Policy objectives & monitoring effectiveness (WP3)

Peer reviewed

		Barton, D.N. et al. (2013) Policyscape—A Spatially Explicit Evaluation of Voluntary Conservation in a Policy Mix for Biodiversity Conservation in Norway. Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal, 26:10, 1185-1201
		Schröter et al. (2015) Ecosystem Services and Opportunity Costs Shift Spatial Priorities for Conserving Forest Biodiversity. PLOS ONE November 13, 2014

		Andrade, J. et al., compensation for Legal Reserves in Northwest Mato Grosso: a policymix to reduce deforestation
		Blumentrath, S. (2011) Site prioritisation models and their suitability for assessing and designing policy mixes for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision: a comparison of software packages. Technical Brief Issue no.4
		Del Arco, P., May P. H., Rusch, G.. 2013. The effect of forest proximity on biological control of pasture in Northwest Mato Grosso, Brazil: an economic analysis for land use policy. ESEE Conference, Lille.
		Rusch,G.M. et al. (2011) Existing data and adequacy of the datasets for the national and local scales analyses for assessing gains in maintaining biodiversity. POLICYMIX Report Issue 3/2011
		Rusch,G.M. et al. (2011) Policy outcomes: A guideline to assess biodiversity conservation and ESS provision gains. Technical Brief Issue no.3
		Rusch,G.M. et al. (2013) Best practice guidelines for assessing effectiveness of instruments on biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision. Technical Brief Issue no. 7
		Schulz- Zunkel, C., Schröter-Schlaack, C., Ring, I. & Klenke, R. (2014): Selecting biodiversity indicators for implementing ecological fiscal transfers at state level in GermanySubmitted to Ecological Indicators
		Sverdrup-Thygeson et al. (2015) Spatial Overlap between Environmental Policy Instruments and Areas of High Conservation Value in Forest