species conservation in the face of political uncertainty martin drechsler/frank wätzold (ufz)
DESCRIPTION
Introduction. Species conservation in the face of political uncertainty Martin Drechsler/Frank Wätzold (UFZ) 1. Motivation 2. Literature 3. Basic model structure 4. Model analysis 5. Model results 6. Final remarks. Motivation. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Species conservation in the face of political uncertainty
Martin Drechsler/Frank Wätzold (UFZ)
1. Motivation2. Literature3. Basic model structure4. Model analysis5. Model results6. Final remarks
Introduction
Examples point to the risk of a „roll back“ in environmental policy, meaning there is „political uncertainty “!
Motivation
Motivation
• Political uncertainty is particularly problematic when there is the risk of irreversible damage, like the extinction of an endangered species
• What are the options of a present government that has the goal of long-term protection of species but has to expect that a future government will give less priority to species conservation?
• Focus on species that require protection measures and corresponding financial compensation on a regular basis
Motivation
• Uncertainty exists over the the availability of a budget in future periods, such that future budgets may be lower than today with
a certain probability
• Problems of similar structure arise from economic fluctuations as well as fluctuating donations to non-commercial conservation funds like WWF
• An institutional framework for transferring financial resources into the future may be an independent foundation that in each period decides how much money shouod be spent for
conservation in the present period and how much should be saved for future efforts
Motivation
Aim of the paper
Develop a conceptual model for this dynami optimisation problem to gain a better understanding of relevant ecological and economic parameters and their interaction in time.
Integration of ecological and economic knowledge in models
Ando, A, Camm, J., Polasky, S., Solow, A. (1998) Science
Perrings, C. (2003) Discussion paper
Baumgärtner (2003) Ecosystem Health
Literature
Dynamic models for biodiversity conservation
Johst, K., Drechsler, M., Wätzold, F. (2002) Ecological Economics
Costello, C., Polasky, S. (2002) Discussion paper
Micro- and macroeconomic dynamic consumption models
Leland (1968) Quarterly Journal of Economics
Ecological benefit function
Basic model structure
Starting point:Maximise the survival probability of a species, T, over T+1 periods
The survival probability over T+1 periods, each of length t, then is
T
t
T
ttt
T
ttT tt
0 00
)exp()exp(
with t the species-specific extinction rate and t the length of the period
For period t: )exp()( tt tt
According to Lande (1993) and Wissel et al. (1994) the extinction rate in period t is given by
with
Kt : habitat capacity
ã : species specific parameter
: positive and inverse proportional to the variance in the population growth rate
t
tK
a~
Basic model structure
• Initial habitat capacity be K(0). If certain measures are carried out in a given period then the habitat capacity in that period (but no longer) increases to K(0)+t.
• Species-friendly land-use measures cause costs (assuming constant marginal costs, such that t=bct).
T
ttc
bK
S0
)0(
)(
1
max)exp( tST with
• The conservation objective of the (present) government can be formulated as the maximisation of the survival probability over T+1 periods:
Basic model structure
Government
Agency
Fund Ft
Measurescosting ct und increasing
habitat capacity by kt
Grant gt
Payment pt
ttt εhg
σσεt ,
Basic model structure
T
tjα
jp
T
tjj
pt pC
ZtpJtt )(
1maxmax),(Value function
pt: control variable (payment)
Model analysis
tttt gFpp 0
111 tttt pgFF (Equation of motion)Boundary conditions
Intertemporal allocation problem under uncertainty.
Solution via stochastic dynamic programming:
2
6)2(
2ˆ
11
211
1
TTT
TTTT hgF
/ασhgFp
111 TTT gFp
),ˆmin(* 111 TTT ppp
Solution for period T-1
11ˆ TT pp
11ˆ TT pp
Interiour solution
Corner solution
Model analysis
TTTT pgF*p
Solution for period T
ht: deterministic component of the grant: stochastic variation (s.d.) of the grant
Model analysis
Solution pT-k* depends only on the number of consecutive periods withinterior solution (without a corner solution in between) following thePresent period T-k
In the deterministic case the future and particularly the number of future consecutive periods with interiour solution is known.
In the stochastic case the probability distribution of the number of consecutive periods with interiour solution can be approximated.
Optimal payments (dotted line) when grants (solid line) first fall, then rise and then fall again. The evolution of the fund is presented by the dashed line.
Model results - Example 1: no stochasticity
Period
0 2 4 6 8
Mag
nitu
de
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
αtpC )(
1
tp
Distribution of the number l of consecutive periods with interiour solution: P(l)
Optimal Payment under the assumption of exactly l periods with interioursolution following: pt(l)
Uncertainty reduces the optimal payment („precautionary saving“,Leland 1968).The larger , the more is saved
Model results - Example 2: stochasticity, no trend
)1(2
)1)(ln(
)1(6
)2(*
22
0
TT
T
hhp
Optimal payment in period t=0:
: uncertainty in the grants: ecological parameter(shape of the benefit function)h: mean of the grants
Model results - Example 3: negative trend plus stochasticity, 3 periods t=0,1,2
: Uncertainty in the grants: ecological parameterh0: grant in periode t=0: negative trend in the grantsC: constante
For small and for large (uncertainty in the grants):
Ch
/ασδh*p
0
2
00
12)2(
But latter equation can be approximated by former with error <3%. Therefore the effect of is clear with negligible error.
Uncertainty reduces the optimal payment („precautionary saving“)
Für median :
σ
δδ
Ch
/ασh*p
24
312)2(
0
2
00
p0* can increase with („precautionary spending“)– effect of ambiguous!
Final remarks
• Even allocation of the payments should be aimed at, as long as the boundary conditions (non-negativity of the fund) allow for it
• Consideration of interest rates complicated and ambiguous
• Stochasticity large or small against the trend: stochasticity reduces the optimal payment, i.e. save more - the larger (i.e., in species with weakly fluctuating population growth), the more should be saved
• Stochasticity of similar magnitude as the trend: stochasticity may increase optimal payment, but only marginally
• Further research: Analysis of the problems of political uncertainty with respect to a concrete species conservation programme