Efficiency of incentives to jointly increase carbon sequestration and species conservation on a landscape

被引:248
作者
Nelson, Erik [1 ,2 ]
Polasky, Stephen [3 ]
Lewis, David J. [4 ]
Plantinga, Andrew J. [5 ]
Lonsdorf, Eric [6 ]
White, Denis [7 ]
Bael, David [3 ]
Lawler, Joshua J. [8 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Woods Inst Environm, Dept Biol, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Woods Inst Environm, Nat Capital Project, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Univ Minnesota, Dept Appl Econ, St Paul, MN 55108 USA
[4] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Agr & Appl Econ, Madison, WI 53706 USA
[5] Oregon State Univ, Dept Agr & Resource Econ, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
[6] Davee Ctr Epidemiol & Endocrinol, Chicago, IL 60614 USA
[7] US EPA, Corvallis, OR 97333 USA
[8] Univ Washington, Coll Forest Resources, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
关键词
conservation payments; ecosystem services; landscape modeling; private landowners; land-use change;
D O I
10.1073/pnas.0706178105
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
We develop an integrated model to predict private land-use decisions in response to policy incentives designed to increase the provision of carbon sequestration and species conservation across heterogeneous landscapes. Using data from the Willamette Basin, Oregon, we compare the provision of carbon sequestration and species conservation under five simple policies that offer payments for conservation. We evaluate policy performance compared with the maximum feasible combinations of carbon sequestration and species conservation on the landscape for various conservation budgets. None of the conservation payment policies produce increases in carbon sequestration and species conservation that approach the maximum potential gains on the landscape. Our results show that policies aimed at increasing the provision of carbon sequestration do not necessarily increase species conservation and that highly targeted policies do not necessarily do as well as more general policies.
引用
收藏
页码:9471 / 9476
页数:6
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Adamus P. R., 2000, TERRESTRIAL VERTEBRA
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2006, METHODS CALCULATING
  • [3] EXISTENCE VALUES IN BENEFIT-COST-ANALYSIS AND DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
    BISHOP, RC
    WELSH, MP
    [J]. LAND ECONOMICS, 1992, 68 (04) : 405 - 417
  • [4] Conservation planning for ecosystem services
    Chan, Kai M. A.
    Shaw, M. Rebecca
    Cameron, David R.
    Underwood, Emma C.
    Daily, Gretchen C.
    [J]. PLOS BIOLOGY, 2006, 4 (11) : 2138 - 2152
  • [5] CHRISTY J, 1998, PRESETTLEMENT VEGETA
  • [6] EGGLESTON S, 2006, IPCC GUIDELINES NAT, V4
  • [7] Policies for habitat fragmentation: Combining econometrics with GIS-based landscape simulations
    Lewis, David J.
    Plantinga, Andrew J.
    [J]. LAND ECONOMICS, 2007, 83 (02) : 109 - 127
  • [8] Land-use change and carbon sinks: Econometric estimation of the carbon sequestration supply function
    Lubowski, RN
    Plantinga, AJ
    Stavins, RN
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2006, 51 (02) : 135 - 152
  • [9] Mapping the economic costs and benefits of conservation
    Naidoo, Robin
    Ricketts, Taylor H.
    [J]. PLOS BIOLOGY, 2006, 4 (11) : 2153 - 2164
  • [10] *OR NAT HER INF CT, 2000, INT WILL BAS LANDC G