Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 13
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Narloch, Ulf Pascual, Unai and Drucker, Adam G. 2013. How to achieve fairness in payments for ecosystem services? Insights from agrobiodiversity conservation auctions. Land Use Policy, Vol. 35, p. 107.


    Kolinjivadi, Vijay Grant, Angela Adamowski, Jan and Kosoy, Nicolás 2015. Juggling multiple dimensions in a complex socio-ecosystem: The issue of targeting in payments for ecosystem services. Geoforum, Vol. 58, p. 1.


    Narloch, Ulf Drucker, Adam G. and Pascual, Unai 2015. What role for cooperation in conservation tenders? Paying farmer groups in the High Andes. Land Use Policy,


    Pascual, Unai Jackson, Louise E. and Drucker, Adam G. 2013. Encyclopedia of Biodiversity.


    Zagonari, Fabio 2016. Using ecosystem services in decision-making to support sustainable development: Critiques, model development, a case study, and perspectives. Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 548-549, p. 25.


    Krishna, Vijesh V. Drucker, Adam G. Pascual, Unai Raghu, Prabhakaran T. and King, E.D. Israel Oliver 2013. Estimating compensation payments for on-farm conservation of agricultural biodiversity in developing countries. Ecological Economics, Vol. 87, p. 110.


    Costedoat, Sébastien Koetse, Mark Corbera, Esteve and Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss 2016. Cash only? Unveiling preferences for a PES contract through a choice experiment in Chiapas, Mexico. Land Use Policy, Vol. 58, p. 302.


    Hejnowicz, Adam P. Kennedy, Hilary Rudd, Murray A. and Huxham, Mark R. 2015. Harnessing the climate mitigation, conservation and poverty alleviation potential of seagrasses: prospects for developing blue carbon initiatives and payment for ecosystem service programmes. Frontiers in Marine Science, Vol. 2,


    Samuel, Aurelia F. Drucker, Adam G. Andersen, Sven B. Simianer, Henner and van Zonneveld, Maarten 2013. Development of a cost-effective diversity-maximising decision-support tool for in situ crop genetic resources conservation: The case of cacao. Ecological Economics, Vol. 96, p. 155.


    Prager, C.M. Varga, A. Olmsted, P. Ingram, J.C. Cattau, M. Freund, C. Wynn-Grant, R. and Naeem, S. 2016. An assessment of adherence to basic ecological principles by payments for ecosystem service projects. Conservation Biology, Vol. 30, Issue. 4, p. 836.


    Narloch, Ulf Pascual, Unai and Drucker, Adam G. 2012. Collective Action Dynamics under External Rewards: Experimental Insights from Andean Farming Communities. World Development, Vol. 40, Issue. 10, p. 2096.


    Hejnowicz, Adam P. Raffaelli, David G. Rudd, Murray A. and White, Piran C.L. 2014. Evaluating the outcomes of payments for ecosystem services programmes using a capital asset framework. Ecosystem Services, Vol. 9, p. 83.


    McElwee, Pamela Nghiem, Tuyen Le, Hue Vu, Huong and Tran, Nghi 2014. Payments for environmental services and contested neoliberalisation in developing countries: A case study from Vietnam. Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 36, p. 423.


    ×

Cost-effectiveness targeting under multiple conservation goals and equity considerations in the Andes

  • ULF NARLOCH (a1), UNAI PASCUAL (a1) (a2) and ADAM G. DRUCKER (a3)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0376892911000397
  • Published online: 01 August 2011
Abstract
SUMMARY

Internationally, there is political impetus towards providing incentive mechanisms, such as payments for ecosystem services (PES), that motivate land users to conserve that which benefits wider society by creating an exchange value for conservation services. PES may incorporate a number of conservation goals other than just maximizing the area under a certain land use, so as to optimize multiple benefits from environmental conservation. Environmental additionality (conservation services generated relative to no intervention) and social equity aspects (here an equitable distribution of conservation funds) of PES depend on the conservation goals underlying the cost-effective targeting of conservation payments, which remains to be adequately explored in the PES literature. This paper attempts to evaluate whether multiple conservation goals can be optimized, in addition to social equity, when paying for the on-farm conservation of neglected crop varieties (landraces), so as to generate agrobiodiversity conservation services. Case studies based on a conservation auction in the Bolivian and Peruvian Andes (through which community-based groups identified the conservation area and the number of farmers taking part in conservation, as well as the payment required), identified significant cost-effectiveness tradeoffs between alternative agrobiodiversity conservation goals. There appears to be a non-complementary relationship between maximizing conservation area under specific landraces (a proxy for genetic diversity maintenance) and the number of farmers conserving such landraces (a proxy for agricultural knowledge and cultural traditions maintenance). Neither of the two are closely connected with maximizing the number of targeted farming communities (a proxy for informal seed exchange networks and hence geneflow maintenance). Optimizing cost-effectiveness with regard to conservation area or number of farmers would also be associated with a highly unequal distribution of payments. Multi-criteria targeting approaches can reach compromise solutions, but frameworks for these are still to be established and scientifically informed about the underlying link between alternative conservation goals and conservation service provision.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*Correspondence: Ulf Narloch e-mail: ugn20@cantab.net
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.


B.A. Babcock , P.G. Lakshminarayan , J.J. Wu & D. Zilberman (1996) The economics of a public fund for environmental amenities: a study of CRP contracts. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78: 961971.


J. Börner , S. Wunder , S. Wertz-Kanounnikoff , M. Rügnitz Tito , L. Pereira & N. Nascimento (2010) Direct conservation payments in the Brazilian Amazon: scope and equity implications. Ecological Economics 69: 12721282.

S. Brush (1989) Rethinking crop genetic resource conservation. Conservation Biology 3: 1929.

D. Castillo , F. Bousquet , M.A. Janssen , K. Worrapimphong & J.C. Cardenas (2011) Context matters to explain field experiments: results from Colombian and Thai fishing villages. Ecological Economics 70: 16091620.

X. Chen , F. Lupi , A. Viña , G. He & J. Liu (2010) Using cost-effective targeting to enhance the efficiency of conservation investments in payments for ecosystem services. Conservation Biology 24: 14691478.

O. Coomes (2010) Of stakes, stems, and cuttings: the importance of local seed systems in traditional Amazonian societies. The Professional Geographer 62: 323334.

E. Corbera , K. Brown & W.N. Adger (2007) The equity and legitimacy of markets for ecosystem services. Development and Change 38: 587613.


S. Engel , S. Pagiola & S. Wunder (2008) Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issue. Ecological Economics 65: 663674.

P.J. Ferraro (2001) Global habitat protection: limitations of development interventions and a role for conservation performance payments. Conservation Biology 15: 9901000.

P. J. Ferraro (2003) Assigning priority to environmental policy interventions in a heterogeneous world. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 22: 2743.

P.J. Ferraro & A. Kiss (2002) Direct payments to conserve biodiversity. Science 298: 17181719.

R. Hajjar , D.I. Jarvis & B. Gemmill-Herren (2008) The utility of crop genetic diversity in maintaining ecosystem services. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 123: 261270.

S. Hajkowicz , A. Higgins , C. Miller & O. Marinoni (2008) Targeting conservation payments to achieve multiple outcomes. Biological Conservation 141: 23682375.

J. Hellin & S Higman (2005) Crop diversity and livelihood security in the Andes. Development in Practice 15: 165174.


B.K. Jack , B. Leimona & P.K. Ferraro (2009) A revealed preference approach to estimating supply curves for ecosystem services: use of auctions to set payments for soil erosion control in Indonesia. Conservation Biology 23: 359367.

L.E. Jackson , U. Pascual & T. Hodking (2007) Utilizing and conserving agrobiodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Agriculture Ecosystems Environment 121: 196210.

D. Kleijn & W.J. Sutherland (2003) How effective are European agri-environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity? Journal of Applied Ecology 40: 947969.

N. Kosoy & E. Corbera (2010) Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecological Economics 69: 12281236.

N. Kosoy , M. Martinez-Tuna , R. Muradian & J. Martinez-Alier (2007) Payments for environmental services in watersheds: Insights from a comparative study of three cases in Central America. Ecological Economics 61: 446455.

U. Latacz-Lohmann & C.P.C.M. Van der Hamsvoort (1997) Auctioning conservation contracts: a theoretical analysis and an application. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79: 407418.

K. McAfee & E.N. Shapiro (2010) Payments for ecosystem services in Mexico: nature, neoliberalism, social movements, and the state. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 100: 579599.

C. Muñoz-Piña , A. Guevara , J.M. Torres & J. Braña (2008) Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: analysis, negotiations and results. Ecological Economics 65: 725736.

R. Muradian , E. Corbera , U. Pascual , N. Kosoy & P.H. May (2010) Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 69: 12021208.

R. Naidoo & T.H. Ricketts , (2006) Mapping the economic costs and benefits of conservation. PLoS Biology 4: 21532164.

R. Norgaard (2010) Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecological Economics 69: 12191227

S. Pagiola , E. Ramirez , J. Gobbi , C. de Haan , M. Ibrahim , E. Murgueitio & J.P. Ruiz (2007) Paying for the environmental services of silvopastoral practices in Nicaragua. Ecological Economics 64: 374385.

U. Pascual , R. Muradian , L.C. Rodríguez & A. Duraiappah (2010) Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: a conceptual approach. Ecological Economics 69: 12371244.

S.K. Pattanayak , S. Wunder & P.J. Ferraro (2010) Show me the money: do payments supply environmental services in developing countries? Review of Environmental Economic Policy 4: 254274.

G.A. Sanchez-Azofeifa , A Pfaff , J.A. Robalino & J.P. Boomhower (2007) Costa Rica's payment for environmental services program: intention, implementation, and impact. Conservation Biology 21: 11651173.

S. Schilizzi & U. Latacz-Lohmann (2007) Assesing the performance of conservation auctions: an experimental study. Land Economics 83: 497515.

R. Sierra & E. Russman (2006) On the efficiency of environmental service payments: a forest conservation assessment in the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica. Ecological Economics 59: 131141.

M. Smale , M.R. Bellon , D. Jarvis & B. Sthapit (2004) Economic concepts for designing policies to conserve crop genetic resources on farms. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 51: 121135.

M. Sommerville , J.P.G. Jones , M. Rahajaharison & E.J. Milner-Gulland (2010) The role of fairness and benefit distribution in community-based payment for environmental services interventions: a case study from Menabe, Madagascar. Ecological Economics 69: 12621271.

P. Stromberg , U. Pascual & M. Bellon (2010) Seed systems and farmers’ seed choices: the case of maize in the Peruvian Amazon. Human Ecology 38: 539553.

G. Stoneham , V. Chaudhri , A. Ha & L. Strappazzon (2003) Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trials. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 47: 477500.

P. Trawick (2001) The moral economy of water: equity and antiquity in the Andean commons. American Anthropologist 103: 361379.

M.L. Weitzman (1998) The Noah's Ark problem. Econometrica 66: 12791298.

J. Windle & J. Rolfe (2008) Exploring the efficiencies of suing competitive tenders over fixed price grants to protect biodiversity in Australian rangeland. Land Use Policy 25: 388398.

S. Wunder (2007) The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation. Conservation Biology 21: 4858.

S. Wunder , S. Engel & S. Pagiola (2008) Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecological Economics 65: 834852.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Environmental Conservation
  • ISSN: 0376-8929
  • EISSN: 1469-4387
  • URL: /core/journals/environmental-conservation
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords: