Payments for ecosystem services in the tropics: A closer look at effectiveness and equity

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

Volumn 14, Issue , 2015, Pages 150-162

  Calvet Mir, L ^a,b   Corbera, E ^a,c   Martin, A ^d   Fisher, J ^e   Gross Camp, N ^d  

^a INSTITUT DE CIÈNCIA I TECNOLOGIA AMBIENTALS   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITAT OBERTA DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH; LAND COVER; SOCIAL IMPACT; TROPICAL REGION;

EID: 84934949252     PISSN: 18773435     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2015.06.001     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Gutman P. Ecosystem services: foundations for a new rural-urban compact. Ecol Econ 2007, 62:383-387.
2. Potter C.A., Wolf S.A. Payments for ecosystem services in relation to US and UK agri-environmental policy: disruptive neoliberal innovation or hybrid policy adaptation?. Agric Human Values 2014, 31:397-408.
3. Corbera E. Problematizing REDD+ as an experiment in payments for ecosystem services. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2012, 4:612-619.
4. McElwee P.D. Payments for environmental services as neoliberal market-based forest conservation in Vietnam: Panacea or problem?. Geoforum 2012, 43:412-426.
5. Wunder S., Engel S., Pagiola S. Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:834-852.
6. Huang M., Upadhyaya S.K., Jindal R., Kerr J. Payments for watershed services in Asia: a review of current initiatives. J Sustain Forestry 2009, 28:551-575.
7. Dillaha T., et al. Payments for watershed services in developing countries. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers - Conference on 21st Century Watershed Technology: Improving Water Quality and Environment 2008 2008, 176-184.
8. Ferraro P.J. Regional review of payments for watershed services: sub-Saharan Africa. J Sustain Forest 2009, 28:525-550.
9. Southgate D., Wunder S. Paying for watershed services in Latin America: a review of current initiatives. J Sustain Forest 2009, 28:497-524.
10. Jindal R., Swallow B., Kerr J. Forestry-based carbon sequestration projects in Africa: potential benefits and challenges. Nat Res Forum 2008, 32:116-130.
11. Martin-Ortega J., Ojea E., Roux C. Payments for water ecosystem services in Latin America: a literature review and conceptual model. Ecosyst Services 2013, 6:122-132.
12. Milne S., Niesten E. Direct payments for biodiversity conservation in developing countries: practical insights for design and implementation. ORYX 2009, 43:530-541.
13. Myers N., Mittermeler R.A., Mittermeler C.G., Da Fonseca G.A.B., Kent J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 2000, 403:853-858.
14. Geist H.J., Lambin E.F. Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. BioScience 2002, 52:143-150.
15. Fisher B., Christopher T. Poverty and biodiversity: measuring the overlap of human poverty and the biodiversity hotspots. Ecol Econ 2007, 62:93-101.
16. Adams W.M., et al. Biodiversity conservation and the eradication of poverty. Science 2004, 306:1146-1149.
17. Ferraro P.J. ECOLOGY: direct payments to conserve biodiversity. Science 2002, 298:1718-1719.
18. Wunder S. The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation: essays. Conserv Biol 2007, 21:48-58.
19. Sikor T., Martin A., Fisher J., He J. Toward an empirical analysis of justice in ecosystem governance. Conserv Lett 2014, n/a-n/a. 10.1111/conl.12142.
20. Corbera E., Pascual U. Ecosystem services: heed social goals. Science 2012, 335:655-656.
21. Pascual U., et al. Social equity matters in payments for ecosystem services. BioScience 2014.
22. De Koning G.H.J., Benítez P.C., Muñoz F., Olschewski R. Modelling the impacts of payments for biodiversity conservation on regional land-use patterns. Landsc Urban Plann 2007, 83:255-267.
23. Wünscher T., Engel S., Wunder S. Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: a tool for boosting conservation benefits. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:822-833.
24. Bulte E.H., Boone R.B., Stringer R., Thornton P.K. Elephants or onions? Paying for nature in Amboseli, Kenya. Environ Dev Econ 2008, 13:395-414.
25. Barton D.N., et al. Environmental service payments: evaluating biodiversity conservation trade-offs and cost-efficiency in the Osa Conservation Area, Costa Rica. J Environ Manage 2009, 90:901-911.
26. Quintero M., Wunder S., Estrada R.D. For services rendered? Modeling hydrology and livelihoods in Andean payments for environmental services schemes. Forest Ecol Manage 2009, 258:1871-1880.
27. Arias M.E., Cochrane T.A., Lawrence K.S., Killeen T.J., Farrell T.A. Paying the forest for electricity: a modelling framework to market forest conservation as payment for ecosystem services benefiting hydropower generation. Environ Conserv 2011, 38:473-484.
28. Fletcher R., Breitling J. Market mechanism or subsidy in disguise? Governing payment for environmental services in Costa Rica. Geoforum 2012, 43:402-411.
29. Roth R.J., Dressler W. Market-oriented conservation governance: the particularities of place. Geoforum 2012, 43:363-366.
30. Goldman-Benner R.L., et al. Water funds and payments for ecosystem services: practice learns from theory and theory can learn from practice. ORYX 2012, 46:55-63.
31. Zhang W., Pagiola S. Assessing the potential for synergies in the implementation of payments for environmental services programmes: an empirical analysis of Costa Rica. Environ Conserv 2011, 38:406-416.
32. Rico García-Amado L., Ruiz Pérez M., Barrasa García S. Motivation for conservation: assessing integrated conservation and development projects and payments for environmental services in la sepultura biosphere reserve, mexico, chiapas. Ecol Econ 2013, 89:92-100.
33. Kosoy N., Corbera E., Brown K. Participation in payments for ecosystem services: case studies from the Lacandon rainforest, Mexico. Geoforum 2008, 39:2073-2083.
34. Fauzi A., Anna Z. The complexity of the institution of payment for environmental services: a case study of two Indonesian PES schemes. Ecosyst Services 2013, 6:54-63.
35. Nelson F., et al. Payments for ecosystem services as a framework for community-based conservation in northern Tanzania. Conserv Biol 2010, 24:78-85.
36. Pirard R. Payments for Environmental Services (PES) in the public policy landscape: 'Mandatory' spices in the Indonesian recipe. Forest Policy Econ 2012, 18:23-29.
37. Farley K.A., Anderson W.G., Bremer L.L., Harden C.P. Compensation for ecosystem services: an evaluation of efforts to achieve conservation and development in Ecuadorian páramo grasslands. Environ Conserv 2011, 38:393-405.
38. Pagiola S., et al. Paying for biodiversity conservation services: experience in Colombia, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua. Mountain Res Dev 2005, 25:206-211.
39. Sierra R., Russman E. On the efficiency of environmental service payments: a forest conservation assessment in the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica. Ecol Econ 2006, 59:131-141.
40. Pagiola S., et al. Paying for the environmental services of silvopastoral practices in Nicaragua. Ecol Econ 2007, 64:374-385.
41. Sánchez-Azofeifa G.A., Pfaff A., Robalino J.A., Boomhower J.P. Costa Rica's payment for environmental services program: intention, implementation, and impact. Conserv Biol 2007, 21:1165-1173.
42. Asquith N.M., Vargas M.T., Wunder S. Selling two environmental services: in-kind payments for bird habitat and watershed protection in Los Negros, Bolivia. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:675-684.
43. Locatelli B., Rojas V., Salinas Z. Impacts of payments for environmental services on local development in northern Costa Rica: a fuzzy multi-criteria analysis. Forest Policy Econ 2008, 10:275-285.
44. Pagiola S. Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:712-724.
45. Turpie J.K., Marais C., Blignaut J.N. The working for water programme: evolution of a payments for ecosystem services mechanism that addresses both poverty and ecosystem service delivery in South Africa. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:788-798.
46. Corbera E., Soberanis C.G., Brown K. Institutional dimensions of payments for ecosystem services: an analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme. Ecol Econ 2009, 68:743-761.
47. Honey-Rosés J., López-García J., Rendón-Salinas E., Peralta-Higuera A., Galindo-Leal C. To pay or not to pay? Monitoring performance and enforcing conditionality when paying for forest conservation in Mexico. Environ Conserv 2009, 36:120-128.
48. Honey-Rosés J., Baylis K., Ramírez M.I. A spatially explicit estimate of avoided forest loss. Conserv Biol 2011, 25:1032-1043.
49. Van Hecken G., Bastiaensen J. Payments for ecosystem services in Nicaragua: do market-based approaches work?. Dev Change 2010, 41:421-444.
50. Wendland K.J., et al. Targeting and implementing payments for ecosystem services: opportunities for bundling biodiversity conservation with carbon and water services in Madagascar. Ecol Econ 2010, 69:2093-2107.
51. Hegde R., Bull G.Q. Performance of an agro-forestry based payments-for-environmental-services project in Mozambique: a household level analysis. Ecol Econ 2011, 71:122-130.
52. Naidoo R., Weaver L.C., De Longcamp M., Du Plessis P. Namibia's community-based natural resource management programme: an unrecognized payments for ecosystem services scheme. Environ Conserv 2011, 38:445-453.
53. Scullion J., Thomas C.W., Vogt K.A., Pérez-Maqueo O., Logsdon M.G. Evaluating the environmental impact of payments for ecosystem services in Coatepec (Mexico) using remote sensing and on-site interviews. Environ Conserv 2011, 38:426-434.
54. Alix-Garcia J.M., Shapiro E.N., Sims K.R.E. Forest conservation and slippage: evidence from mexico's national payments for ecosystem services program. Land Econ 2012, 88:613-638.
55. Arriagada R.A., Ferraro P.J., Sills E.O., Pattanayak S.K., Cordero-Sancho S. Do payments for environmental services affect forest cover? A farm-level evaluation from Costa Rica. Land Econ 2012, 88:382-399.
56. Garbach K., Lubell M., DeClerck F.A.J. Payment for ecosystem services: the roles of positive incentives and information sharing in stimulating adoption of silvopastoral conservation practices. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2012, 156:27-36.
57. Gross-Camp N.D., Martin A., McGuire S., Kebede B., Munyarukaza J. Payments for ecosystem services in an African protected area: exploring issues of legitimacy, fairness, equity and effectiveness. Oryx 2012, 46:24-33.
58. Hayes T.M. Payment for ecosystem services, sustained behavioural change, and adaptive management: peasant perspectives in the Colombian Andes. Environ Conserv 2012, 39:144-153.
59. Lopa D., et al. Towards operational payments for water ecosystem services in Tanzania: a case study from the Uluguru Mountains. ORYX 2012, 46:34-44.
60. Newton P., Nichols E.S., Endo W., Peres C.A. Consequences of actor level livelihood heterogeneity for additionality in a tropical forest payment for environmental services programme with an undifferentiated reward structure. Global Environ Change 2012, 22:127-136.
61. Zbinden S., Lee D.R. Paying for environmental services: an analysis of participation in Costa Rica's PSA program. World Dev 2005, 33:255-272.
62. Corbera E., Brown K., Adger N.W. The equity and legitimacy of markets for ecosystem services. Dev Change 2007, 38:587-613.
63. Muñoz-Piña C., Guevara A., Torres J.M., Braña J. Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: analysis, negotiations and results. Ecol Econ 2008, 65:725-736.
64. De Koning F., et al. Bridging the gap between forest conservation and poverty alleviation: the Ecuadorian Socio Bosque program. Environ Sci Policy 2011, 14:531-542.
65. Milne S., Adams B. Market Masquerades: uncovering the politics of community-level payments for environmental services in Cambodia. Dev Change 2012, 43:133-158.
66. Krause T., Collen W., Nicholas K.A. Evaluating safeguards in a conservation incentive program: participation, consent, and benefit sharing in indigenous communities of the Ecuadorian Amazon. Ecol Soc 2013, 18.
67. Rico García-Amado L., Pérez M.R., Escutia F.R., García S.B., Mejía E.C. 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.
68. Couto Pereira S.N. Payment for environmental services in the amazon forest: how can conservation and development be reconciled?. J Environ Dev 2010, 19:171-190.
69. Corbera E., Kosoy N., Martínez 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.
70. Kosoy N., Martinez-Tuna M., Muradian R., Martinez-Alier J. Payments for environmental services in watersheds: Insights from a comparative study of three cases in Central America. Ecol Econ 2007, 61:446-455.
71. Clements T., et al. Payments for biodiversity conservation in the context of weak institutions: comparison of three programs from Cambodia. Ecol Econ 2010, 69:1283-1291.
72. Pagiola S., Arcenas A., Platais G. Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An exploration of the issues and the evidence to date from Latin America. World Dev 2005, 33:237-253.
73. Kronenberg J., Hubacek K. Could payments for 'ecosystem services create an ecosystem service curse'?. Ecol Soc 2013, 18.
74. Muradian R., Corbera E., Pascual U., Kosoy N., May P.H. Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecol Econ 2010, 69:1202-1208.
75. Schomers S., Matzdorf B. Payments for ecosystem services: a review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries. Ecosyst Services 2013, 6:16-30.
76. Kroeger T. The quest for the 'optimal' payment for environmental services program: ambition meets reality, with useful lessons. Forest Policy Econ 2013, 37:65-74.
77. Pascual U., Muradian R., Rodríguez L.C., Duraiappah A. Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: a conceptual approach. Ecol Econ 2010, 69:1237-1244.
78. Chhatre A., Agrawal A. Forest commons and local enforcement. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008, 105:13286-13291.
79. Angelsen A., et al. Environmental income and rural livelihoods: a global-comparative analysis. World Dev 2014, 64(Suppl 1):S12-S28.
80. Ferraro P.J., Pattanayak S.K. Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. PLoS Biol 2006, 4:e105.
81. Ferraro P.J., Hanauer M.M. Advances in measuring the environmental and social impacts of environmental programs. Annual Rev Environ Res 2014, 39:495-517.
82. White H. Theory-based impact evaluation: principles and practice. J Dev Effectiveness 2009, 1:271-284.
83. Miteva D.A., Pattanayak S.K., Ferraro P.J. Evaluation of biodiversity policy instruments: what works and what doesn't?. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 2012, 28:69-92.
84. Baylis K., et al. Mainstreaming impact evaluation in nature conservation. Conserv Lett 2015, 10.1111/conl.12180.