When are Payments for Environmental Services Beneficial to the Poor?
The impact of payment for environmental services (PES) on poverty varies. Generally, PES is good for landowners and may negatively affect consumers if food demand is inelastic. Impacts also depend on the correlation between poverty and environmental amenities. If the richer farmers also provide the best environmental services (ES), then the poor farmers may lose. If there is negative correlation between ES and productivity, then the poorer landowners may gain from ES. The distribution of land matters. If smallholders depend on earnings from work on larger farms, then PES may affect them negatively. Program specifications also matter. Working land programs may have better distributional effects then PES for land diversion.
|Date of creation:||2006|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Agricultural Sector in Economic Development Service FAO Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 00153 Rome Italy|
Phone: +39(6) 57051
Fax: +39 06 57055522
Web page: http://www.fao.org/es/esa/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fao:wpaper:0604. 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: (Gustavo Anríquez)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.