IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v23y2012icp55-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revealed payments for biodiversity protection in Swedish forests

Author

Listed:
  • Gren, Ing-Marie
  • Carlsson, Mattias

Abstract

This paper explores the determinants of payments accepted by private land owners for providing biodiversity in Swedish forests. The explanatory power of variables reflecting economic, attitude, learning, spatial autocorrelation, and biological factors are tested by econometric analyses on a panel data set on actual and accepted payments for two types of conservation programs; mandatory set aside and voluntary agreements. The results show both similarities and differences between the two programs; significant and robust results are that payments are increasing in the size of protected areas, and decreasing in spatial autocorrelations. A main difference is that the environmental preferences and ecological productivity have significant effects on actual payments under the voluntary but not the mandatory program.

Suggested Citation

  • Gren, Ing-Marie & Carlsson, Mattias, 2012. "Revealed payments for biodiversity protection in Swedish forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 55-62.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:23:y:2012:i:c:p:55-62
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.06.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934112001281
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.06.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christine A. Ervin & David E. Ervin, 1982. "Factors Affecting the Use of Soil Conservation Practices: Hypotheses, Evidence, and Policy Implications," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 58(3), pages 277-292.
    2. Juha Siikamäki & David F. Layton, 2007. "Potential Cost-Effectiveness of Incentive Payment Programs for the Protection of Non-Industrial Private Forests," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(4), pages 539-560.
    3. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2021. "General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 13-50, January.
    4. Kahn, Matthew E., 2007. "Do greens drive Hummers or hybrids? Environmental ideology as a determinant of consumer choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 129-145, September.
    5. John C. Driscoll & Aart C. Kraay, 1998. "Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation With Spatially Dependent Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 549-560, November.
    6. Christian Langpap, 2004. "Conservation Incentives Programs for Endangered Species: An Analysis of Landowner Participation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(3), pages 375-388.
    7. Nagubadi, Venkatarao & McNamara, Kevin T. & Hoover, William L. & Mills, Walter L., 1996. "Program Participation Behavior of Nonindustrial Forest Landowners: A Probit Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 323-336, December.
    8. Nijkamp, Peter & Vindigni, Gabriella & Nunes, Paulo A.L.D., 2008. "Economic valuation of biodiversity: A comparative study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 217-231, September.
    9. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119.
    10. Bell, Caroline D. & Roberts, Roland K. & English, Burton C. & Park, William M., 1994. "A Logit Analysis Of Participation In Tennessee'S Forest Stewardship Program," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Pandit, Ram & Laband, David N., 2007. "General and specific spatial autocorrelation: Insights from country-level analysis of species imperilment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 75-80, February.
    12. David Layton & Juha Siikamäki, 2009. "Payments for Ecosystem Services Programs: Predicting Landowner Enrollment and Opportunity Cost Using a Beta-Binomial Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(3), pages 415-439, November.
    13. Stephen Polasky & Jeffrey D. Camm & Brian Garber-Yonts, 2001. "Selecting Biological Reserves Cost-Effectively: An Application to Terrestrial Vertebrate Conservation in Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 68-78.
    14. LeVert, Michael & Stevens, Thomas & Kittredge, Dave, 2009. "Willingness-to-sell conservation easements: A case study," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 261-275, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Miljand, Matilda & Bjärstig, Therese & Eckerberg, Katarina & Primmer, Eeva & Sandström, Camilla, 2021. "Voluntary agreements to protect private forests – A realist review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    2. Nielsen, Anne Sofie Elberg & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Strange, Niels, 2018. "Landowner participation in forest conservation programs: A revealed approach using register, spatial and contract data," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-12.
    3. Gren, Ing-Marie & Baxter, Peter & Mikusinski, Grzegorz & Possingham, Hugh, 2014. "Cost-effective biodiversity restoration with uncertain growth in forest habitat quality," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 77-92.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nielsen, Anne Sofie Elberg & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Strange, Niels, 2018. "Landowner participation in forest conservation programs: A revealed approach using register, spatial and contract data," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-12.
    2. Kim, Taeyoung & Langpap, Christian, 2016. "Agricultural landowners’ response to incentives for afforestation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 93-111.
    3. Rabotyagov, Sergey S. & Lin, Sonja, 2013. "Small forest landowner preferences for working forest conservation contract attributes: A case of Washington State, USA," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 307-330.
    4. Kang, Moon Jeong & Siry, Jacek P. & Colson, Gregory & Ferreira, Susana, 2019. "Do forest property characteristics reveal landowners' willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services contracts in southeast Georgia, U.S.?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 144-152.
    5. Tian, Nana & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Lu, Fadian, 2018. "Understanding landowners’ interest and willingness to participate in forest certification program in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 271-280.
    6. Ioanna Grammatikopoulou & Eija Pouta & Sami Myyrä, 2016. "Exploring the determinants for adopting water conservation measures. What is the tendency of landowners when the resource is already at risk?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(6), pages 993-1014, June.
    7. Imre Ferto, 2009. "Labour Market Adjustment and Intra‐Industry Trade: The Effects of Association on the Hungarian Food Industry," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 668-681, September.
    8. Nestor Le Clech & Carmen Fillat‐Castejón, 2017. "International aggregate agricultural supply for grain and oilseed: The effects of efficiency and technological change," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(4), pages 569-585, September.
    9. Lindhjem, Henrik & Mitani, Yohei, 2012. "Forest owners’ willingness to accept compensation for voluntary conservation: A contingent valuation approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 290-302.
    10. Langpap, Christian, 2006. "Conservation of endangered species: Can incentives work for private landowners?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 558-572, June.
    11. Gregory, S. Amacher & Christine Conway, M. & Sullivan, Jay & Gregory, S. Amacher, 2003. "Econometric analyses of nonindustrial forest landowners: Is there anything left to study?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 137-164.
    12. Teng, Meixuan & Burke, Paul J. & Liao, Hua, 2019. "The demand for coal among China's rural households: Estimates of price and income elasticities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 928-936.
    13. Carmen Broto & Javier Díaz-Cassou & Aitor Erce-Domínguez, 2008. "Measuring and explaining the volatility of capital flows towards emerging countries," Working Papers 0817, Banco de España.
    14. García Cruz Gustavo Adolfo, 2008. "Informalidad regional en Colombia. Evidencia y Determinantes," Revista Desarrollo y Sociedad, Universidad de los Andes,Facultad de Economía, CEDE, February.
    15. Skare, Marinko & Gavurova, Beata & Sinkovic, Dean, 2023. "Regional aspects of financial development and renewable energy: A cross-sectional study in 214 countries," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1142-1157.
    16. Mamba, Essotanam & Ali, Essossinam, 2022. "Do agricultural exports enhance agricultural (economic) growth? Lessons from ECOWAS countries," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 257-267.
    17. Wasi Ul Hassan Shah & Rizwana Yasmeen & Muddassar Sarfraz & Larisa Ivascu, 2023. "The Repercussions of Economic Growth, Industrialization, Foreign Direct Investment, and Technology on Municipal Solid Waste: Evidence from OECD Economies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, January.
    18. Kai Daniel Schmid & Michael Schmidt, 2012. "EMU and the Renaissance of Sovereign Credit Risk Perception," IAW Discussion Papers 87, Institut für Angewandte Wirtschaftsforschung (IAW).
    19. Eleftherios Spyromitros, 2020. "The effect of corruption on stock market volatility," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 10(2), pages 1-6.
    20. Yunus Karaömer & Arif Eser Guzel, 2024. "Effect of Economic Policy Uncertainty on Stock Returns: Analysing the Moderating Role of Government Size," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2024(1), pages 50-72.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:23:y:2012:i:c:p:55-62. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.