IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/anr/reseco/v12y2020p209-234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Payments for Environmental Services: Past Performance and Pending Potentials

Author

Listed:
  • Sven Wunder
  • Jan Börner
  • Driss Ezzine-de-Blas
  • Sarah Feder
  • Stefano Pagiola

Abstract

We develop a theory of change for payments for environmental services (PES) to review their imminent strengths and weaknesses in light of a growing body of impact evaluation studies. We show that PES are probably at least as environmentally additional as other conservation tools, based on the limited evidence. The original vision of PES as being direct, flexible, and potentially effective remains valid, but PES design and implementation have to be upgraded in their economic functioning to better realize this potential. Adverse self-selection, inadequate administrative targeting, and ill-enforced conditionality constitute three key obstacles that may considerably hamper PES success. Policies such as spatial targeting to service density, threat and cost levels, and payment differentiation can alleviate the design challenges. PES site selection needs to further move into high-threat areas. Making adequate PES design choices also requires the political will to boost environmental effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Sven Wunder & Jan Börner & Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sarah Feder & Stefano Pagiola, 2020. "Payments for Environmental Services: Past Performance and Pending Potentials," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 209-234, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:anr:reseco:v:12:y:2020:p:209-234
    DOI: 10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094206
    Download Restriction: Full text downloads are only available to subscribers. Visit the abstract page for more information.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-094206?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:anr:reseco:v:12:y:2020:p:209-234. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: http://www.annualreviews.org (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.annualreviews.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.