Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 486

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trial

Stoneham, Gary, Chaudhri, Vivek, Ha, Arthur, Strappazzon, Loris·2003·Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics

Abstract

The present paper proposes that markets for nature conservation on private land are missing because of the problem of asymmetric information. An auction of conservation contracts was designed to reveal hidden information needed to facilitate meaningful transactions between landholders and government. The present paper describes the key elements of auction and contract design employed and the results obtained from a pilot auction of conservation contracts run in two regions of Victoria. The pilot demonstrated that it was possible to create at least the supply side of a market for nature conservation and in conjunction with a defined budget, prices were discovered and resources allocated through contracts with landholders. The present paper compares a discriminative price auction with a hypothetical fixed‐price scheme showing that an auction could offer large cost savings to governments interested in nature conservation on private land. The paper identifies some important design problems that would need to be solved before auctions could be applied more broadly including: multiple complementary outcomes, reserve prices, sequential auction design and contract design. Nevertheless, the paper does show that auctioning conservation contracts for environmental outcomes is an important new policy mechanism that deserves closer examination.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-8489.2003.t01-1-00224.x

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 28 references

Cited by

See all 486

Metadata

Authors
Stoneham, G., Chaudhri, V., Ha, A., & Strappazzon, L.
Venue
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-12
Volume
47
Issue
4
Pages
477-500
ISSN
  • 1364-985X (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8489
OpenAlex
W2126030463
Cited by
486
References
28
FWCI
29.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2003.t01-1-00224.x
The paper
Stoneham, G., Chaudhri, V., Ha, A., & Strappazzon, L. (2003). Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trial. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2003.t01-1-00224.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.