Spatial Coordination Incentives for landscape-scale environmental management: A systematic review

Nguyễn, Chí Công; Latacz‐Lohmann, Uwe; Hanley, Nick; Schilizzi, Steven; Iftekhar, Sayed

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105936

Cited by 41 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 90 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In cultivated grasslands, it might prove difficult to provide incentives for farmers or other stakeholders in order to implement suitable measures. A recent review by Nguyen et al (2022) highlights, for instance, that despite the general recognition to preferably apply conservation measures at a landscape-scale, there are few real-world examples of such implementations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rather, it is necessary to take focused and metered conservation measures that allow target species to thrive and, ideally, expand their range despite the disturbed environment. With the respective knowledge it can be easier to either find the land owners’ acceptance towards conservation measures or intervene with their land use practices as little as possible (Moloney et al, 2018; Will et al, 2021; Nguyen et al, 2022). As thoroughly discussed in our previous studies (Leins et al, 2021; Leins et al, 2022), simulation models together with population viability analysis (PVA) are a valuable tool to aid stakeholders in their effort of identifying such suitable measures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Finding the right balance of conservation effort in cultivated grasslands: A modelling study on protecting dispersers in a climatically changing and anthropogenically disturbed environment

Leins

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Managing cultivated grasslands in a sustainable way is controversial, because it often goes along with economical loss and additional effort for local farmers. On the plus side, such a management could permit inhabiting species not only to survive but to thrive and expand their range. In order to satisfy both aspects, it can be helpful to minimize conservation effort to a degree that is still ecologically beneficial but intervenes as little as possible with regional land-use customs. Computer simulations are a useful tool to find such compromises prior to implementing management strategies. We simulated the population development of the large marsh grasshopper, a grassland species with limited dispersal abilities, in a disturbed and climatically changing environment of Germany up to the year 2080. Our results show that - in a spatially aggregated landscape - adapting the harvesting schedule in a relatively low number < 7 % of (in)directly connected yet otherwise intensively managed grasslands suffices for species preservation and even expansion to some extent. The effect on dispersal success of additional conservation effort above this 7 % threshold is significantly lower than it is below the threshold. In terms of population size, however, every additional refuge benefits the grasshopper. Climate change enhances the positive effects on the target species even further. A higher level of fragmentation, however, requires a substantially larger conservation effort in terms of protected grassland proportion. Therefore, it is recommended and more effective to focus on the implementation of protected areas within spatially aggregated grasslands. Stakeholders should additionally be aware of the fact that it can take several years for a conservation effort to become apparent and measurable, especially if the goal is to support an isolated or reintroduced species in expanding into unpopulated territories.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finding the right balance of conservation effort in cultivated grasslands: A modelling study on protecting dispersers in a climatically changing and anthropogenically disturbed environment

Leins

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11 Finally, we assume that there are no side payments within the coalitions. Indeed, formal systems of side payments have not been observed in real-world applications of AB schemes so far (Nguyen et al, 2022) and although they are theoretically considered in the literature (Drechsler, 2017b;Wätzold & Drechsler, 2014), 12 their consideration would raise the additional issue of the definition of their distribution within the coalitions and goes beyond the objective of our paper. Now that we have presented the logic and the assumptions of our model, we turn to its formal mathematical formulation.…”

Section: Description Of the Coalition Formation Gamementioning

confidence: 99%

Agglomeration bonus and endogenous group formation

Bareille

Zavalloni

Viaggi

2022

American J Agri Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agglomeration bonus schemes are envisioned to incentivize the connectivity of habitat conservation across landowners. Assuming full cooperation among landowners at the landscape scale, the bulk of the literature theoretically finds that agglomeration bonus schemes are more cost effective in achieving biodiversity conservation than spatially homogenous payments. However, it may be rational for landowners not to cooperate all together but, rather, to cooperate within smaller groups. Here, we analyze the cost effectiveness of agglomeration bonus schemes when such partial cooperation is allowed, that is, when cooperation is endogenously chosen. We introduce a spatially explicit ecological-economic model within a coalition formation game to assess how landowners form stable coalition structures and how this affects biodiversity conservation under a wide range of (i) degrees of spatial cost autocorrelation, (ii) bonuses and flat-rate payments, (iii) species dispersal rates, and (iv) coordination costs. We find that agglomeration bonus schemes are more cost effective than homogenous payments only for low public expenditures. This condition is not identified if full cooperation is assumed. We find, however, that full cooperation never emerges and hence that such an assumption leads to an overestimation of the cost effectiveness of agglomeration bonus schemes. Moreover, we find that the cost effectiveness of agglomeration bonus schemes increases when the spatial cost autocorrelation and species dispersal rate decrease. Finally, coordination costs do not affect the cost effectiveness of the agglomeration bonus scheme but they have implications for its design because of their impact on coalition formation.

show abstract

“…In the European Union (EU), effects of AECM on promoting biodiversity and ecosystem services have been criticized as insufficient due to a lack of local targeting of measures and their spatial coordination at landscape scale (Kleijn et al, 2006;Pe'er et al, 2019). Different approaches of incentives are designed to address coordination at landscape scale (Nguyen et al, 2022). One approach can be defined as collective AECM.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

More than spatial coordination – How Dutch agricultural collectives foster social capital for effective governance of agri-environmental measures

Barghusen

Sattler

Berner

et al. 2022

Journal of Rural Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial Coordination Incentives for landscape-scale environmental management: A systematic review

Cited by 41 publications

References 90 publications

Finding the right balance of conservation effort in cultivated grasslands: A modelling study on protecting dispersers in a climatically changing and anthropogenically disturbed environment

Finding the right balance of conservation effort in cultivated grasslands: A modelling study on protecting dispersers in a climatically changing and anthropogenically disturbed environment

Agglomeration bonus and endogenous group formation

More than spatial coordination – How Dutch agricultural collectives foster social capital for effective governance of agri-environmental measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About