Instrumentos económicos basados en mercados para la conservación de la biodiversidad y los servicios ecosistémicos en Latinoamérica: ¿panacea o rueda cuadrada?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.17.27.1.1.262Resumen
La percepción de que las estrategias que llevan adelante los gobiernos para asegurar la conservación de la biodiversidad y la provisión de servicios ecosistémicos son ineficaces o insuficientes dieron lugar a nuevas alternativas basadas en instrumentos económicos, impulsadas tanto por actores privados (en particular, ONG) como por los mismos gobiernos. Algunos de estos instrumentos buscan internalizar una externalidad positiva al compensar al proveedor del servicio ecosistémico (SE) por los costos en los que incurre al asegurar su provisión. Actualmente, no existe consenso respecto a las ventajas y desventajas de los instrumentos económicos basados en mercados para la conservación (IEBMC), y la mayor parte de este debate ha ocurrido en el plano teórico. Esto hace imprescindible la necesidad de evaluaciones empíricas. El objetivo de este trabajo fue caracterizar 60 proyectos que incluyeran IEBMC en Latinoamérica en cuanto a su efectividad y equidad social, y la relación de éstas con diversas características económicas, políticas e institucionales de los proyectos. A través de ello buscamos explorar si existen sinergias o compromisos entre objetivos ambientales y sociales, y si hay características que determinan que los proyectos sean más exitosos respecto a estos objetivos. El 43% de los proyectos resultaron efectivos en cuanto a sus objetivos ambientales, mientras que ~17% resultaron equitativos. La relación entre efectividad y equidad no resultó estadísticamente significativa, lo que indica que no hay sinergias ni compromisos entre ellas. En general, tanto la efectividad como la equidad no se asociaron de manera significativa con ninguna de las características relevadas. Esto implica que no hay un único arreglo institucional que asegure el buen desempeño de este tipo de mecanismos. Nuestros resultados sugieren que no existen evidencias suficientes de que los IEBMC sean ventajosos para conservar la biodiversidad y los SE de forma efectiva y socialmente equitativa en Latinoamérica.
https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.17.27.1.1.262
Citas
Agresti, A., and M. Kateri. 2011. Categorical data analysis. Springer.
Anseeuw, W., J. Lay, P. Messerli, M. Giger, and M. Taylor. 2013. Creating a public tool to assess and promote transparency in global land deals: the experience of the Land Matrix. Journal of Peasant Studies 40:521-530.
Balvanera, P., M. Uriarte, L. Almeida-Leñero, A. Altesor, F. DeClerck, T. Gardner, J. Hall, A. Lara, P. Laterra, and M. Peña-Claros. 2012. Ecosystem services research in Latin America: The state of the art. Ecosystem Services 2:56-70.
Barrett, C. B., A. J. Travis, and P. Dasgupta. 2011. On biodiversity conservation and poverty traps. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108:13907-13912.
Bowles, S. 2008. Policies designed for self-interested citizens may undermine" the moral sentiments": Evidence from economic experiments. Science 320:1605-1609.
Brouwer, R., A. Tesfaye, and P. Pauw. 2011. Meta-analysis of institutional-economic factors explaining the environmental performance of payments for watershed services. Environmental Conservation 38:380-392.
Bull, J. W., K. B. Suttle, A. Gordon, N. J. Singh, and E. Milner-Gulland. 2013. Biodiversity offsets in theory and practice. Oryx 47:369-380.
Calvet-Mir, L., E. Corbera, A. Martin, J. Fisher, and N. Gross-Camp. 2015. Payments for ecosystem services in the tropics: A closer look at effectiveness and equity. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14:150-162.
Cardoso, F. H., and E. Faletto. 1996. Dependencia y desarrollo en América Latina: ensayo de interpretación sociológica. Siglo XXI.
Ceballos, G., P. R. Ehrlich, A. D. Barnosky, A. García, R. M. Pringle, and T. M. Palmer. 2015. Accelerated modern human-induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction. Science 1:e1400253.
Corbera, E., N. Kosoy, and M. M. Tuna. 2007. Equity implications of marketing ecosystem services in protected areas and rural communities: Case studies from Meso-America. Global Environmental Change 17:365-380.
Corbera, E., C. G. Soberanis, and K. Brown. 2009. Institutional dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services: An analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme. Ecological Economics 68:743-761.
Costantino, A. 2014. Land Grabbing in Latin America: Another Natural Resource Curse? Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy 3:17-43.
Chan, K. M., P. Balvanera, K. Benessaiah, M. Chapman, S. Díaz, E. Gómez-Baggethun, R. Gould, N. Hannahs, K. Jax, and S. Klain. 2016. Opinion: Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113:1462-1465.
Daw, T., K. Brown, S. Rosendo, and R. Pomeroy. 2011. Applying the ecosystem services concept to poverty alleviation: the need to disaggregate human well-being. Environmental Conservation 38:370-379.
Engel, S., S. Pagiola, and S. Wunder. 2008. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecological Economics 65:663-674.
Ezzine-de-Blas, D., S. Wunder, M. Ruiz-Pérez, and R. del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez. 2016. Global patterns in the implementation of payments for environmental services. PLoS One 11:e0149847.
Fairhead, J., M. Leach, and I. Scoones. 2012. Green Grabbing: a new appropriation of nature? Journal of Peasant Studies 39:237-261.
Galaz, V., J. Gars, F. Moberg, B. Nykvist, and C. Repinski. 2015. Why ecologists should care about financial markets. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 30:571-580.
Gaston, K. J., S. F. Jackson, L. Cantú-Salazar, and G. Cruz-Piñón. 2008. The ecological performance of protected areas. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 39:93-113.
Gómez-Baggethun, E., R. De Groot, P. L. Lomas, and C. Montes. 2010. The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics 69:1209-1218.
Gómez-Baggethun, E., and R. Muradian. 2015. In markets we trust? Setting the boundaries of market-based instruments in ecosystem services governance. Ecological Economics 117:217-224.
Gómez-Baggethun, E., and M. Ruiz-Pérez. 2011. Economic valuation and the commodification of ecosystem services. Progress in Physical Geography 35:613-628.
Grima, N., S. J. Singh, B. Smetschka, and L. Ringhofer. 2016. Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) in Latin America: Analysing the performance of 40 case studies. Ecosystem Services 17:24-32.
Gwynne, R. N., and C. Kay. 2014. Latin America transformed: globalization and modernity. Routledge.
Harvey, D. 2007. A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford University Press, USA.
Ives, C. D., and S. A. Bekessy. 2015. The ethics of offsetting nature. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 13:568-573.
Jenkins, M., S. J. Scherr, and M. Inbar. 2004. Markets for biodiversity services: potential roles and challenges. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 46:32-42.
Kareiva, P., and M. Marvier. 2012. What is conservation science? BioScience 62:962-969.
Kinzig, A., C. Perrings, F. S. Chapin, S. Polasky, V. Smith, D. Tilman, and B. Turner. 2011. Paying for ecosystem services-promise and peril. Science 334:603-604.
Kinzig, A. P., P. R. Ehrlich, L. J. Alston, K. Arrow, S. Barrett, T. G. Buchman, G. C. Daily, B. Levin, S. Levin, and M. Oppenheimer. 2013. Social norms and global environmental challenges: the complex interaction of behaviors, values, and policy. BioScience 63:164-175.
Kofinas, G. P. 2009. Adaptive co-management in social-ecological governance. Pp. 77-101 in Principles of ecosystem stewardship. Springer.
Kosoy, N., and E. Corbera. 2010. Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecological Economics 69:1228-1236.
Kriebel, D., J. Tickner, P. Epstein, J. Lemons, R. Levins, E. L. Loechler, M. Quinn, R. Rudel, T. Schettler, and M. Stoto. 2001. The precautionary principle in environmental science. Environmental Health Perspectives 109:871-76.
Kronenberg, J., and K. Hubacek. 2013. Could payments for ecosystem services create an “ecosystem service curse”. Ecology and Society 18:10.
Lambin, E., H. Gibbs, L. Ferreira, R. Grau, P. Mayaux, P. Meyfroidt, D. Morton, T. Rudel, I. Gasparri, and J. Munger. 2013. Estimating the world's potentially available cropland using a bottom-up approach. Global Environmental Change 23:892-901.
Lockie, S. 2013. Market instruments, ecosystem services, and property rights: assumptions and conditions for sustained social and ecological benefits. Land Use Policy 31:90-98.
Loreau, M. 2014. Reconciling utilitarian and non-utilitarian approaches to biodiversity conservation. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics 14:27-32.
Mace, G. M. 2014. Whose conservation? Science 345:1558-1560.
Martin-Ortega, J., E. Ojea, and C. Roux. 2013. Payments for water ecosystem services in Latin America: a literature review and conceptual model. Ecosystem Services 6:122-132.
Mascia, M. B., and S. Pailler. 2011. Protected area downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement (PADDD) and its conservation implications. Conservation Letters 4:9-20.
McDermott, M., S. Mahanty, and K. Schreckenberg. 2013. Examining equity: a multidimensional framework for assessing equity in payments for ecosystem services. Environmental Science & Policy 33:416-427.
McDonald, J. H. 2009. Handbook of biological statistics. Sparky House Publishing Baltimore, MD.
Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
Moreno-Sánchez, R. d. P. 2012. Incentivos económicos para la conservación: un marco conceptual. Iniciativa para la conservación en la Amazonía Andina (ICAA).
Muradian, R., E. Corber, U. Pascual, N. Kosoy, and P. H. May. 2010. Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 69(6):1202-1208.
Muradian, R., M. Arsel, L. Pellegrini, F. Adaman, B. Aguilar, B. Agarwal, E. Corbera, D. Ezzine de Blas, J. Farley, and G. Froger. 2013. Payments for ecosystem services and the fatal attraction of win‐win solutions. Conservation Letters 6:274-279.
Naeem, S., J. Ingram, A. Varga, T. Agardy, P. Barten, G. Bennett, E. Bloomgarden, L. Bremer, P. Burkill, and M. Cattau. 2015. Get the science right when paying for nature's services. Science 347:1206-1207.
Norgaard, R. B. 2010. Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecological Economics 69:1219-1227.
Nyborg, K., J. M. Anderies, A. Dannenberg, T. Lindahl, C. Schill, M. Schlüter, W. N. Adger, K. J. Arrow, S. Barrett, and S. Carpenter. 2016. Social norms as solutions. Science 354:42-43.
Ostrom, E. 2007. A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104:15181-15187.
Pagiola, S., A. Arcenas, and G. Platais. 2005. Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An exploration of the issues and the evidence to date from Latin America. World Development 33:237-253.
Pascual, U., R. Muradian, L. C. Rodríguez, and A. Duraiappah. 2010. Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: A conceptual approach. Ecological Economics 69:1237-1244.
Pascual, U., J. Phelps, E. Garmendia, K. Brown, E. Corbera, A. Martin, E. Gomez-Baggethun, and R. Muradian. 2014. Social equity matters in payments for ecosystem services. BioScience 64(11):1027-1036.
Pinho, P. F., G. Patenaude, J. P. Ometto, P. Meir, P. M. Toledo, A. Coelho, and C. E. F. Young. 2014. Ecosystem protection and poverty alleviation in the tropics: Perspective from a historical evolution of policy-making in the Brazilian Amazon. Ecosystem Services 8:97-109.
Pirard, R., and R. Lapeyre. 2014. Classifying market-based instruments for ecosystem services: A guide to the literature jungle. Ecosystem Services 9:106-114.
Prager, C., A. Varga, P. Olmsted, J. Ingram, M. Cattau, C. Freund, R. Wynn‐Grant, and S. Naeem. 2015. An assessment of adherence to basic ecological principles by payments for ecosystem service projects. Conservation Biology.
Raes, L., L. Loft, J. F. Le Coq, G. Van Huylenbroeck, and P. van Damme. 2016. Towards market-or command-based governance? The evolution of payments for environmental service schemes in Andean and Mesoamerican countries. Ecosystem Services 18:20-32.
Ravallion, M. 2014. Income inequality in the developing world. Science 344:851-855.
Ribot, J., and A. Larson. 2012. Reducing REDD risks: affirmative policy on an uneven playing field. International Journal of the Commons 6.
Sandel, M. J. 2012. What money can't buy: the moral limits of markets. Macmillan.
Sattler, C., S. Trampnau, S. Schomers, C. Meyer, and B. Matzdorf. 2013. Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: how do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success? Ecosystem Services 6:31-45.
Satz, D. 2010. Why some things should not be for sale: The moral limits of markets. Oxford University Press.
Schomers, S., and B. Matzdorf. 2013. Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries. Ecosystem Services 6:16-30.
Schröter, M., E. H. Zanden, A. P. Oudenhoven, R. P. Remme, H. M. Serna‐Chavez, R. S. Groot, and P. Opdam. 2014. Ecosystem services as a contested concept: a synthesis of critique and counter‐arguments. Conservation Letters 7:514-523.
Silvertown, J. 2015. Have ecosystem services been oversold? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 30:641-648.
Spash, C. L. 2009. The new environmental pragmatists, pluralism and sustainability. Environmental Values 18:253-256.
Tacconi, L. 2012. Redefining payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 73:29-36.
Turner, W. R., K. Brandon, T. M. Brooks, C. Gascon, H. K. Gibbs, K. S. Lawrence, R. A. Mittermeier, and E. R. Selig. 2012. Global biodiversity conservation and the alleviation of poverty. BioScience 62:85-92.
Vakis, R., J. Rigolini, and L. Lucchetti. 2015. Left behind: chronic poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean. World Bank Publications.
Vatn, A. 2010. An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 69:1245-1252.
Vatn, A. 2015. Markets in environmental governance. From theory to practice. Ecological Economics 117:225-233.
Wallerstein, I. M. 2004. World-systems analysis: An introduction. Duke University Press.
Wunder, S. 2005. Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 42. Pp. 24.
Wunder, S. 2013. When payments for environmental services will work for conservation. Conservation Letters 6:230-237.
Wunder, S. 2015. Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 117:234-243.
Wunder, S., S. Engel, and S. Pagiola. 2008. Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecological Economics 65:834-852.
Descargas
Archivos adicionales
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2017 Sebastián Aguiar, Gonzalo Camba Sans, José M. Paruelo
Esta obra está bajo una licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento 3.0 Unported.
Las/os autoras/es conservan sus derechos de autoras/es: 1) cediendo a la revista el derecho a su primera publicación, y 2) registrando el artículo publicado con una Licencia de Atribución de Creative Commons (CC-BY 4.0), lo que permite a autoras/es y terceros verlo y utilizarlo siempre que mencionen claramente su origen (cita o referencia incluyendo autoría y primera publicación en esta revista). Las/os autores/as pueden hacer otros acuerdos de distribución no exclusiva siempre que indiquen con claridad su origen, así como compartir y divulgar ampliamente la versión publicada de su trabajo.
