Opinions towards the water‐related Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes: The stakeholders’ point of view

Abstract

Background: Forests provide a wide range of water-related ecosystem services (WES) vital for human well-being such as groundwater recharge, runoff and water discharge to streams, soil erosion protection, aesthetic landscape and recreational opportunities. Sustainable forest management and afforestation/reforestation practices can maintain and improve the long-term provision of WES. In this context, new market-based mechanisms-Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES)-can promote sustainable forest management by reducing negative externalities. To implement PES schemes for WES, many stakeholders with different knowledge, interests, and needs must be consulted and involved in the design and implementation process. Methods: The aim of this study is to investigate stakeholders' opinions on the relationships between forests and water resources and the water-related Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes in

A Framework Proposal for the Ex-post Evaluation of a Solution-Driven Pes Scheme. The Case of Medvednica Nature Park

“…The broader the participation in the scheme, the more transparent and socially accepted the process is [58]. To date, several classifications of stakeholder groups exist [7,14,63], here we propose that of Paletto et al [27] modified as follows:…”

“…The main benefits of ecosystem services internalised by PES include regulating services, such as biodiversity protection [26], hydrogeological protection [27], and carbon storage [28]. In recent times, cultural services, such as tourism-recreational activities and health are also gaining recognition [29,30].…”

Stakeholders’ Opinions towards Water-Related Forests Ecosystem Services in Selected Southeast European Countries (Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Slovenia and Serbia)

“…In the first step, a stakeholder analysis was conducted in the forestry and water management sectors as an approach to gain knowledge about stakeholders in order to understand their responsibilities, relations and interests [16,38]. The respondents in each country have been identified considering their affiliation to institutions responsible for forest and water management and relevant expertise.…”

“…In addition, many policy documents related to forest management (Warsaw Resolution on "Forests and Water", 2007; European Union (EU) Forest Strategy, 2013; and Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)) emphasize the relationship between forests and WES supply [7]. Accordingly, EU member states should ensure soil protection, water quality and water quantity regulation by integrating sustainable forestry practices into the Programme of Measures of River Basin Management Plans (Water Framework Directive, 2000/60/EC) and in the Rural Development Programmes (2014-2020) [16].…”

“…Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are one of the market-based mechanisms that aim to influence decision making about forest management, which is crucial for the sustainable provision of WES [20], and provide financial support. The role of stakeholders in the implementation of PES is very important, and their involvement can be challenging as there are many of them, whom all have different knowledges, interests, needs and perceptions of the current state of ecosystem services (ES) [16,19,21,22]. Stakeholders may be individuals, groups and institutions/organizations from the market, education, research, resource management or government and civil society sectors, each representing different interests and holding different values, thus influencing the implementation of PES [19,23].…”