IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0192560.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial analysis of ecosystem service relationships to improve targeting of payments for hydrological services

Author

Listed:
  • Pierre Mokondoko
  • Robert H Manson
  • Taylor H Ricketts
  • Daniel Geissert

Abstract

Payment for hydrological services (PHS) are popular tools for conserving ecosystems and their water-related services. However, improving the spatial targeting and impacts of PHS, as well as their ability to foster synergies with other ecosystem services (ES), remain challenging. We aimed at using spatial analyses to evaluate the targeting performance of México’s National PHS program in central Veracruz. We quantified the effectiveness of areas targeted for PHS in actually covering areas of high HS provision and social priority during 2003–2013. First, we quantified provisioning and spatial distributions of two target (water yield and soil retention), and one non-target ES (carbon storage) using InVEST. Subsequently, pairwise relationships among ES were quantified by using spatial correlation and overlap analyses. Finally, we evaluated targeting by: (i) prioritizing areas of individual and overlapping ES; (ii) quantifying spatial co-occurrences of these priority areas with those targeted by PHS; (iii) evaluating the extent to which PHS directly contribute to HS delivery; and (iv), testing if PHS targeted areas disproportionately covered areas with high ecological and social priority. We found that modelled priority areas exhibited non-random distributions and distinct spatial patterns. Our results show significant pairwise correlations between all ES suggesting synergistic relationships. However, our analysis showed a significantly lower overlap than expected and thus significant mismatches between PHS targeted areas and all types of priority areas. These findings suggest that the targeting of areas with high HS provisioning and social priority by Mexico’s PHS program could be improved significantly. This study underscores: (1) the importance of using maps of HS provisioning as main targeting criteria in PHS design to channel payments towards areas that require future conservation, and (2) the need for future research that helps balance ecological and socioeconomic targeting criteria.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0192560
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192560
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0192560
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0192560&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0192560?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    2. Troy, Austin & Wilson, Matthew A., 2006. "Mapping ecosystem services: Practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 435-449, December.
    3. Pan, Ying & Xu, Zengrang & Wu, Junxi, 2013. "Spatial differences of the supply of multiple ecosystem services and the environmental and land use factors affecting them," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 4-10.
    4. Mokondoko, Pierre & Manson, Robert H. & Pérez-Maqueo, Octavio, 2016. "Assessing the service of water quality regulation by quantifying the effects of land use on water quality and public health in central Veracruz, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 161-173.
    5. 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.
    6. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    7. Corbera, Esteve & Brown, Katrina, 2008. "Building Institutions to Trade Ecosystem Services: Marketing Forest Carbon in Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1956-1979, October.
    8. 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.
    9. Alix-Garcia, Jennifer & De Janvry, Alain & Sadoulet, Elisabeth, 2008. "The role of deforestation risk and calibrated compensation in designing payments for environmental services," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 375-394, June.
    10. Gwenolé Le Velly & Céline Dutilly, 2016. "Evaluating Payments for Environmental Services: Methodological Challenges," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, February.
    11. Kerstin K Zander & Stephen T Garnett, 2011. "The Economic Value of Environmental Services on Indigenous-Held Lands in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-6, August.
    12. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    13. 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.
    14. Remme, Roy P. & Schröter, Matthias & Hein, Lars, 2014. "Developing spatial biophysical accounting for multiple ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 6-18.
    15. Kareiva, Peter & Tallis, Heather & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Daily, Gretchen C. & Polasky, Stephen (ed.), 2011. "Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199589005.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Céline Dutilly & José-Alberto Lara-Pulido & Gwenolé Le Velly & Alejando Guevara-Sanginés, 2016. "Payments for Environmental Services in a Policymix: Spatial and Temporal Articulation in Mexico," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-15, April.
    22. Robin Naidoo & Taylor H Ricketts, 2006. "Mapping the Economic Costs and Benefits of Conservation," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(11), pages 1-12, October.
    23. Stephen Polasky & Kris Johnson & Bonnie Keeler & Kent Kovacs & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Andrew J. Plantinga & John Withey, 2012. "Are investments to promote biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services aligned?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 139-163, Spring.
    24. Martínez-Harms, María José & Quijas, Sandra & Merenlender, Adina M. & Balvanera, Patricia, 2016. "Enhancing ecosystem services maps combining field and environmental data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 32-40.
    25. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.
    26. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Winthrop, Robert, 2013. "Comparing approaches to spatially explicit ecosystem service modeling: A case study from the San Pedro River, Arizona," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 40-50.
    27. Bruijnzeel, L.A., 2001. "Hydrology of tropical montane cloud forests: A Reassessment," Land Use and Water Resources Research, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Centre for Land Use and Water Resources Research, vol. 1, pages 1-18.
    28. Corbera, Esteve & Soberanis, Carmen González & Brown, Katrina, 2009. "Institutional dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services: An analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 743-761, January.
    29. C. David L. Orme & Richard G. Davies & Malcolm Burgess & Felix Eigenbrod & Nicola Pickup & Valerie A. Olson & Andrea J. Webster & Tzung-Su Ding & Pamela C. Rasmussen & Robert S. Ridgely & Ali J. Statt, 2005. "Global hotspots of species richness are not congruent with endemism or threat," Nature, Nature, vol. 436(7053), pages 1016-1019, August.
    30. 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.
    31. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    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. Mayer, Alex & Jones, Kelly & Hunt, David & Manson, Robert & Carter Berry, Z. & Asbjornsen, Heidi & Wright, Timothy Max & Salcone, Jacob & Lopez Ramirez, Sergio & Ã vila-Foucat, Sophie & Von Thaden Uga, 2022. "Assessing ecosystem service outcomes from payments for hydrological services programs in Veracruz, Mexico: Future deforestation threats and spatial targeting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    2. Stanislav E. Shmelev & Linus Agbleze & Joachim H. Spangenberg, 2023. "Multidimensional Ecosystem Mapping: Towards a More Comprehensive Spatial Assessment of Nature’s Contributions to People in France," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-32, May.
    3. Carter Berry, Z. & Jones, Kelly W. & Gomez Aguilar, Leon Rodrigo & Congalton, Russell G. & Holwerda, Friso & Kolka, Randall & Looker, Nathaniel & Lopez Ramirez, Sergio Miguel & Manson, Robert & Mayer,, 2020. "Evaluating ecosystem service trade-offs along a land-use intensification gradient in central Veracruz, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    4. Orsi, Francesco & Ciolli, Marco & Primmer, Eeva & Varumo, Liisa & Geneletti, Davide, 2020. "Mapping hotspots and bundles of forest ecosystem services across the European Union," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    6. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    7. Von Thaden, Juan & Manson, Robert H. & Congalton, Russell G. & López-Barrera, Fabiola & Jones, Kelly W., 2021. "Evaluating the environmental effectiveness of payments for hydrological services in Veracruz, México: A landscape approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(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. Campanhão, Ligia Maria Barrios & Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima, 2019. "Guideline framework for effective targeting of payments for watershed services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-109.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Benra, F. & Nahuelhual, L. & Felipe-Lucia, M. & Jaramillo, A. & Jullian, C. & Bonn, A., 2022. "Balancing ecological and social goals in PES design – Single objective strategies are not sufficient," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    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. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    7. 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.
    8. Von Thaden, Juan & Manson, Robert H. & Congalton, Russell G. & López-Barrera, Fabiola & Jones, Kelly W., 2021. "Evaluating the environmental effectiveness of payments for hydrological services in Veracruz, México: A landscape approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    9. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    10. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    11. Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Bax, Vincent & Quintero, Marcela & Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S. & Groeneveld, Rolf A. & Perez-Marulanda, Lisset, 2018. "The Different Dimensions of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) Schemes: A Systematic Review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 160-183.
    12. Loft, Lasse & Mann, Carsten & Hansjürgens, Bernd, 2015. "Challenges in ecosystem services governance: Multi-levels, multi-actors, multi-rationalities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 150-157.
    13. Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Corbera, Esteve & Lapeyre, Renaud, 2019. "Payments for Environmental Services and Motivation Crowding: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 434-443.
    14. Saint-Cyr, Legrand D.F. & Védrine, Lionel & Legras, Sophie & Le Gallo, Julie & Bellassen, Valentin, 2023. "Drivers of PES effectiveness: Some evidence from a quantitative meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    15. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    16. Bottazzi, Patrick & Wiik, Emma & Crespo, David & Jones, Julia P.G., 2018. "Payment for Environmental “Self-Service”: Exploring the Links Between Farmers' Motivation and Additionality in a Conservation Incentive Programme in the Bolivian Andes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 11-23.
    17. Neitzel, K. Christoph & Caro-Borrero, Angela Piedad & Revollo-Fernandez, Daniel & Aguilar-Ibarra, Alonso & Ramos, Alya & Almeida-Leñero, Lucia, 2014. "Paying for environmental services: Determining recognized participation under common property in a peri-urban context," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 46-55.
    18. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.
    19. Reutemann, Tim & Engel, Stefanie & Pareja, Eliana, 2016. "How (not) to pay — Field experimental evidence on the design of REDD+ payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 220-229.
    20. Kaiser, Josef & Krueger, Tobias & Haase, Dagmar, 2023. "Global patterns of collective payments for ecosystem services and their degrees of commodification," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).

    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:plo:pone00:0192560. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.