Policy-Mix or Instrument-Mess?

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Policy-Mix or Instrument-Mess?"

Charles Bradford
5 years ago
Views:

mix for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision

1 Policy-Mix or Instrument-Mess? POLICYMIX: Assessing the role of economic instruments in a policy mix for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision Christoph Schröter-Schlaack*, David N. Barton, Irene Ring *Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ

2 Structure of talk POLICYMIX project background Why policymixes for biodiversity and ESS? Development of a policymix analysis framework Instrument example: Ecological Fiscal Transfers Conclusions from POLICYMIX

3 Introduction to EU FP7 project POLICYMIX POLICYMIX: Assessing the role of economic instruments in a policy mix for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision April 2010 March 2014 Coordinator: David Barton, NINA Deputies: Graciela Rusch, NINA and Irene Ring, UFZ 9 partners in 6 European and 2 Latin American countries Three project phases: 1. Review of instruments and framework development 2. Case studies at national and regional levels 3. Comparative analysis, transfer of insights, synthesis and dissemination

4 Forest PES, EFT

5 What is a policy mix? A combination of policy instruments which has evolved to influence the quantity and quality of biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision in public and private sectors

6 Why policy mixes for BD&ESS? Characteristics of biodiversity and ecosystem services Irreversibility of biodiversity loss Potential trade-offs between biodiversity and ecosystem services Potential trade-offs between ecosystem services Mix of drivers of loss and degradation Multiple actors and governance levels Multiple objectives of biodiversity conservation and ESS management Cultural and constitutional settings Different instruments for different purposes and functions

7 How to evaluate instruments in policy mixes? 1. Instrument choice and evaluation criteria for single policy instruments Effectiveness Efficiency Social and distributional impacts Institutional aspects influencing the design and implementation of instruments 2. Frameworks for policy mix analysis Little literature available Environmental policies: Gunningham & Grabosky 1998, Sorrell et al. 2003, Bressers & O Toole 2005, OECD 2007 Conservation policies: Young et al., 1996; OECD 1999

8 Policymix thinking a heterodox research approach POLICYMIX POLICYMIX POLICYMIX Source:

9 Step 1. Identifying challenges and context Policy mix Situations a. Ex post b. Ex ante Step 2. Identifying gaps and choosing instruments for analysis POLICYMIX framework and analysis pathways Functional role evaluation of existing policy mix Instrument interactions Prospective functional role evaluation incl. new instrument Instrument interactions Step 3. Policy evaluation and design Effectiveness Efficiency / Cost- Effectiveness Legitimacy / Fairness Legal and Institutional Fit

Framework for policy mix analysis Does not primarily ask whether one instrument is more effective or efficient than another, assuming that only the better instrument should be used.

10 Framework for policy mix analysis Does not primarily ask whether one instrument is more effective or efficient than another, assuming that only the better instrument should be used. Policy mix analysis focuses on the interaction of instruments positive interaction: complementary combinations of instruments, enhancing the effects of each other negative interaction: one instrument negates or dilutes the effect of another sequencing instrument combinations

Frameworks for policy mix analysis Environmental policies: Overlap of instruments considered as a negative interaction reducing efficiency Conservation policies: Functional redundancy in the face

11 Frameworks for policy mix analysis Environmental policies: Overlap of instruments considered as a negative interaction reducing efficiency Conservation policies: Functional redundancy in the face of ignorance; Overlap considered necessary (e.g., OECD, 1999; Gunningham and Young, 1997) not the same as risk or portfolio diversification, although the latter may also be policy mix design criteria

12 Policyscape = a policymix in space Deforestation probability High rare endemic high biomass complexcanopy rare endemic low biomass simple canopy common endemic high biomass complex canopy common endemic low biomass simple canopy exotic high biomass complex canopy exotic low biomass simple canopy Low High

State of forest biodiversity (Nature Index rescaled) National parks Nature reserve Area

13 Other conservation areas Voluntary conservation Relatively few high NI & high productivity forests voluntarily protected? State of forest biodiversity (Nature Index rescaled) National parks Nature reserve Area (km 2 ) Source: Barton et al.(forthcoming) Society and Natural Resources Opportunity cost of conservation (Forest productivity classes rescaled)

14 Instrument Example: Ecological Fiscal Transfers(EFT) Portugal Local Finances Law 2007 promote sustainable local development Natura 2000 and other nationally protected areas as indicators for fiscal transfers to municipalities Brazil (since 1991) 14 out of 26 states consider protected areas for distributing statelevel value-added tax to municipalities ( ICMS Ecológico )

15 The rationale for Ecological Fiscal Transfers Benefits: Goods and services of national and global relevance Costs: Regionally and sectorally unequal distribution Environmental services involving spatial externalities: local costs and spillover benefits Payments for ecological services at the local level: Land users: PES schemes Local governments: Intergovernmental fiscal transfers but very few conservation indicators thus far Page 15

16 Growth in protected areas from 1992 to 2009, Paraná, Brazil Protected areas Prior to 1991 (ha) Up to August 2009 (ha) Increase (%) Federal conservation units 584, , State conservation units 118, , Municipal conservation units 8, , ,338.8 Indigenous areas 81, , RPPN 0 42, Faxinais (traditional community) 0 17, Permanent Protection Areas - APP 0 17, Legal Reserves RL 0 16, Special Sites SE 0 1, Other connective forests OFC 0 3, Total 792, ,096, Source: Wilson Loureiro, IAP/DIBAP-ICMS Ecológico for Biodiversity, in POLICYMIX report D2.1

17 Impacts of (ecological) fiscal transfers on municipal budgets in Portugal (2008) Municipalities with more than 75% conservation areas Municipalities with less than 75% conservation areas Municipalities Share of fiscal transfers as a proportion of total municipal revenue Share of ecological fiscal transfers Share of conservation areas to total municipal area Campo Maior 89% 25% 100% Murtosa 78% 6% 80% Porto de Mós 75% 11% 76% Aljezur 70% 16% 73% Barrancos 97% 26% 100% Terras de Bouro 94% 22% 95% Freixo de Espada à Cinta 93% 21% 91% Castro Verde 90% 34% 76% Lisboa 25% 0% 0% Grândola 71% 2% 9% Viana do Castelo 60% 0,5% 24% Lamego 80% 1% 33% Almeirim 62% 0% 0% Peso da Régua 87% 0,4% 12% Évora 62% 1% 16% Vimioso 96% 8% 38%

Example: Ecological Fiscal Transfers in the policymix Builds on PA

levels addressed: governments at different levels national / state / local

complement: PES private actors; Conservation support prog.

18 Example: Ecological Fiscal Transfers in the policymix Builds on PA regulation Complements e.g. PES Requires info and involvement Governance levels addressed: governments at different levels national / state / local Associated with: Constitution, Protected area regulation Potential complement: PES private actors; Conservation support prog. management costs Relevant: Good information policy to increase knowledge and motivation of actors addressed

Propositions and POLICYMIX findings combining economic instruments and other conservation policies is inefficient => not necessarily market-based instruments are more efficient than

19 Propositions and POLICYMIX findings combining economic instruments and other conservation policies is inefficient => not necessarily market-based instruments are more efficient than command-and-control instruments => not necessarily payments for ecosystem services is a marketbased instrument => usually not halting biodiversity loss relies on protected area and ensuring compliance to protection regulations => not enough

20 Findings. in brief Peter, please add a photo from MT here Economic instruments need a regulatory home and a family of information instruments.

22 policymix.nina.no

Aligning ecological fiscal transfers in national and state policy mixes

International Conference on Policy Mixes in Environmental and Conservation Policies Aligning ecological fiscal transfers in national and state policy mixes Irene Ring, Peter H. May and Rui Santos 25 27