IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v8y2014icp56-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utility engagement with payments for watershed services in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Bennett, Drew E.
  • Gosnell, Hannah
  • Lurie, Susan
  • Duncan, Sally

Abstract

This research demonstrates the growing use of payments for watershed services (PWS) by drinking water, wastewater, and electric utilities in the USA to meet a variety of objectives and considers the potential these widespread and long established institutions hold in driving PWS implementation and mainstreaming ecosystem services approaches. We developed a working typology highlighting similarities and differences among 37 identified programs covering source water protection, fire risk mitigation, point source pollution offsets, voluntary customer offsets, and hydropower mitigation. We identified six distinct mechanisms for funding the identified programs. Sales taxes and bond measures generated the most annual funding per capita while voluntary ratepayer contributions and donated water conservation savings generated the least. A variety of actors were involved in the implementation of these different programs. Notably, nonprofit organizations were critical to each program type and often acted as important intermediaries, facilitating transactions among utilities and landowners. We found these initiatives face multiple challenges including the difficulty of demonstrating the business case for investments in ecosystem services and changes in the regulatory environment that can decrease ecosystem service demand and limit flexibility in pursuing PWS approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Bennett, Drew E. & Gosnell, Hannah & Lurie, Susan & Duncan, Sally, 2014. "Utility engagement with payments for watershed services in the United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 56-64.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:8:y:2014:i:c:p:56-64
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.02.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041614000059
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.02.001?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. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    3. Lurie, Susan & Bennett, Drew E. & Duncan, Sally & Gosnell, Hannah & Hunter, Maria Lewis & Morzillo, Anita T. & Moseley, Cassandra & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Parker, Robert & White, Eric M., 2013. "PES marketplace development at the local scale: The Eugene Water and Electric Board as a local watershed services marketplace driver," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 93-103.
    4. 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.
    5. Kosoy, Nicolas & Martinez-Tuna, Miguel & Muradian, Roldan & Martinez-Alier, Joan, 2007. "Payments for environmental services in watersheds: Insights from a comparative study of three cases in Central America," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 446-455, March.
    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. Bingham, Logan Robert, 2021. "Vittel as a model case in PES discourse: Review and critical perspective," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    2. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    3. Benjamin S. Thompson, 2023. "Impact investing in biodiversity conservation with bonds: An analysis of financial and environmental risk," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 353-368, January.
    4. Margaret Walls & Yusuke Kuwayama, 2019. "Evaluating Payments for Watershed Services Programs in the United States," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(04), pages 1-38, October.
    5. Brownson, Katherine & Fowler, Laurie, 2020. "Evaluating how we evaluate success: Monitoring, evaluation and adaptive management in Payments for Watershed Services programs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. Benjamin S. Thompson, 2021. "Corporate Payments for Ecosystem Services in Theory and Practice: Links to Economics, Business, and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    7. Espécie, Mariana de Assis & de Carvalho, Pedro Ninô & Pinheiro, Maria Fernanda Bacile & Rosenthal, Vinicius Mesquita & da Silva, Leyla A. Ferreira & Pinheiro, Mariana Rodrigues de Carvalhaes & Espig, , 2019. "Ecosystem services and renewable power generation: A preliminary literature review," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 39-51.
    8. Lien, Aaron M. & Schlager, Edella & Lona, Ashly, 2018. "Using institutional grammar to improve understanding of the form and function of payment for ecosystem services programs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 21-31.
    9. Edna Tusak Loehman, 2014. "Social Investment for Sustainability of Groundwater: A Revealed Preference Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-41, August.
    10. Sheng, Jichuan & Webber, Michael, 2018. "Using incentives to coordinate responses to a system of payments for watershed services: The middle route of South–North Water Transfer Project, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 1-8.
    11. Jones, Kelly W. & Gannon, Benjamin & Timberlake, Thomas & Chamberlain, James L. & Wolk, Brett, 2022. "Societal benefits from wildfire mitigation activities through payments for watershed services: Insights from Colorado," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    12. Davies, Helen J. & Doick, Kieron J. & Hudson, Malcolm D. & Schaafsma, Marije & Schreckenberg, Kate & Valatin, Gregory, 2018. "Business attitudes towards funding ecosystem services provided by urban forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PB), pages 159-169.
    13. Natasha Haruka Collins & Courtney A. Schultz, 2021. "Why companies fund climate change projects on national forests: insights into the motivations of the Forest Service’s corporate partners," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 1-26, December.
    14. van den Belt, Marjan & Stevens, Sharon M., 2016. "Transformative agenda, or lost in the translation? A review of top-cited articles in the first four years of Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 60-72.
    15. Stefano Pagiola & Gunars Platais & Marcos Sossai, 2019. "Protecting Natural Water Infrastructure in Espírito Santo, Brazil," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(04), pages 1-24, October.
    16. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    17. Sheng, Jichuan & Webber, Michael, 2017. "Incentive-compatible payments for watershed services along the Eastern Route of China’s South-North Water Transfer Project," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 213-226.
    18. Huber-Stearns, Heidi R. & Goldstein, Joshua H. & Cheng, Antony S. & Toombs, Theodore P., 2015. "Institutional analysis of payments for watershed services in the western United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 83-93.
    19. Bremer, Leah L. & Auerbach, Dan A. & Goldstein, Joshua H. & Vogl, Adrian L. & Shemie, Daniel & Kroeger, Timm & Nelson, Joanna L. & Benítez, Silvia P. & Calvache, Alejandro & Guimarães, João & Herro, 2016. "One size does not fit all: Natural infrastructure investments within the Latin American Water Funds Partnership," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 217-236.
    20. Price, James I. & Heberling, Matthew T., 2018. "The Effects of Source Water Quality on Drinking Water Treatment Costs: A Review and Synthesis of Empirical Literature," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 195-209.
    21. Gasparatos, Alexandros & Doll, Christopher N.H. & Esteban, Miguel & Ahmed, Abubakari & Olang, Tabitha A., 2017. "Renewable energy and biodiversity: Implications for transitioning to a Green Economy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 161-184.
    22. Batista Mattos, Jonatas & Brito Silva, Kaique & da Silva, Roberto José & Mota Almeida, Thiara Helena & Sibilla Soares Póvoas, Hogana & da Silva, Paulo Vagner Ribeiro & de Araújo Góes, Ingrid Matos & d, 2019. "Natural factors or environmental neglect? Understanding the dilemma of a water crisis in a scenario of water plenty," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 509-517.

    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. Lin, Yongsheng & Dong, Zhanfeng & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Hongyu, 2020. "Estimating inter-regional payments for ecosystem services: Taking China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    2. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Vásquez, William F., 2012. "The viability of local payments for watershed services: Empirical evidence from Matiguás, Nicaragua," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 169-176.
    3. 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.
    4. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    5. 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.
    6. Bremer, Leah L. & Farley, Kathleen A. & Lopez-Carr, David & Romero, José, 2014. "Conservation and livelihood outcomes of payment for ecosystem services in the Ecuadorian Andes: What is the potential for ‘win–win’?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 148-165.
    7. Leimona, Beria & van Noordwijk, Meine & de Groot, Rudolf & Leemans, Rik, 2015. "Fairly efficient, efficiently fair: Lessons from designing and testing payment schemes for ecosystem services in Asia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 16-28.
    8. Lurie, Susan & Bennett, Drew E. & Duncan, Sally & Gosnell, Hannah & Hunter, Maria Lewis & Morzillo, Anita T. & Moseley, Cassandra & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Parker, Robert & White, Eric M., 2013. "PES marketplace development at the local scale: The Eugene Water and Electric Board as a local watershed services marketplace driver," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 93-103.
    9. Raes, Leander & Loft, Lasse & Le Coq, Jean François & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido & Van Damme, Patrick, 2016. "Towards market- or command-based governance? The evolution of payments for environmental service schemes in Andean and Mesoamerican countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 20-32.
    10. 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.
    11. Tacconi, Luca, 2012. "Redefining payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 29-36.
    12. Bösch, Matthias & Elsasser, Peter & Wunder, Sven, 2019. "Why do payments for watershed services emerge? A cross-country analysis of adoption contexts," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 111-119.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    18. 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).
    19. Kathleen McAfee, 2012. "The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 105-131, January.
    20. Alireza Daneshi & Mostafa Panahi & Saber Masoomi & Mehdi Vafakhah & Hossein Azadi & Muhammad Mobeen & Pinar Gökcin Ozuyar & Vjekoslav Tanaskovik, 2021. "Assessment of non-monetary facilities in Urmia Lake basin under PES scheme: a rehabilitation solution for the dry lake in Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10141-10172, July.

    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:ecoser:v:8:y:2014:i:c:p:56-64. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.