IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Targeting and implementing payments for ecosystem services: Opportunities for bundling biodiversity conservation with carbon and water services in Madagascar


  • Wendland, Kelly J.
  • Honzák, Miroslav
  • Portela, Rosimeiry
  • Vitale, Benjamin
  • Rubinoff, Samuel
  • Randrianarisoa, Jeannicq


Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are generating a lot of attention among conservationists because they have the potential to create new funding opportunities for biodiversity protection and other ecosystem services that contribute to human well-being. A number of recent publications have suggested ways to target and implement PES projects in order to maximize their cost-effectiveness and efficiency, and the Heredia Declaration (this issue) sets forth a list of agreed-upon principles concerning the use of PES schemes. One of those principles concerns the "bundling" of joint products of intact ecosystems in PES schemes in order to maximize the benefits to society. There have been several recent studies focusing on the degree of overlap between biodiversity and other ecosystem services and therefore the opportunities and constraints to bundling these services. Building on this idea, the bulk of this paper focuses on developing a method for selecting sites for PES where the main interest is to bundle biodiversity with other ecosystem services. We focus our analysis on Madagascar, a country with globally important biodiversity that is also beginning to explore the utility of PES as a conservation mechanism. Specifically, we assess the opportunities for bundling biodiversity conservation with carbon and water services at the national scale and identify where using PES to protect these areas of multiple benefits would be most cost-effective and efficient. This analysis identifies almost 30,000Â km2 -- out of 134,301Â km2 -- of natural habitat that could potentially meet biodiversity conservation goals and protect additional ecosystem services through a PES scheme. One of the places identified by our methodology corresponds to an ongoing conservation project that has already begun using payments from carbon emission reductions to protect standing forests and restore important biodiversity corridors -- the Ankeniheny-Mantadia-Zahamena Biodiversity Conservation and Restoration Project. This project site was selected for its high biodiversity and carbon values, lending credibility to our spatial targeting methodology and providing a case study to draw insights on how multiple-benefit PES schemes can be implemented in biodiversity "hotspots". In the discussion section of this paper we draw on experiences from this project to consider how many of the principles outlined in the Heredia Declaration affect implementation of PES schemes in Madagascar, providing lessons for similar countries experimenting with PES for biodiversity conservation.

Suggested Citation

  • Wendland, Kelly J. & Honzák, Miroslav & Portela, Rosimeiry & Vitale, Benjamin & Rubinoff, Samuel & Randrianarisoa, Jeannicq, 2010. "Targeting and implementing payments for ecosystem services: Opportunities for bundling biodiversity conservation with carbon and water services in Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2093-2107, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:69:y:2010:i:11:p:2093-2107

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Muñoz-Piña, Carlos & Guevara, Alejandro & Torres, Juan Manuel & Braña, Josefina, 2008. "Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: Analysis, negotiations and results," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 725-736, May.
    2. Sierra, Rodrigo & Russman, Eric, 2006. "On the efficiency of environmental service payments: A forest conservation assessment in the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 131-141, August.
    3. Egoh, Benis & Rouget, Mathieu & Reyers, Belinda & Knight, Andrew T. & Cowling, Richard M. & van Jaarsveld, Albert S. & Welz, Adam, 2007. "Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 714-721, September.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Ferraro, Paul J., 2002. "The local costs of establishing protected areas in low-income nations: Ranomafana National Park, Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 261-275, December.
    8. Boyd, James & Wainger, Lisa, 2003. "Measuring Ecosystem Service Benefits: The Use of Landscape Analysis to Evaluate Environmental Trades and Compensation," Discussion Papers dp-02-63, Resources For the Future.
    9. Farley, Josh & Aquino, André & Daniels, Amy & Moulaert, Azur & Lee, Dan & Krause, Abby, 2010. "Global mechanisms for sustaining and enhancing PES schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2075-2084, September.
    10. Bienabe, Estelle & Hearne, Robert R., 2006. "Public preferences for biodiversity conservation and scenic beauty within a framework of environmental services payments," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 335-348, December.
    11. Casse, Thorkil & Milhoj, Anders & Ranaivoson, Socrate & Romuald Randriamanarivo, Jean, 2004. "Causes of deforestation in southwestern Madagascar: what do we know?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 33-48, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Anderson, Blake & M'Gonigle, Michael, 2012. "Does ecological economics have a future?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 37-48.
    2. Kroeger, Timm, 2013. "The quest for the “optimal” payment for environmental services program: Ambition meets reality, with useful lessons," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 65-74.
    3. repec:eee:wdevel:v:98:y:2017:i:c:p:148-159 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Felardo, Jeff & Lippitt, Christopher D., 2016. "Spatial forest valuation: The role of location in determining attitudes toward payment for ecosystem services policies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 158-167.
    5. repec:eee:wdevel:v:99:y:2017:i:c:p:498-517 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Eike Luedeling & Henry Neufeldt, 2012. "Carbon sequestration potential of parkland agroforestry in the Sahel," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 443-461, December.
    7. Gsottbauer, Elisabeth & Logar, Ivana & van den Bergh, Jeroen, 2015. "Towards a fair, constructive and consistent criticism of all valuation languages: Comment on Kallis et al. (2013)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 164-169.
    8. Juutinen, Artti & Ollikainen, Markku & Mönkkönen, Mikko & Reunanen, Pasi & Tikkanen, Olli-Pekka & Kouki, Jari, 2014. "Optimal contract length for biodiversity conservation under conservation budget constraint," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 14-24.
    9. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    10. Maczka, Krzysztof & Matczak, Piotr & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Rechciński, Marcin & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Cent, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2016. "Application of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy—A systematic empirical analysis of national level policy documents in Poland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 169-176.
    11. Barbier, Edward B., 2012. "Natural capital, ecological scarcity and rural poverty," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6232, The World Bank.
    12. Naughton-Treves, Lisa & Wendland, Kelly, 2014. "Land Tenure and Tropical Forest Carbon Management," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 1-6.


    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:69:y:2010:i:11:p:2093-2107. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.