| 1. |
- Busch, Jonah, et al.
(författare)
-
A global review of ecological fiscal transfers
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Nature Sustainability. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2398-9629. ; 4:9, s. 756-765
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Ecological fiscal transfers (EFT) transfer public revenue between governments within a country based on ecological indicators. EFT can compensate subnational governments for the costs of conserving ecosystems and in principle can incentivize greater ecological conservation. We review established EFT in Brazil, Portugal, France, China and India, and emerging or proposed EFT in ten more countries. We analyse common themes related to EFT emergence, design and effects. EFT have grown rapidly from US$0.35 billion yr−1 in 2007 to US$23 billion yr−1 in 2020. We discuss the scope of opportunity to expand EFT to other countries by ‘greening’ intergovernmental fiscal transfers.
|
|
| 2. |
- Olschewski, Roland, et al.
(författare)
-
Policy Forum: Challenges and opportunities in developing new forest governance systems : Insights from the IPBES assessment for Europe and Central Asia
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Forest Policy and Economics. - : Elsevier. - 1389-9341 .- 1872-7050. ; 97, s. 175-179
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Efforts to develop new governance systems in environmental policy at the international, national and subnational level face multiple challenges. In the context of these challenges, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) was established by the United Nations in 2012 to become the leading intergovernmental body for assessing the state of the planet’s biodiversity, its ecosystems, and the essential contributions they provide to society. In this note, we refer to the Regional Assessment for Europe and Central Asia. As co-authors of the report, we present the results of our assessment focusing on the forest sector due to its high potential for conserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services. Notwithstanding several knowledge gaps, the IPBES regional assessment provides a valuable basis to make better-informed decisions. It identifies promising governance options by mainstreaming the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and the sustained provision of ecosystem services into public and private decision making, emphasising a more pro-active and goal-oriented policy approach. To which degree these options can be realized and which pathways will be taken towards a sustainable transition is a matter of societal choice, including policy, economy and citizens.
|
|
| 5. |
- Simoncini, Riccardo, et al.
(författare)
-
Constraints and opportunities for mainstreaming biodiversity and ecosystem services in the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy : Insights from the IPBES assessment for Europe and Central Asia
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Land use policy. - : Elsevier. - 0264-8377 .- 1873-5754. ; 88
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), being one of the strongest drivers of agricultural land-use practices, has a substantial impact on biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Member States. The initial focus of the CAP to increase and intensify agricultural production affected water and land qualities and contributed to the degradation of traditional agricultural landscapes, cultural identities, and erosion of typical farmland biodiversity. Recent CAP reforms have begun to consider biodiversity and ecosystem services, but still fall short of a thorough mainstreaming approach. The objectives of this paper are to point out main findings regarding (i) key shortcomings of the current CAP, and (ii) major opportunities to enhance the mainstreaming of biodiversity and ecosystem services within the CAP. The paper is based on insights generated in the sub-global assessment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) for Europe and Central Asia11A major part of this contribution is based on an earlier, pre-peer reviewed version of Ring et al. (2018): Ring, I., Sandström, C., Acar, S., Adeishvili, M., Albert, C., Allard, C., Anker, Y., Arlettaz, R., Bela, G., ten Brink, B., Fischer, A., Fürst, C., Galil, B., Hynes, S., Kasymov, U., Marta-Pedroso, C., Mendes, A., Molau, U., Olschewski, R., Pergl, J., & Simoncini, R. (2018): Chapter 6: Options for governance and decision-making across scales and sectors. In: IPBES (2018): The IPBES regional assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Europe and Central Asia. Rounsevell, M., Fischer, M., Torre-Marin Rando, A., Mader, A. (eds.). Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany, pp. 661-802.. Our results illustrate the evolution of agricultural policy objectives and instruments applied in the CAP, and their effects on selected ecosystem services and biodiversity. We shed light on key shortcomings of existing policy and provide recommendations for further CAP reforms to achieve more effective biodiversity conservation and sustainable use of ecosystem services.
|
|
