Market-based instruments for the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Latin America: panacea or square wheel?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.17.27.1.1.262Abstract
The perception that the strategies carried out by governments for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision are ineffective or insufficient, led to diverse new alternatives based on economic instruments driven by both private actors (fundamentally NGO’s) and governments. Some of these instruments seek to internalize a positive externality by compensating the ecosystem service (ES) provider for the costs incurred in ensuring its provision. Currently, there is no consensus on the strengths and weaknesses of the market based economic instruments for nature conservation (MBEINC), and most of this debate has taken place in a theoretical arena. Thus, the need for empirical assessment is essential. The objective of this work was to characterize 60 projects, which included MBEINC, in Latin America in terms of their effectiveness and social equity, and the relation of them with diverse economic, political and institutional characteristics. Through this we seek to explore whether there are synergies or tradeoffs between environmental and social objectives, and determine which characteristics determine that the projects are more successful with respect to these objectives. 43% of the projects were effective in terms of their environmental objectives, while approximately 17% were socially equitable. The relationship between effectiveness and social equity was not statistically significant, indicating that there are no synergies or tradeoffs between them. In general, both effectiveness and social equity were not significantly associated with any of the characteristics surveyed. This implies that there is no single institutional arrangement to ensure the positive outcomes of this type of mechanism. Our results suggest that there is insufficient evidence of the advantages of MBEINC to conserve biodiversity and ES in an effective and socially equitable manner in Latin America.References
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.
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Sebastián Aguiar, Gonzalo Camba Sans, José M. Paruelo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Authors retain their rights as follows: 1) by granting the journal the right to its first publication, and 2) by registering the published article with a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which allows authors and third parties to view and use it as long as they clearly mention its origin (citation or reference, including authorship and first publication in this journal). Authors can make other non-exclusive distribution agreements as long as they clearly indicate their origin and are encouraged to widely share and disseminate the published version of their work.
