Fair payments for effective environmental conservation

Abstract

Global efforts for biodiversity protection and land use-based greenhouse gas mitigation call for increases in the effectiveness and efficiency of environmental conservation. Incentive-based policy instruments are key tools for meeting these goals, yet their effectiveness might be undermined by such factors as social norms regarding whether payments are considered fair. We investigated the causal link between equity and conservation effort with a randomized real-effort experiment in forest conservation with 443 land users near a tropical forest national park in the Vietnamese Central Annamites, a global biodiversity hotspot. The experiment introduced unjustified payment inequality based on luck, in contradiction of local fairness norms that were measured through responses to vignettes. Payment inequality was perceived as less fair than payment equality. In agreement with our preregistered hypotheses, participants who were disadvantaged by unequal payments exerted significantly less conservation effort than other participants receiving the same payment under an equal distribution. No effect was observed for participants advantaged by inequality. Thus, equity effects on effort can have consequences for the effectiveness and efficiency of incentive-based conservation instruments. Furthermore, we show that women exerted substantially more conservation effort than men, and that increasing payment size unexpectedly reduced effort. This emphasizes the need to consider social comparisons, local equity norms, and gender in environmental policies using monetary incentives to motivate behavioral change.

Ensuring a Post-COVID Economic Agenda Tackles Global Biodiversity Loss

“…For example, burdens of environmental risk also tend to fall on those of lower income classes; poorer and minority communities often face ''pollution inequity,'' in that they are not only exposed to more pollution but their ecological footprints are smaller and they cause less pollution. 117 Inequality can also decrease people's motivation to participate in biodiversity conservation measures if they do not see the potential benefits of doing so, 118 and can undermine democratic decision-making to protect collective public goods. 119 Traditional policies to tackle inequality, such as fairer taxation, fees on wealth transfer, and other measures, can be combined with attention to biodiversity: for example, VAT on luxury goods with higher negative environmental costs.…”

Governance Innovations for forest ecosystem service provision – Insights from an EU-wide survey

“…To encounter this, a growing body of literature related to PES (e.g., Alpízar et al, 2017 ; Ferraro and Hanauer, 2014 ) and other incentive programs (e.g., Ashraf et al, 2014 ) points out that building non-monetary decision-making preferences into policy instruments can increase conservation efforts and people’s satisfaction with the transaction. Conversely, failing to do so can have unintended negative effects ( Loft et al, 2020 ; Loft et al, 2015 ).…”

Hubungan Lingkungan Kerja Fisik dan Beban Kerja Terhadap Kelelahan Kerja pada Pekerja Pabrik Kerupuk

“…Data dari ILO tahun 2018 menyatakan bahwa sejumlah 2 juta buruh tiap tahun mengakibatkan korban sebab kecelakaan kerja sebab faktor kelemahan/kelelahan. Menurut Teori Loss Causation Model model oleh Toft pada tahun 2020 yang menyebutkan faktor kelelahan ialah lantaran kecelakaan kerja (Loft, Gehrig, Salk, & Rommel, 2020). Kelelahan kerja adalah sebuah sistem untuk melindungi tubuh dari dampak yang tidak di inginkan sehingga dapat dilakukan pemulihan setelah istirahat (Hidayah, 2018).…”