Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 14, Issue 8, pp 2009–2027 | Cite as

Information as a regulatory instrument to price biodiversity benefits: certification and ecolabeling policy practices

  • Paulo A.L.D. Nunes
  • Yohanes E. Riyanto


In this paper we address the issue of market failure arising from the non-existence of (market) prices for biodiversity, and also present and discuss alternative policies to cope with it. Particular attention is given to certification and ecolabeling of policies. First, we critically survey the role of certification and ecolabeling as an information provision instrument. Second, we provide a comprehensive view on basic foundations and crucial issues that underpin the design of a certification and ecolabeling policy. Finally, we present some case studies to draw some lessons from current certification and ecolabeling policy practices.


Biodiversity benefits Biodiversity oriented products Biodiversity segmented market Command and control Information provision instrument Market failure Market regulation Non-market values Public good character 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Akerlof, G. 1970The market for ȁ8Lemons’: qualitative uncertainty and the market mechanismQuarterly Journal of Economics89488500Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baharuddin H.G. 2001. Timber certification: an overview. available at http://www. Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barron D.E. 1994. ‘Sustainable forest certification’, paper presented at the 75th Anniversary Annual Meeting of the Woodlands. Canadian Pulp and Paper Association, AlbertaCanada.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baumol, W.J., Oates, W.E. 1988The Theory of Environmental PolicyCambridge University PressCambridgeUKGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bourke, I.J. 2000a‘Certification and labeling of paper and other forest products: where are we heading?’FAO Committee on Paper and Wood Products, 41st SessionRotoruaNew ZealandGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bourke, I.J. 2000b‘Trade and forestry: agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures and agreement on technical barriers to trade’FAO discussion paperRomeItalyGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Braden, J.B.Kolstad, C.D. eds. 1991Measuring the Demand for Environment QualityElsevier Science PublishersAmsterdamThe NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carson, R.T., Mitchell, R.C., Hanemann, W.M., Kopp, R.J., Presser, S., Ruud, P.A. 1992‘A contingent valuation study of lost Passive Use Values Resulting from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill’Report Prepared for the Attorney General of the State of AlaskaWashington, DCGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dosi, C.M., Moretto,  1998‘Is Ecolabeling a Reliable Environmental Policy Measure?’, mimeoDepartment of Economics, University of PadovaItalyGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Emil S., Djalins U. and Suntana A. 1997. ‘Trade and timber certification: international setting and Indonesian experience’ paper presented at the XI World Forestry Congress, Antalya, Turkey. Au: Au: Emil et al. 1997 not cited. Please cite reference in text or delete from the list. Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    EPA 1993. Status Report on the Use of Environmental Labels Worldwide. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic, Environmental protection Agency, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Forest Stewardship Council - FSC 2000. Forest Stewardship Council Web Site, Scholar
  13. 13.
    Garrod, G., Willis, K.G. 1999Economic Valuation of the Environment: Methods and Case StudiesEdward ElgarCheltenhamUKGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    FAO – Committee on Commodity Problems 1995. Developments in International Protection Legislation and ecolabeling. CCP: JU 95/7, RomeItaly.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    IFOAM 2000. Basic Standards for Organic Production and Processing, International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements, General Assembly, Basel, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mattoo, A., Singh, V.S. 1994Ecolabeling: policy considerationsKyklos475365Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Milgrom, P. 1988Employment contracts, influence activity, and efficient organizationJournal of Political Economy964260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nielsen, L., Jeppesen, T. 2000Green Electricity Certificates – A Supplement to the Flexible Mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol, mimeoDepartment of Economics, University of Southern Denmark-OdenseDenmarkGoogle Scholar
  19. 20.
    Nunes, P.A.L.D., den Bergh, J.C.J.M., Nijkamp, P. 2003The Ecological Economics of Biodiversity: Methods Values and Policy ApplicationsEdward ElgarCheltenhamUKGoogle Scholar
  20. 21.
    Nunes, P.A.L.D. 2002The Contingent Valuation of Natural Parks: Assessing the Warmglow Propensity FactorNew Horizons in Environmental Economics SeriesEdward ElgarCheltenhamUKGoogle Scholar
  21. 22.
    Nunes, P.A.L.D, den Bergh, J.C.J.M. 2001Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense?’Ecological Economics,39203222Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    Nunes, P.A.L.D., den Bergh, J.C.J.M., Nijkamp, P. 2001Integration of economic and ecological indicators of biodiversityValuation of Biodiversity Studies: Selected StudiesOECD, Environment DirectorateParis, France153182Google Scholar
  23. 24.
    Simpson, R.D., Sedjo, R.A., Reid, J.W. 1996Valuing biodiversity for use in pharmaceutical researchJournal of Political Economy,101163185Google Scholar
  24. 25.
    van Bellegem, T., Beijerman, A.M., Eijs, A. 1999Green investment funds: organic farming in the NetherlandsHandbook of Incentive Measures for Biodiversity: Design and ImplementationOECDParis, FranceGoogle Scholar
  25. 26.
    der Grijp, N.M., den Hond, F. 1999Green Supply Chain Initiatives in the European Food and Retailing IndustryInstitute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit AmsterdamThe NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  26. 27.
    van Ravenswaay E. 1995. Public Perceptions of Agrochemicals, Ames, IA Council on Agricultural Science and Technology. Task Force ReportNo. 123.Google Scholar
  27. 28.
    van Ravenswaay, E. 1996Emerging Demands on Our Food and Agricultural System: Developments in Ecolabeling, mimeoDepartment of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State UniversityAnn arborMichiganGoogle Scholar
  28. 29.
    van Ravenswaay, E., Blend, J. 1997Using Ecolabeling to Encourage Adoption of Innovative Environmental Technologies in AgriculturemimeoDepartment of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State UniversityAnn arborMichiganGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsCa’ Foscari University VeniceVeniceItaly
  2. 2.Centre of Excellence for Sustainable DevelopmentCa’Foscari University VeniceVeniceItaly
  3. 3.Fondazione Eni Enrico MatteiPalazzo Querini StampaliaVeniceItaly
  4. 4.Department of Economics, Faculty of Arts and Social SciencesNational University of SingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations