Abstract
In 2014, the Paraíba do Sul River Basin Integration Committee (CEIVAP) established its Pilot Program of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES), focusing on water resources. The projects from this program share the same goal: to disseminate the use of PES as a tool for land management in watersheds. Contemplating 11 municipalities, including 84 landowners, conserving 718.63 ha and restoring 188.58 ha, this program was concluded in April 2020. Reviewing its historical and contextualizing features, we have observed that the outcomes from this program extend beyond these numbers. Here, we propose an evaluation methodology comparing the efficiency, performance, and impact of the PES projects. Based on new indicators that are easy to measure, we have identified key elements that have asymmetrically affected the projects. The complexity of the project scope and the execution of high-cost, and risky interventions on rural properties, have resulted in expensive projects with little tangible outputs. Our results support the upgrade of public policy for investment in ecosystem services by CEIVAP in the Paraíba do Sul watershed. In addition, our results can be more successful by improving the decision-making processes for similar projects in other watersheds.
Highlights
The concept of ecosystem services (ES) highlights the interdependence between ecosystem function and human well-being [1,2]
By associating these two components in the same project scope, the Payments for Watershed (PWS) program of CEIVAP required from project implementers multidisciplinary expertise and financial prudence
Our results showed that failures in the mobilization process may have compromised the greater participation of ecosystem services providers in preventative actions for degrading agents (PPrev ), permanence (PRem ), and engagement (IEng ) in the projects
Summary
The concept of ecosystem services (ES) highlights the interdependence between ecosystem function and human well-being [1,2]. Since the publication of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment [3], ES have been conceptualized as the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems, organized into four groups: supporting, provisioning, regulating, and cultural. Water 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW [3], ES2020, have Water. 2441 conceptualized as the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems, organized 2into of 24 four groups: supporting, provisioning, regulating, and cultural. From international initiatives on ES, such as The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB), Intergovernmental Science-Policy. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB), Intergovernmental Science-Policy. Partnership (ESP), Biodiversity and Ecosystem (IPBES), and Service (ESP), the concept the concept has become the key to discussions on global environmental change and decision-making hasnatural becomeresource the keymanagement to discussions[4].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
