Pragmatic conservation: Discourses of payments for ecosystem services in Colombia

Moros, Lina; Corbera, Esteve; Vélez, María Alejandra; Flechas, Daniel

doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.09.004

Cited by 23 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Q-methodology is a quali-quantitative methodology that originated in the field of psychology (Brown, 1980) but is now used in a wide array of fields to understand the range of stakeholder perceptions in reference to contested issues [e.g., education (Rodl et al, 2020), medicine (Hammami et al, 2020), and environment (Moros et al, 2020)]. Q-methodology combines statistical analysis in the form of a data-reduction technique applied to pseudo-ranking data with the analysis of qualitative data obtained during the ranking exercise to reveal core perceptions.…”

Section: Q-methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognising Stakeholder Conflict and Encouraging Consensus of ‘Science-Based Management’ Approaches for Marine Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ)

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) encompass the seabed, subsoil and water column beyond coastal State jurisdiction and marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) is rich and varied. From providing sustenance and supporting livelihoods, to absorbing anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, ABNJ ecosystems are vital to the wellbeing of humankind. However, an enhanced understanding of BBNJ and its significance has not equated to its successful conservation and sustainable use. Negotiations for a new international legally binding instrument for the conservation and sustainable use of BBNJ have scoped applicable principles for a future agreement, including the use of best available science and science-based approaches. But there remains a lack of convergence on what science-based approaches would look like, or how they would be operationalised. In order to negotiate and implement a meaningful BBNJ treaty that can meet conservation and sustainable use objectives, stakeholder perceptions must be identified, and areas of divergence must be overcome. This study uses Q-methodology to reveal and analyse the diversity of perceptions that exist amongst key stakeholders regarding what it means to operationalise sciencebased approaches for the conservation and sustainable use of BBNJ. The Q-study features 25 stakeholder interviews and 30 Q-study participants revealing four different perceptions, each of which represent a different interpretation of what science-based management means in the context of BBNJ. Across these perceptions, there were areas of stakeholder consensus (e.g., regarding the benefits of integrative management, the application of precautionary approaches when data are insufficient, and the issues pertaining to the trustworthiness and credibility of science) and areas of stakeholder conflict (e.g., regarding the definition, function and authority of science within current and future BBNJ governance processes). Key implications of this study include the evidencing of fundamental tensions between differing perceptions of the authority of science and between conservation and sustainable use objectives, that may be fueling stakeholder conflict, and the subsequent proposal of integrative and highly participatory management approaches to operationalise science-based management of BBNJ.

show abstract

Section: Q-methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognising Stakeholder Conflict and Encouraging Consensus of ‘Science-Based Management’ Approaches for Marine Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ)

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contexts of high deforestation risk (as modeled in our experimental design where the agricultural opportunity cost is high), where there is a tradeoff between conservation and agriculture for marginalized farmers, the "recognition or gratitude effect" may also be playing an important role. Payments, even for a limited period of time, might be perceived as a welcome, just re-distribution of the costs of conservation (Moros, Corbera, Vélez and Flechas, 2020). Further qualitative studies regarding the perceptions of removed PES participants are needed to calibrate this effect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Ending Payments for Ecosystem Services: Removal Does not Crowd Prior Conservation Out

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

http://economia.uniandes.edu.co Impreso en Colombia -Printed in Colombia La serie de Documentos de Trabajo CEDE se circula con propósitos de discusión y divulgación. Los artículos no han sido evaluados por pares ni sujetos a ningún tipo de evaluación formal por parte del equipo de trabajo del CEDE. El contenido de la presente publicación se encuentra protegido por las normas internacionales y nacionales vigentes sobre propiedad intelectual, por tanto su utilización, reproducción, comunicación pública, transformación, distribución, alquiler, préstamo público e importación, total o parcial, en todo o en parte, en formato impreso, digital o en cualquier formato conocido o por conocer, se encuentran prohibidos, y sólo serán lícitos en la medida en que se cuente con la autorización previa y expresa por escrito del autor o titular. Las limitaciones y excepciones al Derecho de Autor, sólo serán aplicables en la medida en que se den dentro de los denominados Usos Honrados (Fair use), estén previa y expresamente establecidas, no causen un grave e injustificado perjuicio a los intereses legítimos del autor o titular, y no atenten contra la normal explotación de la obra.

show abstract

“…PES in Colombia are still not widespread; and even when the legal framework was already developed, clear protocols on how or where to implement PES are vague and diverse, and its execution depends on the funding source, implementation agency and regional factors [37][38][39]. The most extensive PES effort to date covers approximately 130 km 2 ; these areas are primarily located within small private farms (mean forest size = 0.15 km 2 [40]) that are scattered and opportunistically dispersed across the country.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most extensive PES effort to date covers approximately 130 km 2 ; these areas are primarily located within small private farms (mean forest size = 0.15 km 2 [ 40 ]) that are scattered and opportunistically dispersed across the country. Existing PES sites were not selected on the basis of either their location or size [ 37 , 38 ]. Location of selected farms is not systematic and is guided mainly by state-specific interests or by the voluntary commitment by landowners to the programme [ 37 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Connectivity conservation at the crossroads: protected areas versus payments for ecosystem services in conserving connectivity for Colombian carnivores

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protected areas (PAs) constitute one of the main tools for global landscape conservation. Recently, payments for environmental services (PES) have attracted interest from national and regional governments and are becoming one of the leading conservation policy instruments in tropical countries. However, the degree to which areas designated for PES overlap with areas that are critical for maintaining species' landscape connectivity is rarely evaluated. We estimated habitat distributions and connectivity for 16 of the 22 mammalian carnivores occurring in the Caribbean region of Colombia, and identified the overlap between existing PAs and areas identified as being important for connectivity for these species. We also evaluated the potential impact of creation of new PAs versus new PES areas on conserving connectivity for carnivores. Our results show that PAs cover only a minor percentage of the total area that is important for maintaining connectivity ( x = 26.8 % ± 20.2 s . d . ). On the other hand, PES, if implemented extensively, could contribute substantially to mammalian carnivores’ connectivity ( x = 45.4 % ± 12.8 s . d . ). However, in a more realistic scenario with limited conservation investment in which fewer areas are set aside, a strategy based on implementing new PAs seems superior to PES. We argue that prioritizing designation of new PAs will be the most efficient means through which to maintain connectivity.

show abstract

Pragmatic conservation: Discourses of payments for ecosystem services in Colombia

Cited by 23 publications

References 41 publications

Recognising Stakeholder Conflict and Encouraging Consensus of ‘Science-Based Management’ Approaches for Marine Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ)

Recognising Stakeholder Conflict and Encouraging Consensus of ‘Science-Based Management’ Approaches for Marine Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ)

Effects of Ending Payments for Ecosystem Services: Removal Does not Crowd Prior Conservation Out

Connectivity conservation at the crossroads: protected areas versus payments for ecosystem services in conserving connectivity for Colombian carnivores

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About