IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v88y2025i7d10.1007_s10640-025-00998-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Quantitative Macroeconomic and Ecosystem Service Modeling Methods to Assess Conservation Programs in Mexico

Author

Listed:
  • Onil Banerjee

    (RMGEO Consultants Inc.)

  • Martín Cicowiez

    (National University of La Plata)

  • Juan Manuel Torres-Rojo

    (Iberoamerican University, University Transdisciplinary Center for Sustainability)

  • Kenneth J. Bagstad

    (Geosciences and Environmental Change Science, Center United States Geological Survey)

  • Renato Vargas

    (CHW Research)

  • Bram Edens

    (OECD Statistics and Data Directorate)

  • Jacob Salcone

    (United Nations Environment Program, The Economics of Nature Unit, Ecosystems Division)

  • Elsa Marcela Begne de Larrea

    (United Nations Statistics Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs)

  • Mónica Lopez-Conlon

    (United Nations Environment Program, The Economics of Nature Unit, Ecosystems Division)

  • César Rodríguez-Ortega

    (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources)

  • José Eduardo de la Torre-Bárcena

    (National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI-Mexico))

  • Vicente Díaz-Núñez

    (National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI-Mexico))

  • Francisco Guillen-Martin

    (National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI-Mexico))

Abstract

Conveying the importance of public conservation programs to Government decision makers is challenging given the long-term nature of investments in conservation and competition for scarce public resources. The effectiveness of conservation programs in terms of their impact on ecological and socioeconomic outcomes has been evaluated in the literature though not typically in an integrated way that enables the assessment of trade-offs across environmental, economic and social objectives. Through a novel approach that uses macroeconomic tools that incorporate land use-land cover change and ecosystem services, we conduct policy scenario analysis to investigate the economic, natural capital and ecosystem service impacts of three conservation programs in Mexico. We show their combined impact on Gross Domestic Product and wealth in 2035 to be US$856.9 and US$492.3 million, respectively and that the programs reduce poverty by 1,800 individuals. In addition to macroeconomic effects, our approach illustrates that by accounting for changes in regulating ecosystem service flows, cumulative Gross Domestic Product would be 1.34 times higher. Our results build a business case for ongoing investment and expansion of these conservation programs by demonstrating the benefits to biodiversity, natural capital and the economic well-being of Mexican society. The case study allows for replication in other countries as the tools and data employed are openly available for much of Latin America and the Caribbean, Southeast Asia and increasingly worldwide.

Suggested Citation

  • Onil Banerjee & Martín Cicowiez & Juan Manuel Torres-Rojo & Kenneth J. Bagstad & Renato Vargas & Bram Edens & Jacob Salcone & Elsa Marcela Begne de Larrea & Mónica Lopez-Conlon & César Rodríguez-Orteg, 2025. "Integrating Quantitative Macroeconomic and Ecosystem Service Modeling Methods to Assess Conservation Programs in Mexico," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 88(7), pages 1995-2021, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:88:y:2025:i:7:d:10.1007_s10640-025-00998-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-025-00998-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10640-025-00998-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10640-025-00998-8?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. David Pimentel, 2006. "Soil Erosion: A Food and Environmental Threat," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 119-137, February.
    3. Blanchflower, David G. & Oswald, Andrew J., 2005. "The Wage Curve Reloaded," IZA Discussion Papers 1665, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Banerjee, Onil & Cicowiez, Martin & Horridge, Mark & Vargas, Renato, 2019. "Evaluating synergies and trade-offs in achieving the SDGs of zero hunger and clean water and sanitation: An application of the IEEM Platform to Guatemala," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 280-291.
    5. Rob Vos & Marco V. Sánchez, 2010. "A non-parametric microsimulation approach to assess changes in inequality and poverty," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 3(1), pages 8-23.
    6. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    7. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.
    8. Ben Groom & Moritz A. Drupp & Mark C. Freeman & Frikk Nesje, 2022. "The Future, Now: A Review of Social Discounting," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 467-491, October.
    9. Onil Banerjee & Martin Cicowiez & Mark Horridge & Renato Vargas, 2016. "A Conceptual Framework for Integrated Economic-Environmental Modelling," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0202, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    10. Amartya Sen & Joseph Stiglitz & Jean-Paul Fitoussi, 2010. "Mis-measuring our lives : why GDP doesn't add up?," Post-Print hal-03415632, HAL.
    11. Glyn Wittwer & Onil Banerjee, 2015. "Investing in irrigation development in North West Queensland, Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(2), pages 189-207, April.
    12. Sartori, Martina & Ferrari, Emanuele & M'Barek, Robert & Philippidis, George & Boysen-Urban, Kirsten & Borrelli, Pasquale & Montanarella, Luca & Panagos, Panos, 2024. "Remaining Loyal to Our Soil: A Prospective Integrated Assessment of Soil Erosion on Global Food Security," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    13. Robinson, Sherman & Yunez-Naude, Antonio & Hinojosa-Ojeda, Raul & Lewis, Jeffrey D. & Devarajan, Shantayanan, 1999. "From stylized to applied models:: Building multisector CGE models for policy analysis," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 5-38.
    14. Nyboer, Elizabeth A & Nguyen, Vivian & Young, Nathan & Rytwinski, Trina & Taylor, Jessica J & Lane, John Francis & Bennett, Joseph R & Harron, Nathan & Aitkin, Susan M & Auld, Graeme, 2021. "Supporting actionable science for environmental policy: Advice for funding agencies from decision makers," EcoEvoRxiv 4ye2u, Center for Open Science.
    15. Kevin J. Boyle & Nicolai V. Kuminoff & Christopher F. Parmeter & Jaren C. Pope, 2010. "The Benefit-Transfer Challenges," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 161-182, October.
    16. Rishikesh Ram Bhandary & Kelly Sims Gallagher & Fang Zhang, 2021. "Climate finance policy in practice: a review of the evidence," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 529-545, April.
    17. Clements, Tom & John, Ashish & Nielsen, Karen & An, Dara & Tan, Setha & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2010. "Payments for biodiversity conservation in the context of weak institutions: Comparison of three programs from Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1283-1291, April.
    18. Pasquale Borrelli & David A. Robinson & Larissa R. Fleischer & Emanuele Lugato & Cristiano Ballabio & Christine Alewell & Katrin Meusburger & Sirio Modugno & Brigitta Schütt & Vito Ferro & Vincenzo Ba, 2017. "An assessment of the global impact of 21st century land use change on soil erosion," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-13, December.
    19. James E. M. Watson & Nigel Dudley & Daniel B. Segan & Marc Hockings, 2014. "The performance and potential of protected areas," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7525), pages 67-73, November.
    20. Amartya Sen & Joseph Stiglitz & Jean-Paul Fitoussi, 2010. "Mis-measuring our lives : why GDP doesn't add up?," Post-Print hal-03415632, HAL.
    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. Onil Banerjee & Martin Cicowiez & Žiga Malek & Peter H. Verburg & Renato Vargas & Sean Goodwin & Kenneth J. Bagstad & Josué Ávila Murillo, 2024. "Banking on strong rural livelihoods and the sustainable use of natural capital in post-conflict Colombia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(10), pages 26517-26538, October.
    2. Onil Banerjee & Martín Cicowiez & Juan Manuel Torres-Rojo & Renato Vargas & Mónica LopezConlon & Jacob Salcone & Bram Edens & Elsa Marcela Begne De Larrea & César Rodríguez-Ortega & José Eduardo de la, 2023. "La Contribución Económica Ambiental de Programas de Conservación en México: Una Aplicación del Modelo Integrado Económico-Ambiental (IEEM)," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0315, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    3. Banerjee, Onil & Crossman, Neville & Vargas, Renato & Brander, Luke & Verburg, Peter & Cicowiez, Martin & Hauck, Jennifer & McKenzie, Emily, 2020. "Global socio-economic impacts of changes in natural capital and ecosystem services: State of play and new modeling approaches," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    4. Onil Banerjee & Martin Cicowiez & Marcia Macedo & Žiga Malek & Peter Verburg & Sean Goodwin & Renato Vargas & Ludmila Rattis & Paulo M. Brando & Michael T. Coe & Christopher Neill & Octavio Damiani, 2020. "An Amazon Tipping Point: The Economic and Environmental Fallout," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0292, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    5. Jones, Kelly W. & Muñoz Brenes, Carlos L. & Shinbrot, Xoco A. & López-Báez, Walter & Rivera-Castañeda, Andrómeda, 2018. "The influence of cash and technical assistance on household-level outcomes in payments for hydrological services programs in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 208-218.
    6. Pierre Mokondoko & Robert H Manson & Taylor H Ricketts & Daniel Geissert, 2018. "Spatial analysis of ecosystem service relationships to improve targeting of payments for hydrological services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, February.
    7. M. Mani & H. Pollitt, 2024. "Towards a Green and Resilient Thailand," World Bank Publications - Reports 42397, The World Bank Group.
    8. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    9. Hayes, Tanya & Murtinho, Felipe & Wolff, Hendrik, 2017. "The Impact of Payments for Environmental Services on Communal Lands: An Analysis of the Factors Driving Household Land-Use Behavior in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 427-446.
    10. Colman, David & Pascual, Unai & Hodge, Ian, 2010. "Evolution of Land Conservation Policy," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188082, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    11. Lishan Xu & Changlin Ao & Baoqi Liu & Zhenyu Cai, 2023. "Ecotourism and sustainable development: a scientometric review of global research trends," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 2977-3003, April.
    12. Chervier, Colas & Costedoat, Sébastien, 2017. "Heterogeneous Impact of a Collective Payment for Environmental Services Scheme on Reducing Deforestation in Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 148-159.
    13. Steven G. Medema, 2020. "The Coase Theorem at Sixty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1045-1128, December.
    14. 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.
    15. Izquierdo-Tort, Santiago & Ortiz-Rosas, Fiorella & Vázquez-Cisneros, Paola Angélica, 2019. "‘Partial’ participation in Payments for Environmental Services (PES): Land enrolment and forest loss in the Mexican Lacandona Rainforest," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    16. 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.
    17. Brownson, Katherine & Guinessey, Elizabeth & Carranza, Marcia & Esquivel, Manrique & Hesselbach, Hilda & Madrid Ramirez, Lucia & Villa, Luis, 2019. "Community-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services (CB-PES): Implications of community involvement for program outcomes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Kumar, Pushpam & Kumar, Manasi & Garrett, Lucy, 2014. "Behavioural foundation of response policies for ecosystem management: What can we learn from Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 128-136.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:kap:enreec:v:88:y:2025:i:7:d:10.1007_s10640-025-00998-8. 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.