scholarly journals Using Contingent Valuation in the Design of Payments for Environmental Services Mechanisms: A Review and Assessment

2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Whittington ◽  
S. Pagiola
2009 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
DOUGLAS SOUTHGATE ◽  
TIMOTHY HAAB ◽  
JOHN LUNDINE ◽  
FABIÁN RODRÍGUEZ

ABSTRACTPresented in this paper are the results of two contingent valuation analyses, one undertaken in Ecuador and the other in Guatemala, of potential payments for environmental services (PES) directed toward rural households. We find that minimum compensation demanded by these households is far from uniform, depending in particular on individual strategies for raising incomes and dealing with risks. Our findings strengthen the case for allowing conservation payments to vary among recipients, which would be a departure from the current norm for PES initiatives in Latin America.


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felipe Vásquez Lavín ◽  
Ricardo Flores ◽  
Verónica Ibarnegaray

AbstractStated preference approaches, such as contingent valuation, focus mainly on the estimation of the mean or median willingness to pay (WTP) for an environmental good. Nevertheless, these two welfare measures may not be appropriate when there are social and political concerns associated with implementing a payment for environmental services (PES) scheme. In this paper the authors used a Bayesian estimation approach to estimate a quantile binary regression and the WTP distribution in the context of a contingent valuation PES application. Our results show that the use of other quantiles framed in the supermajority concept provides a reasonable interpretation of the technical nonmarket valuation studies in the PES area. We found that the values of the mean WTP are 10–37 times higher than the value that would support a supermajority of 70 per cent of the population.


2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
JENNIFER ALIX-GARCIA ◽  
ALAIN DE JANVRY ◽  
ELISABETH SADOULET

ABSTRACTThis paper discusses the gain in efficiency from including deforestation risk as a targeting criterion in payments for environmental services (PES) programs. We contrast two payment schemes that we simulate using data from Mexican common property forests: a flat payment scheme with a cap on allowable hectares per enrollee, similar to the program implemented in many countries, and a payment that takes deforestation risk and heterogeneity in land productivity into account. We simulate the latter strategy both with and without a budget constraint. Using observed past deforestation, we find that while risk-targeted payments are far more efficient, capped flat payments are more egalitarian. We also consider the characteristics of communities receiving payments from both programs. We find that the risk-weighted scheme results in more payments to poor communities, and that these payments are more efficient than those made to non-poor ejidos. Finally, we show that the risk of deforestation can be predicted quite precisely with indicators that are easily observable and that cannot be manipulated by the community.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 101212
Author(s):  
Thales A.P. West ◽  
Juan J. Monge ◽  
Les J. Dowling ◽  
Steve J. Wakelin ◽  
Holly K. Gibbs

Oryx ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Pamela McElwee ◽  
Huệ Thị Văn Lê ◽  
Tuyến Phương Nghiêm ◽  
Hương Diệu Vũ ◽  
Nghị Hữư Trần

Abstract There has been a rapid expansion in the use of payments for environmental services (PES) as a key conservation finance policy. However, there is insufficient understanding of how gender can affect PES implementation and outcomes. We present results from a case study in Viet Nam, where a national PES programme has been in place for a decade. Through panel household survey data, focus groups and interviews, we examined how women have been involved in PES policies, what the impacts have been on decision-making by men and women, participation rates and use of PES income over time, and the potential conservation outcomes. Our research confirms that resource use varies between men and women, and changes in access rights can fall disproportionately on women. Participation in PES has been lower for female-headed households and for women within male-headed households, although gradually more equitable participation has evolved within households. Female-headed households reported expending more yearly effort on PES activities despite protecting less land, and also increased their conservation activities over time as they presumably became more familiar with PES. Use of income from PES also showed differences between male and female-led households, with men more likely to spend funds on non-essential goods. Within households, although men initially decided how to spend PES money, decision-making has become more equitable over time. We conclude with some recommendations on how to increase attention to gender in PES projects and future research to improve outcomes.


2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Romain Pirard ◽  
Raphaël Billé ◽  
Thomas Sembrés

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e0152514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Driss Ezzine-de-Blas ◽  
Céline Dutilly ◽  
José-Alberto Lara-Pulido ◽  
Gwenolé Le Velly ◽  
Alejando Guevara-Sanginés

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document