IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v144y2016icp58-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Actual provision as an alternative criterion to improve the efficiency of payments for ecosystem services for C sequestration in semiarid vineyards

Author

Listed:
  • Galati, Antonino
  • Crescimanno, Maria
  • Gristina, Luciano
  • Keesstra, Saskia
  • Novara, Agata

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to evaluate the efficiency of the PES scheme actually used in the Sicilian rural development program, based on an egalitarian criterion, and proposing an alternative scheme in order to guarantee a greater equity and fairness of premium distribution in relation to soil carbon (C) sequestration potential. We, first, assessed the ecosystem services (ES) provided by agri-environmental measures (AEM) in terms of SOC stock increase in Sicilian vineyards. Based on these data we evaluated the efficiency of agro-environmental payments according to an egalitarian criterion and simulated the effects of the actual provision criterion adoption. Results showed that the adoption of an egalitarian criterion generates an inequitable distribution of agri-environmental payments, which could potentially be mitigated by a scheme such as actual provision. The latter, indeed, leads to a greater efficiency in the distribution of financial resources among land users and offers a higher premium to land users that, by adopting an agro-environmental practice, contribute to increase soil C sequestration.

Suggested Citation

  • Galati, Antonino & Crescimanno, Maria & Gristina, Luciano & Keesstra, Saskia & Novara, Agata, 2016. "Actual provision as an alternative criterion to improve the efficiency of payments for ecosystem services for C sequestration in semiarid vineyards," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 58-64.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:144:y:2016:i:c:p:58-64
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2016.02.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X1630021X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.02.004?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
    2. Paul J. Ferraro & R. David Simpson, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Conservation Payments," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 339-353.
    3. Dustin L. Pendell & Jeffery R. Williams & Scott B. Boyles & Charles W. Rice & Richard G. Nelson, 2007. "Soil Carbon Sequestration Strategies with Alternative Tillage and Nitrogen Sources under Risk," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(2), pages 247-268.
    4. Kemkes, Robin J. & Farley, Joshua & Koliba, Christopher J., 2010. "Determining when payments are an effective policy approach to ecosystem service provision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2069-2074, September.
    5. Tschakert, Petra, 2004. "The costs of soil carbon sequestration: an economic analysis for small-scale farming systems in Senegal," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 227-253, September.
    6. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    7. Tacconi, Luca, 2012. "Redefining payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 29-36.
    8. James Konow, 2003. "Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(4), pages 1188-1239, December.
    9. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.
    10. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    11. Pascual, Unai & Muradian, Roldan & Rodríguez, Luis C. & Duraiappah, Anantha, 2010. "Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: A conceptual approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1237-1244, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tugrul Yakupoglu & Recep Gundogan & Turgay Dindaroglu & Kadir Kusvuran & Veysel Gokmen & Jesus Rodrigo-Comino & Yeboah Gyasi-Agyei & Artemi Cerdà, 2021. "Tillage Impacts on Initial Soil Erosion in Wheat and Sainfoin Fields under Simulated Extreme Rainfall Treatments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Slaveya Petrova & Iliana Velcheva & Bogdan Nikolov & Nikola Angelov & Gergana Hristozova & Penka Zaprjanova & Ekaterina Valcheva & Irena Golubinova & Plamen Marinov-Serafimov & Petar Petrov & Veneta S, 2022. "Nature-Based Solutions for the Sustainable Management of Urban Soils and Quality of Life Improvements," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-22, April.
    3. Melánia Feszterová & Lýdia Porubcová & Anna Tirpáková, 2021. "The Monitoring of Selected Heavy Metals Content and Bioavailability in the Soil-Plant System and Its Impact on Sustainability in Agribusiness Food Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-24, June.
    4. Yu Peng & Hubert Hirwa & Qiuying Zhang & Guoqin Wang & Fadong Li, 2021. "Dryland Food Security in Ethiopia: Current Status, Opportunities, and a Roadmap for the Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-10, June.
    5. Guilherme Silva Fracarolli, 2021. "Global Markets, Local Issues: The Hegemonic Process of Agri-Food Construction to Present Challenges," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kristin Nicolaus & Jens Jetzkowitz, 2014. "How Does Paying for Ecosystem Services Contribute to Sustainable Development? Evidence from Case Study Research in Germany and the UK," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(5), pages 1-24, May.
    2. Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Bax, Vincent & Quintero, Marcela & Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S. & Groeneveld, Rolf A. & Perez-Marulanda, Lisset, 2018. "The Different Dimensions of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) Schemes: A Systematic Review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 160-183.
    3. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Windey, Catherine, 2015. "Towards a power-sensitive and socially-informed analysis of payments for ecosystem services (PES): Addressing the gaps in the current debate," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 117-125.
    4. Hejnowicz, Adam P. & Raffaelli, David G. & Rudd, Murray A. & White, Piran C.L., 2014. "Evaluating the outcomes of payments for ecosystem services programmes using a capital asset framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 83-97.
    5. Kumar, Pushpam & Kumar, Manasi & Garrett, Lucy, 2014. "Behavioural foundation of response policies for ecosystem management: What can we learn from Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 128-136.
    6. Bauchet, Jonathan & Asquith, Nigel & Ma, Zhao & Radel, Claudia & Godoy, Ricardo & Zanotti, Laura & Steele, Diana & Gramig, Benjamin M. & Chong, Andrea Estrella, 2020. "The practice of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) in the Tropical Andes: Evidence from program administrators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    7. Ma, Zhao & Bauchet, Jonathan & Steele, Diana & Godoy, Ricardo & Radel, Claudia & Zanotti, Laura, 2017. "Comparison of Direct Transfers for Human Capital Development and Environmental Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 498-517.
    8. Mangubhai, Sangeeta & Sykes, Helen & Manley, Marita & Vukikomoala, Kiji & Beattie, Madeline, 2020. "Contributions of tourism-based Marine Conservation Agreements to natural resource management in Fiji," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    9. Sattler, Claudia & Trampnau, Susanne & Schomers, Sarah & Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 31-45.
    10. Hayes, Tanya & Murtinho, Felipe, 2018. "Communal governance, equity and payment for ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 123-136.
    11. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    12. Kolinjivadi, Vijay & Adamowski, Jan & Kosoy, Nicolás, 2014. "Recasting payments for ecosystem services (PES) in water resource management: A novel institutional approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 144-154.
    13. Yan, Haiming & Yang, Huicai & Guo, Xiaonan & Zhao, Shuqin & Jiang, Qun'ou, 2022. "Payments for ecosystem services as an essential approach to improving ecosystem services: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    14. Sattler, Claudia & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "PES in a nutshell: From definitions and origins to PES in practice—Approaches, design process and innovative aspects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 2-11.
    15. Kaiser, Josef & Krueger, Tobias & Haase, Dagmar, 2023. "Global patterns of collective payments for ecosystem services and their degrees of commodification," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    16. Li, Ruiqian & van den Brink, Margo & Woltjer, Johan, 2017. "Market-based instruments for the governance of coastal and marine ecosystem services: An analysis based on the Chinese case," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 71-81.
    17. Teo Dang Do & Anchana NaRanong, 2019. "Livelihood and Environmental Impacts of Payments for Forest Environmental Services: A Case Study in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-22, August.
    18. Derissen, Sandra & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2013. "What are PES? A review of definitions and an extension," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 12-15.
    19. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    20. Pham, Thu Thuy & Loft, Lasse & Bennett, Karen & Phuong, Vu Tan & Dung, Le Ngoc & Brunner, Jake, 2015. "Monitoring and evaluation of Payment for Forest Environmental Services in Vietnam: From myth to reality," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 220-229.

    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:eee:agisys:v:144:y:2016:i:c:p:58-64. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    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.