Payments For Ecosystem Services Design Research Articles

Spatial prioritization to achieve the triple bottom line in Payment for ecosystem services design

Payment for ecosystem services (PES) schemes are an increasingly important approach that often try to achieve triple bottom line solutions – achieving biodiversity conservation and social equity–, while minimizing costs. However, when planning for multiple objectives with a limited budget, spatial mismatches and trade-offs between objectives are likely to exist. Here, we present a framework for evaluating the potential spatial trade-offs among different objectives for sound policy- and decision-making. We explore the trade-offs: 1) between water and above-ground carbon storage ecosystem services; 2) among ecosystem services (both individually and when they are considered simultaneously) and biodiversity; and 3) among ecosystem services, biodiversity, and social equity in Colombia. We found that there are clear trade-offs between water services and biodiversity, and between social equity and biodiversity, suggesting that PES schemes targeting just one of these objectives may lead to poor outcomes for the others. However, there are a minimal trade-off between carbon and biodiversity, indicating that PES schemes targeted at biodiversity likely also contribute to carbon sequestration objectives. The framework we employ here can be used in other contexts to navigate the potential trade-offs in PES designed for triple bottom line solutions to allow decision-makers to better target where to prioritize PES investment.

Achieving landscape patterns for biodiversity conservation through payments for ecosystem services – Evidence from a field experiment in Indonesia

Payments for ecosystem services (PES) can encourage land owners to manage their land in a biodiversity-friendly way. To increase the effectiveness of PES for biodiversity conservation, incentives could be set to reach a minimum size of conservation area and a suitable spatial connectivity between conserved areas. However, little knowledge exists about which incentives most likely generate such landscape patterns since threshold effects and spatial connectivity have been mostly considered separately. Therefore, we present results from a framed field experiment with Indonesian oil palm farmers and compare the effectiveness between two conditional group payment schemes: In the first one, the size threshold payment, payments are made if at least three farmers in the group conserve. In the second one, an agglomeration payment, payments are made if at least three farmers with bordering land engage in conservation. Our results suggest that both PES designs are similarly effective in the absence of communication. Under both, communication increases conservation outcomes in the case of previous successful coordination and is ineffective in the case of previous coordination failure. Yet, for individuals who are reluctant to conserve, communication only increases conservation outcomes under the size threshold payment. We further discuss potential welfare implications of our results.

Balancing ecological and social goals in PES design – Single objective strategies are not sufficient

Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are key instruments to foster environmental conservation and, arguably, social development goals. PES are, however, commonly designed based on a single environmental objective (e.g., conservation of native forest areas), and expected to simultaneously fulfil social goals which are rarely evaluated. Thus, to meet social goals, PES design needs to transcend single environmental objectives. Here, we evaluate the performance of three PES strategies composed of different targeting criteria. The strategies were (1) conserving native forest cover, (2) production of a specific ecosystem service (ES) based on a single ecological objective and (3) production of a specific ES based on multiple social and ecological objectives. We illustrate the performance of the three PES strategies for a forest dominated rural area in southern Chile using a Surface Measure Overall Performance (SMOP) analysis. We evaluate the outcomes of the three strategies based on ten ecological and social criteria, namely ecosystem service supply productivity, threats to ES supply, farm property size, social vulnerability, indigenous status of land tenure, landscape connectivity, proportion of native forest cover, number of targeted properties, number of small-sized targeted properties, and proportion of ES supply. Strategies based on a single objective (1 and 2) resulted in higher scores for the criteria landscape connectivity and ES productivity, while failing to improve social goals by targeting mainly large non-indigenous properties. In contrast, the multiple-objective strategy (3) achieved a better balance between ecological and social criteria and targeted mainly small-sized properties belonging to indigenous landowners. Our results show that selecting sound PES objectives is key to achieving a balance between social and ecological goals in forest-dominated rural landscapes threatened by land use change. Relying on commonly employed single objective PES strategies is not sufficient to foster sustainable development.

Payment for ecosystem services and motivational crowding: Experimental insights regarding the integration of plural values via non-monetary incentives

Incentives based on extrinsic motivations such as Payments for ecosystem Services (PES) could negatively affect intrinsic motivations (i.e., motivational crowding-out). This effect may be evidenced when conservation levels, after PES intervention, decline relative to those existing before PES implementation. However, still few experimental studies have assessed PES effects on motivations once economic incentives are missing. Moreover, experimental research still lacks insights on PES designs that may reduce the risk of motivational crowding-out. This paper aims to assess the post-intervention effects of integrating plural values via non-monetary incentives (i.e. environmental awareness, social recognition) into PES design. We conducted a lab-in-the-field experiment followed by a questionnaire involving 120 participants in rural Cali, Colombia. We use non-parametric and Differences in Differences regression analysis to show that integrating plural values (intrinsic and relational) via non-monetary incentives may have a long-lasting effect on conservation (motivational crowding-in) in comparison with a PES alone. We did not find strong evidence of PES motivational crowding-out. We conclude that PES effectiveness and equity-related outcomes could be fostered by integrating the multiple ways of knowing, relating and caring for Nature.

Payments for ecosystem services or collective stewardship of Mother Earth? Applying deliberative valuation in an indigenous community in Colombia

The literature on payments for ecosystem services (PES) applied in regions where indigenous peoples are key social actors has not cast much light on their preferences regarding the framing and design features that such economic incentives should have to ensure their effectiveness. Thus, it is key to find appropriate approaches that can be used to elicit the preferences of indigenous peoples regarding PES design. Here we provide new insights regarding the use of deliberative valuation to elicit of the preferences of an indigenous community from Colombia towards the design of a PES program. A deliberative choice experiment is applied that sheds light on why indigenous people’s perspectives need to be taken into account if PES are to be effective and fair. We find that participants from the indigenous community value highly equity considerations that go beyond the monetary benefit that PES provide, such as being able to meaningfully participate in the design of PES or deciding the fairest way to distribute payments.

Effectiveness and equity of Payments for Ecosystem Services: Real-effort experiments with Vietnamese land users

Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are widespread in conservation policy. In PES, environmental effectiveness and social equity are often perceived as conflicting goals. Empirical studies on the relationship between popular design features, such as payment differentiation and payment conditionality, and effectiveness and equity are scarce. Further, they struggle with measuring and separating ecological and equity outcomes. In this study, we combine two incentivized lab-in-the-field experiments with 259 land users from eight villages in North-Western Vietnam to assess both individual conservation effort and community-level equity perceptions under four different PES designs. Effort is measured in a real-effort task with real-world environmental benefits; equity perceptions about payment designs in the real-effort task are measured in a coordination game. We demonstrate that payment design affects both effort and equity perceptions. Payments which are differentiated and are solely conditional on individuals’ contributions of effort are perceived as most equitable. They are also more effective in motivating conservation effort than other designs, although the differences are small and not significant for all comparisons. By working out the positive correlation of effectiveness and equity across the four payment schemes, we show that these objectives are not necessarily conflicting goals in incentive-based conservation policy. Further, we can show that women exert greater conservation efforts. We discuss how greater equity and effectiveness could be achieved with reforms towards more input-based distribution criteria in Vietnam’s PES legislation and the limitations and opportunities of the experimental paradigm for research on PES.

Design considerations in supporting payments for ecosystem services from community-managed forests in Nepal

Despite widespread implementation of payments for ecosystem services (PES), benefits to poor people in developing countries have been limited. The success of PES varies with the local context, policy environment and PES design and its implementation. Until recently, there have been few studies of factors that might contribute to the success of PES and associated outcomes. Ex-ante analysis of design considerations is critical in developing a robust and sustainable PES scheme. This research aimed to determine the key elements of PES design and prioritise those likely to support successful PES for community-managed forests using a case in the Phewa watershed in western Nepal. Community perceptions and expert opinion were used to identify 19 design considerations relevant to stakeholders. These were integrated into a PES design index. Analysis using this index indicated that livelihoods, pro-poor participation, tenure arrangements, transaction and opportunity costs, payment structures and government policy were perceived as most important to stakeholders. Although the effectiveness of a PES scheme has often been measured economically or biologically, our results indicate that the most important design considerations for stakeholders were policy, social, financial and institutional arrangements. The analysis indicated that there are often trade-offs between equity, efficiency, and effectiveness involved in achieving livelihood improvements for rural poor and, consequently, the longer-term sustainability of a PES scheme.

Capabilities as justice: Analysing the acceptability of payments for ecosystem services (PES) through ‘social multi-criteria evaluation’

‘Payments for ecosystem services’ (PES) is rapidly becoming a popular governance intervention within natural resource management to align land-use stewardship to conserve critical ecosystem services while simultaneously improving human well-being through the provision of incentives. This paper introduces two novel components for refining the legitimacy of PES in water resource management. Firstly, we broaden consideration of human well-being in PES beyond income effects by considering justice as the freedom or capability to ‘do and be’ whatever is desired. Secondly, this paper applies social multi-criteria evaluation as a decision-support framework to determine the acceptability and payment vehicle of PES within a set of alternative policy considerations for a complex ecosystem management decision. Through both technical and social evaluations of different management options against a set of criteria, we highlight the legitimacy that different PES designs may have for improving water quality and capabilities for well-being.

Can conservation contracts co-exist with change? Payment for ecosystem services in the context of adaptive decision-making and sustainability.

This paper considers the ability of payment for ecosystem services (PES) programs to operate in the context of dynamic and complex social-ecological systems. Drawing on the experiences of two different PES programs in Latin America, we examine how PES institutions fit with the tenets of adaptive decision-making for sustainable resource management. We identify how the program goals and the connection to the market influence the incentive structure, information gathering, learning and feedback processes, and the structure of decision-making rights, specifically the ability to make and modify resource-use rules. Although limited in their generalizability, findings from the two case studies suggest a tension between the contractual model of PES and adaptive decision-making in natural resource systems. PES programs are not inherently decentralized, flexible management tools, as PES contracts tend to restrict decision-making rights and offer minimal flexibility mechanisms to change resource-use practices over the duration of the contract period. Furthermore, PES design and flexibility is heavily dependent on the goals and mission of the buyer and the respective market. If PES is to facilitate sustainable resource management, greater attention is needed to assess how the institutional design of the PES contracts influence the motivation and capacity of participants and program officers alike to adaptively manage the respective resource systems.

Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success?

Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are defined in different ways and a variety of approaches is currently summarized under the PES label. This paper introduces a system for the multi-classification of PES schemes. The classification is based on different PES characteristics and their specifications. Analyzed characteristics include, amongst others: PES type, ecosystem service paid for (e.g. types of services, if the PES tries to improve the quality of the service vs. the quantity); payments specifics (e.g. funding sources, input- vs. output-based payments, etc.); involved actors (e.g. actors from the market, government or civil society sector); duration (short or long-term), and spatial scale (local to global). The classification system is then applied to 22 PES cases from Germany and the United States (US) that were assessed as successful by expert judgment. A comparative analysis (CA) is used to investigate how certain PES characteristics relate to PES success. Results of the CA indicate that characteristics such as intermediary involvement, involvement of governmental actors, contract length, co-benefits, voluntariness in entering the PES agreement, and design of PES as output-based schemes are of particular importance for the success of PES schemes.

Community participation in payment for ecosystem services design and implementation: An example from Trinidad

The inclusion of communities in the design and implementation of payment for ecosystem services (PES) schemes is not a widely publicized practice in spite of the many accepted benefits that arise from the full participation of communities in interventions which affect them. The results of a pilot PES project in the Caura Valley, Trinidad presented in this paper, show that even with the highly technical aspects of valuing ecosystem services as a requirement for PES schemes, communities can be involved in the design and implementation of such schemes. Based on an examination of the Caura community during the design and implementation of the PES project, we suggest that the successful design of the PES scheme in Caura was based on the community's active participation in the development of the project concept, the ecosystem service infrastructure, and the management framework for the PES. The paper concludes with research recommendations for improving the design and implementation of PES schemes.