[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v24y2017icp187-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Synergies and trade-offs between nature conservation and climate policy: Insights from the “Natural Capital Germany – TEEB DE” study

Author

Listed:
  • Wüstemann, Henry
  • Bonn, Aletta
  • Albert, Christian
  • Bertram, Christine
  • Biber-Freudenberger, Lisa
  • Dehnhardt, Alexandra
  • Döring, Ralf
  • Elsasser, Peter
  • Hartje, Volkmar
  • Mehl, Dietmar
  • Kantelhardt, Jochen
  • Rehdanz, Katrin
  • Schaller, Lena
  • Scholz, Mathias
  • Thrän, Daniela
  • Witing, Felix
  • Hansjürgens, Bernd
Abstract
Ecosystem-based approaches provide opportunities for climate policy to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, to expand the adaptive capacities and resilience of land systems to a changing climate, and to simultaneously protect biodiversity and ecosystems services (ESS). However, knowledge about the economic benefits and cost-efficiency of ecosystem-based approaches is still limited. The objective of this paper is to enhance understanding of synergies and trade-offs between climate policy related measures and nature conservation and how ecosystem-based approaches can contribute to both climate as well as biodiversity and ESS conservation goals, through overall economic analyses to inform balanced decision making. The paper builds upon the current state of knowledge as brought together by contributors to the German national TEEB-study “Natural Capital and Climate Policy – Synergies and Conflicts”. We present options and lessons learned from major land-use sectors of high relevance for ecosystem-based approaches to climate change, namely agriculture, peatlands, forests, wetlands and coastal and marine ecosystems. Based on these assessments, we argue that successful implementation of an ecosystem-based climate policy requires effective coordination and coherence between sectors and their respective policies, for example agriculture, forestry and energy. We identify specific targets for an ecosystem-based climate policy and options for achieving this coherent implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Wüstemann, Henry & Bonn, Aletta & Albert, Christian & Bertram, Christine & Biber-Freudenberger, Lisa & Dehnhardt, Alexandra & Döring, Ralf & Elsasser, Peter & Hartje, Volkmar & Mehl, Dietmar & Kantelh, 2017. "Synergies and trade-offs between nature conservation and climate policy: Insights from the “Natural Capital Germany – TEEB DE” study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 187-199.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:24:y:2017:i:c:p:187-199
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.02.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041616303862
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.02.008?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. Bonn, Aletta & Reed, Mark S. & Evans, Chris D. & Joosten, Hans & Bain, Clifton & Farmer, Jenny & Emmer, Igino & Couwenberg, John & Moxey, Andrew & Artz, Rebekka & Tanneberger, Franziska & von Unger, M, 2014. "Investing in nature: Developing ecosystem service markets for peatland restoration," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 54-65.
    2. Löschel, Andreas & Sturm, Bodo & Vogt, Carsten, 2013. "The demand for climate protection—Empirical evidence from Germany," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(3), pages 415-418.
    3. Henseler, Martin & Roder, Norbert & Kreins, Peter & Liebersbach, Horst & Osterburg, Bernhard, 2015. "The mitigation potential and cost efficiency of abatement-based payments for the production of short-rotation coppices in Germany," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212287, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Reed, Mark S. & Moxey, Andrew & Prager, Katrin & Hanley, Nick & Skates, James & Bonn, Aletta & Evans, Chris D. & Glenk, Klaus & Thomson, Ken, 2014. "Improving the link between payments and the provision of ecosystem services in agri-environment schemes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 44-53.
    5. Mann, Stefan & Wustemann, Henry, 2008. "Multifunctionality and a new focus on externalities," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 293-307, February.
    6. Osterburg, Bernhard & Nieberg, Hiltrud & Ruter, Sebastian & Isermeyer, Folkhard & Haenel, Hans-Dieter & Hahne, Jochen & Krentler, Jan-Gerd & Paulsen, Hans Marten & Schuchardt, Frank & Schweinle, Jorg , 2009. "Erfassung, Bewertung und Minderung von Treibhausgasemissionen des deutschen Agrar- und Ernährungssektors," Thünen Working Paper 103666, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    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. Bösch, Matthias & Elsasser, Peter & Franz, Kristin & Lorenz, Martin & Moning, Christoph & Olschewski, Roland & Rödl, Anne & Schneider, Heike & Schröppel, Bettina & Weller, Priska, 2018. "Forest ecosystem services in rural areas of Germany: Insights from the national TEEB study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 77-83.
    2. Lienhoop, Nele & Schröter-Schlaack, Christoph, 2018. "Involving multiple actors in ecosystem service governance: Exploring the role of stated preference valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 181-188.
    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. Cameron Hepburn & Brian O’Callaghan & Nicholas Stern & Joseph Stiglitz & Dimitri Zenghelis, 2020. "Will COVID-19 fiscal recovery packages accelerate or retard progress on climate change?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 36(Supplemen), pages 359-381.
    5. Lee, Jongyeol & Kim, Hyungsub & Song, Cholho & Kim, Gang Sun & Lee, Woo-Kyun & Son, Yowhan, 2020. "Determining economically viable forest management option with consideration of ecosystem services in Korea: A strategy after successful national forestation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    6. Albert, Christian & Schröter-Schlaack, Christoph & Hansjürgens, Bernd & Dehnhardt, Alexandra & Döring, Ralf & Job, Hubert & Köppel, Johann & Krätzig, Sebastian & Matzdorf, Bettina & Reutter, Michaela , 2017. "An economic perspective on land use decisions in agricultural landscapes: Insights from the TEEB Germany Study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 69-78.

    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. Johanna Norris & Bettina Matzdorf & Rena Barghusen & Christoph Schulze & Bart van Gorcum, 2021. "Viewpoints on Cooperative Peatland Management: Expectations and Motives of Dutch Farmers," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Martin Henseler & Ruth Delzeit & Marcel Adenäuer & Sarah Baum & Peter Kreins, 2020. "Nitrogen Tax and Set-Aside as Greenhouse Gas Abatement Policies Under Global Change Scenarios: A Case Study for Germany," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(2), pages 299-329, July.
    3. Martin-Ortega, Julia & Allott, Timothy E.H. & Glenk, Klaus & Schaafsma, Marije, 2014. "Valuing water quality improvements from peatland restoration: Evidence and challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 34-43.
    4. 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.
    5. Andrey Sirin & Maria Medvedeva & Vladimir Korotkov & Victor Itkin & Tatiana Minayeva & Danil Ilyasov & Gennady Suvorov & Hans Joosten, 2021. "Addressing Peatland Rewetting in Russian Federation Climate Reporting," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    6. Tianran Ding & Wouter Achten, 2023. "Coupling agent-based modeling with territorial LCA to support agricultural land-use planning," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/359527, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. 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.
    8. Helena Fornwagner & Oliver P. Hauser, 2022. "Climate Action for (My) Children," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(1), pages 95-130, January.
    9. Matzek, Virginia & Wilson, Kerrie A. & Kragt, Marit, 2019. "Mainstreaming of ecosystem services as a rationale for ecological restoration in Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 79-86.
    10. Sidemo-Holm, William & Smith, Henrik G. & Brady, Mark V., 2018. "Improving agricultural pollution abatement through result-based payment schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 209-219.
    11. Yaofeng Yang & Yajuan Chen & Zhenrong Yu & Pengyao Li & Xuedong Li, 2020. "How Does Improve Farmers’ Attitudes toward Ecosystem Services to Support Sustainable Development of Agriculture? Based on Environmental Kuznets Curve Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    12. Kesternich, Martin & Löschel, Andreas & Römer, Daniel, 2016. "The long-term impact of matching and rebate subsidies when public goods are impure: Field experimental evidence from the carbon offsetting market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 70-78.
    13. Ewelina Olba-Zięty & Mariusz Jerzy Stolarski & Michał Krzyżaniak, 2021. "Economic Evaluation of the Production of Perennial Crops for Energy Purposes—A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, November.
    14. Manyise, Timothy & Dentoni, Domenico, 2021. "Value chain partnerships and farmer entrepreneurship as balancing ecosystem services: Implications for agri-food systems resilience," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    15. Sheng, Jichuan & Qiu, Wenge & Han, Xiao, 2020. "China’s PES-like horizontal eco-compensation program: Combining market-oriented mechanisms and government interventions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    16. Clements, Jen & Lobley, Matt & Osborne, Juliet & Wills, Jane, 2021. "How can academic research on UK agri-environment schemes pivot to meet the addition of climate mitigation aims?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    17. Andreas Loschel & Michael Price & Laura Razzolini & Madeline Werthschulte, 2020. "Negative income shocks and the support of environmental policies - Insights from the COVID-19 pandemic," Framed Field Experiments 00710, The Field Experiments Website.
    18. Alberini, Anna & Bigano, Andrea & Ščasný, Milan & Zvěřinová, Iva, 2018. "Preferences for Energy Efficiency vs. Renewables: What Is the Willingness to Pay to Reduce CO2 Emissions?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 171-185.
    19. Herzon, I. & Birge, T. & Allen, B. & Povellato, A. & Vanni, F. & Hart, K. & Radley, G. & Tucker, G. & Keenleyside, C. & Oppermann, R. & Underwood, E. & Poux, X. & Beaufoy, G. & Pražan, J., 2018. "Time to look for evidence: Results-based approach to biodiversity conservation on farmland in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 347-354.
    20. repec:zbw:rwimat:079 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Ana Ramos & Xavier Labandeira & Andreas Löschel, 2016. "Pro-environmental Households and Energy Efficiency in Spain," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(2), pages 367-393, February.

    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:ecoser:v:24:y:2017:i:c:p:187-199. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.