IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Negotiation analysis for mechanisms to deliver ecosystem services: The case of soil conservation in Costa Rica

  • Vignola, Raffaele
  • McDaniels, Tim L.
  • Scholz, Roland W.
Registered author(s):

    The nature and structure of institutional mechanisms is fundamental for commons management, and yet has received relatively little attention for ecosystem service provision. In this paper, we develop and employ a value-focused structured decision process for a negotiation analysis about mechanisms to maintain and enhance ecosystem service (ES) provision at the watershed scale. We use a case study in the Birris watershed of Costa Rica where upstream farmers and downstream hydropower might jointly benefit from the design of a mechanism to foster the provision of soil regulation services (SRS). We identify and use parties' fundamental objectives, and views on means to achieve these objectives, to structure a negotiation template representing the important components that a soil conservation program should include. A voting-based elicitation process was employed to identify sub-alternatives acceptable both parties, which in turn identifies the zone of bargaining, or negotiation space in which future negotiations should focus. We conclude with discussion of the potential for application of this approach to other ES contexts, and the importance of the overall policy framework to provide resources and incentives to achieve enhance ES provision.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

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

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Ecological Economics.

    Volume (Year): 75 (2012)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 22-31

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:75:y:2012:i:c:p:22-31
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.01.004
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    2. Robin Gregory & Ralph L. Keeney, 1994. "Creating Policy Alternatives Using Stakeholder Values," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(8), pages 1035-1048, August.
    3. Wossink, Ada & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Jointness in production and farmers' willingness to supply non-marketed ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 297-304, December.
    4. Miriam Miranda & Carel Dieperink & Pieter Glasbergen, 2007. "Voluntary Agreements In Watershed Protection Experiences From Costa Rica," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, February.
    5. Keeney, Ralph L., 1996. "Value-focused thinking: Identifying decision opportunities and creating alternatives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 537-549, August.
    6. Bulow, Jeremy & Klemperer, Paul, 1996. "Auctions versus Negotiations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 180-94, March.
    7. Timothy L. McDaniels & Karen Thomas, 1999. "Eliciting preferences for land use alternatives: A structured value referendum with approval voting," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(2), pages 264-280.
    8. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    12. Pagiola, Stefano, 2006. "Payments for Environmental Services in Costa Rica," MPRA Paper 2010, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Wilson, Matthew A. & Howarth, Richard B., 2002. "Discourse-based valuation of ecosystem services: establishing fair outcomes through group deliberation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 431-443, June.
    14. de Groot, Roland B.A. & Hermans, Leon M., 2009. "Broadening the picture: Negotiating payment schemes for water-related environmental services in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2760-2767, September.
    15. James K. Sebenius, 1992. "Negotiation Analysis: A Characterization and Review," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(1), pages 18-38, January.
    16. 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.
    17. Oran Young, 2003. "Environmental Governance: The Role of Institutions in Causing and Confronting Environmental Problems," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 377-393, December.
    18. Bekele, Wagayehu & Drake, Lars, 2003. "Soil and water conservation decision behavior of subsistence farmers in the Eastern Highlands of Ethiopia: a case study of the Hunde-Lafto area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 437-451, October.
    19. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    20. Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Shogren, Jason F., 2007. "Spatial incentives to coordinate contiguous habitat," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 344-355, December.
    21. Douglas Southgate & Robert Macke, 1989. "The Downstream Benefits of Soil Conservation in Third World Hydroelectric Watersheds," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 65(1), pages 38-48.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:75:y:2012:i:c:p:22-31. 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: (Shamier, Wendy)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.