit from co-operation will be an important future topic in ecosystem services research (e.g., Stallman, 2011;Sutherland et al, 2012;Cong et al, 2014).…”
Section: Challenge 4: Considering Appropriate Spatial and Temporal Scmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model allows for all sorts of connectivity assumptions, but in the simulations in the following sections we assume queen contiguity, that is, we allow for both horizontal and diagonal connections (cf. Parkhurst et al 2002, Drechsler et al 2010, Iftekhar and Tisdell 2014.…”
Section: A Corridor Auction Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, ecological efficiency might not be reached when procurement from the lowest bidders delivers a fragmented outcome and crucial pathways to connect different habitat patches are not formed (Margules and Pressey 2000, Williams and Snyder 2005, Conrad et al 2012. 1 Mechanisms in which the payment received for conserving a plot depends on the number of retired neighboring plots (so-called agglomeration bonuses) can help reduce this potential fragmentation problem (Parkhurst et al 2002, Parkhurst and Shogren 2007, Wätzold and Drechsler 2005, Drechsler et al 2010. 2 Experimental studies on the effectiveness and efficiency of agglomeration bonuses typically use fixed corridor values and opportunity costs, and they also impose that participation is mandatory (cf.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%