IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v214y2023ics0921800923002392.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who benefits from payments for ecosystem services? Policy lessons from a forest carbon sink program in China

Author

Listed:
  • Hu, Yuan
  • Kuhn, Lena
  • Zeng, Weizhong
  • Glauben, Thomas

Abstract

To secure effective and sustainable climate change policies, it is of the utmost importance to create synergies between socioeconomic and environmental development goals. Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) programs are being promoted as a suitable mechanism furthering, among others, carbon offsetting and poverty reduction in ecologically fragile areas of developing countries. Rural households are compensated for the loss of property and business income through income transfers and potential job opportunities connected to environmental programs. While the potential pro-poor effects of such policies are well recognized, the impact of PES on extremely poor households has not been systematically reviewed. Drawing on a pooled cross-sectional dataset of 5225 households in the Province of Sichuan, this paper analyzes the income and distributional effects among poor households in rural China participating in a forest carbon sink (FCS) program. To be able to make causal inferences, we employ an Instrumental Variable (IV) approach to control for potential endogeneity and self-selection. Our results indicate a strong need to adjust the PES program: While moderately poor rural households benefit from program participation, extremely poor rural households, in fact, suffer net losses. The main reason is that income reduction resulting from limited access to forest resources is compensated mainly via wage income from participating in forest tending work. Extremely poor households with low labor ability cannot make use of these job opportunities, and thus they'll not only fail to benefit but even incur losses from a PES program. While PES programs can be a viable tool for poverty reduction in underdeveloped regions due to their overall pro-poorness, they need to be accompanied by additional benefits for extremely poor rural households to avoid net losses among marginalized population groups especially.

Suggested Citation

  • Hu, Yuan & Kuhn, Lena & Zeng, Weizhong & Glauben, Thomas, 2023. "Who benefits from payments for ecosystem services? Policy lessons from a forest carbon sink program in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:214:y:2023:i:c:s0921800923002392
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107976
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800923002392
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107976?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. Laterra, Pedro & Nahuelhual, Laura & Gluch, Mariana & Sirimarco, Ximena & Bravo, Gonzalo & Monjeau, Adrián, 2019. "How are jobs and ecosystem services linked at the local scale?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 207-218.
    2. Christopher F Baum & Mark E. Schaffer & Steven Stillman, 2003. "Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(1), pages 1-31, March.
    3. repec:oup:apecpp:v:37:y:2015:i:1:p:86-106 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Li, Yi & Gong, Peichen & Ke, Jiesheng, 2021. "Development opportunities, forest use transition, and farmers' income differentiation: The impacts of Giant panda reserves in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    5. Alkire, Sabina & Foster, James, 2011. "Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 476-487.
    6. Xiangbin Kong, 2014. "China must protect high-quality arable land," Nature, Nature, vol. 506(7486), pages 7-7, February.
    7. Tao Yang, Dennis, 2004. "Education and allocative efficiency: household income growth during rural reforms in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 137-162, June.
    8. Ruggiero, Patricia G.C. & Metzger, Jean Paul & Reverberi Tambosi, Leandro & Nichols, Elizabeth, 2019. "Payment for ecosystem services programs in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: Effective but not enough," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 283-291.
    9. Gelo, Dambala & Dikgang, Johane, 2019. "Collective action and heterogeneous welfare effects: Evidence from Ethiopian villages," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 16(C).
    10. Xu, Chang & Li, Lingchao & Cheng, Baodong, 2021. "The impact of institutions on forestland transfer rents: The case of Zhejiang province in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    11. Du, Yimeng & Takeuchi, Kenji, 2019. "Can climate mitigation help the poor? Measuring impacts of the CDM in rural China," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 178-197.
    12. Locatelli, Bruno & Rojas, Varinia & Salinas, Zenia, 2008. "Impacts of payments for environmental services on local development in northern Costa Rica: A fuzzy multi-criteria analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(5), pages 275-285, April.
    13. Gren, Ing-Marie & Zeleke, Abenezer Aklilu, 2016. "Policy design for forest carbon sequestration: A review of the literature," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 128-136.
    14. Glauben, Thomas & Herzfeld, Thomas & Rozelle, Scott & Wang, Xiaobing, 2012. "Persistent Poverty in Rural China: Where, Why, and How to Escape?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 784-795.
    15. Ashish Aggarwal, 2014. "How sustainable are forestry clean development mechanism projects?—A review of the selected projects from India," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 73-91, January.
    16. Pagiola, Stefano & Arcenas, Agustin & Platais, Gunars, 2005. "Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-253, February.
    17. Juha Siikamäki & Yonjie Ji & Jintao Xu, 2015. "Post-reform Forestland Markets in China," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(2), pages 211-234.
    18. Robinson, Elizabeth J. Z. & Somerville, Scott & Albers, Heidi J., 2019. "The Economics of REDD through an Incidence of Burdens and Benefits Lens," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 165-202, April.
    19. Ma, Wanglin & Abdulai, Awudu, 2016. "Does cooperative membership improve household welfare? Evidence from apple farmers in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 94-102.
    20. Wu, Xutong & Wang, Shuai & Fu, Bojie & Zhao, Yan & Wei, Yongping, 2019. "Pathways from payments for ecosystem services program to socioeconomic outcomes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    21. Gelo, Dambala & Muchapondwa, Edwin & Koch, Steven F., 2016. "Decentralization, market integration and efficiency-equity trade-offs: Evidence from Joint Forest Management in Ethiopian villages," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 1-23.
    22. Lanjouw, Peter & Quizon, Jaime & Sparrow, Robert, 2001. "Non-agricultural earnings in peri-urban areas of Tanzania: evidence from household survey data," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 385-403, August.
    23. Wesseh, Presley K. & Lin, Boqiang, 2016. "Modeling environmental policy with and without abatement substitution: A tradeoff between economics and environment?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 34-43.
    24. Sarah Eissler, 2018. "Randall A. Bluffstone and Elizabeth J. Z. Robinson (eds.): Forest tenure reform in Asia and Africa: local control for improved livelihoods, forest management, and carbon sequestration," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 547-548, June.
    25. Cernea, Michael M. & Schmidt-Soltau, Kai, 2006. "Poverty Risks and National Parks: Policy Issues in Conservation and Resettlement," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1808-1830, October.
    26. Han Zhang & Jari Kuuluvainen & Youliang Ning & Wenmei Liao & Can Liu, 2017. "Institutional Regime, Off-Farm Employment, and the Interaction Effect: What are the Determinants of Households’ Forestland Transfer in China?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, October.
    27. Hong, Yan-Zhen & Chang, Hung-Hao, 2020. "Does digitalization affect the objective and subjective wellbeing of forestry farm households? Empirical evidence in Fujian Province of China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    28. Diafas, Iason & Barkmann, Jan & Mburu, John, 2017. "Measurement of Bequest Value Using a Non-monetary Payment in a Choice Experiment—The Case of Improving Forest Ecosystem Services for the Benefit of Local Communities in Rural Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 157-165.
    29. Sikor, Thomas, 2001. "The allocation of forestry land in Vietnam: did it cause the expansion of forests in the northwest?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-11, April.
    30. 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.
    31. Ellen Verhofstadt & Miet Maertens, 2015. "Can Agricultural Cooperatives Reduce Poverty? Heterogeneous Impact of Cooperative Membership on Farmers' Welfare in Rwanda," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 86-106.
    32. Perez, Carlos & Roncoli, Carla & Neely, Constance & Steiner, Jean L., 2007. "Can carbon sequestration markets benefit low-income producers in semi-arid Africa? Potentials and challenges," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(1), pages 2-12, April.
    33. Emi Uchida & Scott Rozelle & Jintao Xu, 2009. "Conservation Payments, Liquidity Constraints, and Off-Farm Labor: Impact of the Grain-for-Green Program on Rural Households in China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 70-86.
    34. Humphries, Shoana & Holmes, Thomas & Andrade, Dárlison Fernandes Carvalho de & McGrath, David & Dantas, Jeremias Batista, 2020. "Searching for win-win forest outcomes: Learning-by-doing, financial viability, and income growth for a community-based forest management cooperative in the Brazilian Amazon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    35. Yang, Fan & Paudel, Krishna P. & Cheng, Rongzhu & Qiu, Lingling & Zhuang, Tianhui & Zeng, Weizhong, 2018. "Acculturation of rural households participating in a clean development mechanism forest carbon sequestration program: A survey of Yi ethnic areas in Liangshan, China," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 135-145.
    36. Bluffstone, Randy & Dannenberg, Astrid & Martinsson, Peter & Jha, Prakash & Bista, Rajesh, 2020. "Cooperative behavior and common pool resources: Experimental evidence from community forest user groups in Nepal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    37. Benjamin, Emmanuel O. & Ola, Oreoluwa & Buchenrieder, Gertrud, 2018. "Does an agroforestry scheme with payment for ecosystem services (PES) economically empower women in sub-Saharan Africa?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 1-11.
    38. R A Arriagada & E O Sills & P J Ferraro & S K Pattanayak, 2015. "Do Payments Pay Off? Evidence from Participation in Costa Rica’s PES Program," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    39. Yuan feng Zhao & Zhihui Chai & Michael S Delgado & Paul V Preckel, 2016. "An empirical analysis of the effect of crop insurance on farmers’ income: results from Inner Mongolia in China," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 8(2), pages 299-313, May.
    40. Grieg-Gran, Maryanne & Porras, Ina & Wunder, Sven, 2005. "How can market mechanisms for forest environmental services help the poor? Preliminary lessons from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1511-1527, September.
    41. Wünscher, Tobias & Engel, Stefanie & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: A tool for boosting conservation benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 822-833, May.
    42. Adhikari, Bhim, 2005. "Poverty, property rights and collective action: understanding the distributive aspects of common property resource management," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 7-31, February.
    43. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    44. Ba, Feng & Liu, Jinlong & Zhu, Ting & Liu, Yonggong & Zhao, Jiacheng, 2020. "CDM forest carbon sequestration projects in western China: An analysis using actor-centered power theory," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    45. Kate Ervine, 2018. "How Low Can It Go? Analysing the Political Economy of Carbon Market Design and Low Carbon Prices," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(6), pages 690-710, November.
    46. Yuan feng Zhao & Zhihui Chai & Michael S Delgado & Paul V Preckel & Xian Xin & Xiuqing Wang, 2016. "An empirical analysis of the effect of crop insurance on farmers’ income: results from Inner Mongolia in China," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(2), pages 1-1, March.
    47. Jusrut, Poonam, 2022. "Localization of elite capture in wood charcoal production and trade: Implications for development outcomes of a forest management program in rural Senegal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    48. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    49. Hegde, Ravi & Bull, Gary Q., 2011. "Performance of an agro-forestry based Payments-for-Environmental-Services project in Mozambique: A household level analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 122-130.
    50. Oliveira Fiorini, Ana Carolina & Mullally, Conner & Swisher, Marilyn & Putz, Francis E., 2020. "Forest cover effects of payments for ecosystem services: Evidence from an impact evaluation in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    51. Ola, Oreoluwa & Menapace, Luisa & Benjamin, Emmanuel & Lang, Hannes, 2019. "Determinants of the environmental conservation and poverty alleviation objectives of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) programs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 52-66.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Liu, Zhaoyang & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2018. "Meta-Analysis of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services Programmes in Developing Countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 48-61.
    3. Sheng, Jichuan & Wang, Hui, 2022. "Participation, income growth and poverty alleviation in payments for ecosystem services: The case of China's Wolong Nature Reserve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    4. Campanhão, Ligia Maria Barrios & Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima, 2019. "Guideline framework for effective targeting of payments for watershed services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-109.
    5. Ola, Oreoluwa & Menapace, Luisa & Benjamin, Emmanuel & Lang, Hannes, 2019. "Determinants of the environmental conservation and poverty alleviation objectives of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) programs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 52-66.
    6. Iván Pérez-Rubio & Daniel Flores & Christian Vargas & Francisco Jiménez & Iker Etxano, 2021. "To What Extent Are Cattle Ranching Landholders Willing to Restore Ecosystem Services? Constructing a Micro-Scale PES Scheme in Southern Costa Rica," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.
    7. Hu, Yuan & Kuhn, Lena & Zheng, Wenxue, 2021. "Promote or Inhibit?the Effects of Forest Carbon Sinks Projects on Agricultural Development: Evidence from Sichuan, China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315381, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Long, Kaisheng & Omrani, Hichem & Pijanowski, Bryan C., 2020. "Impact of local payments for ecosystem services on land use in a developed area of China: A qualitative analysis based on an integrated conceptual framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    9. Lliso, Bosco & Pascual, Unai & Engel, Stefanie, 2021. "On the role of social equity in payments for ecosystem services in Latin America: A practitioner perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    12. Ina, Porras & Bruce, Alyward & Jeff, Dengel, 2013. "Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries," MPRA Paper 47185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Authelet, Manon & Subervie, Julie & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Asquith, Nigel & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2021. "Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    14. George A Dyer & Robin Matthews & Patrick Meyfroidt, 2012. "Is There an Ideal REDD+ Program? An Analysis of Policy Trade-Offs at the Local Level," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-12, December.
    15. Hao Li & Michael T Bennett & Xuemei Jiang & Kebin Zhang & Xiaohui Yang, 2017. "Rural Household Preferences for Active Participation in “Payment for Ecosystem Service” Programs: A Case in the Miyun Reservoir Catchment, China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, January.
    16. Perevochtchikova, Maria & Castro-Díaz, Ricardo & Langle-Flores, Alfonso & Von Thaden Ugalde, Juan José, 2021. "A systematic review of scientific publications on the effects of payments for ecosystem services in Latin America, 2000–2020," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    17. Kaczan, David & Pfaff, Alexander & Rodriguez, Luz & Shapiro-Garza, Elizabeth, 2017. "Increasing the impact of collective incentives in payments for ecosystem services," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 48-67.
    18. Hajjar, Reem & Newton, Peter & Ihalainen, Markus & Agrawal, Arun & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer & Castle, Sarah E. & Erbaugh, James T. & Gabay, Monica & Hughes, Karl & Mawutor, Samuel & Pacheco, Pablo & Scho, 2021. "Levers for alleviating poverty in forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    19. Jespersen, Kristjan & Gallemore, Caleb, 2018. "The Institutional Work of Payments for Ecosystem Services: Why the Mundane Should Matter," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 507-519.
    20. Yang, Yu & Wu, Feng & Zhang, Qian & Hong, Jiayu & Dong, Congcong, 2020. "Is It Sustainable to Implement a Regional Payment for Ecosystem Service Programme for 10 Years? An Empirical Analysis From the Perspective of Household Livelihoods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).

    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:ecolec:v:214:y:2023:i:c:s0921800923002392. 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/ecolecon .

    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.