The viability of local payments for watershed services: Empirical evidence from Matiguás, Nicaragua

Hecken, Gert Van; Bastiaensen, Johan; Vásquez, William F.

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.12.016

Cited by 59 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the case of watershed services, access to the service is limited to those downstream (physically) within the same water basin. In this regard, it becomes simpler to identify the beneficiaries of improved watershed services and those that should be the providers of the service (Turpie et al 2008, Van Hecken et al 2012). With fewer possible providers and fewer identified beneficiaries on both sides of the contract, transaction costs are expected to be lower and potential free riding to be smaller than in the case of carbon sequestration.…”

Section: Transaction Costs and Property Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The basic economic criterion necessary is that the willingness to pay (WTP), the monetary utility derived from consuming the service, be greater than the willingness to accept (WTA), the marginal cost of producing the service. 13 Van Hecken et al (2012) focus on the demand side, conducting a contingent valuation survey of water users in Nicaragua. Van Hecken et al find that the WTP is significant; however, users are willing to make greater payments for infrastructure improvements compared with payment to land owners upstream.…”

Section: Pes In Action: Will It Work? Is It Working?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Payment for Environmental Services: Hypotheses and Evidence

Alston

Andersson

Smith

2013

Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of payment for environmental services (PES) is not a new type of contract, but PES programs have become more in vogue because of the potential for sequestering carbon by paying to prevent deforestation and degradation of forestlands. We provide a framework utilizing transaction costs to hypothesize which services are more likely to be provided effectively. We then interpret the literature on PES programs to see the extent to which transaction costs vary as predicted across the type of service and to assess the performance of PES programs. As predicted, we find that transaction costs are the least for club goods like water and greatest for pure public goods like carbon reduction. Actual performance is difficult to measure and varies across the examples. More work and experimentation are needed to gain a better outlook on what elements support effective delivery of environmental services.

show abstract

Section: Transaction Costs and Property Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pes In Action: Will It Work? Is It Working?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Payment for Environmental Services: Hypotheses and Evidence

Alston

Andersson

Smith

2013

Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This calls into question the 'cause-and-effect' assumptions underlying market-based PES projects, as the agency of project participants blends the motivations and project rationale with other interpretative frameworks and perceptions (Van Hecken et al, 2012).…”

Section: A Socio-institutional Reassessment Of the Risemp Experiencementioning

confidence: 99%

What’s in a name? Epistemic perspectives and Payments for Ecosystem Services policies in Nicaragua

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The following question is that, what and how stakeholders would do if their interests are affected or are potential affected by PES programs? Although stakeholders' participation/involvement (Bremer, Farley, & LopezCarr, 2014;Farley & Costanza, 2010;Prager & Freese, 2009; and its influencing factors such as land tenure and participants' characteristics (Bremer et al, 2014), payment amount Pagiola, 2005), contract duration (Muñoz-Piña, Guevarab, Torres, & Braña, 2008;Yin et al, 2013), and technical assistance (Hecken, Bastiaensen, & V asquez, 2012) have been explored in literature, the details of stakeholders' activities are not been attached importance to. This study thus would further explore more details of stakeholders' activities in PES systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%