Problematizing REDD+ as an experiment in payments for ecosystem services

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

Volumn 4, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 612-619

  Corbera, Esteve ^a  

^a INSTITUT DE CIÈNCIA I TECNOLOGIA AMBIENTALS   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARBON SEQUESTRATION; DEVELOPING WORLD; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; NEOLIBERALISM; POLICY APPROACH; SUSTAINABILITY; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; VALUATION;

EID: 84869221642     PISSN: 18773435     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2012.09.010     Document Type: Review

References (86)

1. Corbera E., Schroeder H. Governing and implementing REDD+. Environ Sci Policy 2011, 14:89-99.
2. Pistorius T. From RED to REDD+: the evolution of a forest-based mitigation approach for developing countries. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2012, 4:638-645.
3. Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options 2009, Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor. A. Angelsen (Ed.).
4. FONAFIFO, CONAFOR and Ministry of Environment Lessons Learned for REDD+ from PES and Conservation Incentive Programs. Examples from Costa Rica, Mexico, and Ecuador 2012, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank, p. 164.
5. Palmer C. Property rights and liability for deforestation under REDD+: implications for 'permanence' in policy design. Ecol Econ 2011, 70:571-576.
6. Corbera E., Estrada M., May P., Navarro G., Pacheco P. Rights to land, forests and carbon in REDD+: insights from Mexico, Brazil and Costa Rica. Forests 2011, 2:301-342.
7. Thompson M.C., Baruah M., Carr E.R. Seeing REDD+ as a project of environmental governance. Environ Sci Policy 2011, 14:100-110.
8. Lederer M. REDD+ governance. WIREs Climate Change 2012, 3:107-113.
9. Engel S., Hobi S., Zabel A. Ensuring REDD plays its part in any post-2012 agreement: which issues remain to be resolved?. Carbon Manage 2010, 1:261-269.
10. Wunder S: Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts. Occasional Paper No. 42, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia; 2006.
11. Muradian R., Corbera E., Pascual U., Kosoy N., May P.H. Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative framework for understanding payments for ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 2010, 69:1202-1208.
12. Kosoy N., Corbera E. Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecol Econ 2010, 69:1228-1236.
13. Büscher B., Whande W. Whims of the winds of time? Emerging trends in biodiversity conservation and protected area management. Conserv Soc 2007, 5:22-43.
14. Roth R.J., Dressler W. Market-oriented conservation governance: the particularities of place. Geoforum 2012, 43:363-366.
15. Castree N. Commodifying what nature?. Prog Hum Geogr 2003, 27:273-297.
16. Castree N. Neoliberalising nature: the logics of deregulation and reregulation. Environ Plan A 2008, 40:131-152.
17. Bakker K. Neoliberal nature, ecological fixes, and the pitfalls of comparative research. Environ Plan A 2009, 41:1781-1787.
18. Igoe J., Brockington D. Neoliberal conservation: a brief introduction. Conserv Soc 2007, 5:432-449.
19. McAfee K. Selling nature to save it? Biodiversity and the rise of green development planning. Environ Plan D: Soc Space 1999, 17:133-154.
20. Brockington D., Duffy R. Capitalism and conservation: the production and reproduction of biodiversity conservation. Antipode 2010, 42:469-484.
21. Arsel M., Büscher B. NatureTM Inc.: changes and continuities in neoliberal conservation and market-based environmental policy. Dev Change 2012, 43:53-78.
22. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and HumanWell-being Synthesis 2005, Island Press, Washington, DC.
23. Fisher B., Turner R.K., Morling P. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 2009, 68:643-653.
24. Wallace K.J. Classification of ecosystem services: problems and solutions. Biol Conserv 2007, 139:235-246.
25. Gómez-Baggethun E., de Groot R., Lomas P., Montes C. The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecol Econ 2010, 69:1209-1218.
26. Vatn A. The environment as a commodity. Environ Values 2000, 9:493-509.
27. Saundberg A. Property rights and ecosystem properties. Land Use Policy 2007, 24:613-623.
28. Norgaard R. Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecol Econ 2010, 69:1219-1227.
29. Costanza R. Nature: ecosystems without commodifying them. Nature 2006, 443:749.
30. Gómez-Baggethun E., Ruiz-Pérez M. Economic valuation and the commodification of ecosystem services. Prog Phys Geogr 2011, 35:613-628.
31. McCaulay D. Selling out on nature. Nature 2006, 443:27-28.
32. Putz F.E., Redford K.H. Dangers of carbon-based conservation. Global Environ Change 2009, 19:400-401.
33. Raudsepp-Hearne C., Peterson G.D., Bennet M. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010, 107:1-6.
34. Rodríguez J.P., Beard T.D., Bennett E.M., Cumming G.S., Cork S., Agard J., Dobson A.P., Peterson G.D. Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecol Soc 2006, 11:28.
35. Burkhard B., de Groot R., Costanza R., Seppelt R., Jørgensen S.E., Potschin M. Solutions for sustaining natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecol Indic 2012, 21:1-6.
36. Milne S., Niesten E. Direct payments for biodiversity conservation in developing countries: practical insights for design and implementation. Oryx 2011, 43:530-541.
37. Engel S., Pagiola S., Wunder S. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:663-674.
38. Brouwer R., Tesfaye A., Pauw P. Meta-analysis of institutional-economic factors explaining the environmental performance of payments for watershed services. Environ Conserv 2012, 38:380-392.
39. Kosoy N., Corbera E., Brown K. Participation in payments for ecosystem services: case studies from the Lacandon rainforest, Mexico. Geoforum 2008, 39:2073-2083.
40. Milne S., Adams B. Market masquerades: uncovering the politics of community-level payments for environmental services in Cambodia. Dev Change 2012, 43:133-158.
41. Corbera E., Kosoy N., Martinez-Tuna M. Equity implications of marketing ecosystem services in protected areas and rural communities: case studies from Meso-America. Global Environ Change 2007, 17:365-380.
42. Redford K.H., Adams W.M. Payment for ecosystem services and the challenge of saving nature. Conserv Biol 2009, 23:785-787.
43. Corbera E., Brown K. Offsetting benefits? Analyzing access to forest carbon. Environ Plan A 2010, 42:1739-1761.
44. Pagiola S, Bosquet B: Estimating the Costs of REDD at the Country Level. World Bank Working Paper, Version 2.2 - 22 September 2009.
45. Kindermann G., Obersteiner M., Sohngen B., Sathaye J., Andrasko K., Rametsteiner E., Schlamadinger B., Wunder S., Beach R. Global cost estimates of reducing carbon emissions through avoided deforestation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105:10302-10307.
46. Sathaye J., Andrasko K., Chan P. Emissions scenarios, costs, and implementation considerations of REDD-plus programs. Environ Dev Econ 2011, 16:361-380.
47. Fisher B., Lewis S.L., Burgess N.D., Malimbwi R.E., Munishi P.K., Swetnam R.D., Turner R.K., Willcock S., Balmford A. Implementation and opportunity costs of reducing deforestation and forest degradation in Tanzania. Nat Climate Change 2011, 1:161-164.
48. Mattsson E., Persson U.M., Ostwald M., Nissanka S.P. REDD+ readiness implications for Sri Lanka in terms of reducing deforestation. J Environ Manage 2012, 100:29-40.
49. Corbera E., Estrada M., Brown K. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation in developing countries: revisiting the assumptions. Climatic Change 2010, 100:355-388.
50. Clements T. Reduced expectations: the political and institutional challenges of REDD+. Oryx 2010, 44:309-310.
51. Karsenty A., Ongoro S. Can " fragile states" decide to reduce their deforestation? The inappropriate use of the theory of incentives with respect to the REDD mechanism. Forest Policy Econ 2012, 18:38-45.
52. White A. Cash alone will not slow forest carbon emissions. Nature 2011, 471:267.
53. Mellström C., Johannesson M. Crowding out in blood donation: was Titmuss right?. J Eur Econ Assoc 2008, 6:845-863.
54. Bowles S. Policies designed for self-interested citizens may undermine " the moral sentiments": evidence from economic experiments. Science 2008, 320:1605-1609.
55. Lacetera N., Macis M. Social image concerns and prosocial behavior: field evidence from a nonlinear incentive scheme. J Econ Behav Organ 2010, 76:225-237.
56. Kerr J., Vardhan M., Jindal R. Prosocial behavior and incentives: evidence from field experiments in rural Mexico and Tanzania. Ecol Econ 2012, 73:220-227.
57. Narloch U., Pascual U., Drucker A.G. Collective action dynamics under external rewards: experimental insights from andean farming communities. World Dev 2012, 40:2096-2107.
58. Rico García-Amado L., Ruiz Pérez M., Reyes Escutia F., Barrasa García S., Contreras Mejía E. Efficiency of payments for environmental services: equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico. Ecol Econ 2011, 70:2361-2368.
59. Fisher J. No pay, no care? A case study exploring motivations for participation in payments for ecosystem services in Uganda. Oryx 2011, 46:45-54.
60. Anderson K. The inconvenient truth of carbon offsets. Nature 2012, 484:7.
61. Grandia L. Between bolivar and bureaucracy: the Mesoamerican biological corridor. Conserv Soc 2007, 5:478-503.
62. Olufunso A., Somorin O.A., Brown H.C.P., Visseren-Hamakers I.J., Sonwa D.J., Arts B., Nkemd J. The Congo Basin forests in a changing climate: policy discourses on adaptation, and mitigation (REDD+). Global Environ Change 2012, 22:288-298.
63. Büscher B. Payments for ecosystem services as neoliberal conservation: (reinterpreting) evidence from the Maloti-Drakensberg, South Africa. Conserv Soc 2012, 10:29-41.
64. McAfee K., Shapiro E.N. Payments for ecosystem services in Mexico: nature, neoliberalism, social movements, and the state. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 2010, 100:579-599.
65. Muñoz-Piña C., Guevara A., Torres J.M., Braña J. Paying for hydrological services of Mexico's forests: analysis, negotiations and results. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:725-736.
66. Bennet M.T. China's sloping land conversion program: institutional innovation or business as usual?. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:699-711.
67. Reynolds T.W. Institutional determinants of success among forestry-based carbon sequestration projects in sub-Saharan Africa. World Dev 2011, 40:542-544.
68. Schroeder H. Agency in international climate negotiations: the case of indigenous peoples and avoided deforestation. Int Environ Agreements 2010, 10:317-332.
69. Williams LG, Davis C, Lupberger S, Daviet F: Getting Ready with Forest Governance: A Review of the World Bank Forest Carbon Partnership Facility Readiness Preparation Proposals and the UN-REDD National Programme Documents. v 1.6. WRI Working Paper. World Resources Institute, Washington DC; 2011.
70. Lemaitre S. Indigenous peoples' land rights and REDD: a case study. RECIEL 2011, 20:150-162.
71. Mahanty S, Tacconi L, Suich H: Access and benefits in payments for environmental services and implications for REDD+: lessons from seven PES schemes. Land Use Policy 2012, online 30 January 2012.
72. Corbera E., Brown K., Adger W.N. The equity and legitimacy of markets for ecosystem services. Dev Change 2007, 38:587-613.
73. Peskett L., Schreckenberg K., Brown J. Institutional approaches for carbon financing in the forest sector: learning lessons for REDD+ from forest carbon projects in Uganda. Environ Sci Policy 2011, 14:216-229.
74. Osborne T. Carbon forestry and agrarian change: access and land control in a Mexican Rainforest. J Peasant Stud 2011, 38:859-883.
75. Fletcher R. Using the master's tools? Neoliberal conservation and the evasion of inequality. Dev Change 2012, 43:295-317.
76. McCandless S., Ibarra J.T., Barreau A., del Campo C., Camacho C.I., Martin G.J. Political ecology of community conservation and payments for environmental services in a Chinantec Community in Mexico. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers 2012.
77. Corbera E., Friedli C. Planting trees through the Clean Development Mechanism: a critical assessment. Ephemera Theory Polit Organ 2012, 12:194-229.
78. Tienhaara K. The potential perils of forest carbon contracts for developing countries: cases from Africa. J Peasant Stud 2012, 39:551-572.
79. Boyd E., May P., Chang M., Veiga F. Exploring socioeconomic impacts of forest based mitigation projects: lessons from Brazil and Bolivia. Environ Sci Policy 2007, 10:419-433.
80. Jindal R., Swallow B., Kerr J. Forestry-based carbon sequestration projects in Africa: potential benefits and challenges. Nat Resour Forum 2008, 32:116-130.
81. Bozmoski A., Hultman N. Participant perceptions of risk and benefit in carbon forestry: evidence from central Tanzania. J Environ Dev 2010, 19:4-27.
82. Fairhead J., Leach M., Scoones I. Green Grabbing: a new appropriation of nature?. J Peasant Stud 2012, 39:237-261.
83. Beymer-Farris B.A., Bassett T.J. The REDD menace: resurgent protectionism in Tanzania's mangrove forests. Global Environ Change 2012, 22:332-341.
84. Ghazoul J., Butler R.A., Mateo-Vega J., Pin Koh L. REDD: a reckoning of environment and development implications. Trends Ecol Evol 2010, 25:396-402.
85. Hirons M. Locking-in carbon, locking-out livelihoods? Artisanal mining and REDD in sub-Saharan Africa. J Int Dev 2011, 23:1140-1150.
86. Srinivasan U., Susan P., Carey S.P., Hallsteind E., Higgins P.A.T., Kerr A.C., Koteen L.E., Smith A.B., Watson R., Hart J., Norgaard R.B. The debt of nations and the distribution of ecological impacts from human activities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105:1768-1773.