推进生态系统服务拍卖:国际德尔菲小组的见解

IF 6.1 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY Ecosystem Services Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101647
{"title":"推进生态系统服务拍卖:国际德尔菲小组的见解","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Auction theory has made major contributions to overcoming allocation problems involving asymmetric information and common-pool resources, leading to multiple Nobel Prizes and serving as a foundation for multi-billion-dollar markets. Despite evidence that related mechanisms could enhance the performance of payments for ecosystem services (PES), adoption has been sporadic and inconsistent. One possibility is that the relevant peer reviewed literature has low visibility or consensus design elements are not sufficiently accessible to interested experts. To overcome this barrier, we adopt a straightforward approach: we asked the PES auction subfield to describe itself. In collaboration with an expert panel (<em>n</em> = 32) whose affiliations span more than two dozen universities and research bodies across three continents—including top-ranked economists, ecosystem services theorists, and practitioners with experience designing and implementing PES programs with and without auctions—we synthesize a birds-eye view of ecosystem services auctions for an interdisciplinary audience. Through an iterative, mixed-method Delphi consultation, we identify broad consensus about fundamental elements of theory and practice, including what functions auctions tend to perform well, common challenges, and key factors influencing their performance. By selecting topics that panelists appeared to disagree about for further discussion, we also highlight open questions and potential research frontiers. We conclude with a reflection on using the Delphi method to foster exchange between time-constrained experts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000548/pdfft?md5=7b580615f16f2f949ba580c1d3c9b6f8&pid=1-s2.0-S2212041624000548-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing ecosystem services auctions: Insights from an international Delphi panel\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101647\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Auction theory has made major contributions to overcoming allocation problems involving asymmetric information and common-pool resources, leading to multiple Nobel Prizes and serving as a foundation for multi-billion-dollar markets. Despite evidence that related mechanisms could enhance the performance of payments for ecosystem services (PES), adoption has been sporadic and inconsistent. One possibility is that the relevant peer reviewed literature has low visibility or consensus design elements are not sufficiently accessible to interested experts. To overcome this barrier, we adopt a straightforward approach: we asked the PES auction subfield to describe itself. In collaboration with an expert panel (<em>n</em> = 32) whose affiliations span more than two dozen universities and research bodies across three continents—including top-ranked economists, ecosystem services theorists, and practitioners with experience designing and implementing PES programs with and without auctions—we synthesize a birds-eye view of ecosystem services auctions for an interdisciplinary audience. Through an iterative, mixed-method Delphi consultation, we identify broad consensus about fundamental elements of theory and practice, including what functions auctions tend to perform well, common challenges, and key factors influencing their performance. By selecting topics that panelists appeared to disagree about for further discussion, we also highlight open questions and potential research frontiers. We conclude with a reflection on using the Delphi method to foster exchange between time-constrained experts.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51312,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecosystem Services\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000548/pdfft?md5=7b580615f16f2f949ba580c1d3c9b6f8&pid=1-s2.0-S2212041624000548-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecosystem Services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000548\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystem Services","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000548","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

拍卖理论为克服涉及信息不对称和共用资源的分配问题做出了重大贡献,多次获得诺贝尔奖,并为价值数十亿美元的市场奠定了基础。尽管有证据表明,相关机制可以提高生态系统服务补偿(PES)的绩效,但采用情况却时有发生且不一致。其中一个可能的原因是,相关的同行评议文献知名度较低,或者感兴趣的专家无法充分了解共识设计要素。为了克服这一障碍,我们采用了一种直接的方法:我们要求生态系统服务补偿拍卖子领域进行自我描述。我们与一个专家小组(= 32)合作,该小组成员来自三大洲的二十多所大学和研究机构,其中包括一流的经济学家、生态系统服务理论家以及在设计和实施生态系统服务补偿项目(无论是否采用拍卖)方面拥有丰富经验的实践者,我们为跨学科受众综合了生态系统服务拍卖的鸟瞰图。通过迭代、混合方法德尔菲咨询,我们就理论和实践的基本要素达成了广泛共识,包括拍卖往往能很好地履行哪些功能、常见挑战以及影响其绩效的关键因素。通过选择小组成员似乎存在分歧的主题进行进一步讨论,我们还强调了开放性问题和潜在的研究前沿。最后,我们对使用德尔菲法促进时间有限的专家之间的交流进行了反思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Advancing ecosystem services auctions: Insights from an international Delphi panel

Auction theory has made major contributions to overcoming allocation problems involving asymmetric information and common-pool resources, leading to multiple Nobel Prizes and serving as a foundation for multi-billion-dollar markets. Despite evidence that related mechanisms could enhance the performance of payments for ecosystem services (PES), adoption has been sporadic and inconsistent. One possibility is that the relevant peer reviewed literature has low visibility or consensus design elements are not sufficiently accessible to interested experts. To overcome this barrier, we adopt a straightforward approach: we asked the PES auction subfield to describe itself. In collaboration with an expert panel (n = 32) whose affiliations span more than two dozen universities and research bodies across three continents—including top-ranked economists, ecosystem services theorists, and practitioners with experience designing and implementing PES programs with and without auctions—we synthesize a birds-eye view of ecosystem services auctions for an interdisciplinary audience. Through an iterative, mixed-method Delphi consultation, we identify broad consensus about fundamental elements of theory and practice, including what functions auctions tend to perform well, common challenges, and key factors influencing their performance. By selecting topics that panelists appeared to disagree about for further discussion, we also highlight open questions and potential research frontiers. We conclude with a reflection on using the Delphi method to foster exchange between time-constrained experts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecosystem Services
Ecosystem Services ECOLOGYENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES&-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
14.90
自引率
7.90%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: Ecosystem Services is an international, interdisciplinary journal that is associated with the Ecosystem Services Partnership (ESP). The journal is dedicated to exploring the science, policy, and practice related to ecosystem services, which are the various ways in which ecosystems contribute to human well-being, both directly and indirectly. Ecosystem Services contributes to the broader goal of ensuring that the benefits of ecosystems are recognized, valued, and sustainably managed for the well-being of current and future generations. The journal serves as a platform for scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders to share their findings and insights, fostering collaboration and innovation in the field of ecosystem services.
期刊最新文献
A multi-indicator distributive justice approach to assess school-related green infrastructure benefits in Brussels Ecosystem accounting applied to the restoration of a brackish coastal lagoon highlights the importance of individual ecosystem-level studies A global systematic review of the cultural ecosystem services provided by wetlands Integration of the system of environmental economic accounting-ecosystem accounting (SEEA-EA) framework with a semi-distributed hydrological and water quality simulation model Collaborative models and uncertain water quality in payments for watershed services: China’s Jiuzhou River eco-compensation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1