Designing payments for ecosystem services (PES) program to reduce deforestation in Tanzania: An assessment of payment approaches

Ecological Economics

Volumn 95, Issue , 2013, Pages 20-30

  Kaczan, David ^a   Swallow, Brent M ^a   Adamowicz, W L Vic ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Agroforestry; Choice experiments; Contract design; Latent class model; Payments for ecosystem services; Tanzania

Indexed keywords

AGROFORESTRY; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEFORESTATION; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; INCENTIVE; LAND USE CHANGE; VOLUNTARY APPROACH;

TANGA [TANZANIA]; TANZANIA; USAMBARA MOUNTAINS;

EID: 84883296830     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.011     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Arifin B., Swallow B., Suyanto S., Coe R. A conjoint analysis of farmer preferences for community forestry contracts in the Sumber Jaya Watershed, Indonesia. Ecological Economics 2009, 68(7):2040-2050.
2. Arrow K., Daily G., Dasgupta P., Levin S., Maler K., Maskin E., Starrett D., Sterner T., Tietenberg T. Managing ecosystem resources. Environmental Science & Technology 2000, 34(8):1401-1406.
3. Bech M., Gyrd-Hansen D. Effects coding in discrete choice experiments. Health Economics 2005, 14:1079-1083.
4. Beharry-Borg N., Smart J.C.R., Termansen M., Hubacek K. Evaluating farmers' likely participation in a payment programme for water quality protection in the UK uplands. Regional Environmental Change 2013, 13(3):633-647.
5. Ben-Akiva M., Lerman S. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand 1985, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
6. Boxall P., Adamowicz W. Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: a latent class approach. Environmental and Resource Economics 2002, 23(4):421-446.
7. Broch S., Vedel S. Using choice experiments to investigate the policy relevance of heterogeneity in farmer agri-environmental contract preferences. Environmental and Resource Economics 2012, 51(4):561-581.
8. Broch S.W., Strange N., Jacobsen J.B., Wilson K.A. Farmers' willingness to provide ecosystem services and effects of their spatial distribution. Ecological Economics 2013, 92:78-86.
9. Brooks T., Mittermeier R., Mittermeier C., Da Fonseca G., Rylands A., Konstant W., Flick P., Pilgrim J., Oldfield S., Magin G., Hilton-Taylor C. Habitat loss and extinction in the hotspots of biodiversity. Conservation Biology 2002, 16(4):909-923.
10. Bullock R., Mithöfer D., Vihemäki H. A comparative financial analysis of current land use systems and implications for the adoption of improved agroforestry in the East Usambaras, Tanzania. Working Paper No 125 2011, World Agroforestry Centre, Nairobi.
11. Burgess N., Butynski T., Cordeiro N., Doggart N., Fjeldsa J., Howell K., Kilahama F., Loader S., Lovett J., Mbilinyi B., Menegon M., Moyer D., Nashanda E., Perkin A., Rovero F., Stanley W. The biological importance of the Eastern Arc Mountains of Tanzania and Kenya. Biological Conservation 2007, 134(2):209-231.
12. Campbell B. Editorial: beyond Copenhagen: REDD+, agriculture, adaptation, strategies and poverty. Global Environmental Change 2009, 19:397-399.
13. Carlsson F., Frykblom P., Johan Lagerkvist C. Using cheap talk as a test of validity in choice experiments. Economics Letters 2005, 89(2):147-152.
14. ChoiceMetrics Ngene 1.1 Available online [21st May 2011] at. http://www.choice-metrics.com/index.html.
15. Christensen T., Pedersen A., Nielsen H., Mørkbak M., Hasler B., Denver S. Determinants of farmers' willingness to participate in subsidy schemes for pesticide-free buffer zones: a choice experiment study. Ecological Economics 2011, 70(8):1558-1564.
16. CIA World Factbook: Country Profile: Tanzania Available online [18th Feb 2011] at. http://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/tz.html.
17. Cooper J. A joint framework for analysis of agri-environmental payment programs. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2003, 85(4):976-987.
18. Cooper J., Osborne C. The effect of rental rates on the extension of conservation reserve program contracts. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1998, 80(1):184-194.
19. Cummings R., Taylor L. Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: a cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method. The American Economic Review 1999, 89(3):649-665.
20. Ducos G., Dupraz P., Bonnieoux F. Agri-environment contract adoption under fixed and variable compliance costs. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2009, 52(5):669-687.
21. Engel S., Pagiola S., Wunder S. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecological Economics 2008, 65(4):663-674.
22. Espinosa-Goded M., Barreiro-Hurlé J., Ruto E. What do farmers want from agri-environmental scheme design? A choice experiment approach. Journal of Agricultural Economics 2010, 61(2):259-273.
23. Ferraro P., Kiss A. Ecology: direct payments to conserve biodiversity. Science 2002, 298(5599):1718-1719.
24. Hall J., Burgess N., Lovett J., Mbilinyi B., Gereau R. Conservation implications of deforestation across an elevational gradient in the Eastern Arc Mountains, Tanzania. Biological Conservation 2009, 142(11):2510-2521.
25. Hall J., Gillespie T., Mwangoka M. Comparison of agroforests and protected forests in the East Usambara Mountains, Tanzania. Environmental Management 2011, 48(2):237-247.
26. Hanemann W. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1984, 66:332-341.
27. Hanley N., Mourato S., Wright R. Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation. Journal of Economic Surveys 2001, 15(3):435-462.
28. Horne P. Forest owners' acceptance of incentive based policy instruments in forest biodiversity conservation: a choice experiment based approach. Silva Fennica 2006, 40(1):169-178.
29. Jack B., Kousky C., Sims K. Designing payments for ecosystem services: lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2008, 195(28):9465-9470.
30. Kemkes R., Farley J., Koliba C. Determining when payments are an effective policy approach to ecosystem service provision. Ecological Economics 2010, 69(11):2069-2074.
31. Kerr J., Vardhan M., Jindal R. Prosocial behavior and incentives: evidence from field experiments in rural Mexico and Tanzania. Ecological Economics 2012, 73:220-227.
32. Klosowski R., Stevens T., Kittredge D., Dennis D. Economic incentives for coordinated management of forest land: a case study of southern New England. Forest Policy and Economics 2001, 2(1):29-38.
33. Leimona B., Joshi L., van Noordwijk M. Can rewards for environmental services benefit the poor? Lessons from Asia. International Journal of the Commons 2009, 3(1):82-107.
34. Leonard C., Mwangoka V., Mkongewa M., Doggart N., Vihemäki H. Assessment of the biological values of different land cover types in the East Usambara Mountains of Tanzania. Technical Paper No. 23 2010, Tanzania Forest Conservation Group, Dar es Salaam.
35. Little J., Berrens R. Explaining disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values: further investigation using meta-analysis. Economic Bulletin 2004, 3(6):1-13.
36. Lopa D. Equitable payment for watershed services (EPWS): A CARE/WWF Programme. Proceedings of the Kagera Tamp-Regional Technical Workshop on Land Planning and Management, 31st August, Kabale, Uganda 2011.
37. Lovett J., Clarke G., Moore R., Morrey G. Elevational distribution of restricted range forest tree taxa in eastern Tanzania. Biodiversity and Conservation 2001, 10(4):541-550.
38. Lusk J., Norwood B. Bridging the gap between laboratory experiments and naturally occurring markets: an inferred valuation method. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2009, 58(2):236-250.
39. Maguire K. Does mode matter? A comparison of telephone, mail, and in-person treatments in contingent valuation surveys. Journal of Environmental Management 2009, 90(11):3528-3533.
40. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis 2005, Island Press, Washington, D.C.
41. Muradian R., Corbera E., Pascual U., Kosoy N., May P. Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 2010, 69(6):1202-1208.
42. Myers N., Mittermeler R., Mittermeler C., Da Fonseca G., Kent J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 2000, 403(6772):853-858.
43. Newmark W. Conserving Biodiversity in East African Forests: A Study of the Eastern Arc Mountains 2002, Springer, New York.
44. NORAD Real-Time Evaluation of Norway's International Climate and Forest Initiative: Country Report: Tanzania 2011, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, Oslo.
45. Nunes P., Schokkaert E. Identifying the warm glow effect in contingent valuation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2003, 45(2):231-245.
46. Petheram L., Campbell B.M. Listening to locals on payments for environmental services. Journal of Environmental Management 2010, 91(5):1139-1149.
47. Rantala S., Vihemäki H. Human impacts of displacement from protected areas: lessons from the establishment of the Derema Corridor, Northeastern Tanzania. Paper presented in the 13th Biannual Conference of the International Association for the Study of the Commons, Hyderabad, India, 11-14th January 2011.
48. Reyes T. Agroforestry Systems for Sustainable Livelihoods and Improved Land Management in the East Usambara Mountains, Tanzania 2008, Doctoral Thesis, The University of Helsinki, Helsinki.
49. Reyes T., Luukkanen O., Quiroz R. Small cardamom: precious for people, harmful for mountain forests. Possibilities for sustainable cultivation in the East Usambaras, Tanzania. Mountain Research and Development 2006, 26(2):131-137.
50. Ruto E., Garrod G. Investigating farmer's preferences for the design of agri-environmental schemes: a choice experiment approach. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2009, 52(5):631-647.
51. Sagebiel J. Comparing the latent class model with the random parameters logit: a choice experiment analysis of highly heterogeneous electricity consumers in Hyderabad, India. Paper presented at the 2nd Annual International Choice Modelling Conference, Leeds, UK, 4-6th July 2011.
52. Scarpa R., Thiene M. Destination choice models for rock climbing in the Northeastern Alps: a latent-class approach based on intensity of preferences. Land Economics 2005, 81(3):426-444.
53. Southgate D., Haab T., Lundine J., Rodríguez F. Payments for environmental services and rural livelihood strategies in Ecuador and Guatemala. Environment and Development Economics 2010, 15:21-37.
54. Stevens T., Dennis D., Kittredge D., Rickenbach M. Attitudes and preferences toward co-operative agreements for management of private forest lands in the North-eastern United States. Journal of Environmental Management 1999, 55(2):81-90.
55. Swallow B., Kallesoe M., Iftikhar U., van Noordwijk M., Bracer C., Scherr S., Raju K., Poats S., Duraiappah A., Ochieng B., Mallee H., Rumley R. Compensation and rewards for environmental services in the developing world: framing pan-tropical analysis and comparison. Ecology and Society 2009, 14(2):26-36.
56. Tacconi L., Mahanty S., Suich H. Assessing the livelihood impacts of payments for environmental services: implications for avoided deforestation. Crawford School Research Summary 2009, Australian National University, Canberra.
57. UNDP Project Novella: The Allanblackia Value Chain in the United Republic of Tanzania, A Growing Sustainable Business Case Study (Project Brief) 2009, United Nations Development Programme, New York.
58. van Noordwijk M., Leimona B. Principles for fairness and efficiency in enhancing environmental services in Asia: payments, compensation, or co-investment?. Ecology and Society 2010, 15(4):17-35.
59. Whittington D., Pagiola S. Using contingent valuation in the design of payments for environmental services mechanisms: a review and assessment. World Bank Research Observer 2012, 27(2):261-287.
60. Wunder S. Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 42 2005, Center for International Forestry Research, Jakarta.
61. Wunder S. The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation: essays. Conservation Biology 2007, 21(1):48-58.
62. WWF Implementation of REDD+ in Community Forestry in the East Usambara Mountains, Tanzania: Possibilities and Challenges 2010, WWF Finland, Helsinki.