Analysing the impacts of PES programmes beyond economic rationale: Perceptions of ecosystem services provision associated to the Mexican case

Ecosystem Services

Volumn 29, Issue , 2018, Pages 116-127

  Arriagada, Rodrigo ^a   Villaseñor, Adrián ^b   Rubiano, Eliana ^c   Cotacachi, David ^d   Morrison, Judith ^d  

^a Avenida Vicuña Mackenna   (Chile)

^b PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^c WORLD BANK   (United States)

^d INTER AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK   (United States)

Author keywords

Conservation; Ecosystem services; Impact evaluation; Mexico; Payment for environmental services; Socio economic

Indexed keywords

EID: 85038869300     PISSN: 22120416     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.12.007     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Abadie, A., Imbens, G.W., Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica 74 (2006), 235–267.
2. Abram, N.K., Meijaard, E., Ancrenaz, M., Runting, R.K., Wells, J.A., Gaveau, D., Pellier, A.-S., Mengersen, K., Spatially explicit perceptions of ecosystem services and land cover change in forested regions of Borneo. Ecosyst. Serv. 7 (2014), 116–127.
3. Agarwal, B., Gender and forest conservation: The impact of women's participation in community forest governance. Ecol. Econ. 68 (2009), 2785–2799.
4. Alcorn, J., Toledo, V., The role of tenurial shells in ecological sustainability: property rights and natural resource management in Mexico. Hanna, S., Monasinghe, M., (eds.) Prop. Rights a Soc. Ecol. Context, 1995, The World Bank, Washington, DC.
5. Alix-Garcia, J., Wolff, H., Payment for ecosystem services from forests. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 6 (2014), 4.1–4.20.
6. 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. 88 (2012), 613–638.
7. Alix-Garcia, J.M., Sims, K.R.E., Yañez-Pagans, P., Only one tree from each seed? Environmental effectiveness and poverty alleviation in Mexico's Payments for ecosystem services program. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 7 (2015), 1–40.
8. Arriagada, R.A., Sills, E.O., Ferraro, P.J., Pattanayak, S.K., Do payments pay off? Evidence from participation in Costa Rica's PES program. PLoS One 10 (2015), 1–17.
9. Arriagada, R.A., Sills, E.O., Pattanayak, S.K., Ferraro, P.J., Combining qualitative and quantitative methods to evaluate participation in Costa Rica's program of payments for environmental services. J. Sustain. For. 28 (2009), 343–367.
10. Asah, S.T., Guerry, A.D., Blahna, D.J., Lawler, J.J., Perception, acquisition and use of ecosystem services: human behavior, and ecosystem management and policy implications. Ecosyst. Serv. 10 (2014), 180–186.
11. Berlin, E.A., Berlin, B., Medical Ethnobiology of the Highland Mayan of Chiapas, Mexico: The Gastrointestinal Diseases. 1996, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
12. Bernard, H.R., Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Fourth ed., 2006, Altamira Press, New York.
13. Börner, J., Baylis, K., Corbera, E., Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Honey-Rosés, J., Persson, U.M., Wunder, S., The effectiveness of payments for environmental services. World Dev. 96 (2017), 359–374.
14. Boster, J., The successive pile sort 1 triad tests and free pile sorts. Cult. Anthropol. Methods J. 6 (1994), 2–4.
15. Broussard, S.R., Jones, S.B., Nielsen, L.A., Flanagan, C.A., Forest stewardship education: fostering positive attitudes in urban youth. J. For. 99 (2001), 37–42.
16. Bruijnzeel, L.A., 2004. Hydrological functions of tropical forests: Not seeing the soil for the trees?.
17. Caliendo, M., Kopeinig, S., Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. SSRN eLib. 22 (2005), 31–72.
18. Caro-Borrero, A., Corbera, E., Neitzel, K.C., Almeida-Leñero, L., “We are the city lungs”: payments for ecosystem services in the outskirts of Mexico City. Land Use Policy 43 (2015), 138–148.
19. Corbera, E., Soberanis, C.G., Brown, K., Institutional dimensions of payments for ecosystem services: an analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme. Ecol. Econ. 68 (2009), 743–761.
20. Costedoat, S., Corbera, E., Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Honey-Rosés, J., Baylis, K., Castillo-Santiago, M.A., How effective are biodiversity conservation payments in Mexico?. PLoS One 10 (2015), 1–20.
21. Diamond, A., Sekhon, J., Genetic matching for estimating causal effects. Rev. Econ. Stat. 95 (2013), 932–945.
22. DOF, Tercera seccion. Secretaria de medio ambiente y recursos naturales, Terc. Secc. Secr. MEDIO Ambient. Y Recur. Nat., 2013, 111.
23. Dolisca, F., McDaniel, J.M., Shannon, D.A., Jolly, C.M., A multilevel analysis of the determinants of forest conservation behavior among farmers in Haiti. Soc. Nat. Resour. 22 (2009), 433–447.
24. Engel, S., The devil in the detail: a practical guide on designing payments for environmental services. Int. Rev. Environ. Resour. Econ. 9 (2016), 131–177.
25. Engel, S., Pagiola, S., Wunder, S., Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecol. Econ. 65 (2008), 663–674.
26. Ferraro, P.J., Simpson, R.D., The cost-effectiveness of conservation payments. Land Econ. 78 (2002), 339–353.
27. Figueroa, F., Caro-Borrero, Á., Revollo-Fernández, D., Merino, L., Almeida-Leñero, L., Paré L., Espinosa, D., Mazari-Hiriart, M., “I like to conserve the forest, but I also like the cash”: Socioeconomic factors influencing the motivation to be engaged in the Mexican Payment for environmental services programme. J. For. Econ. 22 (2016), 36–51.
28. Frick, J., Kaiser, F.G., Wilson, M., Environmental knowledge and conservation behavior: exploring prevalence and structure in a representative sample. Pers. Individ. Dif. 37 (2004), 1597–1613.
29. 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 46 (2012), 24–33.
30. Van Hecken, G., Bastiaensen, J., Payments for ecosystem services in Nicaragua: do market-based approaches work?. Dev. Change 41 (2010), 421–444.
31. Hegde, R., Bull, G.Q., Performance of an agro-forestry based payments-for-environmental-services project in Mozambique: a household level analysis. Ecol. Econ. 71 (2011), 122–130.
32. Hein, L., van Koppen, K., de Groot, R.S., van Ierland, E.C., Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol. Econ. 57 (2006), 209–228.
33. Ho, D.E., Imai, K., King, G., Stuart, E.S.A., Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Polit. Anal. 15 (2007), 199–236.
34. Imbens, G.W., Wooldridge, J.M., Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. J. Econ. Lit. 47 (2009), 5–86.
35. Jack, B.K., Kousky, C., Sims, K.R.E., Designing payments for ecosystem services: Lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 105 (2008), 9465–9470.
36. Katz, D., The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opin. Q. 24 (1960), 163–204.
37. Keller, S., Hemmert, W., Völk, F., Aspects of generating syntax-free word lists for quantifying speech intelligibility. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 140, 2016, 3213.
38. Koster, J., Bruno, O., Burns, J.L., Wisdom of the Elders?. Curr. Anthropol. 57 (2016), 113–121.
39. Liu, C., Lu, J., Yin, R., An estimation of the effects of China's priority forestry programs on farmers's income. Environ. Manage. 45 (2010), 526–540.
40. Long, J.S., Freese, J., Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. Third, 2014, Stata Press, Texas.
41. Martin Persson, U., Alpízar, F., Conditional cash transfers and payments for environmental services-a conceptual framework for explaining and judging differences in outcomes. World Dev. 43 (2013), 124–137.
42. McKinnon, M.C., Cheng, S.H., Dupre, S., Edmond, J., Garside, R., Glew, L., Holland, M.B., Levine, E., Masuda, Y.J., Miller, D.C., Oliveira, I., Revenaz, J., Roe, D., Shamer, S., Wilkie, D., Wongbusarakum, S., Woodhouse, E., What are the effects of nature conservation on human well-being? A systematic map of empirical evidence from developing countries. Environ. Evid., 5, 2016, 8.
43. MEA, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Wellbeing: Synthesis, Washington, DC.
44. Muller, S., Indigenous payment for environmental service (PES) opportunities in the Northern Territory: negotiating with customs. Aust. Geogr. 39 (2008), 149–170.
45. 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. 65 (2008), 725–736.
46. Muñoz-Piña, C., De Janvry, A., Sadoulet, E., Recrafting rights over common property resources in Mexico. Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 52 (2003), 129–158.
47. 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. 69 (2010), 1202–1208.
48. Pagiola, S., Agostini, P., Gobbi, J., de Haan, C., Ibrahim, M., Murgueitio, E., Ramírez, E., Rosales, M., Ruíz, J.P., Paying for biodiversity conservation services. Mt. Res. Dev. 25 (2005), 206–211.
49. Pagiola, S., Ramírez, E., Gobbi, J., de Haan, C., Ibrahim, M., Murgueitio, E., Ruíz, J.P., Paying for the environmental services of silvopastoral practices in Nicaragua. Ecol. Econ. 64 (2007), 374–385.
50. Pattanayak, S.K., Wunder, S., Ferraro, P.J., Show me the money: do payments supply environmental services in developing countries?. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 4 (2010), 254–274.
51. Pham, T.T., Campbell, B.M., Garnett, S., Aslin, H., Hoang, M.H., Importance and impacts of intermediary boundary organizations in facilitating payment for environmental services in Vietnam. Environ. Conserv. 37 (2010), 64–72.
52. Porras, I., Alyward, B., Dengel, J., 2013. Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries, p. 36.
53. Reutemann, T., Engel, S., Pareja, E., How (not) to pay — field experimental evidence on the design of REDD + payments. Ecol. Econ. 129 (2016), 220–229.
54. Rodríguez-Robayo, K.J., Ávila-Foucat, V.S., Maldonado, J.H., Indigenous communities’ perception regarding payments for environmental services programme in Oaxaca Mexico. Ecosyst. Serv. 17 (2016), 163–171.
55. Rosenbaum, P., Sensitivity analysis for certain permutation inferences in matched observational studies. Biometrika 74 (1987), 13–26.
56. Ryan, G.W., Nolan, J.M., Yoder, P.S., Successive free listing: using multiple free lists to generate explanatory models. Field Methods 12 (2000), 83–107.
57. Samii, C., Lisiecki, M., Kulkarni, P., Chavis, L., Effects of payment for environmental services (PES) on deforestation and poverty in low- and middle-income countries. Campbell Syst. Rev., 11, 2014.
58. SEMARNAT, 2003. Reglas de Operación para el otorgamiento de pagos del Programa de Servicios Ambientales Hidrológicos, D. Of. La Fed., pp. 6–22.
59. Sims, K.R.E., Alix-Garcia, J.M., Parks versus PES: evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 86 (2017), 8–28.
60. Sims, K.R.E., Alix-Garcia, J.M., Shapiro-Garza, E., Fine, L.R., Radeloff, V.C., Aronson, G., Castillo, S., Ramirez-Reyes, C., Yañez-Pagans, P., Improving environmental and social targeting through adaptive management in Mexico's payments for hydrological services program. Conserv. Biol. 28 (2014), 1151–1159.
61. Wallace, K.J., Classification of ecosystem services: problems and solutions. Biol. Conserv. 139 (2007), 235–246.
62. S. Wunder, 2005. Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts, Jakarta.
63. Wunder, S., The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation: essays. Conserv. Biol. 21 (2007), 48–58.
64. Wunder, S., Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecol. Econ. 117 (2015), 234–243.
65. Zander, K.K., Dunnett, D.R., Brown, C., Campion, O., Garnett, S.T., Rewards for providing environmental services – where indigenous Australians’ and western perspectives collide. Ecol. Econ. 87 (2013), 145–154.
66. Zanella, M.A., Schleyer, C., Speelman, S., Why do farmers join payments for ecosystem services (PES) schemes? An assessment of PES water scheme participation in Brazil. Ecol. Econ. 105 (2014), 166–176.
67. 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. 38 (2011), 406–416.
68. Zorondo-Rodríguez, F., Natural Capital and Human Well-Being: What are the Links? A Study Among Rural Inhabitants from Kodagu District (Karnataka State). 2012, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, India.