Browsing by Person "Feuerbacher, Arndt"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

The economic value of pollination services for seed production: a blind spot deserving attention
(2024) Feuerbacher, Arndt; Herbold, Theresa; Krumbe, Falk; Feuerbacher, Arndt; Ecological-Economic Policy Modelling Research Group, University of Hohenheim, Schwerzstr. 46, 70599, Stuttgart, Germany; Herbold, Theresa; Ecological-Economic Policy Modelling Research Group, University of Hohenheim, Schwerzstr. 46, 70599, Stuttgart, Germany; Krumbe, Falk; Ecological-Economic Policy Modelling Research Group, University of Hohenheim, Schwerzstr. 46, 70599, Stuttgart, Germany
Animal-mediated pollination is important for agricultural seed and crop production, and critical to overall ecosystem health. However, the scientific literature focused on the economic valuation of pollination services has thus far neglected the role of pollination services in seed production. The marketed food output of many crops is not dependent on pollination services, but these crops indirectly depend on pollination services with respect to their seed production. This study proposes a partial equilibrium framework for identifying the value of pollination services. Using Germany as a case study, we find the value of pollination services is about 33% higher when seed production is considered. This increased valuation is driven by two effects: higher seed costs due to high dependence on pollination services, and a higher demand for seeds due to the land expansion needed to mitigate a potential pollinator collapse. This study demonstrates that more sophisticated approaches are needed to estimate the economic value of pollination services more accurately.
Exploring private financing for biodiversity conservation: Stakeholder perspectives and governance in the case of wildflower strips in Germany
(2024) Bücheler, Hannah; Bieling, Claudia; Feuerbacher, Arndt
This study explores the understudied role of privately financed ecosystem service provision in biodiversity conservation, focusing on the example of wildflower strips in Germany. Using qualitative methods, it investigates the diversity of private financing schemes, stakeholder involvement, scheme implementation and farmers motivations to engage in private schemes. The results draw on literature-based stakeholder analysis and expert interviews, including ecol- ogists and practitioners, in three German federal states: Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria and Lower Saxony. Findings include a stakeholder map, the identification of four types of private financing schemes, and the formulation of 17 design criteria covering ecological, economic, and social aspects. These criteria aim to guide providers and sponsors and to emphasise the diverse nature of private wildflower strip financing schemes and their role as crucial links among farmers, the private sector, and society. The study highlights private schemes as viable alternatives to public funding but raises concerns about quality control and coordination with public measures. Combining publicly funded agri-environment schemes with private financing is controversial among stakeholders. Government intervention could formalise the private market, improving control and protection, possibly limiting private sector flexibility and attractiveness due to higher levels of bureaucracy. In any case, transparency in management and financial structures is crucial. Policy recommendations overall include incentivising private sector conservation involvement, offering tax credits for private financing, improving government mechanisms, streamlining coordination of public and private conservation at the landscape level and fostering stakeholder networking. Consequently, this study lays a foundational framework for further exploration into the realm of private financing in biodiversity conservation.
Market-based instruments for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: An evaluation of quality criteria in a German case study
(2025) Streit, Lea; Feuerbacher, Arndt; Röhl, Markus
Market-based instruments (MBIs) for the protection and promotion of biodiversity have gained significant importance in recent years. The success of MBIs depends largely on the transparent presentation of their actual effects, which rely on the quality of implementation. Quality criteria can be used to evaluate this. To date, few studies have examined whether and how these criteria are applied. This study seeks to address this gap, by using MBIs in the German agricultural landscape as a case study. Quality criteria were defined on the basis of a literature review; then applied to MBIs identified through an internet search and finally analyzed. Quality criteria related to methodological approaches (implementation, maintenance, used seed mixtures) and quality control (monitoring, localization) are presented less frequently than information on rights and obligations or the use of financial funds. Among the 151 MBIs analyzed, 70% lack control mechanisms and monitoring systems, indicating unverified effectiveness. Additionally, MBIs financed through program approaches are more likely to have control mechanisms and include perennial measures than MBIs funded by direct payments of sponsors or consumers purchasing a product. The development of MBI offerings suggests that there is persistent and growing demand, as some programs have been running for several decades. However, without ecological monitoring, it is not possible to ascertain whether these measures benefit biodiversity. To establish standardized methods for comparing MBIs for biodiversity, policymakers must consider official guidelines and, where appropriate, implement regulatory frameworks.