Journal
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT
Volume 86, Issue -, Pages 8-28Publisher
ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2016.11.010
Keywords
Protected areas; Payments for ecosystem services; Incentive-based regulation; Poverty and environment; Economic development; Conservation policy; Land use; Deforestation; REDD
Categories
Funding
- NSF [1061852]
- International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie)
- Carnegie Corporation of NY
- Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie
- Divn Of Social and Economic Sciences [1061852] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Protected areas (PM) and payments for ecosystem services (PES) are the top two mechanisms available for countries to achieve international REDD agreements, yet there are few empirical comparisons of their effects. We estimate the impacts of PM and PES on forest conservation, poverty reduction, and population change at the locality level in Mexico in the 2000s. Both policies conserved forest, generating an approximately 20-25% reduction in expected forest cover loss. PES created statistically significant but small poverty alleviation while PAs had overall neutral impacts on livelihoods. Estimates by individual policy type for the same level of deforestation risk indicate that biosphere reserves and PES balanced conservation and livelihood goals better than strict protected areas or mixed-use areas. This suggests that both direct and incentive-based instruments can be effective, and that policies combining sustainable financing, flexible zoning, and recognition of local economic goals are more likely to achieve conservation without harming livelihoods. (c) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available