A large part of the literature analyzing the links between biodiversity conservation and community development assumes that nature-based tourism managed by indigenous communities will result not only in conservation of natural resources but also in increased development. In practice, indigenous communities have often failed to implement successful ecotourism projects due to a combination of factors, including isolation and a lack of financial resources, management skills, and infrastructure. Based on a review of experiences, we analyze the complex interaction among the factors shaping the success and failure of ecotourism experiences in indigenous communities, and we stress the need for a better approach to indigenous-based ecotourism. Moreover, use of complementary economics instruments and marketing of so-called charismatic species may be crucial elements for maximizing revenues of the ecotourism activities.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

A great deal of biodiversity can be found in private forests, and protecting it requires taking into consideration the preferences of key stakeholders. In this study, we examine and compare the valuation of forest attributes across the general public, private non-industrial forest owners and forest officials in Sweden by conducting a choice experiment. Our results indicate that citizens have a positive valuation of biodiversity protection. Moreover, their valuation is statistically higher than those of forest owners, implying that there is room for compensation. Interestingly, our results suggest that both forest owners and forest officials have a strong orientation towards production, with higher valuation than the general public of the common management practice of similar age and clear felling. Even though the Swedish Forestry Act regards production and environmental goals as equally important, we find that forest officials prefer management practices that promote production rather than biodiversity protection.

We examine the choice of policy instrument price, quantity, or a mix of the two when two pollutants are regulated and firms' abatement costs are private information. A key parameter that affects this choice is the technological externality between the abatement efforts involved, i.e., whether they are substitutes or complements. If they are complements, a mix policy instrument with a tax on one pollutant and a quota on the other is sometime preferable, even if the pollutants are identical in terms of benefits and costs of abatement. Yet, if they are substitutes, the mix policy is dominated by taxes or quotas.

Drained peatlands are hotspots for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which could be mitigated by rewetting and land use change. We performed an ecological/economic analysis of rewetting drained fertile peatlands in a hemiboreal climate using different land use strategies over 80 years. Vegetation, soil processes, and total GHG emissions were modeled using the CoupModel for four scenarios: (1) business as usual-Norway spruce with average soil water table of -40 cm; (2) willow with groundwater at -20 cm; (3) reed canary grass with groundwater at -10 cm; and (4) a fully rewetted peatland. The predictions were based on previous model calibrations with several high-resolution datasets consisting of water, heat, carbon, and nitrogen cycling. Spruce growth was calibrated by tree-ring data that extended the time period covered. The GHG balance of four scenarios, including vegetation and soil, were 4.7, 7.1, 9.1, and 6.2 Mg CO eq ha year , respectively. The total soil emissions (including litter and peat respiration CO + N O + CH ) were 33.1, 19.3, 15.3, and 11.0 Mg CO eq ha year , respectively, of which the peat loss contributed 35%, 24%, and 7% of the soil emissions for the three drained scenarios, respectively. No peat was lost for the wet peatland. It was also found that draining increases vegetation growth, but not as drastically as peat respiration does. The cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is sensitive to time frame, discount rate, and carbon price. Our results indicate that the net benefit was greater with a somewhat higher soil water table and when the peatland was vegetated with willow and reed canary grass (Scenarios 2 and 3). We conclude that saving peat and avoiding methane release using fairly wet conditions can significantly reduce GHG emissions, and that this strategy should be considered for land use planning and policy-making.

No abstract