Article Biodiversity Protection in Private Forests: PES Schemes, Institutions and Prosocial Behavior Jens Abildtrup 1 , Anne Stenger 2, *, Francis de Morogues 3 , Philippe Polomé 4 , Marieke Blondet 5 and Claude Michel 6   Citation: Abildtrup, J.; Stenger, A.; de Morogues, F.; Polomé, P.; Blondet, M.; Michel, C. Biodiversity Protection in Private Forests: PES Schemes, Institutions and Prosocial Behavior. Forests 2021, 12, 1241. https:// doi.org/10.3390/f12091241 Academic Editor: Jessica Leahy Received: 21 June 2021 Accepted: 26 August 2021 Published: 14 September 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affil- iations. Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). 1 INRAE, BETA-Université de Lorraine, 54000 Nancy, France; jens.abildtrup@inrae.fr 2 INRAE, BETA-Université de Strasbourg, 67081 Strasbourg, France 3 FCBA, 38610 Grenoble, France; francis.DE.MOROGUES@fcba.fr 4 Faculty of Economics and Management, Université de Lyon, 69007 Lyon, France; polome@gate.cnrs.fr 5 AgroParisTech, 54000 Nancy, France; marieke.blondet@agroparistech.fr 6 Parc du Ballon des Vosges, 68140 Munster, France; c.michel@parc-ballons-vosges.fr * Correspondence: anne.stenger-letheux@inrae.fr Abstract: The overall research question addresses the effectiveness of incentive mechanisms in poli -cies that enhance private forest owners’ biodiversity protection. In particular, the paper focuses on the link between forest owners’ motivations, incentives, and institutions, and questions the incentives of the current biodiversity protection policies. Our hypothesis is that the purely monetary nature of the incentives can cause a “crowding out effect”, i.e., forest owners may reduce their voluntary contribution to biodiversity protection that is driven by prosocial motivations (altruism, self-image, etc.). With this in mind, as well as the knowledge acquired via this project about forest owners’ motivations, we looked for the most effective combinations of “incentive mechanisms” (monetary and non-monetary) and “institutions” (national and local authorities, NGOs, etc.) to encourage forest owners to adopt biodiversity protection measures in their forests. Keywords: PES; prosocial behavior; crowding out; biodiversity; choice experiment; forest owners 1. Introduction In this paper we empirically analyze designs of voluntary biodiversity protection schemes. In particular, we investigate whether or not institutions, prosocial behavior, and potential crowding out may influence participation in protection schemes. Our research is based on a survey of private forest owners in France consisting of a discrete choice experiment, in line with [1]. Forests are home to 80% of the earth’s biodiversity, and much biodiversity is found on private land, including private forests. Conservation of biodiversity thus requires the design of policies that influence foresters’ decisions [2]. Biodiversity is central to forest ecosystem services and there is still a great need to implement better management and practices, especially in forests and outside protected areas [3]. In [4], the authors observed that monetary tools are the most frequently used solution in a review of studies on Mediterranean agroecosystems. However, they argue that social and biophysical attributes are important as well when considering cases in which farmers have to be incentivized to supply ecosystem services. Institutions, regulation, and political aspects like law enforcement are also important. For example, in [5], the authors reported that the main constraints that impede an effective monitoring of biodiversity in Greece are institutional and political. Voluntary contracts with forest owners have been suggested as one approach to encouraging private forest owners to consider biodiversity protection in their management, and the payment for ecosystem services (PES) schemes has recently been the focus of a large number of papers [6–9]. In France, private forest owners with land in Natura Forests 2021, 12, 1241. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12091241 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/forests