Upload
lauren-sullivan
View
215
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Extractive Reserves as Property Right Regime for Biodiversity Conservation in the Brazilian Amazon
Timo Goeschl & Danilo Camargo Igliori
Fourth Bioecon Workshop on the Economics of Biodiversity Conservation
Venice28 August 2003
Department of Land Economy
Research
1. Preliminary efforts: presented at the first Biecon workshop, Rome, May 2002
2. Progress:
1. Dynamic Hotelling Model, paper presented at the Eaere annual conference, Bilbao, June 2003 (available at https:\\www.gruponhaise.com/eaere2003/session03.htm)
2. Analysis of Property Rights
Policy problem
• Maintenance of biologically diverse ecosystems
• Land requirements and the opportunity costs of non-conversion
critical trade-off for developing countries
Brazilian answer
• In the 1960s and 1970s:– Development programme– Road building – New settlements– Agriculture and pastureland
• From the 1980s: – Conservation becomes part of the development
agenda– New instrument: Extractive reserves
Extractive Reserves• Objective:
– conservation and development in territorial spaces of ecological and social importance
• Approach:– Property rights over land and biological capital stock held by the
federal government.– Property rights over the flow of NWFP contracted out to indigenous
community
• Assessment:– Highly ambiguous (Peluso 1992, Allegretti 1994 versus Andersen et
al. 2003, Southgate 1998, and others)– Key problem: Competition with plantations producing NWFP using
preferred production conditions
NWFP competitors
Plantation• Owns all assets• Free choice of
technology• Free choice of stock of
biological/genetic capital
• Cost dynamics (technology vs. genetic depreciation)
Extractive Reserve• Owns only outputs and
non-biological inputs• Restricted to technology
approved under use plan• Fixed biological/genetic
capital stock• No cost dynamics
Can ER work in theory?
• Competition between highly heterogeneous producers
• Factors in favour of viable Extractive Reserves– Spatial aspects: market power
Transportation costs, spatial differentiation
– Intertemporal aspects: cost dynamicsYield loss dynamics, pesticide, genetic improvement
– IO aspects: Vertical interactions with competitorsSupply of germplasm to intensive production
Are these factors sufficient to generate long-run positive profits?
Model
• Positive analysis• Construct ‘most favourable’ scenario
– Stylised model of spatial duopolistic competition between two heterogeneous competitors
– Heterogeneous dynamics: One competitor features production cost dynamics of investment and depreciation of biological capital
=> Dynamic Hotelling model
• Assess long-term viability of an extractive reserve under this scenario
Markets for NWFP
• Revenue source for ER• Commodities: Rubber, nuts, oils,...• Common feature: Products produced using a
biological capital stock• Market participants:
– Extractive reserves– Plantations / Quasi-plantations
Horizontal interaction only
Proposition I
If biological inputs are priced and relatively scarce, then
the extractive reserve can sustain long-run positive
profits.
Proposition II
If biological inputs are not priced or not relatively scarce
and initial production costs for plantations are high, then
the extractive reserve can earn interim positive profits
while plantation costs converges to limit price at which
reserve exits.
Markets for biological inputs
• Relies on cost dynamics of plantation depreciation of genetic inputs
• Critical issue: price of biological inputs• ER as biological input supplier:
– Uses locally abundant biological capital– Uses local human capital (knowledge)– Neg. link between market share on NWFP and
demand for biological inputs
Vertical and horizontal interaction
Proposition IIIIf the rate of exogenous technological progress is low, the reserve will make positive long-run profits on both the output and input market.
If the rate of technological progress is moderate, the reserve will make positive long-run profits on the input market only.
Proposition IV: Vertical interaction is not strictly improving reserve’s welfare position.
Markets for new NWFP
• NWFP: Limited long-run revenue potential• But evidence of short-run potential through
temporary monopoly on NWFP market• Can ER generate sequences of new NWFP?
– Uses locally abundant biological capital stock– Returns to product search?
• Cost of product search• Pool of potential products in capital stock
Evidence
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
years
mar
ket s
hare
extraction
cultivation
Development pathways
Analysis suggests three possible pathways(1) Continued production of existing NWFP(2) Discovery of new NWFP(3) Supply of biological inputs
Question: Property rights in place to support pathways bygenerating rents for relevant inputs/outputs?
Property rights within the reserveSTATE
Land Ownership
Determines the constraintsover resource exploitation
Long term concession
External Monitoring
Use Plan
COMMUNITY
Institutional rights over the exploitation of NWFP within the
Reserve's designated area
HOUSEHOLDS
Exclusive rights over the exploitation of natural resources in individual land plots
Institutional Support
Internal MonitoringLegitimate the community
PRs within the reserve– Existing NWFP
• Boundaries and population with use rights are clearly defined;
• Community designs operational rules;• Monitors are the appropriators themselves; • There is an association, which is a local forum for conflict
resolution;• Governmental authorities do not challenge autonomous
institutional building.
Extractive reserves have most of the necessary institutionalcharacteristics proposed by Ostrom (1990)
• Critical input: search activity directed towards the discovery of new NWFP with revenue potential.
• Problem: - individuals in the reserves cannot exclude others from
benefiting potential discoveries;- there are few incentives for putting efforts in R&D
activities;
Also: Lack of necessary expertise to carry outsystematic research and product development.
PRs within the reserve– New NWFP
• Critical input: knowledge about production-relevant characteristics of the local biological capital stock.
• Problem: there is currently no mechanism to reward information with respect to biological characteristics, productive properties and resistance to diseases
PR within the reserve– Genetic resources
PRs in the wider economy
Output Property Right
NWFP Private PR
Discovery No private PR
Genetic Resources No private PR
Discussion
Development Pathways
PR Ex NWFP Discov. Biol. Inputs
Inputs E D D
Outputs E D/E D
E: effective; D: deficient
Conclusions
• Three development pathways under ER framework• PRs supports the extraction of existing NWFP• Existing NWFP is theoretically viable only under highly
restrictive conditions• Conditions generally not fulfilled in reality• PRs does not support the other two pathways• Development objectives unlikely to be realised under
given set of PRs
Questions: Is it feasible to change the PR structure toenable reserves to pursue the other pathways?