@misc{DrechslerGerlingKeuleretal., author = {Drechsler, Martin and Gerling, Charlotte and Keuler, Klaus and Leins, Johannes A. and Sturm, Astrid and W{\"a}tzold, Frank}, title = {A quantitative approach for the design of robust and cost-effective conservation policies under uncertain climate change: The case of grasshopper conservation in Schleswig-Holstein, Germany}, series = {Journal of Environmental Management}, volume = {296}, journal = {Journal of Environmental Management}, issn = {1095-8630}, doi = {10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113201}, pages = {7}, language = {en} } @misc{DrechslerWaetzoldGrimm, author = {Drechsler, Martin and W{\"a}tzold, Frank and Grimm, Volker}, title = {The hitchhiker's guide to generic ecological-economic modelling of land-use-based biodiversity conservation policies}, series = {Ecological Modelling}, volume = {465}, journal = {Ecological Modelling}, issn = {0304-3800}, doi = {10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109861}, pages = {22}, language = {en} } @misc{GerlingDrechslerKeuleretal., author = {Gerling, Charlotte and Drechsler, Martin and Keuler, Klaus and Sturm, Astrid and W{\"a}tzold, Frank}, title = {Time to consider the timing of conservation measures: designing cost-effective agri-environment schemes under climate change}, series = {MPRA paper}, journal = {MPRA paper}, pages = {38}, language = {en} } @misc{GerlingDrechslerKeuleretal., author = {Gerling, Charlotte and Drechsler, Martin and Keuler, Klaus and Leins, Johannes A. and Radtke, Kai and Schulz, Bj{\"o}rn and Sturm, Astrid and W{\"a}tzold, Frank}, title = {Climate-ecological-economic modelling for the cost-effective spatiotemporal allocation of conservation measures in cultural landscapes facing climate change}, series = {Q Open}, volume = {2}, journal = {Q Open}, number = {1}, issn = {2633-9048}, doi = {10.1093/qopen/qoac004}, pages = {1 -- 20}, language = {en} } @misc{GerlingSturmWaetzoldetal., author = {Gerling, Charlotte and Sturm, Astrid and W{\"a}tzold, Frank and Keuler, Klaus and Radtke, Kai and Drechsler, Martin and Leins, Johannes A.}, title = {{\"O}konomie der Klimaanpassung zum Schutz der biologischen Vielfalt ; Postervorstellung : BfN Statuskonferenz "Biodiversit{\"a}t und Klimawandel - Synergien erforschen" in Berlin, 7.12.2023}, doi = {10.13140/RG.2.2.16540.97923}, pages = {2}, language = {de} } @misc{Drechsler, author = {Drechsler, Martin}, title = {Flexibility trade-offs in conservation offsets}, series = {Conservation Biology}, volume = {38}, journal = {Conservation Biology}, number = {1}, issn = {0888-8892}, doi = {10.1111/cobi.14144}, abstract = {Conservation offsets promise cost-effective conservation of biodiversity, especially under economic and environmental change, because they represent a more flexible approach to biodiversity conservation, allowing for the economic development of ecologically valuable land provided that this development is offset by restoration of previously developed areas. The level of flexibility is determined by the trading rules. Lax rules allow for more flexibility, which promises cost savings, but will likely lead to unintended loss of biodiversity. I analyzed the trade-off between economic costs and ecological benefits (biodiversity conservation) in biodiversity offsetting with an ecological-economic model that considered the three main types of offset flexibility: spatial, temporal, and ecosystem type. I sought to examine the influence of ecological and economic conditions on offset flexibility trade-offs. Large variation in the conservation costs and small costs of habitat restoration strongly increased trading activity and reduced the ecological benefit. The ecological benefit was most sensitive to spatial flexibility when a short range of ecological interaction was considered. At a large interaction range, spatial flexibility delivered large cost savings without overly reducing the ecological benefit. Risks and time lags associated with habitat restoration favored an offsetting scheme in which credits are awarded with the initiation of restoration projects rather than their successful completion—given appropriate offsetting multipliers were chosen. Altogether, under scarce resources, the level of flexibility in an offsetting scheme should be chosen by carefully balancing ecological benefits and economic costs.}, language = {en} } @misc{Drechsler, author = {Drechsler, Martin}, title = {The influence of farmland distribution on the performance of the agglomeration bonus}, series = {Frontiers in Environmental Science}, volume = {11}, journal = {Frontiers in Environmental Science}, issn = {2296-665X}, doi = {10.3389/fenvs.2023.1233758}, abstract = {Coordination incentives like the agglomeration bonus have been proposed to induce the spatial agglomeration of biodiversity conservation efforts and counter the loss and fragmentation of species habitats. Most theoretical and empirical analyses of the agglomeration bonus make unrealistic assumptions about the spatial structure of landholdings. This paper presents a spatially explicit agent-based simulation model to explore how the spatial structure of landholdings affects the performance of the agglomeration bonus. It turns out that if the number of land parcels per landowner is large and their land is spatially cohesive, a higher proportion and agglomeration of conserved land parcels can be achieved for the given budget, implying a higher level of cost-effectiveness. This also has implications for the cost-effective design of coordination incentives. The observed effects are especially high if the conservation costs vary strongly in space}, language = {en} } @misc{DePetrisDrechsler, author = {De Petris, Caterina and Drechsler, Martin}, title = {Harnessing social norms to gain cost-effectiveness in conservation schemes through dynamic scheme design: implications of bounded rationality and other-regarding preferences for Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES)}, series = {MPRA paper}, journal = {MPRA paper}, pages = {42}, language = {en} } @misc{Drechsler, author = {Drechsler, Martin}, title = {On the cost-effective temporal allocation of credits in conservation Ooffsets when habitat restoration takes time and is uncertain}, series = {Environmental and Resource Economics}, volume = {82}, journal = {Environmental and Resource Economics}, number = {2}, publisher = {Springer Netherlands}, issn = {0924-6460}, doi = {10.1007/s10640-022-00685-y}, pages = {437 -- 459}, abstract = {Tradable permits, or offsetting schemes, are increasingly used as an instrument for the conservation of biodiversity on private lands. Since the restoration of degraded land often involves uncertainties and time lags, conservation biologists have strongly recommended that credits in conservation offset schemes should be awarded only with the completion of the restoration process. Otherwise, the instrument is claimed to fail on the objective of no net loss in species habitat and biodiversity. What is ignored in these arguments, however, is that such a scheme design may incur higher economic costs than a design in which credits are already awarded at the initiation of the restoration process. In the present paper a generic agent-based ecological-economic simulation model is developed to explore different pros and cons of the two scheme designs, in particular their cost-effectiveness. The model considers spatially heterogeneous and dynamic conservation costs, risk aversion and time preferences in the landowners, as well as uncertainty in the duration and the success of the restoration process. It turns out that, especially under fast change of the conservation costs, awarding credits at the initiation of restoration can be more cost-effective than awarding them with completion of restoration.}, language = {en} } @misc{ReutterDrechslerGaweletal., author = {Reutter, Felix and Drechsler, Martin and Gawel, Erik and Lehmann, Paul}, title = {Social costs of setback distances for onshore wind turbines: a model analysis applied to the German State of Saxony}, series = {Environmental and Resource Economics}, volume = {87}, journal = {Environmental and Resource Economics}, number = {2}, publisher = {Springer Netherlands}, issn = {0924-6460}, doi = {10.1007/s10640-023-00777-3}, pages = {437 -- 463}, abstract = {Wind power is a key for decarbonizing economies. Yet, wind turbines can produce negative environmental externalities. These include bird collisions and disamenities for residents. Setback distances for onshore wind turbines to settlements and bird nests are a common policy instrument to address these externalities. In this paper, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of setback distances. We use a spatially-explicit model to investigate the social costs of different options for setbacks to settlements and red kite nests. In terms of social costs, we consider production costs and external costs associated with residents' disamenities and red kite impacts given an exogenously set wind energy production target. The model is applied using data for the German State of Saxony. Three key results are: (1) More restrictive setbacks may increase social costs. (2) Uniform red kite setbacks reduce social costs rather than uniform settlement setbacks. (3) Differentiated settlement setbacks for different settlement types lead to substantially lower social costs than uniform setbacks.}, language = {en} } @misc{GerlingDrechslerLeinsetal., author = {Gerling, Charlotte and Drechsler, Martin and Leins, Johannes A. and Sturm, Astrid and W{\"a}tzold, Frank}, title = {Cost-Effective Policy Instruments for Biodiversity Conservation Under Climate Change - the Need for Flexibility}, series = {SSRN eLibrary}, journal = {SSRN eLibrary}, issn = {1556-5068}, doi = {10.2139/ssrn.4617809}, pages = {1 -- 60}, language = {en} } @misc{GerlingDrechslerKeuleretal., author = {Gerling, Charlotte and Drechsler, Martin and Keuler, Klaus and Sturm, Astrid and W{\"a}tzold, Frank}, title = {Time to consider the timing of conservation measures: Designing cost-effective agri-environment schemes under climate change}, series = {Agricultural and Resource Economics Review}, volume = {52}, journal = {Agricultural and Resource Economics Review}, number = {2}, issn = {2372-2614}, doi = {10.1017/age.2023.4}, pages = {231 -- 249}, language = {en} } @misc{GerlingDrechslerKeuleretal., author = {Gerling, Charlotte and Drechsler, Martin and Keuler, Klaus and Leins, Johannes and Schulz, Bj{\"o}rn and Sturm, Astrid and W{\"a}tzold, Frank}, title = {Effektivit{\"a}t und Kosteneffizienz von Artenschutzmaßnahmen unter Klimawandel - das Beispiel der Sumpfschrecke (Stethophyma grossum) in Schleswig-Holstein}, series = {Natur und Landschaft}, volume = {100. Jahrgang 2025}, journal = {Natur und Landschaft}, number = {1}, isbn = {0028-0615-202501}, pages = {2 -- 8}, language = {de} } @misc{DrechslerSturm, author = {Drechsler, Martin and Sturm, Astrid}, title = {Model-based analysis of the agglomeration bonus for the conservation of twelve meadow bird species in an agricultural landscape}, series = {Ecological Economics}, volume = {236}, journal = {Ecological Economics}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0921-8009}, doi = {10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108663}, pages = {1 -- 8}, abstract = {The agglomeration bonus has been proposed as an effective and cost-effective instrument for inducing the spatial aggregation of conservation measures. It consists of a spatially homogenous base payment (like most existing payment schemes) plus a bonus for each adjacent land parcel that is conserved, too. While the agglomeration bonus has been investigated in numerous theoretical studies, very few applied studies exist to date. We extend a recent modelling study which analysed the effect of several grassland conservation schemes on meadow bird species in the Federal State of Saxony in Germany, by adding to the homogenous payment the described bonus. As expected, the bonus induces a spatial aggregation of the conservation measures. However, for typical bird dispersal ranges this does not reflect in an increased scheme cost-effectiveness. Only for much smaller dispersal ranges, which would be typical for insect species, the cost-effectiveness of the scheme would increase. We conclude that in complex agricultural landscapes with many land-use measures and species the agglomeration bonus may have limited value. Instead it should be used as a targeted instrument for the conservation of selected species of high conservation value that depend on very particular types of land use and have a small dispersal range.}, language = {en} } @misc{Drechsler, author = {Drechsler, Martin}, title = {A game-theoretic systematics of conservation and management of spatial ecosystem services}, series = {Natural resource modeling}, volume = {37}, journal = {Natural resource modeling}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken, NJ}, issn = {0890-8575}, doi = {10.1111/nrm.12404}, pages = {1 -- 26}, abstract = {Since many ecosystem services involve spatial scales beyond farm size, their preservation and management in agricultural systems depend on the interaction of the landowners. For the analysis of such interactive land use a generic dynamic land-use model is developed that considers different payoff structures in a systematic manner and relates land-use dynamics to these payoff structures. A landowner's own payoff depends on the land use on neighboring land parcels. The landowners' payoffs are interpreted in a game-theoretic manner which allows for a game-theoretic classification of the different land-use dynamics generated by the model. The model is analyzed to determine the proportion, spatial aggregation and temporal turnover of land-use measures. The model results are applied to a number of cases from literature in which the management of ecosystem services involves a regional scale, including pollinator conservation, pest control, and coordination incentives for the conservation of species in fragmented landscapes. Four main domains of model behavior are identified and related to the payoff structures (type of game), characterized by the proportions and temporal turnover of land-use measures, and by whether the system has one or two stable equilibria. An important determinant of the land-use dynamics is the spatial heterogeneity of the landowners' payoffs which. It affects the domain and the location in the domain by which the land-use dynamics are characterized.}, language = {en} } @misc{Drechsler, author = {Drechsler, Martin}, title = {Learning coalition formation under an agglomeration bonus : impacts on coalition structure and scheme performance}, series = {Resorce and energy economics}, volume = {83}, journal = {Resorce and energy economics}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, address = {Amsterdam}, doi = {10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101512}, pages = {1 -- 17}, abstract = {Numerous theoretical and empirical studies have demonstrated the potential of coordination incentives like the agglomeration bonus for the establishment of species habitat networks in agricultural landscapes. Less well understood is the social process behind this coordination, and how it affects the performance of the instrument. In the present paper this issue is addressed by simulating the coalition formation between several landowners in a stylized but structurally realistic landscape. Rather than assuming perfectly informed rational decision makers, the landowners are modeled as learning agents. A variety of learning strategies is considered. While these affect the coalition structure they have comparatively little influence on the land-use dynamics and the scheme expenditure, suggesting that knowledge about the details of the coordination process may be less relevant for predicting the performance of an agglomeration bonus. Instead, the performance is shown to mainly depend on the economic settings, such as the spatial correlation of the conservation costs, the spatial distribution of the landowners' properties, and the presence or absence of side payments between the landowners - where the present results largely confirm the results of previous studies. A weak relationship is observed, though, between the average size of the coalitions on the one hand and the ecological scheme performance and scheme expenditure on the other. Confirming previous studies, budget-effectiveness gains of the agglomeration bonus are limited.}, language = {en} } @misc{Drechsler, author = {Drechsler, Martin}, title = {The efficiency of spatial economic incentives in pollination-dependent agrucultural systems}, series = {Journal of geographical systems}, volume = {2025}, journal = {Journal of geographical systems}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Berlin ; Heidelberg}, doi = {10.1007/s10109-025-00479-y}, pages = {22}, abstract = {Agriculture is often in conflict with biodiversity conservation, while at the same time depending on the provided ecosystem services (ESS) biodiversity provides. Many of these ESS have a regional scale that extends beyond the local scale of individual farms. This leads to spatial externalities so that the preservation of ESS on one farm benefits neighbouring farms. At the same time, ESS preservation often incurs local costs, creating a trade-off between local costs and regional benefits. In these types of common-resource-management problems, the observed level of biodiversity and ESS is generally below the economically efficient level. A generic spatially explicit agent-based model from literature that focuses on the ESS of pollination is extended to analyse the impact of spatial coordination payments on the land-use dynamics and the regional level of ESS preservation. The economically efficient design that maximises the return (in terms of agricultural profit) on investment (in terms of expenditure for the payments) is determined and analysed as a function of the ecological and economic conditions in the model region.}, language = {en} } @misc{GerlingDrechslerLeinsetal., author = {Gerling, Charlotte and Drechsler, Martin and Leins, Johannes A. and Sturm, Astrid and W{\"a}tzold, Frank}, title = {Cost-effective instruments for biodiversity conservation under climate change - the need for flexibility}, series = {Ecological economics}, volume = {227}, journal = {Ecological economics}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0921-8009}, doi = {10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108414}, pages = {1 -- 13}, abstract = {Climate change is one of the main threats for biodiversity. As it affects the ecological and economic system, conservation costs and impacts may change in a heterogeneous manner. This implies that cost-effective conservation sites and measures may no longer be so in the future. We investigate spatial flexibility (to adapt the location of conservation sites) and management flexibility (to adapt the conservation measures on those sites) as novel criteria for analysing the cost-effectiveness of policy instruments to conserve biodiversity under climate change. We develop a generic climate-ecological-economic modelling approach that captures the role of spatial and management flexibility to assess the cost-effectiveness of policy instruments. We apply the modelling approach to the conservation of an indicator species in agricultural grasslands in a case study area in Northern Germany, and compare the cost-effectiveness of the policy instruments of land purchase (low spatial flexibility, high management flexibility) and long-term individual conservation contracts (medium spatial and management flexibility) considering a period from 2020 to 2079. We find that both spatial and management flexibility matter in the case study and discuss their broader relevance for conservation in a changing climate.}, language = {en} } @misc{GerlingDrechslerKadiretal., author = {Gerling, Charlotte and Drechsler, Martin and Kadir, Karmand and Kahlau, Bojan and Leins, Johannes and Sturm, Astrid and W{\"a}tzold, Frank}, title = {ClimeHop : an interactive app for teaching cost-effective biodiversity conservation under climate change}, series = {The journal of economic education}, volume = {56}, journal = {The journal of economic education}, number = {2}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis}, address = {Abingdon, Oxon}, issn = {2152-4068}, doi = {10.1080/00220485.2025.2461066}, pages = {202 -- 203}, language = {en} } @misc{FischerDrechslerFranketal., author = {Fischer, Rico and Drechsler, Martin and Frank, Karin and Berger, Uta and Wang, Hsiao-Hsuan and Semeniuk, Christina and Armstrong, Amanda and Grimm, Volker}, title = {Ecological modelling for transormation}, series = {Ecological modelling}, volume = {507}, journal = {Ecological modelling}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, address = {Amsterdam}, doi = {10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2025.111119}, pages = {1 -- 5}, language = {en} } @misc{NezhadkheirollahDrechsler, author = {Nezhadkheirollah, Somaiyeh and Drechsler, Martin}, title = {Collaborative approaches and instruments for the spatial management of agricultural pests}, series = {Regional science and environmental economics}, volume = {3}, journal = {Regional science and environmental economics}, number = {4}, publisher = {MDPI}, address = {Basel}, issn = {3042-4658}, doi = {10.3390/rsee2040037}, pages = {1 -- 19}, abstract = {Due to the mobility of many pest species, effective integrated pest management (IPM) requires spatial coordination of management actions. This paper examines how the consideration of spatial dynamics, spatially coordinated collaboration, and supportive policy instruments improve pest management in agricultural landscapes. We consider empirical studies that explore the effects of spatial structure and processes on pest dynamics; conceptual frameworks that address larger spatial scales, such as Area-Wide Pest Management (AWPM); and policy instruments such as Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) that have an impact on the land use in agricultural landscapes. The aim is to highlight how these three pillars of effective pest management are interrelated. Challenges and approaches for the establishment of spatial collaboration in agricultural pest management are identified and avenues for future research are presented.}, language = {en} }