Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Distinct positions underpin ecosystem services for poverty alleviation

  • Caroline Howe (a1), Esteve Corbera (a2), Bhaskar Vira (a3), Daniel Brockington (a1) and William M. Adams (a3)...
Abstract

As the concept of ecosystem services is applied more widely in conservation, its users will encounter the issue of poverty alleviation. Policy initiatives involving ecosystem services are often marked by their use of win-win narratives that conceal the trade-offs they must entail. Modelling this paper on an earlier essay about conservation and poverty, we explore the different views that underlie apparent agreement. We identify five positions that reflect different mixes of concern for ecosystem condition, poverty and economic growth, and we suggest that acknowledging these helps to uncover the subjacent goals of policy interventions and the trade-offs they involve in practice. Recognizing their existence and foundations can ultimately support the emergence of more legitimate and robust policies.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Distinct positions underpin ecosystem services for poverty alleviation
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Distinct positions underpin ecosystem services for poverty alleviation
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Distinct positions underpin ecosystem services for poverty alleviation
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Corresponding author
(Corresponding author) E-mail c.howe.01@cantab.net
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Also at: Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, UK

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Adams, W.M. (2014) The value of valuing nature. Science, 346, 549551.
Adams, W.M., Aveling, R., Brockington, D., Dickson, B., Elliott, J., Hutton, J. et al. (2004) Biodiversity conservation and the eradication of poverty. Science, 306, 11461149.
Balmford, A., Green, R.E. & Scharlemann, J.P.W. (2005) Sparing land for nature: exploring the potential impact of changes in agricultural yield on the area needed for crop production. Global Change Biology, 11, 15941605.
Collier, P. and Dercon, S. (2014) African agriculture in 50 years: smallholders in a rapidly changing world? World Development, 63, 92101.
Conservation International (2017) Http://www.conservation.org/about [accessed 8 July 2017].
Corbera, E. (2012) Problematizing REDD+ as an experiment in payments for ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4, 612619.
Dercon, S. & Gollin, S. (2014) Agriculture in African development: theories and strategies. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 6, 471492.
Diaz, S., Pascual, U., Stenseke, M., Martin-Lopez, B., Watson, R.T., Molnár, Z. et al. (2018) Assessing nature's contributions to people. Science, 359, 270272.
Ferrario, F., Beck, M.W., Storiazzi, C.D., Micheli, F., Shephard, C.C. & Airoldi, L. (2014) The effectiveness of coral reefs for coastal hazard risk reduction and adaptation. Nature Communications, 5, 3794.
Hermelingmeier, V. & Nicholas, K.A. (2017) Identifying five different perspectives on the ecosystem services concept using Q methodology. Ecological Economics, 136, 255265.
Howe, C., Suich, H., Vira, B. & Mace, G.M. (2014) Creating win-wins from trade-offs? Ecosystem services for human well-being: a meta-analysis of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies in the real world. Global Environmental Change, 2, 263275.
Igoe, J. & Croucher, B. (2007) Conservation, commerce and communities: the story of community-based wildlife management areas in Tanzania's northern tourist circuit. Conservation and Society, 5, 534561.
IUCN (2017) Https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected-areas/about [accessed 7 July 2017].
Juniper, T. (2013) What has Nature Ever Done for Us? How Money Really Does Grow on Trees. Profile Books, London, UK.
Kothari, A., Pande, P., Singh, S. & Variava, D. (1989) Management of National Parks and Sancturies in India. A Status Report. Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi, India.
McCauley, D.J. (2006) Selling out on nature. Nature, 443, 2728.
McShane, T.O., Hirsch, P.D., Trung, T.C., Songorwa, A.N., Kinzig, A., Monteferri, B. et al. (2011) Hard choices: making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being. Biological Conservation, 144, 966972.
Mortimore, M. & Adams, W.M. (1999) Working the Sahel: Environment and Society in Northern Nigeria. Routledge, London, UK.
Muradian, R., Arsel, M., Pellegrini, L., Adaman, F., Aguilar, B., Agarwal, B. et al. (2013) Payments for ecosystem services and the fatal attraction of win-win solutions. Conservation Letters, 6, 274279.
Murphree, M. (2001) Community, council and client. A case study in ecotourism development from Mahenye, Zimbabwe. In African Wildlife and Livelihoods (eds Hulme, D. & Murphree, M.), pp. 177194. Heinemann, Portsmouth, UK.
Naeem, S., Bunker, D.E., Hector, A., Loreau, M. & Perrings, C. (2009) Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning and Human Wellbeing: An Ecological and Economic Perspective. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Naidoo, R., Weaver, C., De Longcamp, M. & Du Plessis, P. (2011) Namibia's community-based natural resource management programme: an unrecognized payments for ecosystem services scheme. Environmental Conservation, 38, 445453.
Peters, P.E. (2013) Land appropriation, surplus people and a battle over visions of agrarian futures in Africa. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 40, 537562.
Phelps, J., Edward, L., Webb, E.L. & Adams, W.M. (2012) Biodiversity co-benefits of policies to reduce forest-carbon emissions. Nature Climate Change, 2, 497503.
Poverty and Conservation (2018) The Information Portal of the Poverty and Conservation Learning Group. Http://www.povertyandconservation.info [accessed 9 February 2018].
Ramnath, M. (2008) Surviving the Forest Rights Act: between Scylla and Charybdis. Economic and Political Weekly, March: 37–42.
Rangan, H. (2000) Of Myths and Movements: Rewriting Chipko into Himalayan History. Verso, London, UK.
Reed, J., Van Vianen, J., Deakin, E.L., Barlow, J. & Sunderland, T. (2016) Integrated landscape approaches to managing social and environmental issues in the tropics: learning from the past to guide the future. Global Change Biology, 22, 25402554.
Reed, J., Van Vianen, J., Barlow, J. & Sunderland, T. (2017) Have integrated landscape approaches reconciled societal and environmental issues in the tropics? Land Use Policy, 63, 481492.
Roe, D., Elliott, J., Sandbrook, C. & Walpole, M. (2012) Biodiversity Conservation and Poverty Alleviation: Exploring the Evidence for a Link. Wiley, Chichester, UK.
SAGCOT (2016) The SAGCOT Greenprint: A Green Growth Investment Framework for the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania. Http://www.sagcot.com/uploads/media/SAGCOT_Greenprint.pdf [accessed 30 June 2016].
Sandbrook, C. & Adams, W.M. (2012) Accessing the impenetrable: the nature and distribution of tourism benefits at a Ugandan national park. Society and Natural Resources, 25, 915932.
Sandbrook, C.G. (2008) Putting leakage in its place: the significance of retained tourism revenue in the local context in rural Uganda. Journal of International Development, 22, 124136.
Sayer, J., Sunderland, T., Ghazoul, J., Pfund, J.-L., Sheil, D., Meijaard, E. et al. (2013) Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 83498356.
Scullion, J., Thomas, C., Vogt, K., Pérez-Maqueo, O. & Logsdon, M. (2011) Evaluating the environmental impact of payments for ecosystem services in Coatepec (Mexico) using remote sensing and on-site interviews. Environmental Conservation, 38, 426434.
Suich, H., Howe, C. & Mace, G.M. (2015) Ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: a review of the empirical links. Ecosystem Services, 12, 137147.
Turner, W.R., Brandon, K., Brooks, T.M., Gascon, C., Gibbs, H.K., Lawrence, K.S. et al. (2012) Global biodiversity conservation and the alleviation of poverty. Bioscience, 62, 8592.
Recommend this journal

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

Oryx
  • ISSN: 0030-6053
  • EISSN: 1365-3008
  • URL: /core/journals/oryx
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 166
Total number of PDF views: 248 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 511 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 30th April 2018 - 16th August 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.