IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02958744.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Private Sector Involvement in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Using a UN platform to promote market-based instruments for ecosystem services

Author

Listed:
  • Marie Hrabanski

    (UMR ART-Dev - Acteurs, Ressources et Territoires dans le Développement - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - UPVD - Université de Perpignan Via Domitia - UM - Université de Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Cirad-ES - Département Environnements et Sociétés - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement)

Abstract

The article analyses the implication of private sector representatives in the Millennium ecosystem assessment (MEA) (2001-2005). The article shows that, prior to this international biodiversity assessment, firms were involved in three coalitions: the greenhouse gas pro-trading coalition, the voluntary private standard coalition and the payment for environmental services coalition. These three coalitions all advocated a particular style of regulation that awarded an overwhelming place to market-based policy instruments. Corporate experts from the three coalitions identified were recruited to participate in the MEA. Thanks to the political visibility given to the ecosystem services concept by the MEA, private industry had an occasion to strengthen and legitimize their actions in favour of market-based environmental governance. At the same time, associating private sector representatives with the Millennium ecosystem Assessment process made it easier to disseminate the concept of ecosystem services.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie Hrabanski, 2017. "Private Sector Involvement in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Using a UN platform to promote market-based instruments for ecosystem services," Post-Print hal-02958744, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02958744
    DOI: 10.1002/eet.1780
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.umontpellier.fr/hal-02958744
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.umontpellier.fr/hal-02958744/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/eet.1780?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
    2. Marie Hrabanski & Cécile Bidaud & Jean-François Le Coq & Philippe Méral, 2013. "Environmental NGOs, policy entrepreneurs of market-based instruments for ecosystem services? A comparison of Costa Rica, Madagascar and France," Post-Print hal-03062762, HAL.
    3. Jennifer Clapp, 2005. "Global Environmental Governance for Corporate Responsibility and Accountability," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 5(3), pages 23-34, August.
    4. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    5. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    6. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    7. Jonas Meckling, 2011. "The Globalization of Carbon Trading: Transnational Business Coalitions in Climate Politics," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 11(2), pages 26-50, May.
    8. Hrabanski, Marie & Bidaud, Cécile & Le Coq, Jean-François & Méral, Philippe, 2013. "Environmental NGOs, policy entrepreneurs of market-based instruments for ecosystem services? A comparison of Costa Rica, Madagascar and France," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 124-132.
    9. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    10. Irja Vormedal, 2008. "The Influence of Business and Industry NGOs in the Negotiation of the Kyoto Mechanisms: the Case of Carbon Capture and Storage in the CDM," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 8(4), pages 36-65, November.
    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. Marie Hrabanski & Jean-François Le Coq, 2018. "Tackling fragmentation of climate and biodiversity regimes complexes: the role ecosystem services and payment for environmental services : the role ecosystem services and payment for environmental ser," Post-Print hal-02958680, HAL.
    2. Pietarinen, Niina & Harrinkari, Teemu & Brockhaus, Maria & Yakusheva, Natalya, 2023. "Discourses in Finnish forest policy: Cherry-picking or sustainability?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    3. Liu, Wenjing & Wang, Jingsheng & Li, Chao & Chen, Baoxiong & Sun, Yufang, 2019. "Using Bibliometric Analysis to Understand the Recent Progress in Agroecosystem Services Research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 293-305.
    4. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen, J. & Toppinen, A., 2019. "Circular, Green, and Bio Economy: How Do Companies in Land-Use Intensive Sectors Align with Sustainability Concepts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 116-133.

    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. Géraldine Froger & Valérie Boisvert & Philippe Méral & Jean-François Le Coq & Armelle Caron & Olivier Aznar, 2015. "Market-Based Instruments for Ecosystem Services between Discourse and Reality: An Economic and Narrative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Coralie Calvet & Claude Napoleone & Jean-Michel Salles & Syndhia Mathé & Hélène Rey-Valette & Leslie Carnoye & Rita Lopes & Valérie Boisvert & Philippe Méral & Jean-François Le Coq & Armelle Caron & O, 2015. "Ecosystem Services and Institutional Dynamics," Post-Print hal-03023959, HAL.
    3. Ma, Zhao & Bauchet, Jonathan & Steele, Diana & Godoy, Ricardo & Radel, Claudia & Zanotti, Laura, 2017. "Comparison of Direct Transfers for Human Capital Development and Environmental Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 498-517.
    4. Hausknost, Daniel & Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron Jit, 2017. "The political dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES): Cascade or stairway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 109-118.
    5. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    6. Hai-Ying Gu & Qing-Mi Hu & Tian-Qiong Wang, 2019. "Payment for Rice Growers to Reduce Using N Fertilizer in the GHG Mitigation Program Driven by the Government: Evidence from Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, April.
    7. Hejnowicz, Adam P. & Raffaelli, David G. & Rudd, Murray A. & White, Piran C.L., 2014. "Evaluating the outcomes of payments for ecosystem services programmes using a capital asset framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 83-97.
    8. Brownson, Katherine & Guinessey, Elizabeth & Carranza, Marcia & Esquivel, Manrique & Hesselbach, Hilda & Madrid Ramirez, Lucia & Villa, Luis, 2019. "Community-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services (CB-PES): Implications of community involvement for program outcomes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    9. Kumar, Pushpam & Kumar, Manasi & Garrett, Lucy, 2014. "Behavioural foundation of response policies for ecosystem management: What can we learn from Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 128-136.
    10. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    11. Lin, Yongsheng & Dong, Zhanfeng & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Hongyu, 2020. "Estimating inter-regional payments for ecosystem services: Taking China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. Hrabanski, Marie, 2015. "The biodiversity offsets as market-based instruments in global governance: Origins, success and controversies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 143-151.
    13. Aguilar-Gómez, Carlos R. & Arteaga-Reyes, Tizbe T. & Gómez-Demetrio, William & Ávila-Akerberg, Víctor D. & Pérez-Campuzano, Enrique, 2020. "Differentiated payments for environmental services: A review of the literature," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    14. Campanhão, Ligia Maria Barrios & Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima, 2019. "Guideline framework for effective targeting of payments for watershed services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-109.
    15. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    16. Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron J. & Smetschka, Barbara, 2018. "Improving payments for ecosystem services (PES) outcomes through the use of Multi-Criteria Evaluation (MCE) and the software OPTamos," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 47-55.
    17. Shengli Dai & Weimin Zhang & Linshan Lan, 2022. "Quantitative Evaluation of China’s Ecological Protection Compensation Policy Based on PMC Index Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-24, August.
    18. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.
    19. Muradian, Roldan & Rival, Laura, 2012. "Between markets and hierarchies: The challenge of governing ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 93-100.
    20. Reutemann, Tim & Engel, Stefanie & Pareja, Eliana, 2016. "How (not) to pay — Field experimental evidence on the design of REDD+ payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 220-229.

    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:hal:journl:hal-02958744. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.