Avaliação da influência dos pagamentos por serviços ambientais sobre a estrutura da paisagem

Do command and control instruments for nature conservation on private property always fail?

“…There are still many questions regarding the determinant role of PES in the result of the increase or maintenance of forest cover (GONZAGA, 2016;MARTÍNEZ-ALIER, 2007;PFAFF;ROBALINO;ARTURO SANCHEZ-AZOFEIFA, 2007;YANG et al, 3 -Ecosystem services are direct or indirect contributions from nature to human well-being (TEEB, 2010). 2013).…”

“…Gonzaga (2016) compared the land-use change in three areas of Brazil (two with PES schemes and one with actions based on C&C) and observed that in the cases of PES there was little significant increase in forest coverage, while deforestation was prevented using command and control. Gonzaga (2016) found that further studies are necessary to isolate the effects of PES, since cases that studied payments to the landholders were also applied to mandatory conservation areas (i.e., APPs). This conclusion corroborates with the findings of Wunder et al (2020) who argue that there are multiple analytical challenges that impact different intervention techniques where multiple instruments are used.…”

“…The case studied by Gonzaga (2016) was called "Projeto Formoso Vivo" (PFV), and is based on C&C alongside the complementary use of other instruments such as training, environmental education, and technical assistance. It was conducted in the municipality of Bonito, in Mato Grosso do Sul (MS), the PFV aimed to regularize the APP and RL to suit private properties adjacent to the Formoso river, and is considered a reference in the regularization of rural properties according to legislation that provides protection to native vegetation in Brazil (LOUBET, 2012;MPMS, 2020).…”