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

Hecken, Gert Van; Bastiaensen, Johan; Huybrechs, Frédéric

doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.05.020

Cited by 41 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A diagnostic of rules‐in‐use provides a common language for defining functional characteristics of instruments, but does not explain the quality of the functional interactions between these characteristics. The focus in IAD is on describing institutional ‘structure’, while a balanced policy mix analysis must also consider ‘agency’ (Van Hecken et al , ; Fletcher and Büscher, ). This is related to how design and transaction costs are increased/reduced by other instruments and the practices in use, which are an essential factor to be considered when evaluating institutional performance (Bollman and Hardy, ; Coggan et al , ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The IAD's rules‐in‐use focuses on instrument structure and makes descriptions of instruments more ideologically neutral. But policy design research must also address policy objectives and the types of agency needed to support their achievement (Van Hecken et al , ; Fletcher and Büscher, ). This requires a complementary set of analytical tools that address political dimensions of instruments (Vatn, ; Hausknost et al , ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Impact assessments of PES have recently included administrative heterogeneity and presence of other instruments (Alix‐Garcia et al , ; Pfaff and Robalino, ; Robalino et al , ). Fletcher and Büscher () note that much of the recent literature (Vatn, ; Dempsey and Robertson, ; Pirard and Lapeyre, ; Gómez‐Baggethun and Muradian, ; Van Hecken et al , ) argues that PES is not a market instrument or neoliberal because of the substantial mix of public funding and regulation of PES implementation on the ground. Yet, the interaction between the institutional context factors and the design of the PES arrangements has not been thoroughly analysed (Huber‐Stearns et al , ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Payments for Ecosystem Services as a Policy Mix: Demonstrating the institutional analysis and development framework on conservation policy instruments

Barton

Benavides²,

Chacón-Cascante

et al. 2017

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Policy mix analysis has been applied in research on energy, climate, urban and transport policy, and more recently biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services. However, policy mix analysis has thus far been employed at a high conceptual level, focusing on describing interactions between instrument types. Policy mix analysis rarely describes instrument ‘structure’ or functional characteristics in a way that would answer the question ‘what constitutes an instrument’? We describe how the rules‐in‐use taxonomy of the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework, developed for research on common pool resource management, can be used to characterize conservation policy instrument interactions. We demonstrate the approach on the well‐known payments for ecosystem services (PES) program in Costa Rica and cross‐compliance policies, arguing that PES is a policy mix rather than a single economic instrument. Our analysis shows how design features of PES described in the economics literature map to ‘rules‐in‐use’ in the IAD framework. The framework provides a terminology for defining what constitutes institutional context, comparing economic, regulatory and information instruments, and studying their interactions. The rules‐in‐use taxonomy of IAD is a ‘structural’ diagnostic approach, which needs to be combined with other tools that analyse the role and ‘agency’ of actors, as part of integrative environmental governance research. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Payments for Ecosystem Services as a Policy Mix: Demonstrating the institutional analysis and development framework on conservation policy instruments

Barton

Benavides²,

Chacón-Cascante

et al. 2017

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Academic scholars have argued against an over-confidence in “win-win” solutions and PES as panacea ( Muradian et al, 2013 ). Some raise concerns due to the multiple and complex conditions for economic instruments to actually work in specific socio-cultural and legal contexts ( Lockie, 2013 , Vatn, 2010 ; Van Hecken, Bastiaensen, & Huybrechs, 2015 ), others even doubt their general (long-term) effectiveness for nature conservation ( Büscher, 2012 , McCauley, 2006 , Redford and Adams, 2009 , Spash, 2008 ). Yet the academic debates often use framings that are too general, formats too complex, and language too academic, all of which render the resulting advice inaccessible to practitioners working on implementation efforts “on the ground”.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Ecosystem service opportunities’: A practice-oriented framework for identifying economic instruments to enhance biodiversity and human livelihoods

Rode

Wittmer

Emerton³

et al. 2016

Journal for Nature Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic instruments that promise “win-win” solutions for both biodiversity conservation and human livelihoods have become increasingly popular over recent years. There however remains a gap in terms of practical and policy-relevant guidance about appropriate approaches that take into account the local needs and the specific cultural, legal, and ecological context in which such instruments are being developed and applied. This paper presents a step-by-step framework that helps conservation and development planners and practitioners to identify economic instruments that can promote pro-conservation behaviour in a specific setting. The concept of ‘ecosystem service opportunities’ builds on, and brings together, general economic principles and an ecosystem services perspective. The framework was designed to also address a number of concerns regarding economic approaches in order to help practitioners recognise the potentials and limits of economic approaches to nature conservation. The framework is illustrated by its application within the realm of a biodiversity conservation project in Thailand.

show abstract

“…Although the values are diverse in REDD+, the neoliberal incentive remains a useful starting point for us to understand stakeholder behaviour in REDD+. We recognize that values are pluralistic in REDD+, including efficiency, equity, social and environmental justice, as well as poverty alleviation [ 91 , 92 , 93 ]. However, when we consider all the values in REDD+ design, the value pluralism may “risk reinforcing the problematic dimensions and entrenched power structures of the approach as a whole and hence work against the effective resolution of these very concerns” [ 94 ].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uncertainty in Estimates, Incentives, and Emission Reductions in REDD+ Projects

Sheng

Zhou

Sherbinin

2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The accurate monitoring and measurement of emission reductions is a critical step in Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+). However, the existence of uncertainty in emission reduction estimates affects the performance of REDD+ projects. We assert that incentive could be a valuable policy tool for reducing monitoring errors and transaction costs. Using Stackelberg models and simulation research, this paper examines the effects of uncertainty and incentive on performance and stakeholder benefits of REDD+ projects. Finally, the uncertainties in REDD+ projects are further discussed, and equilibrium errors, emission reductions, and stakeholder benefits in different scenarios are compared. The results show that errors do affect the measured value of carbon emissions and compensation payments. However, incentive for investors can reduce monitoring errors and improve the performance of REDD+ projects. Therefore, in the future, incentive should be provided to investors rather than landholders.

show abstract

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

Cited by 41 publications

References 60 publications

Payments for Ecosystem Services as a Policy Mix: Demonstrating the institutional analysis and development framework on conservation policy instruments

Payments for Ecosystem Services as a Policy Mix: Demonstrating the institutional analysis and development framework on conservation policy instruments

‘Ecosystem service opportunities’: A practice-oriented framework for identifying economic instruments to enhance biodiversity and human livelihoods

Uncertainty in Estimates, Incentives, and Emission Reductions in REDD+ Projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About