Incentive instruments for the sustainable use of marine resources

Greiner, Romy; Young, Michael D.; McDonald, A. David; Brooks, Michael

doi:10.1016/s0964-5691(99)00067-8

Cited by 33 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Resources are limited and must be deployed where they are most likely to have the greatest positive impact. (Greiner et al 2000) Vieira et al (2007) have developed a system for assessing transport policy instruments where the set of policies are evaluated against certain criteria and in relation to each other. Greiner et al (2000) have also used very similar criteria for transport policy evaluation.…”

Section: Figure 1 Policy Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It relates to whether an instrument is appropriate and technically suitable for achieving a goal. (Greiner et al 2000;Vieira et al 2007) • Economic efficiency relates to effectiveness in terms of implementation costs of an instrument and the economic efficiency of an instrument in a collective sense, assessing the total benefits of the associated change in risk minimizing against its total costs. (Greiner et al 2000;Vieira et al 2007) • Acceptability refers to the stakeholders' level of agreement on a new policy instrument, and to the political and community acceptability of an instrument.…”

Section: Figure 1 Policy Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Acceptability is a necessary condition for the durability of the policy. (Greiner et al 2000;Vieira et al 2007) • Enforcement indicates how effectively a policy instrument can be implemented.…”

Section: Figure 1 Policy Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…lack of suitable technology). (Greiner et al 2000;Vieira et al 2007) • Lateral effects refer to possible spill over effects of an instrument into other sectors (e.g. a reduction in air emissions can improve the health of people, which decreases health care expenses).…”

Section: Figure 1 Policy Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of maritime safety policy instruments

Kuronen

Tapaninen

2010

WMU J Marit Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyzes the effectiveness of the current maritime safety policy system as a whole. It offers an overview of different kinds of policy instruments that are used to enhance maritime safety and the criteria for effective policy instruments. It provides a criticism and goes through the weak points of the current maritime safety policy system, and finally, the system is analyzed in the light of the criteria for effective policy. The paper is based on literary sources, mainly on articles published in academic journals. The conclusion of the article is that the development of individual policies will not greatly improve the current level of maritime safety, and more fundamental changes are needed in the governance of maritime safety. IntroductionAccidents at sea and increasing volumes of maritime traffic, especially the transportation of dangerous cargoes, have given rise to a growing awareness of the safety of maritime traffic. International maritime safety regulation has a long history. Regulation is continuously revised and developed further in numerous maritime safety related issues by several actors. Instead of looking at individual policies, it is sometimes important to think about the system as a whole and its foundations. Do the current maritime safety policies achieve the goals they are meant to achieve, are they effective, and is there a need for change?This paper presents the criteria for effective policy instruments, and it evaluates the current maritime safety policy system as a whole in the light of those criteria. The paper includes a short description and a critique of the maritime safety policy system. The paper is mainly a literature review on the effectiveness of maritime safety policy. The structure of the paper is as follows. Firstly, the criteria for effective policy instruments and a tool for evaluation of maritime policy instruments (Formal Safety Assessment FSA) are presented. Secondly, regulatory bodies of maritime safety and preventive maritime safety policy instruments are reviewed. Next, the article discusses a critique and weak points of the system. Finally, the maritime safety policy system is evaluated against the criteria for effective policy in the light of the critique of a system, and the findings of the study are discussed in the end.

show abstract

Section: Figure 1 Policy Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figure 1 Policy Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figure 1 Policy Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figure 1 Policy Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of maritime safety policy instruments

Kuronen

Tapaninen

2010

WMU J Marit Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…IB instruments also encourage innovation in cost-cutting technologies and in new management practices, which does not typically occur under technology standards, as there is no need to experiment with alternative technologies [55,56]. It is also possible to use revenues from environmental charges to reduce other distortionary taxes-this possibility has been termed the Bdouble dividend^in the literature [57].…”

Section: Incentive-based Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Performance Bonding in Forest Policy Settings

Kuusela

Amacher

2016

Curr Forestry Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest policies have typically relied on prescriptive standards to mitigate various nonpoint negative externalities, whereas more recent approaches have focused on the use of incentive-based policies, such as payments for environmental services (PES), to encourage activities associated with positive externalities. We provide a general review on the current state of knowledge concerning prescriptive standards and incentive-based policies in the context of nonpoint and point source externalities that are typical in industrial and nonindustrial forestry. Our specific focus is on reviewing and assessing the current and future applications of performance bonding in forest policy. We argue that bonds can be viewed either as an enforcement mechanism to achieve compliance with standards, or alternatively, as a deposit-refund instrument that imposes a tax on harmful activities while subsidizing beneficial ones in the form of a refund. Four forest policy settings are considered: best management practices (BMP) for protecting the integrity of water resources, reduced impact logging (RIL) standards in industrial concessions, fire-fuel mitigation in wildland-urban interface (WUI), and carbon sequestration in standing forests and soils. Unique challenges that the successful design of performance bonding present are used as motivation for future research.

show abstract