Payments for ecosystem services and the fatal attraction of win-win solutions

Conservation Letters

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 274-279

  Muradian, R ^a   Arsel, M ^b   Pellegrini, L ^b   Adaman, F ^c   Aguilar, B ^d   Agarwal, B ^e   Corbera, E ^f   Ezzine de Blas, D ^g   Farley, J ^h   Froger, G ⁱ   Garcia Frapolli, E ^j   Gomez Baggethun E ^f,k   Gowdy, J ^l   Kosoy, N ^m   Le Coq, J F ^g,n   Leroy, P ^a   May, P ^o   Meral P ^p   Mibielli, P ^q   Norgaard, R ^r   Ozkaynak, B ^c   Pascual, U ^s,t   Pengue, W ^u   Perez, M ^v   Pesche, D ^g   Pirard, R ^w   Ramos Martin, J ^f   Rival, L ^x   Saenz, F ^o   Van Hecken, G ^y   Vatn, A ^z   Vira, B ^s   Urama, K ^aa   more..

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c BOGAZICI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^d Fundación Neotrópica   (Costa Rica)

^e UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

^g CIRAD   (France)

^h UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

ⁱ LABORATOIRE DES SCIENCES DU CLIMAT ET DE L ENVIRONNEMENT   (France)

^j UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

^k UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^l RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE   (United States)

^m MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

ⁿ UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL   (Costa Rica)

^o FEDERAL RURAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

^p INSTITUT DE RECHERCHE POUR LE DÉVELOPPEMENT   (France)

^q ESTÁCIO DE SÁ UNIVERSITY   (Brazil)

^r UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^s UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^t BASQUE FOUNDATION FOR SCIENCE   (Spain)

^u INSTITUTO DE CIENCIAS   (Argentina)

^v UNIVERSIDAD DEL VALLE   (Colombia)

^w IDDRI ^*  (France)

^x UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^y PC Breeders Alexianen   (Belgium)

^z NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES   (Norway)

^aa African Technology Policy Studies Network   (Kenya)

more..

Author keywords

Ecosystem services; Enviromental governace; Integrated conservation and development projects; Market based policy tools; Payments for ecosystem services

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881650140     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1755263X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00309.x     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Agarwal, B. (2010). Gender and green governance. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
2. Arsel, M. & Büscher, B. (2012). Nature™ Inc.: changes and continuities in neoliberal conservation and market-based environmental policy. Dev. Change, 43, 53-78.
3. Baland, J-M. & Platteau, J-P. (1996). Halting degradation of natural resources. Is there a role for rural communities? FAO, Rome.
4. Bowles, S. (2008). Policies designed for self-interested citizens may undermine 'the moral sentiments' evidence from economic experiments. Science, 320, 1605-1609.
5. Bowles, S. & Polanía-Reyes, S. (2012). Economic incentives and social preferences: substitutes or complements? J. Econ. Lit., 50, 368-425.
6. Boyce, J. (2002). The political economy of the environment. Edward Elgar, U.K.
7. Bromley, D. (1990). The ideology of efficiency: searching for a theory of policy analysis. J. Env. Econ. Man, 19, 86-107.
8. Burkett, P. (2006). Marxism and ecological economics. Monthly Review Press, New York.
9. Büscher, B. (2012). Payments for ecosystem services as neoliberal conservation: (Reinterpreting) evidence from the Maloti-Drakensberg, South Africa. Con. & Soc, 10, 28-41.
10. Butler, R., Pin Koh, L. & Ghazoul, J. (2009). REDD in the red: palm oil could undermine carbon payment schemes. Cons. Lett., 2, 67-73.
11. Charness, G. & Gneezy, U. (2009). Incentives to exercise. Econometrica, 77, 909-931.
12. Christensen, J. (2004). Win-win illusions. Over the past two decades, efforts to heal the rift between poor people and protected areas have foundered. So what next? Cons. In Pract., 5, 12-19.
13. Corbera, E. & Pascual, U. (2012). Ecosystem services: heed social goals. Science, 335, 655-656.
14. Corbera, E., Soberanis, C., & Brown, K. (2009). Institutional dimensions of payments for ecosystem services. An analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme. Ecol. Econ., 68, 743-761.
15. Engel, S., Pagiola, S. & Wunder, S. (2008). Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecol. Econ., 65, 662-674.
16. Fehr, E. & Falk, A. (2002). Psychological foundations of incentives. Eur. Econ. Rev., 46, 687-724.
17. Farley, J. & Costanza, R. (2010). Payments for system services: from local to global. Ecol. Econ., 69, 2060-2068.
18. Ferraro, P. & Kiss, A. (2002). Direct payments to conserve biodiversity. Science, 298, 1718-1719.
19. Frey, B. & Jegen, R. (2001). Motivation crowding theory. J. Econ. Surv., 15, 589-611.
20. Gneezy, U. & Rustichini, A. (2000). Pay enough or don't pay at all. J. Ec. Bev. Org., 39, 341-369.
21. Gregersen, H., El Lakany, H., Karsenty, A. & White, A. (2010). Does the opportunity cost approach indicate the real cost of REDD+ ? Rights and realities of paying for REDD+. Rights and resources initiative. Washington, DC. pp. 24.
22. Hughes, R. & Flintan, F. (2001). Integrating conservation and development experience: a review and bibliography of the ICDP literature. International Institute for Environment and Development, London.
23. Kinzig, A., Perrings, C., Chapin III, F. S., Polasky, S., Smith, V., Tilman, D. & Turner II B. (2011). Paying for ecosystem services-promise and peril. Science, 334, 603-604.
24. Kosoy, N. & Corbera, E. (2010). Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecol. Econ., 69, 1228-1236.
25. Krall, L. and Gowdy, J. (2012). An Institutional and Evolutionary Critique of Natural Capital. Pages 127-146 in Steppacher, R., Gerber, J-F., editors. Toward an integrated paradigm in heterodox economics-alternative approaches to the current eco-social crises. Palgrave-Macmillan, London.
26. Karsenty, A., Vogel, A. & Castell, F. (in press). Carbon rights, REDD+ and payments for environmental services. Env. Sci. & Pol.
27. Lacetera, N. & Macis, M. (2010). Do all material incentives for pro-social activities backfire? The response to cash and non-cash incentives for blood donations. J. Econ. Psy., 31, 738-748.
28. Le Coq, J.F., Froger, G., Legrand, T., Pesche, D. & Saenz, F. (2012). The governance of Costa Rica's programme of payments for environmental services: A stakeholder's perspective. Pages 235-256 in Muradian, R., Rival, L., editors. Governing the provision of ecosystem services. Springer, The Netherlands
29. Lockie, S. (2013). Market instruments, ecosystem services, and property rights: assumptions and conditions for sustained social and ecological benefits. Land Use Pol., 31, 90-98.
30. McAfee, K. (2012). The contradictory logic of global ecosystem services markets. Dev. Change, 43, 105-131.
31. McAfee, K. & Shapiro, E. (2010). Payments for ecosystem services in Mexico: nature, neoliberalism, social movements and the state. Ann. Ass. Am. Geog., 100, 579-599.
32. Miles, L. & Kapos, V. (2008). Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest degradation: global land-use implications. Science, 320, 1454-1455.
33. Muñoz-Piña, C., Guevara, A., Torres, J. & Braña, J. (2008). Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: analysis, negotiations and results. Ecol. Econ., 65, 725-736.
34. Muradian, R., Corbera, E., Pascual, U., Kosoy, N. & May, P. (2010). Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for ecosystem services. Ecol. Econ., 69, 1202-1208.
35. Muradian, R. & Rival, L. (2012). Between markets and hierarchies: the challenge of governing ecosystem services. Ecos. Serv., 1, 93-100.
36. Narloch, U., Pascual, U. & Drucker, A. (2012). Collective action dynamics under external rewards: experimental insights from Andean farming communities. World Dev., 40, 2096-2107.
37. Oldekop, J., Bebbington, A., Hennermann, K., McMorrow, J., Springate, D., Torres, B., Truelove, N., Tysklind, N., Villamarín, S. & Preziosi, R. (in press). Evaluating the effects of common-pool resource institutions and market forces on species richness and forest cover in Ecuadorian indigenous Kichwa communities. Cons. Lett.
38. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons. Cambridge University Press, UK.
39. Ostrom, E., Janssen, M. & Anderies, M. (2007). Going beyond panaceas. PNAS, 104, 15176-15178.
40. Pagiola, S., Arcenas, A. & Plantais, G. (2005). Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An exploration of the issues and the evidence to date from Latin America. World Dev., 33, 237-253.
41. Pascual, U., Muradian, R., Rodriguez, L. & Duraiappah, A. (2010). Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: a conceptual approach. Ecol. Econ., 69, 1237-1244.
42. Pattanayak, S., Wunder, S. & Ferraro, P. (2010). Show me the money: do payments supply environmental services in developing countries? Rev. Env. Econ. Pol., 4, 254-274.
43. Pirard, R. (2012). Market-based instruments for biodiversity and ecosystem services: a lexicon. Env. Sci. & Pol., 19-20, 59-68.
44. Polanyi, Karl. (1944). The Great Transformation. Boston, Beacon Press.
45. Porras, I. (2010). Fair and green? Social impacts of payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. IIED, London, UK.
46. Sanchez-Azofeifa, G., Pfaff, A., Robalino, J. & Boomhower, J. (2007). Costa Rica's payment for environmental services Program: Intention, implementation, and impact. Con. Biol., 21, 1165-1173.
47. Sierra, R. & Russman, E. (2006). On the efficiency of environmental service payments: A forest conservation assessment in the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica. Ecol. Econ., 59, 131-141.
48. Spash, C. (2011). Terrible economics, ecosystems and banking. Env. Val., 20, 141-45.
49. Titmuss, R. (1970). The gift relationship: From human blood to social policy. John Ashton, London, UK.
50. Van Wilgen, B.W., Le Maitre, D.C. & Cowling, R.M. (1998). Ecosystem services, efficiency, sustainability and equity: South Africa's Working for Water Programme. T. Ec. Evol., 13, 378.
51. Vatn, A. (2010). An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services. Ecol. Econ., 69, 1245-1256.
52. Wells, M. & Brandon, K. (1992). People and parks. Linking protected area management with local communities. World Bank, Washington.