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
»
Methodologies Logo
»
Policy instruments
Methodologies Logo » Policy instruments
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
Klassert, C., und Möckel, S. (2013). Improving the Policy Mix: The Scope for Market-Based Instruments in EU Biodiversity Policy. Environmental Policy and Governance (EPG) 23: 311-322
Lienhoop, N., Brouwer, R., 2014: Agrienvironmental policy valuation: Farmers‘ design preferences for afforestation schemes. Land Use Planning
Santos, R., Antune,s P., Ring, I., Clemente, P., Ribas, T., Directing economic instruments at public and private local stakeholders for biodiversity conservation. The case of agrienvironment schemes and ecological fiscal transfers. Environmental Policy and Governance
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
Schröter-Schlaack, C., Ring, I., Koellner, T., Santos, R., Antunes, P., Clemente, P., Mathevet, R., Borie, M., Grodzińska-Jurczak, M. (2014): Intergovernmental fiscal transfers to support local conservation action in Europe. The German Journal of Economic Geography
Project publications
Barton et al. (2014) Guidelines for multi-scale policy mix assessments. POLICYMIX Technical Brief No. 12
Barton, D. N. et al. (2012)Assessment of existing and proposed policy instruments for biodiversity conservation in Norway. Report 1/2012
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.
Bittner, S. and Lienhoop, N., 2013: Understanding non-participation of farmers in agri-environmental schemes for afforestation. The case of West Saxony.
Chacón-Cascante, A.et al. (2012). Costa Rica: National level assessment of the role of economic instruments in the conservation policymix. Report 2/2012
Droste, N., Ring, I., Schröter-Schlaack, C., Lenk, T. Ecological Fiscal transfers in Germany. Discussion paper draft.
May, P. et al. (2012) Assessment of the role of economic and regulatory instruments in the conservation policymix for the Brazilian Amazon – a coarse grain study. Report 5/2012
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
Primmer, E. et al. (2013) Finland: Assessment of existing and proposed policy instruments for biodiversity conservation at national level POLICYMIX Report Issue No 2/2013. This report replaces POLICYMIX Report 4/2012.
Ring, I. et al. (2011) Instrument Mixes for Biodiversity Policies. Report 2/2011
Ring, I. et al. (2011) Recommendations for assessing instruments in policy mixes for biodiversity and ecosystem governance. Technical Brief Issue no. 5
Romeiro, A.R. et al. (2012) Assessment of existing and proposed policy instruments for biodiversity conservation in São Paulo -Brazil: a coarse grain analysis. Report 3/2012
Santos, R. et al. (2012) Assessment of the role of economic instruments in the Portuguese conservation policymix – a national coarse grain analysis. Report 6/2012
Santos, R., Clemente, P., Brouwer, R., Antunes, P., Pinto, R., Landowners Preferences for Agri-Environmental Agreements to Improve the Conservation Value of the Montados’ Ecosystem in Portugal (to be submitted in May 2014)
Santos, R., May, P., Barton, D.N., and Ring, I. (eds.) 2014. Comparative assessment of policy mixes across case studies - common design factors and transferability of assessment results. Report 1/2014.
Schröter‐Schlaack,C.et al.(2013) Assessment of existing and proposed policy instruments for biodiversity conservation in Germany The role of ecological fiscal transfers. Report 1/2013
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
Similä, J. et al. (2012) Legal analysis of the relationship between European state aid and nature conservation law, and economic instruments for biodiversity protection. Report 7/2012
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