IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v15y2013i4p1037-1048.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hydrological benefits in the context of Brazilian environmental services program

Author

Listed:
  • Dulce Rodrigues
  • Paulo Oliveira
  • Teodorico Alves Sobrinho
  • Eduardo Mendiondo

Abstract

The Brazilian program of payment for environmental services (PES) is based on ranges of potential erosion decrease (ED) from soil and water conservation proposals estimated from the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Changes in land use and land cover (LULC) result in many alterations of the basin water balance. Therefore, to contribute to the methodological development of Brazilian PES, this paper proposes a quantification of hydrological benefits based on conservation measures. We propose basing the PES program on adding the potential water storage increase (WSI) parameter estimated from the runoff curve number model. Two LULC change scenarios were run considering conservation measures on degraded areas. We found that indicators of ED and WSI were compatible tools for driving the eligibility of soil and water conservation measures. However, the water storage parameter seems to be better at managing the PES mechanism because it is based on water prices and can contribute to appreciation of the efforts performed by the rural producers. The use of the SCS-CN method presents greater feasibility as a tool for the implementation of PES programs in ungauged basins. Thus, an analysis of the success of the innovation proposal of the Brazilian PES program allows inferences to be made about the quantification and financial valuation of hydrological benefits of the potential storage increase and current water price. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Dulce Rodrigues & Paulo Oliveira & Teodorico Alves Sobrinho & Eduardo Mendiondo, 2013. "Hydrological benefits in the context of Brazilian environmental services program," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 1037-1048, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:15:y:2013:i:4:p:1037-1048
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-012-9424-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10668-012-9424-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-012-9424-y?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. Seidl, Andrew F. & Silva, Joao dos Santos Vila de & Moraes, Andre Steffens, 2001. "Cattle ranching and deforestation in the Brazilian Pantanal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 413-425, March.
    2. Grolleau, Gilles & McCann, Laura M.J., 2012. "Designing watershed programs to pay farmers for water quality services: Case studies of Munich and New York City," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 87-94.
    3. Mohamed Elhakeem & Athanasios Papanicolaou, 2009. "Estimation of the Runoff Curve Number via Direct Rainfall Simulator Measurements in the State of Iowa, USA," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(12), pages 2455-2473, September.
    4. Muradian, Roldan & Rival, Laura, 2012. "Between markets and hierarchies: The challenge of governing ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 93-100.
    5. Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio & Maldonado, Jorge Higinio & Wunder, Sven & Borda-Almanza, Carlos, 2012. "Heterogeneous users and willingness to pay in an ongoing payment for watershed protection initiative in the Colombian Andes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 126-134.
    6. Jack, B. Kelsey, 2009. "Upstream-downstream transactions and watershed externalities: Experimental evidence from Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1813-1824, April.
    7. 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)

    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. Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Corbera, Esteve & Lapeyre, Renaud, 2019. "Payments for Environmental Services and Motivation Crowding: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 434-443.
    2. Hong-Zhen Zhang & Ling-Yun He & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2023. "Can Transverse Eco-compensation Mechanism Correct Resource Misallocation in Watershed Environmental Governance? A Cost-benefit Analysis of the Pilot Project of Xin’an River in China," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(4), pages 947-973, April.
    3. Zanella, Matheus A. & Schleyer, Christian & Speelman, Stijn, 2014. "Why do farmers join Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes? An Assessment of PES water scheme participation in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 166-176.
    4. 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.
    5. Li, Guifang & Shi, Minjun & Zhou, Dingyang, 2021. "How much will farmers be compensated for water reallocation from agricultural water to the local ecological sector on the edge of an oasis in the Heihe River Basin?," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    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. 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.
    8. Cailian Hao & Denghua Yan & Mohammed Gedefaw & Tianling Qin & Hao Wang & Zhilei Yu, 2021. "Accounting of Transboundary Ecocompensation Standards Based on Water Quantity Allocation and Water Quality Control Targets," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(6), pages 1731-1756, April.
    9. Rodríguez-Robayo, Karla Juliana & Merino-Perez, Leticia, 2017. "Contextualizing context in the analysis of payment for ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 259-267.
    10. Le Coq, Jean-François & Froger, Geraldine & Pesche, Denis & Legrand, Thomas & Saenz, Fernando, 2015. "Understanding the governance of the Payment for Environmental Services Programme in Costa Rica: A policy process perspective," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 253-265.
    11. Hausknost, Daniel & Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron Jit, 2017. "The political dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES): Cascade or stairway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 109-118.
    12. Brian Witt, 2019. "Evaluating the Effects of a Minimalist Deliberative Framework on the Willingness to Participate in a Payment for Ecosystem Services Program," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, June.
    13. Berthet, Alice & Vincent, Audrey & Fleury, Philippe, 2021. "Water quality issues and agriculture: An international review of innovative policy schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    14. Maca-Millán, Stefany & Arias-Arévalo, Paola & Restrepo-Plaza, Lina, 2021. "Payment for ecosystem services and motivational crowding: Experimental insights regarding the integration of plural values via non-monetary incentives," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    15. 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.
    16. Gáfaro, Margarita & Mantilla, Cesar, 2021. "Environmental valuation using bargaining games: an application to water," OSF Preprints tcfyb, Center for Open Science.
    17. Yaella Depietri & Lorenzo Guadagno & Margaretha Breil, 2013. "Urban Watershed Services For Improved Ecosystem Management and Risk Reduction, Assessment Methods and Policy Instruments: State of the Art," Working Papers 2013.101, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Scemama, Pierre & Levrel, Harold, 2019. "Influence of the Organization of Actors in the Ecological Outcomes of Investment in Restoration of Biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 71-79.
    19. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    20. 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.

    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:spr:endesu:v:15:y:2013:i:4:p:1037-1048. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.