Redefining payments for environmental services

Luca Tacconi

Ecological Economics, 2012, vol. 73, issue C, 29-36

Abstract: The Environmental Economics and the Ecological Economics perspectives on payments for environmental services (PES) propose rather different views on how to define PES, its key elements, and on the role of PES in ecosystem conservation and rural development. This paper compares these two perspectives and addresses the following questions: what is an appropriate definition of PES, grounded in the theory and practice underlying it? What are the key design elements of PES? What should the scope of PES be given the possible trade-offs between efficiency and equity? It is found that PES schemes should focus on cost-effectiveness and best practice for positive livelihood impacts. PES schemes should be transparent, and provide additional services with conditional payments to voluntary providers.

Keywords: PES; Coase; Efficiency; Equity; Cost-effectiveness; Livelihoods (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (82)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800911004046
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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:eee:ecolec:v:73:y:2012:i:c:p:29-36

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.09.028

Access Statistics for this article

Ecological Economics is currently edited by C. J. Cleveland

More articles in Ecological Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().