Response to comment on "Using ecological thresholds to evaluate the costs and benefits of set-asides in a biodiversity hotspot"

2Citations
Citations of this article
98Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Finney claims that we did not include transaction costs while assessing the economic costs of a set-aside program in Brazil and that accounting for them could potentially render large payments for environmental services (PES) projects unfeasible. We agree with the need for a better understanding of transaction costs but provide evidence that they do not alter the feasibility of the set-aside scheme we proposed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Banks-Leite, C., Pardini, R., Tambosi, L. R., Pearse, W. D., Bueno, A. A., Bruscagin, R. T., … Metzger, J. P. (2015). Response to comment on “Using ecological thresholds to evaluate the costs and benefits of set-asides in a biodiversity hotspot.” Science, 347(6223), 731b. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1602

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free