Assigning priority to environmental policy interventions in a heterogeneous world

153 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Spatially Uniform versus Spatially Heterogeneous Compensation Payments for Biodiversity-Enhancing Land-Use Measures (2005, background): “Similarly, Babcock et al. (1997) and Ferraro (2003) analyse efficiency losses if the regulator spatially allocates funds for environmental purposes not according to the cost-effectiveness rule but according to the rules of cost targeting (funds are directed to the least-cost options first) and ben”
Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services (2008, background): “If opportunity costs and environmental benefits are strongly negatively correlated or if the relative spatial variability of costs is much higher than that of benefits, an auction that ignores benefits will secure much of the environmental benefits that could be secured through a targeted auction ( ”
Maximizing return on investment in conservation (2007, background): “Land purchase costs often vary by orders of magnitude across different potential conservation sites (e.g., Ando et al., 1998; Polasky et al., 2001) so ROI is often more dependent on differences in costs than in benefits (Ferraro, 2003).”