Payment for ecosystem services: Possible instrument for managing ecosystem services in Nepal

International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 289-299

  Bhatta, Laxmi D ^a   Van Oort, Bob Eric Helmuth ^b   Rucevska, Ieva ^c   Baral, Himlal ^d  

^a INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR INTEGRATED MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT   (Nepal)

^b CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH OSLO CICERO   (Norway)

^c UNEP/GRID Arendal   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

ecosystem services; local level mechanism; PES; policy framework; sustainability

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; NATIONAL STRATEGY; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; SUSTAINABILITY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

NEPAL;

EID: 84919649705     PISSN: 21513732     EISSN: 21513740     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/21513732.2014.973908     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Acharya KP, Baral SK, Malla R, Basnyat B. 2010. Potentiality of payment for environmental services in community forests of Nepal [Internet]. [cited 2012 Jul 20]. Available from: http://www.forestrynepal.org
2. Adhikaree K. 2010. Socio-technical assessment of payment for environmental services (PES): a case study of Kulekhani watershed, Nepal [dissertation]. Bangkok: School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian Institute of Technology (AIT).
3. Baral H, Keenan RJ, Stork NE, Kasel S. 2014. Measuring and managing ecosystem goods and services in changing landscapes: a south-east Australian perspective. J Environ Plann Manag. 57: 961-983. doi: 10.1080/09640568.2013.824872.
4. Bhatta LD, Kotru R. 2012. Learning perspectives and analytical framework for framing PES in Nepal. In: Acharya KP., et al. editors. Leveraging and landscapes; conservation beyond boundaries. Kathmandu: Nepal Foresters Association.
5. Bhatta LD, Lian K, Chun J. 2010. Policies and legal frameworks of protected area management in Nepal. In: Erene H., et al. editors. Sustainability matters: environment management in Asia. Singapore: World Scientific.
6. Bruce J, Wendland KJ, Naughton-Treves L. 2010. Whom to pay? Key concepts and terms regarding tenure and property rights in payment-based forest ecosystem conservation. Madison (WI): Land Tenure Center Policy Brief.
7. CIFOR. 2007. Tropical forest and climate change adaptation [Internet]. [cited 2013 Aug 11]. Bogor
8. Corbera EK, Brown K, Adger WN. 2007. The equity and legitimacy of markets for ecosystem services. Dev Change. 38: 587-613. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2007.00425.x.
9. Cranford M, Mourato S. 2011. Community conservation and a two-stage approach to payments for ecosystem services. Ecol Econ. 71: 89-98. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.08.007.
10. Cubbage F, Harou P, Sills E. 2007. Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management. Forest Policy Econ. 9: 833-851. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2006.03.010.
11. DNPWC. 2011. Annual Report, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation. Kathmandu: Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation.
12. Engel S, Pagiola S, Wunder S. 2008. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecol Econ. 65: 663-674. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.03.011.
13. Engel S, Palmer C. 2008. Payments for environmental services as an alternative to logging under weak property rights: the case of Indonesia. Ecol Econ. 65: 799-809. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.07.028.
14. Garbacha K, Lubella M, DeClerck FAJ. 2012. Payment for Ecosystem Services: the roles of positive incentives and information sharing in stimulating adoption of silvopastoral conservation practices. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 156: 27-36. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2012.04.017.
15. Ghazoul J, Garcia C, Kushalappa CG. 2009. Landscape labelling: a concept for next-generation payment for ecosystem service schemes. Forest Ecol Manag. 258: 1889-1895. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.01.038.
16. GoN/MFSC. 2010. Nepals readiness project proposal; REDD, Kathmandu: Government of Nepal, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation.
17. GoN/NPC. 2011. Poverty measurement practices in nepal and number of poor. Kathmandu: GoN/NPC.
18. Gutman P. 2007. Ecosystem Services: foundations for a New Rural-urban Compact. Ecol Econ. 62: 383-387. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.027.
19. Hubermann D. 2009. A gateway to PES: using payments for ecosystem services for livelihoods and landscapes. Markets and incentives for livelihoods and landscapes series No. 1, forest conservation programme. Gland: International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
20. [ICIMOD] International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. 2010. Climate change impact and vulnerability in the Eastern Himalayas-synthesis report. Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development.
21. [ICIMOD] International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. 2011. Protected areas and payment for ecosystem services: a feasibility study in Shivapuri-Nagarjun National Park, Nepal. Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development.
22. [IUCN] International Union for the Conservation of Nature, The Nature Conservancy and The World Bank. 2004. How much is an ecosystem worth? Washington (DC): The World Bank. J For. 28: 415-433.Copyright Taylor and Francis Group.
23. Karn PK. 2008. Making payment for environmental services (PES) work: a case study of Shivapuri National Park, Nepal. In: Bajracharya SB, Dahal N., editors. Shifting paradigms in protected area management. Kathmandu: NTNC; p. 171-185.
24. Khatri DB. 2009. Compromising the environment in payments for environmental services? An institutional analysis of mechanisms for sharing hydroelectricity revenue in Kulekhani watershed, Nepal. [dissertation]. The Hague: Institute of Social Studies.
25. Kumar S, Managi S. 2009. Compensation for environmental services and intergovernmental fiscal transfers: the case of India. Ecol Econ. 68: 3052-3059. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.07.009.
26. Landell-Mills N. 2002. Marketing forest environmental services-who benefits? London: IIED.
27. Lauber TB, Decker DJ, Knuth BA. 2008. Social networks and community-based natural resource management. Environ Manage. 42: 677-687. doi: 10.1007/s00267-008-9181-8.
28. Mahato R. 2010. Model Dhulikhel. The Nepali Times [Internet]. Kathmandu; [cited 2010 Sept 3-9]. Available from: http://nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=17422.
29. Maraseni TN, Neupane PR, Lopez-Casero F, Cadman T. 2014. An assessment of the impacts of the REDD+ pilot project on community forests user groups (CFUGs) and their community forests in Nepal. J Environ Manage. 136: 37-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.01.011.
30. McAfee K, Shapiro E. 2010. Payments for ecosystem services in Mexico: nature, neoliberalism, social movements, and the state. A Assoc Am Geog. 100: 579-599. doi: 10.1080/00045601003794833.
31. Merlo M, Briales ER. 2000. Public goods and externalities linked to Mediterranean forests: economic nature and policy. Land Use Policy. 17: 197-208. doi: 10.1016/S0264-8377(00)00017-X.
32. MFSC, SNV, Forest Action. 2010. Nepal ma Batabaran Sewa ka Sambhawana ra Chunautiharu (In Nepali). Kathmandu: Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, SNV Netherlands Development Organisation, and Forest Action.
33. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington (DC): Island Press.
34. Ojha H, Persha L, Chhatre A. 2009. Community forestry in Nepal: a policy innovation for local livelihoods and food security [Internet]. IFRI Working Paper No. W09I-02. International Forestry Resources and Institutions Program. [cited 2013 Jul 10]. Available from: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp00913.pdf
35. Ojha HR, Paudel NS, Banjade MR, McDougall C, Cameron J. 2010. The deliberative scientist: integrating science and politics in forest resource governance in Nepal. In: German L, Ramisch JJ., editors. Beyond the biophysical: knowledge, culture, and power in agriculture and natural resource management. Dordrecht: Springer; 301 p.
36. Pagiola S, Arcenas A, Platais 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. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.07.011.
37. Poudel M, Thwaites R, Race D, Dahal GR. 2014. REDD+ and community forestry: implications for local communities and forest management- a case study from Nepal. Int Forestry Rev. 16: 39-54. doi: 10.1505/146554814811031251.
38. Paudel NS, Budhathoki P, Sharma UR. 2007. Buffer zones: new frontiers for participatory conservation? J For Livelihoods. 6: 44-53.
39. Phelps J, Webb EL, Adams WM. 2012. Biodiversity co-benefits of policies to reduce forest-carbon emissions. Nat Clim Chang. 2: 497-503.
40. Pokharel RK, Tiwari KR. 2013. Good Governance Assessment in Nepals Community Forestry Good Governance Assessment in Nepal. J Sustainable For. 32: 37-41.
41. Porras I, Barton DN, Miranda M, Chacón-Cascante A. 2013. Learning from 20 years of payments for ecosystem services in Costa Rica. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.
42. Proctor W, Köllner T, Lukasiewicz A. 2008. Equity considerations and payments for ecosystem services. Cambridge (UK): University of Cambridge.
43. Rana EB, Karki S, Bs K, Kotru R, Paudel J. 2012. REDD+ and Forest Governance in Nepal. ETFRN News. 53: 167-174.
44. Tacconi L. 2012. Redefining payments for environmental services. Ecol Econ. 73: 29-36. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.09.028.
45. WTLCP. 2012. Batabaraniya Sewa Bhuktani Prakriya (In Nepali). Kathmandu: Western Terai Landscape Complex Project/Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation.
46. Wunder S. 2005. Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts. CIFOR Occasional Paper. Bogor: Center for International Forestry Research; p. 42.
47. Wunder S, Albán M. 2008. Decentralized payments for environmental services: the cases of Pimampiro and PROFAFOR in Ecuador. Ecol Econ. 65: 685-698. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.11.004.
48. Wunder S, Dung B, Ibarra E. 2005. Payment is good, control is better: why payments for environmental services so far have remained incipient in Vietnam. Bogor: CIFOR.
49. Wunder S, Engel S, Pagiola S. 2008. Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecol Econ. 65: 834-852.