IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/adv/wpaper/200606.html

Herramientas de Conservación: Un Menú de Instrumentos para el Corredor Amboró-Madidi

Author

Listed:
  • Kathryn Anderson

    (United Nations Development Program, Bolivia)

  • Lykke E. Andersen

    (Institute for Advanced Development Studies)

Abstract

Este documento revisa una gran variedad de instrumentos que se pueden usar para inducir cambios en los usos de recursos naturales con el fin de alinear los intereses de actores locales con otros intereses que también son afectados por estos usos. Los instrumentos se agrupan en cinco categorías principales: 1) Oportunidades para la conservación voluntaria sobre tierras privadas, 2) Proyectos Integrados de Conservación y Desarrollo, 3) Pagos para Servicios Ambientales, 4) Conservación por Mandamientos Legislativos, y 5) Herramientas Indirectas. El menú completo incluye decenas de diferentes herramientas, pero la manera más barata de promover la conservación sobre tierra que todavía está inaccesible y en un estado prístino simplemente es no hacer proyectos de ningún tipo – no construir caminos, no proveer servicios básicos, ni siquiera pagar para la conservación. Este obviamente va muy en contra de otras políticas prioritarias como la reducción de la pobreza y el desarrollo humano y no es suficiente para tierras que ya están en un proceso de degradación. Sin embargo, es posible hacerlo en áreas específicas que son muy importantes para los servicios ambientales, asegurándose que la población local tiene la opción de trasladarse a lugares alternativos que mejor atienden a sus necesidades. Esto significa que el ordenamiento territorial y el manejo de la migración se vuelvan una de las tareas más importantes para las políticas de conservación con desarrollo. Aplicando una combinación de instrumentos repulsivos en algunas áreas y atractivos en otras, se puede asegurar que la gente se establezca donde ocasionan menor daño al medio ambiente y donde tengan más posibilidades para hacer actividades productivas que contribuyan al bienestar de su familia y al desarrollo del país. Otro tema sumamente importante para la conservación con desarrollo humano es el de títulos de tierra, ya que la falta de títulos causa muchos efectos adversos, no solamente para la conservación sino también para el desarrollo. La titulación también es un instrumento que se puede aplicar para dirigir la migración.

Suggested Citation

  • Kathryn Anderson & Lykke E. Andersen, 2006. "Herramientas de Conservación: Un Menú de Instrumentos para el Corredor Amboró-Madidi," Development Research Working Paper Series 06/2006, Institute for Advanced Development Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:adv:wpaper:200606
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inesad.edu.bo/pdf/wp06_2006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    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. Araujo, Claudio & Bonjean, Catherine Araujo & Combes, Jean-Louis & Combes Motel, Pascale & Reis, Eustaquio J., 2009. "Property rights and deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2461-2468, June.
    2. Hoang Phan Bich Ngoc & Takahiro Fujiwara & Seiji Iwanaga & Noriko Sato, 2021. "Participation of Local People in the Payment for Forest Environmental Services Program: A Case Study in Central Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-13, November.
    3. Brian Witt, 2019. "Evaluating the Effects of a Minimalist Deliberative Framework on the Willingness to Participate in a Payment for Ecosystem Services Program," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, June.
    4. 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.
    5. De Pinto, Alessandro & Robertson, Richard D., 2010. "Adoption Of Carbon-Sequestering Practices In Developing Countries And Risk-Averse Farmers," 2010: Climate Change in World Agriculture: Mitigation, Adaptation, Trade and Food Security, June 2010, Stuttgart-Hohenheim, Germany 91272, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    6. Bingtao Qin & Yongwei Yu & Liming Ge & Le Yang & Yuanguo Guo, 2022. "Does Eco-Compensation Alleviate Rural Poverty? New Evidence from National Key Ecological Function Areas in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-21, September.
    7. Nicolas Kosoy & Miguel Martinez-Tuna & Roldan Muradian & Joan Martinez-Alier, "undated". "Payments for Environmental Services in Watersheds: Insights From a Comparative Study of three Cases in Central America," UHE Working papers 2006_01, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Departament d'Economia i Història Econòmica, Unitat d'Història Econòmica.
    8. Jyotsna Krishnakumar & John Yanagida & V. Anitha & Rajeev Balakrishnan & Theodore Radovich, 2015. "Non-timber forest products certification and management: a socioeconomic study among the Kadars in Kerala, India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 837-858, August.
    9. Vorlaufer, Miriam & Ibanez, Marcela & Juanda, Bambang & Wollni, Meike, 2015. "Conservation vs. equity: Can payments for environmental services achieve both?," EFForTS Discussion Paper Series 18, University of Goettingen, Collaborative Research Centre 990 "EFForTS, Ecological and Socioeconomic Functions of Tropical Lowland Rainforest Transformation Systems (Sumatra, Indonesia)".
    10. Etchart, Nicolle & Freire, José Luis & Holland, Margaret B. & Jones, Kelly W. & Naughton-Treves, Lisa, 2020. "What happens when the money runs out? Forest outcomes and equity concerns following Ecuador’s suspension of conservation payments," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Caiado, Nathália & Guarnieri, Patricia & Xavier, Lúcia Helena & de Lorena Diniz Chaves, Gisele, 2017. "A characterization of the Brazilian market of reverse logistic credits (RLC) and an analogy with the existing carbon credit market," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 47-59.
    13. Yergeau, Marie-Eve & Boccanfuso, Dorothée & Goyette, Jonathan, 2017. "Reprint of: Linking conservation and welfare: A theoretical model with application to Nepal," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 229-243.
    14. Rawlins, Maurice A. & Westby, Leon, 2013. "Community participation in payment for ecosystem services design and implementation: An example from Trinidad," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 117-121.
    15. Soh, Moonwon & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, Edward & Boyer, Christopher & English, Burton, "undated". "Targeting Payments for Ecosystem Services Given Ecological and Economic Objectives," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266502, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    16. Myers Madeira, Erin, 2009. "REDD in Design: Assessment of Planned First-Generation Activities in Indonesia," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-49, Resources for the Future.
    17. Mudaca, Joao Daniel & Tsuchiya, Toshiyuki & Yamada, Masaaki & Onwona-Agyeman, Siaw, 2015. "Household participation in Payments for Ecosystem Services: A case study from Mozambique," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-27.
    18. Nelson Grima & Lisa Ringhofer & Simron J. Singh & Barbara Smetschka & Christian Lauk, 2017. "Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Development Practice: Can the Concept of PES Deliver?," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 17(4), pages 267-281, October.
    19. Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio del Pilar & Maldonado, Jorge Higinio & Wunder, Sven & Borda, Carlos Andres, "undated". "Do Environmental Services Buyers Prefer Differentiated Rates? A Case Study from the Colombian Andes," Documentos CEDE Series 91171, Universidad de Los Andes, Economics Department.
    20. Pagiola, Stefano & Rios, Ana R. & Arcenas, Agustin, 2008. "Can the poor participate in payments for environmental services? Lessons from the Silvopastoral Project in Nicaragua," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 299-325, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development
    • Q32 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Exhaustible Resources and Economic Development

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:adv:wpaper:200606. 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: Lykke Andersen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inesabo.html .

    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.