The Experts below are selected from a list of 127722 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Alistair S. Jump - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Perspectives on Forest Conservation: building evidence at the frontier between policy and Conservation science
Biodiversity and Conservation, 2014Co-Authors: Georg Winkel, Alistair S. JumpAbstract:The Conservation and sustainable management of Forests is a topic of significant interest for scholars and policy makers alike. Yet, this is a multifaceted issue that raises important questions related to different societal and scientific perspectives, while values of the multiple services that Forest ecosystems deliver for society must also be taken into account. However, perspectives on Forest Conservation may differ with regard to region and scale. This paper summarizes the contributions of a special issue on Forest Conservation that brings together diverse disciplinary and regional perspectives. First, we explore the necessity for interdisciplinary perspectives on Forest Conservation, and particularly the urgent need to bridge between social and natural science views in order to better understand complex socio-ecological systems. Second, we discuss a variety of case studies on Forest Conservation in different spatial and socio-economic contexts. Third, we focus on the science-policy and science-management interface as the critical “zone” where knowledge about Forest Conservation is exchanged. Finally, we emphasize again the diversity of possible perspectives on the issue, and conclude by identifying some possible ways of thinking about issues such as integrative versus segregative Forest Conservation, and science-policy-management interactions.
Mika Rekola - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Non-market benefits of Forest Conservation in southern Finland
Environmental Science & Policy, 2003Co-Authors: Emmi Lehtonen, Jari Kuuluvainen, Eija Pouta, Mika RekolaAbstract:Abstract This study analyses Finnish citizens’ valuations of Forest Conservation programmes for southern Finland. Contingent valuation (CV) and choice experiment (CE) methods were applied. According to the CV results, 74% of respondents were prepared to pay for increased Conservation and 16% supported increased Conservation but were not willing to pay for it. A further 5% were indifferent and 5% supported a decrease in Forest Conservation. In CE, only 14% of respondents chose the present Conservation level in all eight choice tasks, indicating zero willingness-to-pay (WTP). Average WTP for increased biodiversity Conservation ranged from 60 to 223 € per household per year, depending on the described project and measurement method. In addition to costs per household, the number of conserved biotopes and endangered plant and animal species had an effect on the probability of support for increased Conservation. Aggregate WTP measures for different biodiversity Conservation programmes were compared with the suggested costs of the programmes.
Emmi Lehtonen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Framework for cost-benefit analysis of Forest Conservation in southern Finland
2005Co-Authors: Emmi LehtonenAbstract:This paper provides a theoretical model for cost-benefit analysis of increased Forest Conservation in southern Finland. First, the cost-benefit rule is derived to make visible the exact components that should be considered in the cost-benefit analysis. In a second part we apply a multimarket equilibrium model to connect the theoretical results of cost-benefit rule to emp irically estimable models. Results indicate that the Forest owners benefit from Forest Conservation in addition to the valuation of amenity values, also as producers gaining producers surplus from Forest biodiversity production. If industry can import wood to substitute the decrease in the domestic supply, then their losses are not significant. If, however, importing is impossible, effect o increased Conservation on producers surplus of Forest industry may be substantial. The presented models are static, but possibility to apply a dynamic model could be examined.
-
Non-market benefits of Forest Conservation in southern Finland
Environmental Science & Policy, 2003Co-Authors: Emmi Lehtonen, Jari Kuuluvainen, Eija Pouta, Mika RekolaAbstract:Abstract This study analyses Finnish citizens’ valuations of Forest Conservation programmes for southern Finland. Contingent valuation (CV) and choice experiment (CE) methods were applied. According to the CV results, 74% of respondents were prepared to pay for increased Conservation and 16% supported increased Conservation but were not willing to pay for it. A further 5% were indifferent and 5% supported a decrease in Forest Conservation. In CE, only 14% of respondents chose the present Conservation level in all eight choice tasks, indicating zero willingness-to-pay (WTP). Average WTP for increased biodiversity Conservation ranged from 60 to 223 € per household per year, depending on the described project and measurement method. In addition to costs per household, the number of conserved biotopes and endangered plant and animal species had an effect on the probability of support for increased Conservation. Aggregate WTP measures for different biodiversity Conservation programmes were compared with the suggested costs of the programmes.
Georg Winkel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Perspectives on Forest Conservation: building evidence at the frontier between policy and Conservation science
Biodiversity and Conservation, 2014Co-Authors: Georg Winkel, Alistair S. JumpAbstract:The Conservation and sustainable management of Forests is a topic of significant interest for scholars and policy makers alike. Yet, this is a multifaceted issue that raises important questions related to different societal and scientific perspectives, while values of the multiple services that Forest ecosystems deliver for society must also be taken into account. However, perspectives on Forest Conservation may differ with regard to region and scale. This paper summarizes the contributions of a special issue on Forest Conservation that brings together diverse disciplinary and regional perspectives. First, we explore the necessity for interdisciplinary perspectives on Forest Conservation, and particularly the urgent need to bridge between social and natural science views in order to better understand complex socio-ecological systems. Second, we discuss a variety of case studies on Forest Conservation in different spatial and socio-economic contexts. Third, we focus on the science-policy and science-management interface as the critical “zone” where knowledge about Forest Conservation is exchanged. Finally, we emphasize again the diversity of possible perspectives on the issue, and conclude by identifying some possible ways of thinking about issues such as integrative versus segregative Forest Conservation, and science-policy-management interactions.
Sven Wunder - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
National and subnational Forest Conservation policies: What works, what doesn’t
2018Co-Authors: Jan Börner, Thales A. P. West, Allen Blackman, Daniela A. Miteva, Katharine R. E. Sims, Sven WunderAbstract:Key messagesNational and subnational policies contribute to Forest Conservation, but their effectiveness is low on average, especially in the tropics.No particular policy instrument stands out as a ‘silver bullet’. Achieving the multiple objectives of REDD+ will require policy mixes that are sensitive to local contexts.More rigorous evidence on the effectiveness of Forest Conservation policies is needed, especially from Africa.
-
Emerging Evidence on the Effectiveness of Tropical Forest Conservation.
PloS one, 2016Co-Authors: Jan Börner, Kathy Baylis, Esteve Corbera, Driss Ezzine-de-blas, Paul J. Ferraro, Jordi Honey-rosés, Renaud Lapeyre, U. Martin Persson, Sven WunderAbstract:The PLOS ONE Collection "Measuring Forest Conservation effectiveness" brings together a series of studies that evaluate the effectiveness of tropical Forest Conservation policies and programs with the goal of measuring Conservation success and associated co-benefits. This overview piece describes the geographic and methodological scope of these studies, as well as the policy instruments covered in the Collection as of June 2016. Focusing on Forest cover change, we systematically compare the Conservation effects estimated by the studies and discuss them in the light of previous findings in the literature. Nine studies estimated that annual Conservation impacts on Forest cover were below one percent, with two exceptions in Mexico and Indonesia. Differences in effect sizes are not only driven by the choice of Conservation measures. One key lesson from the studies is the need to move beyond the current scientific focus of estimating average effects of undifferentiated Conservation programs. The specific elements of the program design and the implementation context are equally important factors for understanding the effectiveness of Conservation programs. Particularly critical will be a better understanding of the causal mechanisms through which Conservation programs have impacts. To achieve this understanding we need advances in both theory and methods.
-
The implementation costs of Forest Conservation policies in Brazil
Ecological Economics, 2016Co-Authors: Felipe Arias Fogliano De Souza Cunha, Jan Börner, Sven Wunder, Carlos Alberto Nunes Cosenza, André F.p. LucenaAbstract:Abstract Tropical Forest Conservation is considered a low-cost option for climate change mitigation. But mitigation cost assessments have featured opportunity costs, neglecting policy implementation costs. Here we use official data to identify the Brazilian federal government's operational and institutional budgets related to Forest Conservation policies implemented from 2000 to 2014. We distinguish the allocated and executed budgets of these policies, and provide scenario-based estimates of their cost-effectiveness. On average, Brazil spent US$ 1 billion/year on Forest Conservation policies at the federal level. Brazil's substantial reduction in annual Forest loss after 2004 was accompanied by a higher operational budget execution of disincentive-based policy instruments, and an absolute increase in both allocated and executed institutional budgets. The post-2004 successful mitigation effort represented additional implementation costs to the Brazilian federal government of US$ 308–923/ha of avoided deForestation, or US$ 0.87–2.60/tCO2 of avoided emissions. Factoring in also approximate municipal and state expenditures, these costs increase to US$ 385–1153/ha or US$ 1.09–3.25/tCO2. We conclude that implementations costs are non-trivial in size, including compared to estimates of land users' opportunity costs. This has important implications for REDD + policy design, in the sense that implementation costs need to be adequately considered.