Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES): An Innovative Tool for Financing Environmental Conservation
Who will you meet?
Cities are innovating, companies are pivoting, and start-ups are growing. Like you, every urban practitioner has a remarkable story of insight and challenge from the past year.
Meet these peers and discuss the future of cities in the new Meeting of the Minds Executive Cohort Program. Replace boring virtual summits with facilitated, online, small-group discussions where you can make real connections with extraordinary, like-minded people.
Rising opportunity costs and population growth are resulting in land use change and declines in critical ecosystem services. The 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment found that 60% of the Earth’s ecosystem services are being depleted at a very rapid rate.
Biodiversity and ecosystems provide invaluable services and products to the society. These include food, water, and protection from erosion, recreational services, medicinal products, and climate regulation. Despite this significant economic, social, and cultural value of biodiversity and the associated ecosystem services, biodiversity is lost at a rapid rate. The need for policies that promote the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystem services is more important than ever. Word Resource Institute (WRI) estimates the value of ecosystem services to be US$33 trillion a year, nearly twice the value of the global gross national product (GNP) of US$18 trillion.
Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) are agreements whereby a user of an ecosystem service makes a payment to an individual or communities whose practices like land use or deforestation directly affects the use of that ecosystem services. Ecosystem beneficiaries include downstream hydroelectric utilities that use clean water for their day-to-day operations. Payment for such management practices reduces soil erosion. Soil erosion and sediment buildup have negative effects that impact the efficiency of dams and the cost of energy. Interest in PES has been rapidly increasing over the past few years and according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) these projects channel over $6.53 billion annually. Over 300 PES projects are implemented in countries like India, Indonesia, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Australia. These schemes flourish wherever private companies, public-sector agencies, and non profit organizations like Conservation International (CI) have joined hands in addressing various environmental issues.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and PES
As Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) becomes an integral part of many organizations, PES offers an innovative solution that fits within the “Green Growth” approach of sustainable development- synergizing economic development with environmental protection. Companies that are adopting CSR practices are implementing PES projects in partnership with the government and local communities to offset the damage to the ecosystem as a result of their operation or practices.
In southwestern China’s Sichuan Province, Marriott protects the source of fresh water for more than 2 billion people by investing $500,000 over two years in a Nobility of Nature program in partnership with a nonprofit Conservation International (CI). The partnership promotes beekeeping and honey production. Nobility of Nature honey is sold in nearly all Marriott hotels throughout China, with a portion of the proceeds going back to support the program. Marriott’s investment in the Nobility of Nature project addresses several of the company’s key CSR goals including the reduction of energy and water consumption and investment in innovative conservation initiatives like rainforest protection and water conservation. Locally Marriott’s funding has helped provide equipment to monitor the condition of nearby fresh water sources and wildlife, 600 bee hives, and training in the organic bee farming business.
Growing Market for Carbon Sequestration
PES is also gaining attention because of its link to the growing mitigation efforts associated with climate change. Deforestation is responsible for up to 1/5th of global greenhouse gas emissions. Markets for carbon sequestration have facilitated payments for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) on a voluntary basis, and are growing rapidly. For example, the World Bank estimates that Indonesia alone could earn up to US$ 2 billion a year in such a forest carbon market.
Despite the success of PES in the past decade, the biggest criticism is their cost-effectiveness which in turn depends on the design and implementation of the program, and the region where it is implemented. Because payments are based on the quantity of services provided, PES programs must appropriately measure the ecosystem services, a rather difficult task. Measurements depend on complicated ecological relationships that are often poorly understood, especially in developing countries. For example, the contribution of a hectare of forest to aquifer recharge depends on the flora, soil, hydrology, and weather in the forest. Given the challenges involved in measuring ecosystem services, most PES programs use relatively coarse estimates and assumptions.
Tragedy of the Commons
Proponents of PES envision it as a solution to the so called “tragedy of the commons” (Hardin 1968), defined as “a dilemma in which multiple individuals acting independently in their own self-interest can ultimately destroy a shared resource even where it is clear that it is not in anyone’s long-term interest for this to happen.” A promising concept that has received considerable attention, PES has the potential to become a conventional environmental management tool. It is an essential part of the set of instruments necessary for a transition to a green economy, triple bottom line benefits, and a sustainable society.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
A few years ago, I worked with some ARISE-US members to carry out a survey of small businesses in post-Katrina New Orleans of disaster risk reduction (DRR) awareness. One theme stood out to me more than any other. The businesses that had lived through Katrina and survived well understood the need to be prepared and to have continuity plans. Those that were new since Katrina all tended to have the view that, to paraphrase, “well, government (city, state, federal…) will take care of things”.
While the experience after Katrina, of all disasters, should be enough to show anyone in the US that there are limits on what government can do, it does raise the question, of what could and should public and private sectors expect of one another?
When planning for new mobilities, it is important to be a little skeptical. Advocates often exaggerate the benefits and overlook significant costs. Here’s an example. Optimists predict that autonomous cars will reduce traffic congestion, crash risk, energy consumption and pollution emissions, but to achieve these benefits they require dedicated lanes for platooning (many vehicles driving close together at relatively high speeds). When should communities dedicate special lanes for the exclusive use of autonomous vehicles? How much should users pay for the privilege? How should this be enforced? Who will be liable if a high-speed platoon crashes, resulting in a multi-vehicle pile-up?
Infrastructure is on the tip of every mayor’s tongue. It’s no wonder, with billions in federal funding on the table for the first time in a generation and rapidly compounding infrastructure needs. American Rescue Plan dollars represent a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to invest in communities, support resident priorities, and move the needle on racial equity all at the same time. Parks and playgrounds exist in an ideal sweet spot in each of these areas, and cities should consider making investments in these vital pieces of community infrastructure as part of their recovery and resilience strategies.