Suchergebnisse

Payments for environmental services (PES) are seen as a useful economic tool to ensure both environmental health and human welfare. Doubts have been expressed, however, as to whether PES can be pro-poor. Using four PES case studies in Vietnam (one project on carbon sequestration, two projects on landscape beauty and biodiversity conservation, and one project on watershed protection), the article highlights the pitfalls of PES projects and discusses lessons learnt for PES and pro-poor PES approaches. Major pitfalls and lessons for PES and pro-poor PES are: high transaction costs due to complex project administration and conflicts among actors; limited number of ES buyers due to political interference; the need for continuous follow-up activities among potential ES buyers; the need to adopt an approach to PES that is more bottom-up than the current rather top-down approach; and transparent and well monitored mechanisms for the distribution of benefits. The studied projects, although still incipient, have had both positive and negative impacts on the poor. The impacts have been mainly financial. Adapted from the source document.

REDD+—which stands for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries—debuted on the global stage more than a decade ago. The idea prompted high expectations that an approach that featured results-based incentives for reducing tropical deforestation and degradation could rapidly succeed where other approaches had failed. Since then, over 50 countries have initiated REDD+ strategies; subnational governments have experimented with jurisdictional REDD+ programs; and more than 350 REDD+ projects have been implemented globally. What are the lessons learned from REDD+ initiatives so far? How can these lessons support future forest-based climate change mitigation?

Global conservation discourses and practices increasingly rely on market-based solutions to fulfill the dual objective of forest conservation and economic development. Although varied, these interventions are premised on the assumption that natural resources are most effectively managed and preserved while benefiting livelihoods if the market-incentives of a liberalised economy are correctly in place. By examining three nationally supported payment for ecosystem service (PES) schemes in Vietnam we show how insecure land tenure, high transaction costs and high opportunity costs can undermine the long-term benefits of PES programmes for local households and, hence, potentially threaten their livelihood viability. In many cases, the income from PES programmes does not reach the poor because of political and economic constraints. Local elite capture of PES benefits through the monopolization of access to forestland and existing state forestry management are identified as key problems. We argue that as PES schemes create a market for ecosystem services, such markets must be understood not simply as bald economic exchanges between 'rational actors' but rather as exchanges embedded in particular socio-political and historical contexts to support the sustainable use of forest resources and local livelihoods in Vietnam.

Global conservation discourses and practices increasingly rely on market-based solutions to fulfill the dual objective of forest conservation and economic development. Although varied, these interventions are premised on the assumption that natural resources are most effectively managed and preserved while benefiting livelihoods if the market-incentives of a liberalised economy are correctly in place. By examining three nationally supported payment for ecosystem service (PES) schemes in Vietnam we show how insecure land tenure, high transaction costs and high opportunity costs can undermine the long-term benefits of PES programmes for local households and, hence, potentially threaten their livelihood viability. In many cases, the income from PES programmes does not reach the poor because of political and economic constraints. Local elite capture of PES benefits through the monopolization of access to forestland and existing state forestry management are identified as key problems. We argue that as PES schemes create a market for ecosystem services, such markets must be understood not simply as bald economic exchanges between 'rational actors' but rather as exchanges embedded in particular socio-political and historical contexts to support the sustainable use of forest resources and local livelihoods in Vietnam.

Global conservation discourses and practices increasingly rely on market-based solutions to fulfill the dual objective of forest conservation and economic development. Although varied, these interventions are premised on the assumption that natural resources are most effectively managed and preserved while benefiting livelihoods if the market-incentives of a liberalised economy are correctly in place. By examining three nationally supported payment for ecosystem service (PES) schemes in Vietnam we show how insecure land tenure, high transaction costs and high opportunity costs can undermine the long-term benefits of PES programmes for local households and, hence, potentially threaten their livelihood viability. In many cases, the income from PES programmes does not reach the poor because of political and economic constraints. Local elite capture of PES benefits through the monopolization of access to forestland and existing state forestry management are identified as key problems. We argue that as PES schemes create a market for ecosystem services, such markets must be understood not simply as bald economic exchanges between 'rational actors' but rather as exchanges embedded in particular socio-political and historical contexts to support the sustainable use of forest resources and local livelihoods in Vietnam.

Who makes land-use decisions, how are those decisions made, and who influences whom, how and why? This working paper is part of a series based on research studying multilevel decision-making institutions and processes. The series is aimed at providing insight into why efforts to keep forests standing, such as initiatives like Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), are still so far from altering development trajectories. It underlines the importance of understanding the politics of multilevel governance in forest, land and climate policy and practice, and identifies potential ways forward, while highlighting the role of conservation and sustainable management of forests for the enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries.