Institutional dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services: An analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme

By E. Corbera, Carmen González Soberanis, K. Brown. 2009

370 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/40452233519a9da38e6783740cd7535393fa8e05

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism (2010, background): “Some PES schemes function as policy instruments through which it is possible to subsidise environmental stewardship (Corbera et al., 2009; Corbera and Brown, 2008) while others are actual markets which are dependent on other existing commodities.”
Payments for Ecosystem Services: Rife With Problems and Potential—For Transformation Towards Sustainability (2017, background): “Broadbrush arguments can impede progress, because appropriateness of program designs depends on various dimensions of context (Wunder et al., 2008; Corbera et al., 2009; Kemkes et al., 2010; Brooks et al., 2012; Muradian et al., 2013).”
An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services (2010, background): “In relation to this, Corbera et al. (2009) document a range of problems for providers to get access to necessary information.”
Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries (2013, methodology): “Corbera et al. (2009) define institutions as ‘‘formal and informal rules which regulate what to do and not to do in a given situation’’ and conceptualize PES as ‘‘new institutions designed to enhance or change natural resource managers’ behavior in relation to ecosystem management through the…”
Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global (2010, background): “For example, the literature frequently refers to carbon sequestration as non-rival (e.g. Corbera et al., 2009).”
Rights to Land, Forests and Carbon in REDD+: Insights from Mexico, Brazil and Costa Rica (2011, background): “Although depending on institutional conditions and self-governance capacity, rural communities have proved to be effective forest stewards, engaging in community forest management and payment for environmental services related-projects, among others [41,74,113].”
The Different Dimensions of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) Schemes: A Systematic Review (2018, background): “, 2015), by accounting for their institutional aspects (Corbera et al., 2009), equity considerations (Pascual et al.”
Offsetting Benefits? Analyzing Access to Forest Carbon (2010, background): “In another carbon-forestry project operating on communal lands in Mexico, formal and informal right holders(6) got differential economic rewards from their tree-planting tasks, thus leading to local mistrust (Corbera et al, 2009b).”
Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services (2010, neutral): “…PES scheme is the one implemented in Mexico, where in some cases the government allocates payments for reforestation and forest conservation to peasant communities which hold forests in common and invest all or a share of payments in collective goods and development projects (Corbera et al., 2009).”
Effects of Payment for Environmental Services (PES) on Deforestation and Poverty in Low and Middle Income Countries: A Systematic Review (2014, background): “Poverty alleviation effects of PES will depend on the targeting of the program and whether local institutions represent the interest of the poor and therefore provide accountability mechanisms to ensure that benefits accrue to the poor (Corbera et al., 2009).”
Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico (2011, methodology): “The same problem happened with PSA-CABSA, the carbon sequestration PES (Corbera et al., 2009).”
Blue carbon: : Knowledge gaps, critical issues, and novel approaches (2014, background): “wetlandmitigation banking, for instance – and PES –watershed protection or carbon sequestration– in thatMES aremore likely to have a commercial (for-profit) aspect (Corbera et al., 2009; Gómez-Baggethun et al., 2010).”