Improving the Policy Mix: The Scope for Market‐Based Instruments in EU Biodiversity Policy

Abstract

The European Union (EU) is still lagging behind its objective to halt the loss of biodiversity. Current research shows promising ways to improve the cost‐effectiveness of existing policy mixes for habitat protection through the introduction of market‐based instruments. To harness the potential of these ideas for the pursuit of the EU's biodiversity conservation objective during upcoming changes in the policy landscape and to identify the optimal allocation for each instrument, it is necessary to understand the scope for the introduction of market‐based instruments across all relevant fields of EU policymaking. So far, there are, however, few systematic analyses satisfying this purpose. This article analyzes existing instruments under the Birds and the Habitats Directives and the Common Agricultural Policy, and the de lege and de facto constraints and opportunities that result from these policies for the introduction of additional market‐based instruments. The analysis shows that the distribution of authority between the EU and its member states gives each of them different comparative advantages for the introduction of market‐based instruments in the different policy fields. These provide various opportunities for the improvement of the existing policy mix for habitat protection. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Policy Mixes and their Alignment over Time: Patching and stretching in the oil sands reclamation regime in Alberta, Canada

“…There are also key linkages between these categories of ecosystem services and components of human well‐being such as the ‘basic material for a good life, security, health, security, and freedom of choice and action (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment ). Managing complex multi‐dimensional policies of this kind to provide for human well‐being and conserve ecosystems requires a mix of policy instruments to address the multiple attributes of the goals and objectives involved (Ring and Schroeter‐Schlaack, ; Klassert and Möckel, ). These policy mixes or portfolios feature the use of combinations of different kinds of policy tool – market based, hierarchical, network and others – whose exact configuration changes from location to location.…”

“…mix of policy instruments to address the multiple attributes of the goals and objectives involved (Ring and Schroeter-Schlaack, 2011;Klassert and Möckel, 2013). These policy mixes or portfolios feature the use of combinations of different kinds of policy toolmarket based, hierarchical, network and otherswhose exact configuration changes from location to location.…”

Payments for Ecosystem Services as a Policy Mix: Demonstrating the institutional analysis and development framework on conservation policy instruments

“…Policy mix analysis is also an emerging area of analysis in the journal of Environmental Policy and Governance (Klassert and Möckel, ; Jordan et al , ; Kivimaa and Virkamäki, ; Mahzouni, ; dos Santos et al , ). Klassert and Möckel () analyse the constraints and opportunities for introducing further market‐based instruments in conjunction with existing policies under the EU Birds and Habitats Directive and Common Agricultural Policy. Jordan et al () evaluate a federal‐level policy mix to overcome the barriers of small and medium‐sized enterprises to resource efficiency innovation in Germany.…”

Evaluation of the Operational Environment Factors of Nature Conservation Policy Implementation: Cases of Selected EU and Non-EU Countries

“…These innovative financing instruments are also suggested by the European Commission, although such instruments are covering a rather small portion of the total financing requirements. This claim for innovative financing mechanisms is also supported by the scientific literature [16,75]. In analyzed EU candidate and potential candidate countries, with the EU Accession, huge financial resources have become available for different nature conservation-related projects.…”

“…The responsibility of implementing and financing the Natura 2000 lays with the EU member states. Therefore, national public funding is the most frequently mentioned source of financing Natura 2000 objectives and measures in all analyzed EU member countries as well as the scientific literature [9,23,30,32,75]. Additionally, the EU offers funding opportunities for Natura 2000 through a so-called 'integrated approach'.…”