Corporate Payments for Ecosystem Services in Theory and Practice: Links to Economics, Business, and Sustainability

Benjamin S. Thompson
Additional contact information
Benjamin S. Thompson: Faculty of Arts, School of Social Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne 3800, Australia

Sustainability, 2021, vol. 13, issue 15, 1-18

Abstract: Few Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes are financed voluntarily by corporations. This is perhaps unsurprising, given that limited literature on the theory and practice of PES has a dedicated focus on businesses. This article unifies the PES and business literatures in order to address the awareness and management challenges that corporations face in engaging in PES. First, it shows how corporations fit into the economic theory that underpins PES, demonstrating that corporate-financed PES schemes can exhibit a diversity and hybridity of Coasean and Pigouvian characteristics. Second, it shows how PES fits into corporate sustainability theory, demonstrating how PES can help companies achieve synergies across the economic, environmental, and social tenets of the triple bottom line; for example, by helping gain social license to operate from adjacent communities, or by using PES to meet sustainability reporting requirements related to emissions and water management. Third, it shows the different PES options available to firms based on their industrial sector, operating practices, and business strategies. The options with higher potential are maintenance and enhancement of production inputs across the supply chain, and carbon offsetting and insetting to help meet climate change mitigation regulations and avoid fines. Fourth, it identifies lessons learned when transitioning from theory to practice by synthesising the latest empirical research on corporate-financed PES schemes—considering exactly what these ‘should’ or ‘could’ resemble, for example, in terms of their additionality, conditionality, permanence, co-benefits, budgeting, and bargaining. Examples are drawn from corporate-financed schemes in forests and watersheds across Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America, and North America. The article concludes that these schemes remain small in number and size, but have significant potential to increase—and this can be aided by future research on corporate motives, understandings, and actions on PES.

Keywords: nature-based solutions; biodiversity; conservation; environmental management; environmental finance; natural capital; environmental sustainability; corporate environmentalism; user-financing; environmental services (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8307/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8307/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8307-:d:601313

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().