Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T18:01:43.430Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Compensation for ecosystem services: an evaluation of efforts to achieve conservation and development in Ecuadorian páramo grasslands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2011

KATHLEEN A. FARLEY ,
WILLIAM G. ANDERSON ,
LEAH L. BREMER  and
CAROL P. HARDEN
KATHLEEN A. FARLEY*
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, San Diego State University, San Diego CA 92182-4493, USA
WILLIAM G. ANDERSON
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, San Diego State University, San Diego CA 92182-4493, USA
LEAH L. BREMER
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, San Diego State University, San Diego CA 92182-4493, USA Department of Geography, 1832 Ellison Hall, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara CA 93106-4060, USA
CAROL P. HARDEN
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996-0925, USA
*
*Correspondence: Dr Kathleen Farley Tel: +1 619 594 8472 Fax: +1 619 594 4938 e-mail: kfarley@mail.sdsu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Ecosystem services programmes have been advocated for their potential to join conservation and poverty alleviation efforts, integrate working landscapes, and provide a flow of ecosystem services upon which populations rely. Ecuadorian páramo grasslands have rapidly become the focus of compensation for ecosystem services (CES) programmes intended to conserve hydrologic services, carbon sequestration and biodiversity. This paper reviews CES programmes in Ecuadorian páramos using a combination of semi-structured interviews with project personnel, policy makers and community leaders involved in CES programme development, document analysis, and archival research. Findings indicate that, in some cases, CES schemes can support local development, with potential to contribute to poverty alleviation; however, measures of programme effects on poverty were lacking. The programmes fell across the spectrum of activity-reducing to activity-enhancing, with some functioning as protected areas and others integrating working landscapes; however, designation of land as protected did not necessarily imply more restrictive use. Finally, these cases all reflect scenarios in which limited information is available linking land use with ecosystem services production and underscore the idea that adequate understanding of ecosystem production functions continues to be a barrier to development of effective programmes, particularly where the provision of multiple ecosystem services is anticipated.

Keywords

AndesbiodiversitycarbonconservationEcuadorpáramo grasslandspayment for ecosystem serviceswater
Type
THEMATIC SECTION: Payments for Ecosystem Services in Conservation: Performance and Prospects
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 38 , Issue 4: Thematic section. Payments for Ecosystem Services in Conservation: Performance and Prospects , December 2011 , pp. 393 - 405
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, W.M., Aveling, R., Brockington, D., Dickson, B., Elliott, J., Hutton, J., Roe, D., Vira, B. & Wolmer, W. (2004) Biodiversity conservation and the eradication of poverty. Science 306 (1146): 1146–1149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Agrawal, A. & Redford, K. (2006) Poverty, development, and biodiversity conservation: shooting in the dark? WCS Working Paper No. 26. Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, NY, USA: 50 pp.Google Scholar
Alvear, J. (2008) La experiencia de la Comuna Zuleta, Provincia de Imbabura. In: Forestación 2. Serie Páramo 26, ed. Mena, P.A. & Ochoa, N., pp. 47–63. Quito, Ecuador: Grupo de Trabajo en Páramos/Abya-Yala.Google Scholar
Benítez, S., Blanco, A., Cole, J., Ibáñez, M., Rodríguez, J.J. & Halloy, S. (2010) Using water funds to finance watershed conservation in the Andes and Costa Rica. Mountain Forum Bulletin January 2010: 71–73.Google Scholar
Brockington, D. & Schmidt-Soltau, K. (2004) The social and environmental impacts of wilderness and development. Oryx 38 (2): 140–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brockington, D., Igoe, J. & Schmidt-Soltau, K. (2006) Conservation, human rights, and poverty reduction. Conservation Biology 20 (1): 250–252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buytaert, W., Celleri, R., De Bievre, B., Cisneros, F., Wyseure, G., Deckers, J. & Hofstede, R. (2006) Human impact on the hydrology of the Andean páramos. Earth-Science Reviews 79: 53–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, K.M.A., Shaw, M.R., Cameron, D.R., Underwood, E.C. & Daily, G.C. (2006) Conservation planning for ecosystem services. PLOS Biology 4 (11): 2138–2152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chisholm, R.A. (2010) Trade-offs between ecosystem services: water and carbon in a biodiversity hotspot. Ecological Economics 69: 1973–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daily, G.C. & Matson, P.A. (2008) Ecosystem services: from theory to implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105 (28): 9455–9456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ellison, K. (2009) Ecosystem services: out of the wilderness? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7 (1): 60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel, S., Pagiola, S. & Wunder, S. (2008) Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecological Economics 65: 663–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farley, J. & Costanza, R. (2010) Payments for ecosystem services: from local to global. Ecological Economics 69: 2060–2068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farley, K.A. (2007) Grasslands to tree plantations: forest transition in the Andes of Ecuador. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 97 (4): 755–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farley, K.A., Jobbágy, E.G. & Jackson, R.B. (2005) Effects of afforestation on water yield: a global synthesis with implications for policy. Global Change Biology 11: 1565–1576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farley, K.A., Kelly, E.F. & Hofstede, R.G.M. (2004) Soil organic carbon and water retention following conversion of grasslands to pine plantations in the Ecuadorian Andes. Ecosystems 7 (7): 729–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grieg-Gran, M., Porras, I. & Wunder, S. (2005) How can market mechanisms for forest environmental services help the poor? Preliminary lessons from Latin America. World Development 33 (9): 1511–1527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gockel, C.K. & Gray, L.C. (2009) Integrating conservation and development in the Peruvian Amazon. Ecology and Society 14 (2): 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, R.L., Tallis, H., Kareiva, P. & Daily, G.C. (2008) Field evidence that ecosystem service projects support biodiversity and diversify options. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (27): 9445–9448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Groom, R. & Harris, S. (2008) Conservation on community lands: the importance of equitable revenue sharing. Environmental Conservation 35 (3): 242–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jack, B.K., Kousky, C. & Sims, K.R.E. (2008) Designing payments for ecosystem services: lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105 (28): 9465–9470.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackson, R.B., Jobbágy, E.G., Avissar, R., Roy, S.B., Barrett, D.J., Cook, C.W., Farley, K.A., le Maitre, D.C., McCarl, B.A. & Murray, B.C. (2005) Trading water for carbon with biological carbon sequestration. Science 310: 1944–1947.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kabii, T. & Horwitz, P. (2006) A review of landholder motivations and determinant for participation in conservation covenanting programmes. Environmental Conservation 33 (1): 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanowski, J. & Catterall, C.P. (2010) Carbon stocks in above-ground biomass of monoculture plantations, mixed species plantations and environmental restoration plantings in north-east Australia. Ecological Management and Restoration 11 (2): 119–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, P.L. (1998) Effects of anthropogenic disturbances on páramo vegetation in Podocarpus National Park, Ecuador. Physical Geography 19: 221–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, P.L. (2007) Fire ecology and conservation in the high tropical Andes: observations from northern Ecuador. Journal of Latin American Geography 6 (1): 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kollmair, M. & Rasul, G. (2010) Addressing equity and poverty concerns in payments for environmental services. Mountain Forum Bulletin January 2010: 12–14.Google Scholar
Landell-Mills, N. & Porras, I.T. (2002) Silver bullet or fools’ gold? A global review of markets for forest environmental services and their impact on the poor. International Institute for Environment and Development [www document]. URL http://pubs.iied.org/9066IIED.htmlGoogle Scholar
Luck, G.W., Chan, K.M.A. & Fay, J.P. (2009) Protecting ecosystem services and biodiversity in the world's watersheds. Conservation Letters 2: 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MA (2005) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Report. New York, NY, USA: United Nations Environment Programme: 219 pp.Google Scholar
MAE (2009) Acuerdo Ministerial No. 115, 12 November 2009. MAE, Quito, Ecuador.Google Scholar
MAE (2010) Acuerdo Ministerial No. 42, 26 March 2010. MAE, Quito, Ecuador.Google Scholar
Miranda, M., Porras, I.T. & Moreno, M.L. (2003) The social impacts of payments for environmental services in Costa Rica: a quantitative field survey and analysis of the Virilla watershed. International Institute for Environment and Development [www document] URL http://www2.gsu.edu/~wwwcec/special/ci/docs/VrillaCostaRicaWatershedPayments.pdf.Google Scholar
Muradian, R., Corbera, E., Pascual, U., Kosoy, N. & May, P.H. (2010) Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 69: 1202–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Cameron, D.R., Chan, K.M.A., Daily, G.C., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P.M., Lonsdorf, E., Naidoo, R., Ricketts, T.H. & Shaw, M.R. (2009) Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7 (1): 4–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pagiola, S., Arcenas, A. & Platais, G. (2005) Can payments of ecosystem services help reduce poverty? An exploration of the issues and the evidence to date from Latin America. World Development 33 (2): 237–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Podwojewski, P., Poulenard, J., Zambrana, T & Hofstede, R. (2002) Overgrazing effects on vegetation cover and properties of volcanic ash soil in the páramo of Llangahua and La Esperanza (Tungurahua, Ecuador). Soil Use and Management 18: 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulenard, J., Podwojewski, P., Janeau, J.L. & Collinet, J. (2001) Runoff and soil erosion under rainfall simulation of Andisols from the Ecuadorian páramo: effect of tillage and burning. Catena 45: 185–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PROFAFOR (2005) Valoración de servicios ambientales hidrológicos. Cuarto Informe de Avance Preparado para la Empresa Municipal de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado del cantón Ibarra (EMAPA I). El Programa FACE de Forestación del Ecuador (PROFAFOR), Quito, Ecuador.Google Scholar
Ramsay, P.M. & Oxley, E.R.B. (1996) Fire temperatures and postfire plant community dynamics in Ecuadorian grass paramo. Vegetatio 124: 129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruffo, S. & Kareiva, P.M. (2009) Using science to assign value to nature. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7 (1): 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salo, M. & Pyhala, A. (2007) Exploring the gap between conservation science and protected area establishment in the Allpahuayo-Mishana National Reserve (Peruvian Amazonia). Environmental Conservation 34 (1): 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanderson, S.E. & Redford, K.H. (2003) Contested relationships between biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation. Oryx 37 (4): 389–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schloegel, C. (2010) Payments for the protection of watershed services: a potential conservation tool for improving protection of ‘paper parks’ in Latin America? Mountain Forum Bulletin January 2010: 68–70.Google Scholar
Secchi, S., Gassman, P.W., Williams, J.R. & Babcock, B.A. (2009) Corn-based ethanol production and environmental quality: a case of Iowa and the Conservation Reserve Program. Environmental Management 44: 732–744.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sunderland, T.C.H., Ehringhaus, C. & Campbell, B.M. (2008) Conservation and development in tropical forest landscapes: a time to face the trade-offs? Environmental Conservation 34 (4): 276–279.Google Scholar
Tallis, H. & Polasky, S. (2009) Mapping and valuing ecosystem services as an approach for conservation and natural-resource management. The Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology 1162: 265–283.Google ScholarPubMed
Tallis, H., Kareiva, P., Marvier, M. & Chang, A. (2008) An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105 (28): 9457–9464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tallis, H., Goldman, R., Uhl, M. & Brosi, B. (2009) Integrating conservation and development in the field: implementing ecosystem service projects. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7 (1): 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, W.R., Brandon, K., Brooks, T.M., Costanza, R., da Fonseca, G.A.B. & Portela, R. (2007) Global conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. BioScience 57 (10): 868–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verweij, P. & Budde, P. (1992) Burning and grazing gradients in páramo vegetation: initial ordination analyses. In: Páramo: An Andean Ecosystem Under Human Influence, ed. Balslev, H. & Luteyn, J.L., pp. 177–195. London, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wunder, S. (2005) Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 42. Center for International Forestry Research, Jakarta, Indonesia.Google Scholar
Wunder, S. (2006) Are direct payments for environmental services spelling doom for sustainable forest management in the tropics? Ecology and Society 11 (2): 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wunder, S. & Albán, M. (2008) Decentralized payments for environmental services: the cases of Pimampiro and PROFAFOR in Ecuador. Ecological Economics 65: 685–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zbiden, S. & Lee, D.R. (2005) Paying for environmental services: an analysis of participation in Costa Rica's PSA program. World Development 33 (2): 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar