Payments for watershed services (PWS) programs are becoming a popular governance approach in the western United States (US) to fund forest management aimed at source water protection. In this paper we conduct a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of one of the first collaboratively funded PWS programs in the US, located in the municipal watersheds servicing Denver, Colorado. We combine wildfire modeling, sediment modeling, and primary and secondary data on economic values to quantify the impact of the program on protecting multiple values at risk. Our results show that while the program has led to diverse societal benefits, it is only economically efficient (benefit-cost ratio greater than one) when all co-benefits beyond source water protection are considered and fuels treatments are assumed to encounter wildfire. When the probability of wildfire is accounted for, economic benefits would need to be triple what was estimated in our analysis to achieve economic efficiency. Our findings suggest that improving spatial prioritization of interventions would increase economic benefits and better data on treatment placement and costs would help facilitate future CBA of PWS programs focused on wildfire mitigation.
Optimal use of source water protection modelling results
