Principles for Fairness and Efficiency in Enhancing Environmental Services in Asia: Payments, Compensation, or Co-Investment?

The term payments for environmental services (PES) has rapidly gained popularity, with its focus on market-based mechanisms for enhancing environmental services (ES). Current use of the term, however, covers a broad spectrum of interactions between ES suppliers and beneficiaries. A broader class of...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Meine van Noordwijk, Beria Leimona
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Resilience Alliance 2010-12-01
Series:Ecology and Society
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art17/
id doaj-d614fbe435e54e41b9d7b6a68359ce86
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d614fbe435e54e41b9d7b6a68359ce862020-11-24T21:11:14ZengResilience AllianceEcology and Society1708-30872010-12-011541710.5751/ES-03664-1504173664Principles for Fairness and Efficiency in Enhancing Environmental Services in Asia: Payments, Compensation, or Co-Investment?Meine van Noordwijk0Beria Leimona1World Agroforestry CentreWorld Agroforestry CentreThe term payments for environmental services (PES) has rapidly gained popularity, with its focus on market-based mechanisms for enhancing environmental services (ES). Current use of the term, however, covers a broad spectrum of interactions between ES suppliers and beneficiaries. A broader class of mechanisms pursues ES enhancement through compensation or rewards. Such mechanisms can be analyzed on the basis of how they meet four conditions: realistic, conditional, voluntary, and pro-poor. Based on our action research in Asia in the Rewarding Upland Poor for Environmental Services (RUPES) program since 2002, we examine three paradigms: commoditized ES (CES), compensation for opportunities skipped (COS), and co-investment in (environmental) stewardship (CIS). Among the RUPES action research sites, there are several examples of CIS with a focus on assets (natural + human + social capital) that can be expected to provide future flows of ES. CES, equivalent to a strict definition of PES, may represent an abstraction rather than a current reality. COS is a challenge when the legality of opportunities to reduce ES is contested. The primary difference between CES, COS, and CIS is the way in which conditionality is achieved, with additional variation in the scale (individual, household, or community) at which the voluntary principle takes shape. CIS approaches have the greatest opportunity to be pro-poor, as both CES and COS presuppose property rights that the rural poor often do not have. CIS requires and reinforces trust building after initial conflicts over the consequences of resource use on ES have been clarified and a realistic joint appraisal is obtained. CIS will often be part of a multiscale approach to the regeneration and survival of natural capital, alongside respect and appreciation for the guardians and stewards of landscapes.http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art17/Asiaboundary organizationscriteria and indicatorslivelihoodpayment for environmental servicesRUPES
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Meine van Noordwijk
Beria Leimona
spellingShingle Meine van Noordwijk
Beria Leimona
Principles for Fairness and Efficiency in Enhancing Environmental Services in Asia: Payments, Compensation, or Co-Investment?
Ecology and Society
Asia
boundary organizations
criteria and indicators
livelihood
payment for environmental services
RUPES
author_facet Meine van Noordwijk
Beria Leimona
author_sort Meine van Noordwijk
title Principles for Fairness and Efficiency in Enhancing Environmental Services in Asia: Payments, Compensation, or Co-Investment?
title_short Principles for Fairness and Efficiency in Enhancing Environmental Services in Asia: Payments, Compensation, or Co-Investment?
title_full Principles for Fairness and Efficiency in Enhancing Environmental Services in Asia: Payments, Compensation, or Co-Investment?
title_fullStr Principles for Fairness and Efficiency in Enhancing Environmental Services in Asia: Payments, Compensation, or Co-Investment?
title_full_unstemmed Principles for Fairness and Efficiency in Enhancing Environmental Services in Asia: Payments, Compensation, or Co-Investment?
title_sort principles for fairness and efficiency in enhancing environmental services in asia: payments, compensation, or co-investment?
publisher Resilience Alliance
series Ecology and Society
issn 1708-3087
publishDate 2010-12-01
description The term payments for environmental services (PES) has rapidly gained popularity, with its focus on market-based mechanisms for enhancing environmental services (ES). Current use of the term, however, covers a broad spectrum of interactions between ES suppliers and beneficiaries. A broader class of mechanisms pursues ES enhancement through compensation or rewards. Such mechanisms can be analyzed on the basis of how they meet four conditions: realistic, conditional, voluntary, and pro-poor. Based on our action research in Asia in the Rewarding Upland Poor for Environmental Services (RUPES) program since 2002, we examine three paradigms: commoditized ES (CES), compensation for opportunities skipped (COS), and co-investment in (environmental) stewardship (CIS). Among the RUPES action research sites, there are several examples of CIS with a focus on assets (natural + human + social capital) that can be expected to provide future flows of ES. CES, equivalent to a strict definition of PES, may represent an abstraction rather than a current reality. COS is a challenge when the legality of opportunities to reduce ES is contested. The primary difference between CES, COS, and CIS is the way in which conditionality is achieved, with additional variation in the scale (individual, household, or community) at which the voluntary principle takes shape. CIS approaches have the greatest opportunity to be pro-poor, as both CES and COS presuppose property rights that the rural poor often do not have. CIS requires and reinforces trust building after initial conflicts over the consequences of resource use on ES have been clarified and a realistic joint appraisal is obtained. CIS will often be part of a multiscale approach to the regeneration and survival of natural capital, alongside respect and appreciation for the guardians and stewards of landscapes.
topic Asia
boundary organizations
criteria and indicators
livelihood
payment for environmental services
RUPES
url http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art17/
work_keys_str_mv AT meinevannoordwijk principlesforfairnessandefficiencyinenhancingenvironmentalservicesinasiapaymentscompensationorcoinvestment
AT berialeimona principlesforfairnessandefficiencyinenhancingenvironmentalservicesinasiapaymentscompensationorcoinvestment
_version_ 1716754100186513408