Assessing the effectiveness of policies in sustaining and promoting ecosystem services in the Indian Himalayas

References

• Andrade A, Córdoba R, Dave R, Girot P, Herrera-F B, et al. 2011. Draft Principles and Guidelines for Integrating Ecosystem-Based Approaches to Adaptation in Project and Policy Design: A Discussion Document. CEM/IUCN, CATIE. Kenya: Commission on Ecosystem Management, IUCN.
   Google Scholar
• Andrés SM, Mir LC, Van Den Bergh JC, Ring I. 2012. A framework for the design of conservation policies based on a scientific understanding of the relation between ecosystem services and biodiversity. Available from: www.connect-biodiversa.eu/wp-content/uploads/D5-11. pdf
   Google Scholar
• Arora D. 1994. From state regulation to people’s participation: case of forest management in India. Econ Polit Weekly. 29:691–698.
   Google Scholar
• Badola R. 1995. Critique of People Oriented Conservation Approaches in India: An Entitlements Approach. Discussion paper. Study report. IDS Sussex.
   Google Scholar
• Badola R, Barthwal S, Hussain SA. 2011. Assessment of Policies and Institutional Arrangements for Rangeland Management in the Indian Hindu Kush Himalayas. Report submitted to ICIMOD, Nepal.
   Google Scholar
• Badola R, Hussain SA, Dobriyal P, Barthwal S. 2014. An Integrated Approach to Reduce the Vulnerability of Local Communities to Environmental Degradation in Western Himalayas. Study report. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India.
   Google Scholar
• Bagstad KJ, Semmens DJ, Waage S, Winthrop R. 2013. A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation. Ecosyst Serv. 5:27–39. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.07.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balthazar V, Vanacker V, Molina A, Lambin EF. 2015. Impacts of forest cover change on ecosystem services in high Andean mountains. Ecol Indic. 48:63–75. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.07.043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbier EB. 2007. Valuing ecosystem services as productive inputs. Econ Policy. 22:178–229. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0327.2007.00174.x
   Google Scholar
• Birch JC, Thapa I, Balmford A, Bradbury RB, Brown C, Butchart SH, et al. 2014. What benefits do community forests provide, and to whom? A rapid assessment of ecosystem services from a Himalayan forest, Nepal. Ecosyst Serv. 8:118–127. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blaikie PM, Muldavin JSS. 2004. Upstream, downstream, China, India: the politics of environment in the Himalayan region. Ann Assoc Am Geog. 94:520–548. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.2004.00412.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CBD, UNEP-WCMC (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre). 2012. Best policy guidance for the integration of biodiversity and ecosystem services in standards, Montreal. Tech Ser. 73:52.
   Google Scholar
• Daily GC, Polasky S, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Mooney HA, Pejchar L, Ricketts TH, Salzman J, Shallenberger R. 2009. Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Front Ecol Environ. 7:21–28. doi:10.1890/080025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dale VH, Joyce LA, McNulty S, Neilson RP, Ayres MP, Flannigan MD, Hanson PJ, Irland LC, Lugo AE, Peterson CJ, et al. 2001. Climate change and forest disturbances. BioSci. 51:723. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2001)051[0723:CCAFD]2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Groot RS, Fisher B, Christie M, Aronson J, Braat L, Gowdy J, Haines-Young R, Maltby E, Neuville A, Polasky S, et al. 2010. Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation. In: Kumar P, editor. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: the ecological and economic foundations. London: Earthscan; p. 9–40.
   Google Scholar
• Dernbach JC, Mintz JA. 2011. Environmental laws and sustainability: an introduction. Sustainability. 3:531–540. doi:10.3390/su3030531
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dyurgerov MB, Meier MF. 2005. Glaciers and the Changing Earth System: A 2004 Snapshot. Boulder: Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson M, Jianchu X, Shrestha AB, Vaidya RA, Nepal S, Sandström K. 2009. The changing Himalayas: impact of climate change on water resources and livelihoods in the Greater Himalayas. Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development Publication; p. 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Turner RK, Morling P. 2009. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ. 68:643–653. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gadgil M, Iyer P. 1989. On the diversification of common property resource use by the Indian society. In: Berkes F, editor. Common property resources: ecology and community based sustainable development. London: Belhaven Press; p. 240–255.
   Google Scholar
• Gautam MR, Timilsina GR, Acharya K. 2013. Climate Change in the Himalayas: Current State of Knowledge. Policy research working papers. The World Bank Development Research Group Environment and Energy Team. WPS6516.
   Google Scholar
• Goldman RL, Thompson BH, Daily GC. 2007. Institutional incentives for managing the landscape: inducing cooperation for the production of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ. 64:333–343. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.01.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goulder LH, Parry IWH. 2008. Instrument choice in environmental policy. Rev Environ Econ Policy. 2:152–174. doi:10.1093/reep/ren005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Government of India. 2008. National Action Plan on Climate Change. Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change. Available from: http://www.moef.nic.in/downloads/home/Pg01-52pdf
   Google Scholar
• Government of India. 2010. National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan Ecosystem under National Action Plan on Climate Change. Available from: http://dst.gov.in/scientific-programme/NMSHE_June_2010. pdf
   Google Scholar
• Gunningham N, Sinclair D. 1999. Integrative regulation: a principle‐based approach to environmental policy. Law & Soc Inquiry. 24:853–896. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.1999.tb00407.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunningham N, Young MD. 1997. Toward optimal environmental policy: the case of biodiversity conservation. Ecol Law Q. 24:243–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hertin J, Jordan A, Turnpenny J, Nilsson M, Russel D, Björn N. 2007. Rationalising the policy mess? Ex ante policy assessment and the utilisation of knowledge in the policy process. Berlin: Freie Universitat Berlin.
   Google Scholar
• Hoermann B, Banerjee S, Kollmair M. 2010. Labour migration for development in the Western Hindu Kush–Himalayas: understanding a livelihood strategy in the context of socioeconomic and environmental change. Kathmandu: ICIMOD.
   Google Scholar
• INCCA (Indian Network for Climate Change Assessment). 2010. Climate Change and India: A 4x4 Assessment. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Available from: http://www.moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/fin-rpt-incca.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Liu X, Chen B. 2000. Climatic warming in the Tibetan plateau during recent decades. Int J Climatol. 20:1729–1742. doi:10.1002/1097-0088(20001130)20:14<1729::AID-JOC556>3.0.CO;2-Y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manning AD, Fischer J, Lindenmayer D. 2006. Scattered trees are keystone structures – implications for conservation. Biol Conserv. 132:311–321. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2006.04.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: the Assessment Series (four volumes and summary). Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom E, Burger J, Field CB, Norgaard RB, Policansky D. 1999. Revisiting the commons: local lessons, global challenges. Science. 284:278–282. doi:10.1126/science.284.5412.278
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pagiola S, von Ritter K, Bishop J. 2004. Assessing the economic value of ecosystem conservation. Environment Department Paper. 101. Washington (DC): The World Bank Environment Department.
   Google Scholar
• PCAST (President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology). 2011. Report to the President- sustaining environmental capital: protecting society and the economy. Report to the President. Washington (DC): Biodiversity Preservation and Ecosystem Sustainability Working Group.
   Google Scholar
• Pejchar L, Morgan P, Caldwell M, Palmer C, Daily GC. 2007. Evaluating the potential for conservation development: biophysical, economic, and institutional perspectives. Conserv Biol. 21:69–78. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00572.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretty JN, Pimbert MP. 1995. Beyond conservation ideology and the wilderness. Nat Resour Forum. 19:5–14. doi:10.1111/j.1477-8947.1995.tb00588.x
   Google Scholar
• Ramanathan U. 2002. Common land and common property resources. In: Jha PK, Ed. Land Reforms in India, Volume 7, Issues of Equity in Rural Madhya Pradesh. New Delhi: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Ring I, Schröter-Schlaack C, Barton DN, Santos R, May P. 2011. Recommendations for assessing instruments in policy mixes for biodiversity and ecosystem governance. In: David N, Barton K, Margrethe KT, Irene R, editors. POLICYMIX technical brief [Internet]. vol. 5, p. 1–24. [cited 2014 Jan 15]. Available from: http://policymix.nina.no
   Google Scholar
• Ring I, Schroter-Schlaak C 2011. Justifying and assessing policy mixes for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision. Paper presented at the special session on ‘Instrument Mixes for Biodiversity Policies’. ESEE 2011, Istanbul.
   Google Scholar
• Saxena KG, Rao KS, Sen KK, Maikhuri RK, Semwal RL. 2001. Integrated natural resource management: approaches and lessons from the Himalaya. Conserv Ecol. 5:14.
   Google Scholar
• Seccombe-Hett T. 2000. Market-based instruments: if they’re so good, why aren’t they the norm? World Economics. J Curr Econ Anal Policy. 1:101–126.
   Google Scholar
• Semwal RL, Nautiyal S, Rao KS, Maikhuri RK, Bhandari BS. 1999. Structure of forests under community conservation: a preliminary study of Jardhar village initiative in Garhwal Himalaya. ENVIS Bull- Himalayan Ecol Dev. 7:16–27.
   Google Scholar
• Seppelt R, Dormann CF, Eppink FV, Lautenbach S, Schmidt S. 2011. A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J Appl Ecol. 48:630–636. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01952.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh SP. 2002. Balancing the approaches of environmental conservation by considering ecosystem services as well as biodiversity. Curr Sci. 82:1331–1335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh SP, Bassignana-Khadka I, Karky BS, Sharma E. 2011. Climate change in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas: the state of current knowledge. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. Kathmandu: Hill Side Press; 102 p.
   Google Scholar
• Smith T. 2014. Climate vulnerability in Asia’s high mountains: how climate change affects communities and ecosystems in Asia’s water towers. Washington (DC): World Wildlife Fund; p. 1–104.
   Google Scholar
• TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity). 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for Local and Regional Policy Makers. Available from: ISBN 978-3-9812410-2-7. http://www. teebweb. org/wpcontent/uploads/StudyReport/TEEB.
   Google Scholar
• Theobald DM, Spies T, Kline J, Maxwell B, Hobbs NT, Dale VH. 2005. Ecological support for rural land-use planning. Ecol Appl. 15:1906–1914. doi:10.1890/03-5331
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO (World Health Organization). 2012. Atlas of health and climate. Geneva: World Health Organization.
   Google Scholar
• Wulf H, Bookhagen B, Scherler D. 2012. Climatic and geologic controls on suspended sediment flux in the Sutlej River Valley, western Himalaya. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci. 16:2193–2217.
   Google Scholar