An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services

被引:523
作者
Vatn, Arild [1 ]
机构
[1] UMB, N-1432 As, Norway
关键词
PES; Environmental governance; Rights; Transaction costs; Motivation structures; Markets; Community; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; TRANSACTION COSTS; FOREST; EQUITY; MANAGEMENT; PROGRAMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.018
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
In this paper the characteristics and functioning of PES is analyzed from an institutional perspective. While in theory PES is seen as a market solution to environmental problems as an alternative to state (hierarchical) and community governance a review of a large amount of case studies shows that PES in practice depends rather fundamentally on state and/or community engagement. Hence PES are foremost a reconfiguration of the roles of public bodies and communities becoming core intermediaries or 'buyers'. First, to establish PES, rights to the land that delivers the environmental service must be clarified. This demands public action. Second, transacting over environmental amenities is very costly. Creating 'markets' for environmental services depends therefore crucially on state and community facilitation. Hence 'buyers' are often public agencies. High transaction costs also influence price setting. Payments do not follow the market format as intermediaries frequently are setting the price, with users often being unaware even of the fact that they pay. Finally, the distinction between payments as incentives and as fair compensations is emphasized. While payments may strengthen community relations and simplify action for environmental care, they may also introduce a purely instrumental logic and in some cases worsen the environmental status by crowding out environmental virtues. For the future, greater awareness of these dynamics is warranted. (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier B.V.
引用
收藏
页码:1245 / 1252
页数:8
相关论文
共 56 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1993, Transaction Costs, Markets and Hierarchies
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1971, SOCIAL COSTS PRIVATE
[3]  
Baland J. M., 1996, HALTING DEGRADATION
[4]  
Boelens R., 2002, Water rights and empowerment, P110
[5]  
Bromley D.W., 1991, ENV EC PROPERTY RIGH
[6]  
Bromley DW, 2006, SUFFICIENT REASON: VOLITIONAL PRAGMATISM AND THE MEANING OF ECONOMIC INSTITUTIONS, P1
[7]   Exploring equity and sustainable development in the new carbon economy [J].
Brown, K ;
Corbera, E .
CLIMATE POLICY, 2003, 3 :S41-S56
[8]   Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs: US experience in theory and practice [J].
Claassen, Roger ;
Cattaneo, Andrea ;
Johansson, Robert .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2008, 65 (04) :737-752
[9]   The Nature of the Firm [J].
Coase, R. H. .
ECONOMICA-NEW SERIES, 1937, 4 (16) :386-405
[10]   THE PROBLEM OF SOCIAL COST [J].
COASE, RH .
JOURNAL OF LAW & ECONOMICS, 1960, 3 (OCT) :1-44