Search

Institutional and legal options and constraints

WP 6 will establish a framework for analyzing institutional constraints and options that condition the introduction and applicability of economic policy instruments for biodiversity conservation. Our focus will be on both formal institutions (law, administrative structures) and informal institutions (practices, traditions, beliefs) that affect the opportunities for adoption of particular policy instruments in several country specific contexts.

Contact: Eeva Primmer, SYKE

Objectives

  •  provide a conceptual framework for an analysis of country specific institutional and legal constraints and options to be applied in the cases studies
  • summarise country specific institutional and legal constraints and options drawing on case studies
  • identify legal constraints and options for the use of economic instruments in biodiversity policies based on EU law
  • provide new insights onto how the European law could be developed to overcome identified constraints

 Task 1. Framework for analysing institutional path dependency of biodiversity policies

 Task 2 Legal constraints and options

Task 3 Country specific institutional options and constraints in case studies

Publications
  • J. Vivan (in memoriam), R. Davenport, P.C. Nunes, R. Abad, P.H. May, D.N. Barton, L.P. Amaral. 2013. Pilot projects and agroenvironmental measures in northwest Mato Grosso, Brazil: impacts and lesson for REDD+ policy “mixes.” Paper presented at ESEE Conference, Lille.
  • May P. H., M. F. Gebara, G. Lima, C. Jordão, P. Nogueira, M. Grieg-Gran. 2013. The effectiveness and fairness of the “Ecological ICMS” as a fiscal transfer for biodiversition conservation. A tale of two municipalities in Mato Grosso, Brazil. Paper presented at ESEE Conference, Lille.
  • Möckel, S. 2013 Zeitschrift für Europäisches Umwelt- und Planungsrecht 2013 (11), p. 85 - 94
  • Primmer (2011), Analysis of institutional adaptation: integration of biodiversity conservation into forestry, Journal of Cleaner Production, 19: 16, 1822 - 1832
  • Primmer, E. et al. (2011) Draft Guidelines for the analysis of institutions shaping biodiversity policy instrument applicability. Technical Brief Issue No. 2
  • Primmer, E. et al. (2013) Best practice guidelines on the role of  multi‐level governance institutions in policy. Technical Brief Issue No. 9  
  • Primmer, E. et al.(2013) Evolution in Finland's Forest Biodiversity Conservation Payments and the Institutional Constraints on Establishing New Policy, Society and Natural Resources, 0:1-18
  • Puga, B.P., Chiodi, R., Sarcinelli, O., Andrade, D.C., Romeiro, A.R. Institutional aspects of PES schemes in Cantareira System Region.
  • 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
  • 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