Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries

Ina, Porras and Bruce, Alyward and Jeff, Dengel (2013): Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries. Published in: : pp. 1-36.

Abstract

Payments for watershed services (PWS) are schemes that use funds from water users (including governments) as an incentive for landholders to improve their land management practices. They are increasingly seen as a viable policy alternative to watershed management issues, and a means of addressing chronic problems such as declining water flows, deteriorating water quality and flooding. In some places, local governments, donor agencies and NGOs are actively trying to upscale and replicate PWS schemes across the area. While their apparent success and progress in launching new initiatives is encouraging, there is still much to be learned from formative experiences in this field, especially with regard to monitoring and evaluation. In this paper we discuss the monitoring and evaluation criteria behind compliance or transactional monitoring, which ensures that contracts are followed, and effectiveness conditionality, which looks at how schemes manage to achieve their environmental objectives regardless of the degree of compliance. Although the two are usually linked, a high degree of compliance does not necessarily ensure that a scheme is effective. This is because a poorly designed scheme may target the wrong land managers and land that is at least risk, meaning that payments do not generate the desired hydro-ecological or conservation benefits. As the levering capacity to demand payments for better watershed management increases, so does the need to understand the dynamics of such activities and demonstrate their impacts. While the growing interest in such schemes shows that participants believe in the principle of land management, evidence of their impact is needed to determine which initiatives genuinely add value and are worth pursuing.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Payments for watershed services; environmental impacts; monitoring and evaluation; land use; low- and middle-income countries
• Subjects: Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q50 - General; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q57 - Ecological Economics: Ecosystem Services ; Biodiversity Conservation ; Bioeconomics ; Industrial Ecology

References

Agarwal, C., Tiwari, S., Borgoyary, M., Acharya, A. and Morrison, E. 2007. Fair deals for watershed services in India. Natural Resource Issues. International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), London.

Alix-Garcia, J., de Janvry, A., Sadoulet, E., Torres, J.M., Braña Varela, J. and Zorilla Ramos, M. 2005a. An assessment of Mexico’s payment for environmental services program, roles of agriculture project environmental services. Agricultural and Development Economics Division (ESA) of the FAO, Italy.

Alix-Garcia, J., Janvry, A.d. and Sadoulet, E. 2005b. A tale of two communities: explaining deforestation in Mexico. World Development 33(2): 219–35.

Alix-Garcia, J., Shapiro, E. and Sims, K. 2010. Forest conservation and slippage: evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Programme. Working paper, 6 August.

Alpizar, F., Blackman, A. and Pffaf, A. 2007. Payments for ecosystem services; measurements with impact. Resources 165, Resources for the Future, Washington DC.

Appleton, A.F. 2002. How New York City used an ecosystem services strategy carried out through an urban–rural partnership to preserve the pristine quality of its drinking water and save billions of dollars, and what lessons it teaches about using ecosystem services. The Katoomba Conference Tokyo, November.

Ardón, M. and Barrantes, G. 2003. Sistematización de experiencias piloto de PSA relacionadas con los recursos hídricos a nivel municipal (acción conjunta entre los Proyectos Regionales PASOLAC y CBM). Experiencias de PSA en: Jesús de Otoro, Campamento (Honduras) Tacuba, Gualabo (El Salvador) y San Pedro del Norte, Regadío (Nicaragua). Prepared for PASOLAC and the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor initiative, Central America.

Arriagada, R.A., Ferraro, P., Sills, E., Pattanayak, S. and Cordero, S. 2010. Do payments for environmental services reduce deforestation? A farm level evaluation from Costa Rica, Working Paper from Georgia State University.

Asquith, N., Vargas, M. and Wunder, S. 2008. Selling two environmental services: in-kind payments for bird habitat and watershed protection in Los Negros, Bolivia. Ecological Economics 65(4): 675–84.

Asquith, N. and Vargas, M.T. 2007. Fair deals for watershed services in Bolivia. Natural Resource Issues, IIED, London. Asquith, N. and Wunder, S. 2008. Payments for watershed services: the Bellagio Conversations. IIED, Blue Moon Fund, CGIAR, DFID, EcoFund Foundation.

Aylward, B. 2005. Towards watershed science that matters. Hydrological Processes 19(13):2643–647.

Barton, D. 2010. Assessment of existing and proposed policy instruments for biodiversity conservation: Norway case study. Report for the Policymix project, prepared by the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA).

Barton, D., Faith, D.P., Rusch, G., Acevedo, M. and Castro, M. 2009. Environmental service payments: evaluating biodiversity conservation trade-offs and cost-efficiency in the Osa Conservation Area, Costa Rica. Journal of Environmental Management 90(2): 901–11.

Baylis, K., Peplow, S., Rausser, G. and Simon, L. 2008. Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: a comparison. Ecological Economics 65(4):753–64.

Bennett, M.T. and Xu, J. 2008. China’s Sloping Land conversion program: institutional innovation or business as usual? Ecological Economics 65(4) 699–711.

Berttram, D. 2011. Positioning the Kagera TAMP project in the PES landscape of East Africa, FAO (NRL), Italy.

Blackman, A. and Woodward, R.T. 2010. User financing in a national payments for environmental services program: Costa Rican hydropower. Ecological Economics 69(8):1626–638. Blanco, R. and Rojo, P. 2005. Fideicomiso para el pago de servicios ambientales forestales Coatepec, Veracruz.

Bond, I., 2008. Payments for ecosystem services in east and southern Africa: assessing prospects and pathways forward, In: Katoomba Group (ed.), Scoping of Potential Payment for Ecosystem Service Sites. The Katoomba Group. Washington D.C

Bond, I., Grieg-Gran, M., Wertz-Kanounnikoff, S., Hazlewood, P., Wunder, S. and Angelsen, A. 2009. Incentives to sustain forest ecosystem services: a review and lessons for REDD. Natural Resource Issues. IIED, London, UK with CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia and World Resources Institute, Washington DC, USA.

Bonell, M., Bruijnzeel, L.A., 2005. Forest, Water and People in the Humid Tropics. Cambridge University Press.

Bruijnzeel, L.A. 2004. Hydrological functions of tropical forests: not seeing the soil for the trees? Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 104(1):185–228.

Bruijnzeel, L.A., Kappelle, M., Mulligan, M. and Scatena, F.N. 2010. Tropical montane cloud forests: state of knowledge and sustainability perspectives in a changing world. In: Bruijnzeel, L.A., Scatena, F.N. and Hamilton, L.S. (eds) Tropical montane cloud forests: science for conservation and management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Buytaert, W., Celleri, R., De Bievre, B., Cisneros, F., Wyseure, G., Deckers, J. and Hofsteade, R. 2006. Human impact on the hydrology of the Andean páramos. Earth- Science Reviews 79, 53–72.

Calder, I. 2005. The Blue Revolution: Land use and integrated water resources management. Earthscan, London, UK. Calder, I.R. and Aylward, B. 2006. Forest and floods: moving to an evidence-based approach to watershed and integrated flood management. Water International 31(1).

Canales, E. 2006. Cuencas y Ciudades II, un proyecto de recaudacion voluntaria. Zona sujeta a conservacion ecologica, Sierra de Zapaliname, Coahuila, Mexico. International Workshop for Ecosystem Services: Products and Market Development. Forest Trends/Katoomba group and the Sierra Gorda Ecological Group, San Juan del Rio, Querétaro. Mexico.

Cannon, P., Hill, B. and McCarthy, C. 2010. Watersheds of Quito: A consultancy to Bolster Fonag’s contribution. Technical report. USAID, USA.

Casasola, F., Ibrahim, M., Sepúlveda, C., Ríos, N. and Tobar, D. 2009. ‘Implementación de sistemas silvopastoriles y el pago de servicios ambientales en Esparza, Costa Rica: una herramienta para la adaptación al cambio climático en fincas ganaderas’. In: Sepúlveda C.and Ibrahim M. (eds) Políticas y sistemas de incentivos para el fomento y adopción de buenas prácticas agrícolas: como una medida para adaptación al cambio climático en América Central, Turrialba.

CCI, BirdLife International. 2011. Measuring and monitoring ecosystem services at the site scale. Cambridge Conservation Initiative and BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK.

Claassen, R., Cattaneo, A. and Johansson, R. 2008. Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs: U.S. experience in theory and practice. Ecological Economics 65(4):737–52.

Crespo, P., Celleri, R., Buytaert, W., Feyen, J., Iñiguez, V., Borja, P. and de Bievre, B. 2009. ‘Land use change impacts on the hydrology of wet Andean páramo ecosystems’. In: Status and Perspectives of Hydrology in Small Basins (Proceedings of the Workshop held at Goslar-Hahnenklee, Germany, 30 March–2 April 2009). IAHS Publ. 336, 2010, 71–76.

Currie, J. and Gahvari, F. 2007. Transfers in cash and in kind: theory meets the data. Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association 46(2):333–83.

Dasgupta, P. 2007. Report on the self-evaluation of RUPES. World Agroforestry Centre, Bogor, Indonesia.

DWAF. 2006. Working for water strategic Plan 2004/2005– 2007/2008. Internal draft South African Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria.

Echavarria, M., Vogel, J., Alban, M. and Meneses, F. 2004. The impacts of payments for watershed services in Ecuador: emerging lessons from Pimampiro and Cuenca. IIED, London.

EEA, 2010. Distribution and targeting of the CAP budget from a biodiversity perspective. EEA Technical Report, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.

Engel, S., Pagiola, S. and Wunder, S. 2008. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecological Economics 65(4), 663–74.

Espinoza, A. Undated. Mecanismos de compensación relacionando bosques con agua en Centroamérica y El Caribe de habla hispana. INAFOR, FAO, p. 11.

FAO, 2010. Informe técnico Visita 1: Intercambio de experiencias Iniciativa PSAH Estelí, El Regadío. Instituto Nacional Forestal, FAO-facility, Managua.

FAO/REDLACH, 2004. Electronic forum on payment schemes for environmental services in watersheds. Final report. FAO, Italy.

Ferraro, P. 2009. Regional review of payments for watershed services: Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 28, 525–50.

Ferraro, P.J. and Pattanayak, S.K. 2006. Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. PLoS Biology 4(4):482–88.

Freeman, A.M. 1993. The measurement of environmental and resource values. Resources for the Future. Washington DC.

Grieg-Gran, M., Porras, I. and Wunder, S. 2005. How can market mechanisms for forest environmental services help the poor? Preliminary lessons from Latin America. World Development 33(9):1511–527.

Gutrich, J., Donovan, D., Finucane, M., Focht, W., Hitzhusen, F., Manopimoke, S., McCauley, D., Norton, B., Sabatier, P., Salzman, J. and Sasmitawidjaja, V. 2005. Science in the public process of ecosystem management: lessons from Hawaii, Southeast Asia, Africa and the US Mainland. Journal of Environmental Management 76(3):197–209.

Harto Widodo, R., Suyanto, S., Verbist, B., Lusiana, B. and Purnomosidhi, P. 2006. Rewarding communities for keeping rivers clean? First steps in a RiverCare Program in West Lampung, Indonesia. International Symposium on Community Activities for the Conservation of Water Environment. ICRAF, Bangkok, Thailand.

Hoffman, C.A. 2009. Evaluation of payments for ecosystem services in the Valley Region of Bolivia. Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.

Holwerda, F., Bruijnzeel, L.A., Muñoz-Villers, L.E., Equihua, M. and Asbjornsen, H. 2010. Rainfall and cloud water interception in mature and secondary lower montane cloud forests of central Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Hydrology 384(1–2):84–96.

Ibrahim, M., Casasola, F., Villanueva, C., Murgueitio, E., Ramirez, E., Sáenz, J. and Sepúlveda, C. 2010. Payment for environmental services as a tool to encourage the adoption of silvo-pastoral systems and restoration of agricultural landscapes dominated by cattle in Latin America. CATIE, Costa Rica.

IFAD, 2012. Upper Tana Catchment natural resource management project. Project design report.The International Fund for Agricultural Development, Italy.

Jeanes, K., van Noordwijk, M., Joshi, L., Widayati, A., Farida and Leimona, B. 2006. Rapid hydrological appraisal in the context of environmental service rewards. World Agroforestry Centre – ICRAF, SEA Regional Office, Bogor, Indonesia, p. 56.

Juutinen, A., Mönkkönen, M. and Ylisirniö, A.-L. 2009. Does a voluntary conservation program result in a representative protected area network? The case of Finnish privately owned forests. Ecological Economics 68(12):2974–984.

Kaimowitz, D. 2004. ‘Useful myths and intractable truths: the politics of the links between forests and water in Central America’. In: Bonell, M. and Bruinjzeel, L.A. (eds) Forests, Water and People in the Humid Tropics: Past, present, and future hydrological research for integrated land and water management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 86–98.

Kalacska, M., Sanchez-Azofeifa, G.A., Rivard, B., Calvo- Alvarado, J.C. and Quesada, M. 2008. Baseline assessment for environmental services payments from satellite imagery: a case study from Costa Rica and Mexico. Journal of Environmental Management 88(2):348–59.

Kosoy, N., Martínez-Tuna, M., Muradian, R. and Martínez-Alier, J. 2005. Payment for environmental services in watersheds: insights from a comparative study of two cases in Central America. Convention on Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, Geneva. Kosoy, N., Martínez-Tuna, M., Muradian, R. and Martínez-Alier, J. 2007. Payments for environmental services in watersheds: insights from a comparative study of three cases in Central America. Ecological Economics 61(2–3), 446–55.

Kroeger, T., Casey, F. 2007. An assessment of market-based approaches to providing ecosystem services on agricultural lands. Ecological Economics 64(2): 321–32.

Laffont, J.-J. and Martimort, D. 2002. The Theory of Incentives. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ, USA.

Landell-Mills, N. and Porras, I. 2002. Silver bullet or fools’ gold? A global review of markets for forest environmental services and their impacts on the poor. IIED, London.

Le Maitre, D.C., Versveld, D.B. and Chapman, R.A. 2000. The impact of invading alien plants on surface water resources in South Africa: a preliminary assessment. Water SA 26, 397–408.

Le Tellier, V., Carrasco, A. and Asquith, N. 2009. Attempts to determine the effects of forest cover on stream flow by direct hydrological measurements in Los Negros, Bolivia. Forest Ecology and Management 258(9): 1881–888.

Lechuga, C. 2009. Zapalinamé: connecting cities and watersheds in Mexico. Ecosystems Marketplace, Washington DC.

Lee, M. 2012. Coffee farmers in Peru look to carbon market to fund climate adaptation. The Ecologist, May 14.

Leshan, J., Xiaoyun, L. and Ting, Z. 2005. Development contract with terms of watershed conservation: a win-win opportunity for development and environment in the Meijiang Watershed, Ningdu County, Jiangxi Province, China. China Agricultural University, Beijing.

Manson, R.H. 2008. Efectos del uso del suelo sobre la provisión de servicios ambientales hidrológicos: monitoreo del impacto del PSAH. Informe Final. Instituto de Ecología, A.C.

Marín, X., Ogier, M., Pérez, C. and Martínez, M. 2006. Elementos metodológicos para la implementación de pagos por servicios ambientales hídricos al nivel municipal en Centroamérica Programa para la Agricultura Sostenible en Laderas de América Central PASOLAC. Tegucigalpa, p. 37.

Mayer, A.L. and Tikka, P.M. 2006. Biodiversity conservation incentive programs for privately owned forests. EnvironmentalScience & Policy 9(7–8):614–25.

Montagnini, F. and Finney, C. 2010. Payments for environmental services in Latin America as a tool for restoration and rural development. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 40(3):285–97.

Muñoz-Piña, C., Guevara, A., Torres, J.M. and Braña Varela, J. 2008. Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico’s forests: analysis, negotiations and results. Ecological Economics 65(4):725–36.

Muñoz-Piña, C., Rivera, M., Cisneros, A. and García, H. 2011. Retos de la focalización del Programa de Pago por los Servicios Ambientales en México. Revista Española de Estudios Agrosociales y Pesqueros 228: 87–112.

Muñoz-Villers, L.E., Holwerda, F., Gomez-Cardenas, M., Equihua, M., Asbjornsen, H., Bruijnzeel, L.A., Marin-Castro, L. and Tobon, C. 2010. Water balances of old-growth and regenerating montane cloud forests in central Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Hydrology draft.

Muñoz, C., Guevara, A., Bulas, J.M., Torres, J.M. and Braña Varela, J. 2005. Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico’s forests.Ecological Economics, 65(4): 725–36.

NSW, 2009. Hunter River salinity trading scheme: 2008–09 performance. New South Wales Government: Environment, Climate Change and Water, Sydney.

Obando, M. 2007. Evolución de la experiencia de los PSA hídricos en Nicaragua: El caso de los Caballos, Municipio de San Pedro del Norte, Chinandega, Programa para la Agricultura Sostenible en Laderas de América Central. PASOLAC, SDC, COSUDE, Tegucigalpa.

Ortiz, E., Sage, L.F. and Borge, C. 2003. Impacto del Programa de Pago por Servicios Ambientales en Costa Rica como medio de reducción de la pobreza en los medios rurales. RUTA, San José.

Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective action. Political economy of institutions and decisions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Pagiola, S., Arcenas, A. and Platais, G. 2005. Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An exploration of the issues and the evidence to date from Latin America. World Development 33(2):237–253.

Pattanayak, S.K., Wunder, S. and Ferraro, P. 2010. Show me the money: do payments supply environmental services in developing countries? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 4(2):1–21.

Perrot-Maitre, D. 2006. The Vittel payments for ecosystem services: a ‘perfect’ PES case? IIED, London, UK.

Pfaff, A., Robalino, J. and Sánchez-Azofeifa, G.A. 2008. Payments for environmental services: empirical analysis for Costa Rica. Working Papers Series, Terry Stanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.

Porras, I. 2008. Forests, flows and markets for watershed environmental services: evidence from Costa Rica and Panama. School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences. University Of Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.

Porras, I. 2010. Fair and green? The social impacts of payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. IIED, London, UK.

Porras, I., 2010b. ,The case of La Esperanza Hydroelectric Power Company, Costa Rica,. In: TEEB (ed.) PES As a Strategy to Minimize Risk, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TTEB), Geneva.

Porras, I., Grieg-Gran, M. and Neves, N. 2008. All that glitters: a review of payments for watershed services in developing countries. IIED, London, UK.

Porras, I., Chacón-Cascante, A., Robalino, J. andOosterhuis, F., 2011. PES and other economic beasts: assessing PES within a policy mix in conservation, 9th International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics Istanbul.

Porras, I., Miranda, M. and Barton, D.N., Chacón-Cascante, A. 2012. De Rio a Rio+: Lecciones de 20 años de experiencia en servicios ambientales en Costa Rica. Shaping Sustainable Markets. IIED, London, UK.

Postel, S. and Thompson, B.H.J. 2005. Watershed protection: capturing the benefits of nature’s water supply services. Natural Resources Forum 29(2):98–108.

Prakash Fernandez, A. 2003. Watershed management: are loans more effective in promoting participation and ownership than contribution? Rural management Systems Series 36, Myrada, Bangalore.

RedLAC 2010. Environmental funds and payments for ecosystem services. RedLAC Capacity Building Project for Environmental Funds.

Reis, N., Sydness, G. and Barton, D. 2007. Feasibility of payments for watershed services in India and Asia. Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Oslo.

Robalino, J., Pffaf, A., Sánchez-Azofeifa, A., Alpízar, F., León, C. and Rodríguez, C.M. 2008. Deforestation impacts of environmental services payments. Discussion Paper Series. Environment for Development; Resources for the Future, Washington DC.

Robertson, N. and Wunder, S. 2005. Fresh tracks in the forest: assessing incipient payments for environmental services in Bolivia. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.

Rojas, M. and Aylward, B. 2003a. What are we learning from experiences with markets for environmental services in Costa Rica? A review and critique of the literature. IIED, London, UK.

Rojas, M. and Aylward, B. 2003b. What are we learning from experiences with markets for environmental services in Costa Rica? A review and critique of the literature. IIED, London, UK.

Ross, M., Depro, B. and Pattanayak, S. 2006. Assessing the economy-wide effects of the PSA Program. Paper presented at the workshop on Costa Rica’s experience with payments for environmental services, San José, 25–26 September.

Saberwal, V.K. 1998. Science and the desiccationist discourse of the 20th Century. Environment and History 4(3): 309–43.

Salas, J. 2004. Case study of the Maasin Watershed: analyzing the role of institutions in a watershed-use conflict, developing mechanisms for rewarding the upland poor in Asia for environmental services they provide. RUPES, World Agroforestry Centre, Nairobi.

Sánchez-Azofeifa, A., Pfaff, A., Robalino, J. and Boomhower, J. 2007. Costa Rica’s Payment for Environmental Services Program: intention, implementation, and impact. Conservation Biology 21, 1165–173.

Sen, A. 1996. ‘The political economy of targeting’. In: D. van de Walle and K. Nead (eds.) Public spending and the poor: theory and evidence. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, USA.

Shrestha, R. and Timilsnia, G. 2002. The additionality criterion for identifying Clean Development Mechanism projects under the Kyoto Protocol. Energy Policy 30(1): 73–79.

Sierra, R. and Russman, E. 2006. On the efficiency of environmental service payments: a forest conservation assessment in the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica. Ecological Economics 59(1):131–41.

Skjeggedal, T., Gundersen, V., Harvold, K.A. and Vistad, O.I. 2010. Frivillig vern av skog-evaluering av arbeidsformen (Voluntary conservation of forest-evaluation working procedure), Samarbeidsrapport. NIBR/NINA.

Skutsch, M.M., van Laake, P.E., Zahabu, E.M., Karky, B.S and Phartiyal, P. 2009. ‘Community monitoring in REDD+’. In: Angelsen, A.w.B., M., Kanninen, M., Sills, E., Sunderlin, W. D. and Wertz-Kanounnikoff, S. (eds) Realising REDD+: National strategy and policy options. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, pp. 101–362.

Southgate, D. and Wunder, S. 2007. Paying for watershed services in Latin America: a review of current initiatives. Working Paper No. 07-07. Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Collaborative Research Support sustainable markets Program (SANREM CRSP) and Office of International Research, Education, and Development (OIRED), Virginia Tech, Blackburg, VA.

Spangenberg, J.H., Settele, J. 2010. Precisely incorrect? Monetising the value of ecosystem services. Ecological Complexity 7(3): 327–37.

Stanton, T., Echavarria, M., Hamilton, K. and Ott, C. 2010. State of watershed payments: an emerging marketplace. Ecosystem Marketplace, Washington, DC.

Stem, C. 2005. TNC and partner experiences with watershed valuation activities in the State of Chiapas, Mexico. Final report. The Nature Conservancy, USAID, USA.

Sun, C. and Chen, L. 2006. A study of policies and legislation affecting payments for watershed services in China. Developing markets for watershed protection services and improved livelihoods. Research Center of Ecological and Environmental Economics Beijing, and IIED, London.

Suyanto, S. 2010. Site Profile: RUPES Sumberjaya, RUPES Program. ICRAF, Bogor, Indonesia.

Svarstad, H., Sletten, A., Paloniemi, R., Barton, D. and Grieg-Gran, M. 2011. ‘Three types of environmental justice: from concepts to empirical studies of social impacts of policy instruments for conservation of biodiversity’. In: Tingstad, K.M.K. (ed.) Assessing the Role of Economic Instruments in Policy Mixes for Biodiversity Conservation and Ecosystem Services Provision. Report for the Policymix project, prepared by the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA).

Swallow, B., Kallesoe, M., Iftikhar, U., Van Noordwijk, M., Bracer, C., Scherr, S., Raju, K.V., Poats, S., Kumar Duraiappah, A., Ochieng, B., Mallee, H. and Rumley, R. 2009. Compensation and rewards for environmental services in the developing world: framing pantropical analysis and comparison. Ecology and Society 14(2):26.

Swallow, B., Leimona, B., Yatich, T., Velarde, S. and Puttaswamaiah, S. 2007. The conditions for effective mechanisms of compensation and rewards for environmental services. CES Scoping Study Issue Paper no.3. World Agroforestry Centre, Nairobi, Kenya.

TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity) 2011. ‘Rewarding benefits through payments and markets’, Chapter 5. In: ten Brink, P. (ed.) TEEB in National and International Policy Making. Earthscan, London.

Tikka, P. 2003. Conservation contracts in habitat protection in southern Finland. Environmental Science & Policy 6, 271–78.

Turpie, J.K., Marais, C. and Blignaut, J.N. 2008. The working for water programme: evolution of a payments for ecosystem services mechanism that addresses both poverty and ecosystem service delivery in South Africa. Ecological Economics 65(4): 788–98.

van Eijk, P., Kumar, R., 2009. Bio-rights in theory and practice: a financing mechanism for linking poverty alleviation and environmental conservation. Wetlands International, Wageningen, The Netherlands, p. 134.

Van Noordwijk, M., 2005. RUPES typology of environmental service worthy of reward In: Suyanto, S., Leimona, B., Permana, R.P. and Chandler, F. (eds.) Developing Mechanisms for Rewarding the Upland Poor in Asia for Environmental Services They Provide, World Agroforestry Centre, Bogor, Indonesia.

Veiga, F. and Gavaldão, M. 2011. Iniciativas de PSA de Conservação dos Recursos Hídricos na Mata Atlântica’. In: Guedes, I., Becker, F. (eds) Pagamento por Serviços Ambientais na Mata Atlântica. Lições aprendidas e desafios. Ministério do Meio Ambiente, Brasilia.

Villanueva, C., Ibrahim, M., Torres, K. and Torres, M. 2008. ‘Planificación agroecológica de fincas ganaderas: La experiencia de la subcuenca Copán, Honduras’. In: Desarrollo, D.d.I.y. (ed.) Serie Técnica. Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza (CATIE), Turrialba.

Waage, S., Steward, E., 2007. The new markets for environmental services: A corporate manager’s guide to trading in air, climate, water and biodiversity assets. December, Business for Social Responsibility, New York.

Wätzold, F., Mewes, M., van Apeldoorn, R., Varjopuro, R., Chmielewski, T., Veeneklaas, F., Kosola and M.-L. 2010. Cost-effectiveness of managing Natura 2000 sites: an exploratory study for Finland, Germany, the Netherlands and Poland. Biodiversity and Conservation 19(7):2053– 069.

White, D. and Minang, P. 2011. Estimating the opportunity costs of REDD+: a training manual. Version 1.3. The World Bank, CGIAR, Carbon Finance Assist, Forest Carbon Partnership, ASB.

Wunder, S. 2005. Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts. CIFOR Occasional Paper. CIFOR, Indonesia.

Wunder, S. 2008. Payments for environmental services and the poor: concepts and preliminary evidence. Environment and Development Economics 13(3):279–97.

Wunder, S. and Albán, M. 2008. Decentralized payments for environmental services: the cases of Pimampiro and PROFAFOR in Ecuador. Ecological Economics 65(4):685–98.

Wunder, S., Engel, S. and Pagiola, S. 2008. Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecological Economics 65(4): 834–52.

Wunder, S., Vargas, M.T. 2005. ‘Beyond “markets”: why terminology matters’. Editorial in The Ecosystem Marketplace, 22 March.The Katoomba Group.

Wünscher, T., Engel, S., Wunder, S. 2008. Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: a tool for boosting conservation benefits. Ecological Economics 65(4):822–33.

Xu, J., Tao, R., Xu, Z. and Bennett, M.T. 2010. China’s Sloping Land Conversion Program: does expansion equal success? Land Economics 86(2):219–44.

Xu, Z., Bennett, M., Tao, R. and Xu, J. 2004. China’s Sloping Land Conversion Program four years on: current situation, pending issues. Special Issue: Forestry in China – Policy, Consumption and Production in Forestry’s Newest Superpower. The International Forestry Review 6, 317–26.