When could payments for environmental services benefit the poor?

By David Zilberman, Leslie Lipper, N. McCarthy. Environment and Development Economics, 2008

149 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change, Soil Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c44434b980c231d75186efd3fa0c679be402fd0d

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

In Soil Science

Citations in the corpus

Trends and future potential of payment for ecosystem services to alleviate rural poverty in developing countries. (2010, background): “These important issues are beyond the scope of our analysis, but are considered in several other studies (e.g., Wunder 2008, Zilberman et al. 2008).”
Poverty, development, and environment (2010, background): “The first is to provide financing directly, through involving the poor in payment for ecosystem services schemes and other measures that enhance the environments on which the poor depend (Grieg-Gran et al., 2005; Pagiola et al., 2005; Alix-Garcia et al., 2008; Barbier, 2008; Bulte et al., 2008; Wund”
Payment for Ecosystem Services from Forests (2014, background): “Zilberman et al. (2008) present a useful microeconomic framework for understanding the potential impacts of both land diversion and working-land programs on PES sellers.”
Only One Tree from Each Seed? Environmental Effectiveness and Poverty Alleviation in Mexico's Payments for Ecosystem Services Program (2015, background): “…households (Pagiola, Arcenas, and Platais 2005, Pfaff et al. 2007, Alix-Garcia, De Janvry, Sadoulet 2008, Bulte et al. 2008, Jack, Kousky, and Sims 2008, Zilberman, Lipper, and McCarthy 2008, Leimona and Joshi 2009, Pattanayak, Wunder, and Ferraro 2010, Pfaff and Robalino 2012, Pfaff et al. 2013).”
Show Me the Money: Do Payments Supply Environmental Services in Developing Countries? (2010, background): “Zilberman et al. (2008) further suggest that the impacts of PES on the poor depend on farm size, the diversity and heterogeneity with respect to wealth, and any general equilibrium effects (e.g., increase in food or land prices because PES reduces farmland).”
Market inefficiencies and the adoption of agricultural technologies in developing countries 1 (2013, background): “In many situations, higher quality agricultural land also provides more environmental services, and as a result, involving poorer individuals in these programs may increase costs (Zilberman et al. 2008).”
The importance of local forest benefits: Economic valuation of Non-Timber Forest Products in the Eastern Arc Mountains in Tanzania (2014, unknown): “At the national and intra-community level, payments may increase the unequal distribution of welfare (Zilberman et al., 2008) and thereby hamper policy effectiveness if the poorest groups do not take part in, and hence do not benefit from, the payments scheme.”
Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services (2010, background): “…addition, we consider that a more comprehensive approach allows placing PES decision-making processes and trade-offs in the centre of any analysis (Zilberman et al., 2008) since it acknowledges that PES can be multi-goal interventions, in which aggregated measures of efficiency normally are not…”
Payments for agrobiodiversity conservation services for sustained on-farm utilization of plant and animal genetic resources (2011, background): “If a pro-poor impact is most desirable, then equity is very much determined by the wealth status of participating farmers and local consumers, who may also be affected by the program (as per Grieg-Gran et al., 2005; Zilberman et al., 2008).”