IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v11y1998i2p217-241.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incremental Cost in the Convention on Biological Diversity

Author

Listed:
  • Raffaello Gervigni

Abstract

The Convention on Biological Diversity stipulates the principle of incremental cost for the international financing of biodiversity conservation. The international debate about the exact meaning of the concept and about its practical application focuses on the issues of baseline determination and treatment of incremental domestic benefits. This paper uses some standard tools of partial equilibrium demand analysis to illustrate theoretical solutions to the indeterminacy of the Convention. The allocation of resources resulting from an incremental cost scheme is compared with a 'domestic optimum', and with a hypothetical 'global optimum'. Regarding the behaviour of the country hosting biodiversity, a distinction is proposed between 'quantity-' and 'transfer-' taking behaviour. The issue of price distortions in the baseline is also addressed. It is shown that both the host country (H) and the Rest of the World (ROW) will have incentives for agreeing on a transfer of resources that entails only partial deduction of domestic incremental benefits. This transfer, despite failing to reach the utilitarian global optimum, still represents a Pareto improvement over the pre-convention status quo. By imposing a particular multiplicative functional form on the utility of both host and ROW, additional results can be obtained. In particular, the optimal transfer implies a clawback factor decreasing with relative income differentials, and incremental cost financing dominates the domestic optimum even when price distortions are present in the host country. If removal of price distortions is a precondition for incremental cost funding, the analysis illustrates the magnitude of incentives necessary for the host to give up the distorted baseline. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Suggested Citation

  • Raffaello Gervigni, 1998. "Incremental Cost in the Convention on Biological Diversity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 217-241, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:11:y:1998:i:2:p:217-241
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1008293329546
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1008293329546
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1008293329546?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. P.M.S. Jones, 1994. "The Value of Diversity," Energy & Environment, , vol. 5(3), pages 215-225, September.
    2. Pearce, David, 1992. "Economic valuation and the natural world," Policy Research Working Paper Series 988, The World Bank.
    3. Scott Barrett, 1994. "The biodiversity supergame," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(1), pages 111-122, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Andreas Löschel & Dirk Rübbelke, 2014. "On the Voluntary Provision of International Public Goods," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 81(322), pages 195-204, April.
    2. Ninan, K.N. & Sathyapalan, Jyothis, 2005. "The economics of biodiversity conservation: a study of a coffee growing region in the Western Ghats of India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 61-72, October.
    3. Herbohn, Kathleen, 2005. "A full cost environmental accounting experiment," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 519-536, August.
    4. Winands, Sarah & Holm-Müller, Karin & Weikard, Hans-Peter, 2013. "The biodiversity conservation game with heterogeneous countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 14-23.
    5. Culas, Richard J., 2006. "Forestry, non-forest sector policies and the environment: a review," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 174100, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    6. Francisco Cabo & Guiomar Martín-Herrán, 2006. "North–South transfers vs biodiversity conservation: a trade differential game," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 40(2), pages 249-278, June.
    7. Sinden, John Alfred & Griffith, Garry, 2007. "Combining economic and ecological arguments to value the environmental gains from control of 35 weeds in Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 396-408, March.
    8. Frisvold, George B. & Condon, Peter T., 1998. "The convention on biological diversity and agriculture: Implications and unresolved debates1," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 551-570, April.
    9. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Rüdiger, 2016. "Coaseian biodiversity conservation. Who benefits?," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145745, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    10. Gollin, Douglas & Evenson, Robert, 2003. "Valuing animal genetic resources: lessons from plant genetic resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 353-363, July.
    11. Tisdell, Clement A. & Xiang, Zhu, 1994. "Reconciling Economic Development, Nature Conservation and Local Communities: Strategies for Biodiversity Conservation in Xishuangbanna," Biodiversity Conservation: Studies in its Economics and Management, Mainly in Yunnan China 145103, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    12. Rupert Gatti & Timo Goeschl & Ben Groom & Timothy Swanson, 2011. "The Biodiversity Bargaining Problem," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(4), pages 609-628, April.
    13. Norton, George W. & Alwang, Jeffrey, 1997. "Policy for Plenty: Measuring the Benefits of Policy-oriented Social Science Research," Staff Papers 232552, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    14. Ana Espínola-Arredondo & Félix Muñoz-García, 2011. "Free-riding in international environmental agreements: A signaling approach to non-enforceable treaties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 111-134, January.
    15. Gerber, Nicolas, 2009. "Measuring Biodiversity – an axiomatic evaluation of measures based on genetic data," Discussion Papers 51305, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    16. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    17. Michael Finus & Bianca Rundshagen, 2003. "How the Rules of Coalition Formation Affect Stability of International Environmental Agreements," Working Papers 2003.62, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Garrod, G. D. & Willis, K. G., 1997. "The non-use benefits of enhancing forest biodiversity: A contingent ranking study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 45-61, April.
    19. Michael Finus, 2004. "Modesty Pays: Sometimes!," Working Papers 2004.68, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    20. C. Martijn van der Heide & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh & Ekko C. van Ierland, 1999. "Globalisation and Nature Policy: An Integrated Environmental-Economic Framework," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 99-090/3, Tinbergen Institute.

    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:kap:enreec:v:11:y:1998:i:2:p:217-241. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.