Paying for Ecosystem Services: Consequences and alternatives (PECA)

This project attempted to achieve an integrated understanding of two principal approaches for encouraging local ecosystem managers to regulate and value ES-provision. The first approach focused on paying landholders for limiting their land use in order to maintain the ES generated on their land (payment for ES, called PES). PES-initiatives are currently widely supported by international actors and large-scale global PES-projects are set up (e.g. REDD). The second approach to support ES provision, engaged with production systems where production and conservation is planned for within the same landscape, mostly practiced by small-holders who do not use any inputs and where governing the ES is a requirement for maintaining production (so called ecoagriculture/forestry).

The study analysed the ecological, economic, social and cultural impacts these two ES provision support strategies would have on local contexts. The research was conducted in four countries (Brazil, Nepal, Peru and Tanzania), where we compared governance, livelihood and social and cultural impacts in one PES site and one ecoagriculture/forestry site respectively.