IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/udc/wpaper/wp505.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Beneficios de Restauracion y REDD+ para Bosque Nativo en Chile: Sinergias y Trade-offs entre Servicios Ecosistemicos, Eficiencia y Reducción de Pobreza

Author

Listed:
  • Eugenio Figueroa B.
  • Enrique Calfucura T.
  • Stavros Papageorgiou
  • Juan Jose Miranda

Abstract

Este trabajo aplica el analisis de costo-beneficio para asignar territorialmente las medidas de cambio del uso de la tierra y la silvicultura (UTCUTS) incluidas en las Contribuciones Determinadas a nivel Nacional (NDC) de Chile, del periodo 2016-2020, utilizando criterios de eficiencia, de vulnerabilidad comunal al cambio climatico y pobreza, y de focalizacion de pobreza comunal. Los resultados muestran que los beneficios netos en valor presente oscilan entre USD 309 y 484 millones para el caso de manejo forestal sustentable y USD 371 y 414 millones para forestacion. El uso de criterio de eficiencia maximiza el beneficio social neto pero restringe la implementacion de las medidas a un numero menor de comunas en comparacion con criterios de vulnerabuilidad comunal al cambio climatico-pobreza y focalizacion de pobreza comunal, las cuales presentan una mayor diversidad territorial. De gran relevancia resultan ser los tradeoffs que aparecen entre asignaciones territoriales alternativas de la NDC cuando estas se hacen con un criterio restringido a maximizar el valor presente del beneficio neto del aumento en el flujo de servicios ecosistemicos provistos por los ecosistemas intervenidos en comparacion con criterios que ademas consideran reducir la pobreza y/o disminuir la vulnerabilidad al cambio climatico de las zonas mas expuestas del pais. Finalmente, cuando se consideran los precios de mercado para el carbono, los beneficios ecosistemicos no transados en mercados se vuelven cruciales para hacer socialmente rentables la aplicacion de las medidas, especialmente para el caso de forestacion.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugenio Figueroa B. & Enrique Calfucura T. & Stavros Papageorgiou & Juan Jose Miranda, 2020. "Beneficios de Restauracion y REDD+ para Bosque Nativo en Chile: Sinergias y Trade-offs entre Servicios Ecosistemicos, Eficiencia y Reducción de Pobreza," Working Papers wp505, University of Chile, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:udc:wpaper:wp505
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.uchile.cl/uploads/publicacion/e9d5f9716400ed4403ef768a5b3060ce36b7ced3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    2. Calfucura, Enrique, 2018. "Governance, Land and Distribution: A Discussion on the Political Economy of Community-Based Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 18-26.
    3. Hoehn, John P & Randall, Alan, 1989. "Too Many Proposals Pass the Benefit Cost Test," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 544-551, June.
    4. Coria, Jessica & Calfucura, Enrique, 2012. "Ecotourism and the development of indigenous communities: The good, the bad, and the ugly," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 47-55.
    5. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L. & Alló, Maria & Barrio, Melina, 2016. "Ecosystem Services and REDD: Estimating the Benefits of Non-Carbon Services in Worldwide Forests," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 246-261.
    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. Vallino, Elena & Aldahsev,Gani, 2013. "NGOs and participatory conservation in developing countries: why are there inefficiencies?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201318, University of Turin.
    2. Chenxi Li & Zhihong Zong & Haichao Qie & Yingying Fang & Qiao Liu, 2023. "CiteSpace and Bibliometric Analysis of Published Research on Forest Ecosystem Services for the Period 2018–2022," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-16, April.
    3. Stoeckl, Natalie & Farr, Marina & Larson, Silva & Adams, Vanessa M. & Kubiszewski, Ida & Esparon, Michelle & Costanza, Robert, 2014. "A new approach to the problem of overlapping values: A case study in Australia׳s Great Barrier Reef," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 61-78.
    4. Hasan-Basri, Bakti & Samdin, Zaiton & Noor Ghani, Awang, 2020. "Willingness to Pay for Conservation of Mangrove Forest in Kuala Perlis, Malaysia," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 54(3), pages 89-99.
    5. Aldashev, Gani & Vallino, Elena, 2019. "The dilemma of NGOs and participatory conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    7. Stefan Liehr & Julia Röhrig & Marion Mehring & Thomas Kluge, 2017. "How the Social-Ecological Systems Concept Can Guide Transdisciplinary Research and Implementation: Addressing Water Challenges in Central Northern Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-19, June.
    8. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    9. Nazifa Rafa & Samiha Nuzhat & Sayed Mohammad Nazim Uddin & Mukesh Gupta & Rahul Rakshit, 2021. "Ecotourism as a Forest Conservation Tool: An NDVI Analysis of the Sitakunda Botanical Garden and Ecopark in Chattogram, Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-22, November.
    10. Breffle, William S. & Muralidharan, Daya & Donovan, Richard P. & Liu, Fangming & Mukherjee, Amlan & Jin, Yongliang, 2013. "Socioeconomic evaluation of the impact of natural resource stressors on human-use services in the Great Lakes environment: A Lake Michigan case study," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 152-161.
    11. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    13. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.
    14. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    16. 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.
    17. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    18. Friedman, Rachel S. & Guerrero, Angela M. & McAllister, Ryan R.J. & Rhodes, Jonathan R. & Santika, Truly & Budiharta, Sugeng & Indrawan, Tito & Hutabarat, Joseph A. & Kusworo, Ahmad & Yogaswara, Herry, 2020. "Beyond the community in participatory forest management: A governance network perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    19. Ilde Rizzo & Anna Mignosa (ed.), 2013. "Handbook on the Economics of Cultural Heritage," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14326.
    20. Juliana Hurtado Rassi, 2020. "Gestión conjunta de ecosistemas transfronterizos: la importancia del trabajo articulado entre los Estados para la conservación de los recursos naturales. Análisis del caso particular de la “Reserva de," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1241, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:udc:wpaper:wp505. 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: Mohit Karnani (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuclcl.html .

    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.