The Value of Biodiversity as an Insurance Device (original) (raw)
Related papers
Ecological Modelling, 2005
This paper investigates how optimal economic growth can affect the natural evolution of the ecological system. Policy makers may perform defensive actions to protect biodiversity. These actions, however, may deeply modify the natural ecological dynamics so that the resulting equilibrium has different dynamic features with respect to the equilibrium that would have naturally emerged without human intervention. To investigate this issue more deeply, we analyze the impact that economic activity and environmental defensive choices can have on the natural ecological dynamics depending on whether agents care or do not care for biodiversity. Using an optimal growth model with pollution, in which biodiversity loss may be caused by the negative side-effects of aggregate production, we show that human action can modify the stability of the ecological fixed points. In particular, from the simple analytical formulations adopted in the paper, it emerges that -when the levels of the species is sufficiently low at the fixed point and agents care for biodiversity -human intervention may cause a stabilization of the fixed point and thus avoid the extinction of a species, even in the absence of defensive expenditures specifically finalized at the protection of that species. It follows that the protection of biodiversity (through the stabilization of the ecological system) may come at the cost of a change in the original features of the natural dynamics. Moreover, it is shown that a limit cycle may arise through a Hopf bifurcation from the interaction of the economic and ecological systems even though none of the two systems taken separately admits a limit cycle.
The Economics of Biodiversity Conservation in Agricultural Transition
2005
This paper explores the dynamic effects of biodiversity conservation on agricultural production in the context of specialised intensive farming systems that may be in transition towards more sustainable farming. The focus is on the analysis of the dynamic effects of changes in the levels of agrobiodiversity, on technical change and productivity in intensive agricultural systems. A theoretical model is used to derive hypotheses regarding these linkages that are empirically tested using a stochastic production frontier model with data from a panel of UK cereal farms for the period 1989-2000. The results suggest that the increased agrobiodiversity has positively helped to shift the production frontier outwards. This indicates that agricultural transition from more to less intensive agricultural systems can be consistent with non-decreasing output levels and an enhancement of biodiversity in agricultural landscapes.
Biodiversity conservation and productivity in intensive agricultural systems
Journal of Agricultural …, 2007
This paper explores the economic effects of biodiversity loss on marketable agricultural output for intensive agricultural systems, which require an increasing level of artificial capital inputs. A theoretical bio-economic model is used to derive a hypothesis about the effect of the state of biodiversity on the optimal crop output both in the longer run and in the transitional path towards the steady-state equilibrium. The hypothesised positive relationship between biodiversity stock and optimal levels of crop output is empirically tested using a stochastic production frontier approach, based on data from a panel of UK specialised cereal farms for the period 1989-2000. The results support the theoretical hypothesis. Increases in biodiversity can lead to a continual outward shift in the output frontier (although at a decreasing rate), controlling for the relevant set of labour and capital inputs. Agricultural transition towards biodiversity conservation may be consistent with an increase in crop output in already biodiversitypoor modern agricultural landscapes.
This paper investigates how optimal economic growth can affect the natural evolution of the ecological system. Policy makers may perform defensive actions to protect biodiversity. These actions, however, may deeply modify the natural ecological dynamics so that the resulting equilibrium has different dynamic features with respect to the equilibrium that would have naturally emerged without human intervention. To investigate this issue more deeply, we analyze the impact that economic activity and environmental defensive choices can have on the natural ecological dynamics depending on whether agents care or do not care for biodiversity. Using an optimal growth model with pollution, in which biodiversity loss may be caused by the negative side-effects of aggregate production, we show that human action can modify the stability of the ecological fixed points. In particular, from the simple analytical formulations adopted in the paper, it emerges that – when the levels of the species is sufficiently low at the fixed point and agents care for biodiversity – human intervention may cause a stabilization of the fixed point and thus avoid the extinction of a species, even in the absence of defensive expenditures specifically finalized at the protection of that species. It follows that the protection of biodiversity (through the stabilization of the ecological system) may come at the cost of a change in the original features of the natural dynamics. Moreover, it is shown that a limit cycle may arise through a Hopf bifurcation from the interaction of the economic and ecological systems even though none of the two systems taken separately admits a limit cycle.
Biodiversity and Economic Growth: Stabilization Versus Preservation of the Ecological Dynamics
2004
This work examines the impact that economic growth can have on biodiversity and on the ecological dynamics that would naturally emerge in the absence of human activity. The loss of biodiversity may induce policy-makers to implement defensive actions that prevent single species from extinction. These defensive actions, however, may deeply alter the natural dynamics of interaction between species, leading to an ecological equilibrium that is completely different from the one that would exist in the absence of human intervention. This suggests that there might exist a conflict between preserving biodiversity (through stabilization of the ecological system) and preserving the intrinsic features of the ecological dynamics. To investigate this issue more deeply, we analyze the impact that different objective functions and defensive technologies can have on the natural ecological dynamics, and show that human action can modify the stability of the ecological fixed points. From the simple analytical formulations adopted in the paper, it emerges that it is possible to stabilize the ecological fixed point and consequently to avoid the extinction of a species, even in the absence of defensive expenditures specifically finalized at the protection of that species. The stabilizing. effect of human intervention, however, turns out to be enhanced when specific defensive expenditures are implemented. Finally, numerical simulations suggest that human activity can have an even deeper impact on the ecological dynamics, substantially modifying not only the stability of the fixed points, but also their number.
A double benefit of biodiversity in agriculture
The objective of this paper is to contribute to accounting for biodiversity goals in the design of agricultural policies. A bio-economic dynamic model is developed with a multi-scale perspective. It couples biodiversity dynamics, farming land-uses selected at the micro level and public policies at the macro level based on financial incentives for land-uses. The public decision maker provides optimal incentives respecting both biodiversity and budgetary constraints. These optimal policies are then analyzed through their private, public and total costs. The model is calibrated and applied to metropolitan France at the PRA ("petite région agricole") scale using common birds as biodiversity metrics. The study first shows that the efficiency curves display decreasing concavities for different biodiversity indicators pointing out the trade-off occuring between biodiversity and economic scores. However, the total and public costs suggest that accounting for biodiversity can generate a second benefit in terms of public incomes. It is argued how a regional redistribution of this public earning to the farmers could promote the acceptability of biodiversity goals in agricultural policies.
Volatility-reducing biodiversity conservation under strategic interactions
Ecological Economics
We study a model of strategic competition among farmers for land use in an agricultural economy. Each agent can take possession of a part of the collective forest land and convert it to farming. Unconverted forest land helps preserving biodiversity, which contributes to reducing the volatility of agricultural production. Agents' utility is given in terms of a Kreps Porteus stochastic dierential utility capable of disentangling risk aversion and aversion to uctuations. We characterize the land used by each farmer and her welfare at the Nash equilibrium, we evaluate the over-exploitation of the land and the agents' welfare loss compared to the socially optimal solution and we study the drivers of the ineciencies of the decentralized equilibrium. After characterizing the value of biodiversity in the model, we use an appropriate decomposition to study the policy implications of the model by identifying in which cases the allocation of property rights is preferable to the introduction of a land conversion tax.
Benefits and costs of biodiversity in agricultural public policies
European Review of Agricultural Economics, 2014
This paper examines the role played by biodiversity goals in the design of agricultural policies. A bio-economic model is developed with a dynamic and multi-scale perspective. It combines biodiversity dynamics, farming land-uses selected at the micro level and public policies at the macro level based on financial incentives for land-uses. The public decision-maker identifies optimal subsidies or taxes with respect to both biodiversity and budgetary constraints. These optimal policies are then analysed through their private, public and social costs. The model is calibrated and applied to metropolitan France at the small agricultural region scale, using common birds as biodiversity metrics. First results relying on optimality curves and private costs stress the bioeconomic trade-off between biodiversity and economic scores. In contrast, the analysis of public costs suggests that accounting for biodiversity can generate a second benefit in terms of public budget. Social costs defined as the sum of private and public costs also show possible bio-economic synergies.
Biodiversity Loss and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Analysis. Contemporary Economic Policy
2015
This paper empirically examines the relationship between biodiversity loss and economic growth in light of the current debate on the effects of economic growth on environmental quality. The basic premise of the paper is that biodiversity belongs to a special class of environmental degradation because it involves complex ecosystems the loss of which cannot be recovered by technological advances. The main finding is that while economic growth has an expected adverse effect on biodiversity, the composition of economic output can also be significant particularly in low-income countries. The study highlights the need to develop appropriate institutions and macroeconomic policies that allow biodiversity values to be internalized in decision-making processes. (JEL Q22, Q23, Q28)
On the Productive Value of Biodiversity
Environmental and Resource Economics, 2009
The paper investigates the value of biodiversity as it relates to the productive value of services provided by an ecosystem. It analyzes how the value of an ecosystem can be "greater than the sum of its parts." First, it proposes a general measure of the value of biodiversity. Second, this measure is decomposed into four components, reflecting the role of complementarity, scale, convexity, and catalytic effects. This provides new information on the sources and determinants of biodiversity value. Third, the paper examines the role of uncertainty. In this context, the role of risk and of downside-risk exposure and their effects on the value of biodiversity are explored. This provides useful insights on how management and policy decisions can affect the value of biodiversity.