Login
Home
Participants
NINA (Norway)
UFZ (Germany)
CENSE (Portugal)
IVM (Netherlands)
IIED (UK)
SYKE (Finland)
REDES (Brazil)
FUNDAG (Brazil)
CATIE (Costa Rica)
Research topics
Review of policy instruments and roles (WP2)
Policy objectives & monitoring effectiveness (WP3)
Economic benefits and costs (WP4)
Social impacts and policy legitimacy (WP5)
Legal & institutional options & constraints (WP6)
Multi-scale case study comparative analysis (WP8)
Methodological synthesis & policy recomm. (WP9)
Case studies
Norway
Germany
Portugal
Finland
Brazil – Mata Atlantica
Brazil – Mato Grosso
Costa Rica
Associated Case studies
South eastern Australia
Conference
Welcome
Themes
Program
Keynotes
Registration
Accommodation
Conference venue
Important dates
Committees
Contact
Publications
Biodiversity and ecosystem impact
Ecosystem service values
Social impact
Institutional fit
Modelling
Policy instruments
Comparisons & mixes
Trade policy
REDDplus
Ecological fiscal transfers
Protected area enforcement
AEM
PES
Tradable rights & offsets
Policymix tool
Search
You are here:
Home »
Policymix tool
»
Policy cycle
»
Final outcomes
Policy cycle » Final outcomes
Peer reviewed
Balvanera, P. et al.(2012). Ecosystem services research in Latin America: The state of the art . Ecosystem Services, In Press
Brouwer, R., Tesfaye, A., and Pauw, P. (2011). Meta-analysis of institutional-economic factors explaining the environmental performance of payments for watershed services. Environmental Conservation, 38(4), 380-392.
Santos, R., Ring, I., Antunes, P., Clemente, P., 2012. Fiscal transfers for biodiversity conservation: the Portuguese Local Finances Law. Land Use Policy, 29, 261-273 Acknowledgement: SCALES EC-FP7 project, which funded part of the research
Schröter et al. (2015) Ecosystem Services and Opportunity Costs Shift Spatial Priorities for Conserving Forest Biodiversity. PLOS ONE November 13, 2014
Project publications
Barton, D. N. et al. (2013) Guidelines for opportunity cost evaluation of conservation policy instruments. Technical Brief Issue no. 11 (rev.)
Barton, D.N. , I. Ring, G. Rusch (2014) Policyscape: Nature-based policy mixes for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision
Bernasconi, P.; S. Blumentrath; D.N. Barton; G. Rusch & A. R. Romeiro (2013) Policyscape— The potential of Tradable Development Rights (TDR) to improve effectiveness and reduce the costs of biodiversity conservation: study case in Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Brouwer, R. and Simon, T. (2011) Review of the Biodiversity Valuation Literature and Meta-Analysis. Report 5/2011
Brouwer, R. et al. (2013) Guidelines for biodiversity valuation and benefits assessment of economic instruments. Tecnical Brief Issue no. 10
Bunikyte, R., G. M. Rusch, and B. J. Graae. 2012. A time-line analysis of the public biodiversity conservation mix: Changes in conservation gains in the county of Sør-Trøndelag.
Grieg-Gran, M. et al. (2011) Guidelines for Assessing Social Impacts and Legitimacy in Conservation. Technical Guide Issue no. 1
Grieg‐Gran, M. et al. (2013) Best practice guidelines for assessing social impacts and legitimacy of conservation policy instruments. Technical Brief Issue no.8
May, P.H. et al (2012) The "Ecological" Value Added Tax (ICMS-Ecologico) in Brazil and its effectiveness in State biodiversity conservation: a comparative analysis
May, P.H. et al (2013) The effectiveness and fairness of the "Ecological ICMS" as a fiscal transfer for biodiversity conservation. A tale of two municipalities in Mato Grosso, Brazil.
Vatn et al.(2014) Payments for Nature Values Market and Non-market Instruments
Vatn, A. et al. (2011) Can markets protect Biodiversity? An evaluation of different financial mechanisms
Previous
<
Policymix tool Home
Policymix webpage Home