2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.03.032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Payment for Environmental “Self-Service”: Exploring the Links Between Farmers' Motivation and Additionality in a Conservation Incentive Programme in the Bolivian Andes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
53
2
5

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(70 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
2
53
2
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore the Watershared scheme is relevant to those interested in the design of conservation incentive schemes such as PES. In exchange for enrolling parcels of land in Watershared agreements, farmers receive varied forms of support (including fruit trees, bee boxes, irrigation material and barbed wire) to help shift away from swidden agriculture and improve livestock management (Bottazzi, Wiik, Crespo, & Jones, ). More than 210,000 ha belonging to 4,500 families are under agreements (Asquith, ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore the Watershared scheme is relevant to those interested in the design of conservation incentive schemes such as PES. In exchange for enrolling parcels of land in Watershared agreements, farmers receive varied forms of support (including fruit trees, bee boxes, irrigation material and barbed wire) to help shift away from swidden agriculture and improve livestock management (Bottazzi, Wiik, Crespo, & Jones, ). More than 210,000 ha belonging to 4,500 families are under agreements (Asquith, ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As with many such schemes, not all land enrolled represented additional conservation (additionality was ca. 13%; Bottazzi et al, ) and there were barriers to entry leading to higher uptake by households with formal land title, larger homes, cattle, and stronger social connections (Grillos, ). Uptake (percentage of a community area under Watershared agreements) was highly variable across the treated communities (Figure b), varying from 3 to 80% (median = 14%).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Watershared is not a PES scheme according to the original definition involving buyers and sellers of services (Wunder, 2007), however it does involve "voluntary transactions between service users and service providers that are conditional on agreed rules of natural resource management for generating offsite services" (Wunder, 2015). In exchange for enrolling parcels of land in Watershared agreements, farmers receive varied forms of support (including fruit trees, bee boxes, irrigation material and barbed wire) to help shift away from swidden agriculture and improve livestock management (Bottazzi, Wiik, Crespo, & Jones, 2018). In exchange for enrolling parcels of land in Watershared agreements, farmers receive varied forms of support (including fruit trees, bee boxes, irrigation material and barbed wire) to help shift away from swidden agriculture and improve livestock management (Bottazzi, Wiik, Crespo, & Jones, 2018).…”
Section: Study Contextmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While it is difficult to draw comparisons across countries with different economies, the value of the incentives in Watershared are low compared with other program (the value of the incentives for the most restricting agreements is $10 a hectare plus the equivalent of a $100 value joining bonus, but just $1 a hectare for the least restricting agreements; SI 2). There is evidence that farmers enroll due to the perception that they or their community will benefit from improved water quality (Bottazzi et al, 2018). Those promoting Watershared argue that it works through nudging, by emphasizing environmental norms and reciprocity rather than paying the opportunity cost, so the level of incentives is relatively unimportant (Asquith, 2016).…”
Section: How Could the Impact Of The Watershared Program Be Increased?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…What we could not explore, because the program was still underway at the time of this work, is whether the behaviours persist when the funding is no longer coming in (Dayer et al ). We do, however, make a preliminary assessment of whether the program is likely to result in additionality, clear increases in some environmental conditions relative to a baseline, described by some as the holy grail of payments for ecosystem service programs (Bottazzi et al ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%