Payments for environmental services: Some nuts and bolts

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorWunder, Svenen
dc.contributor.departmentSustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management (SANREM) Knowledgebaseen
dc.coverage.spatialBoliviaen
dc.coverage.spatialBrazilen
dc.coverage.spatialIndonesiaen
dc.date.accessioned2016-04-19T19:19:04Zen
dc.date.available2016-04-19T19:19:04Zen
dc.date.issued2005en
dc.descriptionMetadata only recorden
dc.description.abstractPayments for environmental services (PES) are part of a new and more direct conservation paradigm, explicitly recognizing the need to bridge the interests of landowners and outsiders. Eloquent theoretical assessments have praised the absolute advantages of PES over traditional conservation approaches. Some pilot PES exist in the tropics, but many field practitioners and prospective service buyers and sellers remain skeptical about the concept. This paper aims to help demystify PES for non-economists, starting with a simple and coherent definition of the term. It then provides practical "how-to" hints for PES design. It considers the likely niche for PES in the portfolio of conservation approaches. This assessment is based on a literature review, combined with field observations from research in Latin America and Asia. It concludes that service users will continue to drive PES, but their willingness to pay will only rise if schemes can demonstrate clear additionality vis-à-vis carefully established baselines, if trust-building processes with service providers are sustained, and PES recipients' livelihood dynamics is better understood. PES best suits intermediate and/or projected threat scenarios, often in marginal lands with moderate conservation opportunity costs. People facing credible but medium-sized environmental degradation are more likely to become PES recipients than those living in relative harmony with Nature. The choice between PES cash and in-kind payments is highly context-dependent. Poor PES recipients are likely to gain from participation, though their access might be constrained and non-participating landless poor could lose out. PES is a highly promising conservation approach that can benefit buyers, sellers and improve the resource base, but it is unlikely to completely outstrip other conservation instruments.en
dc.description.notesPES-1 (Payments for Environmental Services Associate Award)en
dc.format.mimetypetext/plainen
dc.identifier2263en
dc.identifier948en
dc.identifier.citationCentre for International Forestry Research Occasional Paper No. 42en
dc.identifier.issn0854-9818en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/66765en
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherJakarta, Indonesia: CIFOR (Center for International Forestry Research)en
dc.relation.urihttp://www.cifor.cgiar.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-42.pdfen
dc.relation.urihttp://www.cifor.cgiar.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-42S.pdfen
dc.rightsIn Copyrighten
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2005 by Center for International Forestry Research. All Rights Reserved.en
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/en
dc.subjectPayments for environmental servicesen
dc.subjectLivelihoodsen
dc.subjectTropical zonesen
dc.subjectLand tenureen
dc.subjectEnvironmental servicesen
dc.subjectPovertyen
dc.subjectConservationen
dc.subjectConservation incentivesen
dc.subjectRural livelihoodsen
dc.subjectEconomic incentivesen
dc.subjectStewardshipen
dc.subjectIcdpsen
dc.subjectBoliviaen
dc.subjectBrazilen
dc.subjectIndonesiaen
dc.subjectEcosystem Field Scale Watersheden
dc.titlePayments for environmental services: Some nuts and boltsen
dc.typeAbstracten
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten

Files

Collections

Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management (SANREM) Knowledgebase