Page 77 - Economia Azul - versão: inglês

Table 1. Economic instruments applied As for fees, the charge must be estab- use. This can lead to conflicts between local
to the Blue Economy lished at a level that can actually result in communities and these areas, jeopardizing
a change in behavior and thus must con- the enforcement of the protected area and,
sider the price elasticity of the product. therefore, its ecological impact (POLLNAC
Instrument Description and main features It should also be taken into account that et al., 2010).
Taxes Based on the polluter pays principle, taxes place an ad- revenues raised through environmental Many countries use a two-tier fee sys-
ditional cost on using the natural resource or emitting a taxation will not always directly finance tem and charge foreign visitors higher fees,
pollutant to reflect the negative environmental externali- activities to protect marine ecosystems; such as entry fees into Marine Protected
ties they generate. As such, taxes create incentives for both fees established locally may result in the Areas in Kenya (OECD, 2017). In some ar-
producers and consumers to behave in a more environ- displacement of impacts to other regions eas, tourists pay more than residents. Final-
mentally sustainable manner. Examples include taxes on (OOSTERHUIS et al., 2014). ly, institutional factors can also hinder or
dumping of waste and other pollutants at sea. As an application example, it can be- even prevent the implementation of user
Fees and charges Consist of a payment requested from a general govern- highlighted that many protected areas fees. In Antigua and Barbuda, for example,
ment, that is, the payer of the fee receives something in suffer from chronic underfunding (WAT- three government agencies share responsi-
return that is approximatelly proportional to that fee. They SON et al., 2014; GILL et al., 2017), im- bility for managing marine protected areas.
can be used to control access to resources through price pacting their ability to protect biodiversity One of them does not have the authority
extraction, for example through a fishing license fee or en- and provide ecosystem services. Given the to charge fees in the region it manages,
try fee to a marine protected area. direct correlation between funding levels like the other two government agencies,
Subsidies Governments pay subsidies to producers to support the and the effectiveness of conservation and so some maritime protection areas charge
production of certain goods or services. Subsidies can have sustainable use of biodiversity (WALDRON access fees and others do not. In addition,
a negative environmental impact if they increase the level et al., 2017), policies to address funding fees collected are often returned to the
of an environmentally harmful activity, for example sand shortfalls in maritime protected areas are central budget, weakening the incentive
mining for construction. On the other hand, environmen- a priority. In this regard, fees have proven for managers to collect them.
tally motivated subsidies are intended to have a positive to be an effective instrument not only to
impact by lowering the cost of economic activities that generate revenue to help cover the cost 2.2. Subsidies
have less environmental impact. of managing marine protected areas, but
also to control access to high-value marine Pollution emission reduction subsi-
Payments for Ecosystem Based on the polluter-pays principle, PESs are voluntary
Services (PES) transactions between users and service providers that are areas (OECD, 2017). dies occur when a public authority pays
conditioned to agreed rules for the management of natu- There are challenges and opportunities the polluter to reduce a certain amount,
ral resources. An example would be a scheme that pays in using fees and charges. The lack of de- for example, tons of pollution emitted,
for mangrove restoration to store carbon (e.g. blue carbon fined access points to maritime areas can or when such authority encourages pol-
payments) and improve coastal flood protection. make it difficult to implement user fees luters to install equipment to abate their
in maritime protection areas. This creates emissions (PEARCE; TURNER, 1989; FIELD;
Offsets for Biodiversity Based on the mitigation hierarchy, offsetting is a process enforcement problems as they can usual- FIELD, 2014). This instrument works as an
whereby the unavoidable impacts of development are of- ly be accessed from all sides and the cost opportunity cost analysis, because when
fset by the creation of new habitat that is equivalent to of enforcement can be high (OECD, 2017). the polluter chooses to emit a unit of pol-
destroyed areas. Biodiversity offsets can be used, for exam- Social factors can also reduce the effective-
ple, to offset the development of infrastructure related to lution, the waiver of receiving the subsidy
tourism, ports and the extraction of natural resources. ness of fees on marine protected areas, for that he/she could have earned, if he/she
example, if they lead to the exclusion of had chosen to pollute this unit is in effect
Source: OCDE (2017) local populations from areas of traditional (SANTOS, 2014).

74 BLUE ECONOMIYBLUE ECONOMIY
74 Economic and Financial Instruments 75