IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/devchg/v45y2014i6p1310-1331.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unequal Access to Payments for Ecosystem Services: The Case of Costa Rica

Author

Listed:
  • David M. Lansing

Abstract

type="main"> Using Costa Rica's experience with its payments for ecosystem services (PES) programme, this article examines how and why some groups come to be excluded from participating in the programme. It demonstrates that Costa Rica's PES programme results in payments that generally go to larger landowners and tend to exclude certain kinds of smallholders, and that these patterns occur despite concerted state efforts to include the rural poor. The author argues that access exclusions found in PES are the result of historical patterns of agrarian settlement interacting with the state's inability to recognize certain forms of property claims in the context of PES, with the latter condition emerging through ongoing efforts to transform the administration of the nation's property regime in ways that will render it more legible to markets. This case study shows the importance of understanding how access restrictions emerge from the complex relations between multiple state institutions and agrarian producers in the implementation of PES.

Suggested Citation

  • David M. Lansing, 2014. "Unequal Access to Payments for Ecosystem Services: The Case of Costa Rica," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 45(6), pages 1310-1331, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:devchg:v:45:y:2014:i:6:p:1310-1331
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/dech.12134
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Noel Castree, 2008. "Neoliberalising Nature: The Logics of Deregulation and Reregulation," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(1), pages 131-152, January.
    2. Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 712-724, May.
    3. Esteve Corbera & Katrina Brown, 2010. "Offsetting Benefits? Analyzing Access to Forest Carbon," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(7), pages 1739-1761, July.
    4. 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.
    5. Sarah Milne & Bill Adams, 2012. "Market Masquerades: Uncovering the Politics of Community-level Payments for Environmental Services in Cambodia," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 133-158, January.
    6. David M Lansing, 2012. "Performing Carbon's Materiality: The Production of Carbon Offsets and the Framing of Exchange," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(1), pages 204-220, January.
    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. 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).
    2. Benra, Felipe & Nahuelhual, Laura, 2019. "A trilogy of inequalities: Land ownership, forest cover and ecosystem services distribution," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 247-257.
    3. Langhans, Kelley E. & Schmitt, Rafael J.P. & Chaplin-Kramer, Rebecca & Anderson, Christopher B. & Vargas Bolaños, Christian & Vargas Cabezas, Fermin & Dirzo, Rodolfo & Goldstein, Jesse A. & Horangic,, 2022. "Modeling multiple ecosystem services and beneficiaries of riparian reforestation in Costa Rica," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Dirk-Jan Koch & Marloes Verholt, 2020. "Limits to learning: the struggle to adapt to unintended effects of international payment for environmental services programmes," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 507-539, September.
    6. Dirk-Jan Koch & Marloes Verholt, 0. "Limits to learning: the struggle to adapt to unintended effects of international payment for environmental services programmes," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-33.
    7. Sahide, Muhammad Alif K. & Fisher, Micah R. & Erbaugh, J.T. & Intarini, Dian & Dharmiasih, Wiwik & Makmur, Muliadi & Faturachmat, Fatwa & Verheijen, Bart & Maryudi, Ahmad, 2020. "The boom of social forestry policy and the bust of social forests in Indonesia: Developing and applying an access-exclusion framework to assess policy outcomes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    8. 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).

    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. Patrick Bottazzi & David Crespo & Harry Soria & Hy Dao & Marcelo Serrudo & Jean Paul Benavides & Stefan Schwarzer & Stephan Rist, 2014. "Carbon Sequestration in Community Forests: Trade-offs, Multiple Outcomes and Institutional Diversity in the Bolivian Amazon," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 45(1), pages 105-131, January.
    2. Andreas Scheba, 2018. "Market-Based Conservation for Better Livelihoods? The Promises and Fallacies of REDD+ in Tanzania," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, October.
    3. Fletcher, Robert & Büscher, Bram, 2017. "The PES Conceit: Revisiting the Relationship between Payments for Environmental Services and Neoliberal Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 224-231.
    4. Benjamin Neimark & Sango Mahanty & Wolfram Dressler, 2016. "Mapping Value in a ‘Green’ Commodity Frontier: Revisiting Commodity Chain Analysis," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 47(2), pages 240-265, March.
    5. Aguilar-Gómez, Carlos R. & Arteaga-Reyes, Tizbe T. & Gómez-Demetrio, William & à vila-Akerberg, Víctor D. & Pérez-Campuzano, Enrique, 2020. "Differentiated payments for environmental services: A review of the literature," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Hackett, Ryan, 2015. "Market-based environmental governance and public resources in Alberta, Canada," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 174-180.
    8. 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.
    9. To, Phuc & Dressler, Wolfram, 2019. "Rethinking ‘Success’: The politics of payment for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 582-593.
    10. Bottazzi, Patrick & Cattaneo, Andrea & Rocha, David Crespo & Rist, Stephan, 2013. "Assessing sustainable forest management under REDD+: A community-based labour perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 94-103.
    11. Diswandi, Diswandi, 2017. "A hybrid Coasean and Pigouvian approach to Payment for Ecosystem Services Program in West Lombok: Does it contribute to poverty alleviation?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 138-145.
    12. 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.
    13. Hein, Jonas, 2013. "Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), Transnational Conservation and Access to Land in Jambi, Indonesia," EFForTS Discussion Paper Series 2, University of Goettingen, Collaborative Research Centre 990 "EFForTS, Ecological and Socioeconomic Functions of Tropical Lowland Rainforest Transformation Systems (Sumatra, Indonesia)".
    14. Oliver Taherzadeh & Peter Howley, 2018. "No net loss of what, for whom?: stakeholder perspectives to Biodiversity Offsetting in England," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 1807-1830, August.
    15. 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.
    16. Robert Fletcher, 2012. "Using the Master's Tools? Neoliberal Conservation and the Evasion of Inequality," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 295-317, January.
    17. Martin-Ortega, Julia & Dekker, Thijs & Ojea, Elena & Lorenzo-Arribas, Altea, 2019. "Dissecting price setting efficiency in Payments for Ecosystem Services: A meta-analysis of payments for watershed services in Latin America," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Rodrigo Muniz & Maria João Cruz, 2015. "Making Nature Valuable, Not Profitable: Are Payments for Ecosystem Services Suitable for Degrowth?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-27, August.
    19. Eero Palmujoki & Pekka Virtanen, 2016. "Global, National, or Market? Emerging REDD+ Governance Practices in Mozambique and Tanzania," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(1), pages 59-78, February.
    20. Tim Forsyth, 2015. "Ecological Functions and Functionings: Towards a Senian Analysis of Ecosystem Services," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 46(2), pages 225-246, March.

    More about this item

    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:bla:devchg:v:45:y:2014:i:6:p:1310-1331. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0012-155X .

    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.