CIFOR-ICRAF s’attaque aux défis et aux opportunités locales tout en apportant des solutions aux problèmes mondiaux concernant les forêts, les paysages, les populations et la planète.

Nous fournissons des preuves et des solutions concrètes pour transformer l’utilisation des terres et la production alimentaire : conserver et restaurer les écosystèmes, répondre aux crises mondiales du climat, de la malnutrition, de la biodiversité et de la désertification. En bref, nous améliorons la vie des populations.

CIFOR-ICRAF publie chaque année plus de 750 publications sur l’agroforesterie, les forêts et le changement climatique, la restauration des paysages, les droits, la politique forestière et bien d’autres sujets encore, et ce dans plusieurs langues. .

CIFOR-ICRAF s’attaque aux défis et aux opportunités locales tout en apportant des solutions aux problèmes mondiaux concernant les forêts, les paysages, les populations et la planète.

Nous fournissons des preuves et des solutions concrètes pour transformer l’utilisation des terres et la production alimentaire : conserver et restaurer les écosystèmes, répondre aux crises mondiales du climat, de la malnutrition, de la biodiversité et de la désertification. En bref, nous améliorons la vie des populations.

CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

Why were upscaled incentive programs for forest conservation adopted?: Comparing policy choices in Brazil, Ecuador, and Peru

Exporter la citation

Forest conservation policies could potentially become a centerpiece for climate change mitigation. Incentive-based conservation policies, such as payments for environmental services (PES), are seen as promising approaches to reduce deforestation. Yet, arguably the adoption of upscaled PES programs has remained slow, and when implemented their design often diverges from the principles laid out in the theory-based PES literature. In this article, we concentrate on some political economy forces that could help explaining the gap between PES theory and practice, with respect to policy adoption, including opportunities and challenges in this process. Public policy theories grasp the adoption determinants of three large, government-led incentive programs for forest conservation in the Amazon, in Peru, Ecuador, and Brazil. We use Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework to analyze decision-making regarding program initiation, including key stakeholder interviews, to understand policy choices. We find that environmental concerns are not always the prime motives for PES programs, as political and institutional contexts limit environmental policy-makers' actions. Yet, policy choice processes become less constrained when environmental issues are closer to a government's priorities.

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.004
Score Altmetric:
Dimensions Nombre de citations:

    Année de publication

    2015

    Auteurs

    da Conceição, H.R.; Börner, J.; Wunder, S.

    Langue

    English

    Mots clés

    ecosystem services, forest conservation, governance, policy, equity

    Géographique

    Brazil, Ecuador, Peru

Publications connexes