Examining equity: A multidimensional framework for assessing equity in payments for ecosystem services

被引:387
作者
McDermott, Melanie [1 ]
Mahanty, Sango [2 ]
Schreckenberg, Kate [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Rutgers State Univ, Dept Human Ecol, Piscataway, NJ 08855 USA
[2] Australian Natl Univ, Coll Asia & Pacific, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia
[3] Univ Southampton, Fac Engn & Environm, Southampton SO9 5NH, Hants, England
[4] Univ Southampton, Inst Life Sci, Southampton SO9 5NH, Hants, England
基金
英国经济与社会研究理事会; 英国自然环境研究理事会;
关键词
Equity; PES; REDD; Ecosystem services; Justice; PARTICIPATORY FOREST MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES; COMMUNITY FORESTRY; JUSTICE; ACCESS; POOR; SUSTAINABILITY; PROPERTY; BENEFITS; POVERTY;
D O I
10.1016/j.envsci.2012.10.006
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Concern over social equity dominates current debates about payments for ecosystem services and reduced deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+). Yet, despite the apprehension that these initiatives may undermine equity, the term is generally left undefined. This paper presents a systematic framework for the analysis of equity that can be used to examine how local equity is affected as the global value of ecosystem services changes. Our framework identifies three dimensions that form the content (the what) of equity. The first, distributive equity, addresses the distribution of benefits and costs. The second, procedural equity, refers to decision-making. These are linked by the third dimension, contextual equity, which incorporates the pre-existing conditions that limit or facilitate people's access to decision-making procedures, resources and, thereby, benefits. The framework then asks how these dimensions are shaped by the scale and target group of concern (who), the framing of goals with respect to equity (why), and, crucially, how the decisions about the content, target and aims of equity are taken. By spurring debate around the fundamental ethical values at stake, this framework can guide analysts, policymakers and planners towards more open and inclusive processes for defining equity, along with affirmative efforts to engage marginalised people. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:416 / 427
页数:12
相关论文
共 84 条
[1]  
Agrawal A., 2001, COMMUNITY BASED CONS
[2]  
Angelsen A., 2009, REALISING REDD NATL
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2010, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2011, Human Development Report
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2010, Oxford English Dictionary: The Definitive Record of the English Language
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Instruments for sustainable private sector forestry series
[7]   Extraction, inequality and indigenous peoples: Insights from Bolivia [J].
Bebbington, Denise Humphreys .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2013, 33 :438-446
[8]   Irrigated Landscapes, Produced Scarcity, and Adaptive Social Institutions in Rajasthan, India [J].
Birkenholtz, Trevor .
ANNALS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHERS, 2009, 99 (01) :118-137
[9]   Exploring equity and sustainable development in the new carbon economy [J].
Brown, K ;
Corbera, E .
CLIMATE POLICY, 2003, 3 :S41-S56
[10]  
Colchester M., 2007, Forest Peoples Programme