Summary

The purpose of this report is to give recommendations to a framework for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of environmental policies. The nature goods subject to the policy are grouped into three categories:

1) unique nature goods for which a large welfare loss will arise if they are lost,

2) characteristic nature goods, which are relatively wide spread and therefore can be subject to substitution with other nature goods under certain circumstances, and

3) general nature goods, which can be subject to substitution without further restrictions.

It is concluded that rigid regulations, such as preservation schemes, are necessary for protecting unique nature goods that needs absolute protection. More flexible measures can be applied for providing characteristic or general nature goods. The possibility for applying flexible measures should be considered for policies related to all types of nature goods, even for unique goods. For example it is possible to elicitate the grassing rights on a highly protected nature area and thereby reduce the costs of keeping the environmental state.

Last the importance of placing nature goods within the different categories should be stressed. This is because the flexibility for choice of policy measures when defining a given nature good as unique may lead to significantly higher alternative costs of the policy. Therefore a broad multidisciplinary discussion on the specific criteria for placing nature goods within the three categorise should derive much attention.

Full report in pdf-format (390 kB).