IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v34y2018ipbp206-217.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bringing transparency into the process: Social network analysis as a tool to support the participatory design and implementation process of Payments for Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • Schröter, Barbara
  • Hauck, Jennifer
  • Hackenberg, Isabel
  • Matzdorf, Bettina

Abstract

Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are criticized, amongst other reasons, for their basis in ideas suited to the neoliberal political economy and for the unequal distribution of power inherent in such models. However, PES can be a natural resource management approach that combines social and environmental objectives so that they not only serve to protect ecosystems such as tropical forests and wetlands but also to improve social conditions and rural development. Particularly for community-based PES, tools are needed to bring transparency to PES institutional settings and actor constellations by revealing power relations, as well as to empower local actors to engage in social learning through participatory processes. Considering both of these aspects will improve the equity aspects of PES and establish a social context conducive to a payment scheme that considers local behaviors and attitudes towards conservation. Close collaboration – in knowledge co-production processes – between social science and practitioners can address these challenges and support the PES design and implementation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Schröter, Barbara & Hauck, Jennifer & Hackenberg, Isabel & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2018. "Bringing transparency into the process: Social network analysis as a tool to support the participatory design and implementation process of Payments for Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 206-217.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:34:y:2018:i:pb:p:206-217
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041617305314
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
    2. Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Payments for environmental services and the poor: concepts and preliminary evidence," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 279-297, June.
    3. Muñoz-Piña, Carlos & Guevara, Alejandro & Torres, Juan Manuel & Braña, Josefina, 2008. "Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: Analysis, negotiations and results," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 725-736, May.
    4. Anderson, Blake & M'Gonigle, Michael, 2012. "Does ecological economics have a future?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 37-48.
    5. Fenno, Richard F., 1986. "Observation, Context, and Sequence in the Study of Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(1), pages 3-15, March.
    6. Norgaard, Richard B., 2010. "Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1219-1227, April.
    7. Mann, Carsten & Loft, Lasse & Hansjürgens, Bernd, 2015. "Governance of Ecosystem Services: Lessons learned for sustainable institutions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 275-281.
    8. Pagiola, Stefano & Arcenas, Agustin & Platais, Gunars, 2005. "Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-253, February.
    9. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    10. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    11. Larry Lohmann, 2008. "Carbon Trading, Climate Justice and the Production of Ignorance: Ten examples," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 51(3), pages 359-365, September.
    12. Hannah Wittman & Lisa Jordan Powell & Esteve Corbera, 2015. "Financing the agrarian transition? The Clean Development Mechanism and agricultural change in Latin America," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(10), pages 2031-2046, October.
    13. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Windey, Catherine, 2015. "Towards a power-sensitive and socially-informed analysis of payments for ecosystem services (PES): Addressing the gaps in the current debate," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 117-125.
    14. Roldan Muradian & Murat Arsel & Lorenzo Pellegrini & Fikret Adaman & Bernardo Aguilar & Bina Agarwal & Esteve Corbera & Driss Ezzine de Blas & Joshua Farley & Géraldine Froger & Eduardo Garcia-Frapoll, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services and the fatal attraction of win-win solutions," Post-Print hal-03067404, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sattler, Claudia & Loft, Lasse & Mann, Carsten & Meyer, Claas, 2018. "Methods in ecosystem services governance analysis: An introduction," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 155-168.
    2. Barraclough, Alicia D. & Cusens, Jarrod & Måren, Inger Elisabeth, 2022. "Mapping stakeholder networks for the co-production of multiple ecosystem services: A novel mixed-methods approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    3. Francisca Mutwa Kilonzi & Takahiro Ota, 2023. "Application of the 4Rs framework towards effective co-management of protected forests: case of aberdare forest in central Kenya," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8561-8584, August.
    4. Kieran Harrahill & Áine Macken-Walsh & Eoin O’Neill & Mick Lennon, 2022. "An Analysis of Irish Dairy Farmers’ Participation in the Bioeconomy: Exploring Power and Knowledge Dynamics in a Multi-actor EIP-AGRI Operational Group," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-39, September.
    5. Hauck, Jennifer & Omann, Ines & Thronicker, Ines & Spekkink, Wouter & Díaz Ayude, Alberto & Maricchiolo, Fridanna & Mock, Mirijam & Quist, Jaco & Pandur, Vlad, 2020. "Understanding actor roles in sustainability initiatives: An exploratory study in five European countries," UFZ Discussion Papers 2/2020, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    6. Fischer, Richard & Lippe, Melvin & Dolom, Priscilla & Kalaba, Felix Kanungwe & Tamayo, Fabian & Torres, Bolier, 2023. "Effectiveness of policy instrument mixes for forest conservation in the tropics – Stakeholder perceptions from Ecuador, the Philippines and Zambia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    7. Xintao Li & Dong Feng & Jian Li & Zaisheng Zhang, 2019. "Research on the Spatial Network Characteristics and Synergetic Abatement Effect of the Carbon Emissions in Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Urban Agglomeration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, March.
    8. Tobias Fleuren & Ansgar Thiel & Annika Frahsa, 2021. "Identification of Network Promoters in a Regional and Intersectoral Health Promotion Network: A Qualitative Social Network Analysis in Southern Germany," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-15, August.
    9. Secco, Laura & Pisani, Elena & Da Re, Riccardo & Rogelja, Todora & Burlando, Catie & Vicentini, Kamini & Pettenella, Davide & Masiero, Mauro & Miller, David & Nijnjk, Maria, 2019. "Towards a method of evaluating social innovation in forest-dependent rural communities: First suggestions from a science-stakeholder collaboration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 9-22.
    10. Cecilia Arnaiz-Schmitz & Cristina Herrero-Jáuregui & María F. Schmitz, 2021. "Recreational and Nature-Based Tourism as a Cultural Ecosystem Service. Assessment and Mapping in a Rural-Urban Gradient of Central Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, March.
    11. Chen, Cheng & Matzdorf, Bettina & Zhen, Lin & Schröter, Barbara, 2020. "Social-Network Analysis of local governance models for China's eco-compensation program," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    12. Naime, Julia & Angelsen, Arild & Rodriguez-Ward, Dawn & Sills, Erin O., 2024. "Participation, anticipation effects and impact perceptions of two collective incentive-based conservation interventions in Ucayali, Peru," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).

    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. Ma, Zhao & Bauchet, Jonathan & Steele, Diana & Godoy, Ricardo & Radel, Claudia & Zanotti, Laura, 2017. "Comparison of Direct Transfers for Human Capital Development and Environmental Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 498-517.
    2. Campanhão, Ligia Maria Barrios & Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima, 2019. "Guideline framework for effective targeting of payments for watershed services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-109.
    3. Colman, David & Pascual, Unai & Hodge, Ian, 2010. "Evolution of Land Conservation Policy," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188082, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    4. Rodríguez, Luis C. & Pascual, Unai & Muradian, Roldan & Pazmino, Nathalie & Whitten, Stuart, 2011. "Towards a unified scheme for environmental and social protection: Learning from PES and CCT experiences in developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2163-2174, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Bauchet, Jonathan & Asquith, Nigel & Ma, Zhao & Radel, Claudia & Godoy, Ricardo & Zanotti, Laura & Steele, Diana & Gramig, Benjamin M. & Chong, Andrea Estrella, 2020. "The practice of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) in the Tropical Andes: Evidence from program administrators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    7. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    8. Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Bax, Vincent & Quintero, Marcela & Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S. & Groeneveld, Rolf A. & Perez-Marulanda, Lisset, 2018. "The Different Dimensions of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) Schemes: A Systematic Review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 160-183.
    9. Pascual, Unai & Muradian, Roldan & Rodríguez, Luis C. & Duraiappah, Anantha, 2010. "Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: A conceptual approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1237-1244, April.
    10. Izquierdo-Tort, Santiago & Ortiz-Rosas, Fiorella & Vázquez-Cisneros, Paola Angélica, 2019. "‘Partial’ participation in Payments for Environmental Services (PES): Land enrolment and forest loss in the Mexican Lacandona Rainforest," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    11. Kallis, Giorgos & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Zografos, Christos, 2013. "To value or not to value? That is not the question," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 97-105.
    12. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    13. Kathleen McAfee, 2012. "The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 105-131, January.
    14. Sattler, Claudia & Trampnau, Susanne & Schomers, Sarah & Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 31-45.
    15. Alireza Daneshi & Mostafa Panahi & Saber Masoomi & Mehdi Vafakhah & Hossein Azadi & Muhammad Mobeen & Pinar Gökcin Ozuyar & Vjekoslav Tanaskovik, 2021. "Assessment of non-monetary facilities in Urmia Lake basin under PES scheme: a rehabilitation solution for the dry lake in Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10141-10172, July.
    16. Liu, Zhaoyang & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2018. "Meta-Analysis of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services Programmes in Developing Countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 48-61.
    17. Moros, Lina & Vélez, María Alejandra & Corbera, Esteve, 2019. "Payments for Ecosystem Services and Motivational Crowding in Colombia's Amazon Piedmont," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 468-488.
    18. Lliso, Bosco & Pascual, Unai & Engel, Stefanie, 2021. "On the role of social equity in payments for ecosystem services in Latin America: A practitioner perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    19. Martin-Ortega, Julia & Dekker, Thijs & Ojea, Elena & Lorenzo-Arribas, Altea, 2019. "Dissecting price setting efficiency in Payments for Ecosystem Services: A meta-analysis of payments for watershed services in Latin America," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Chan, Kai M.A. & Anderson, Emily & Chapman, Mollie & Jespersen, Kristjan & Olmsted, Paige, 2017. "Payments for Ecosystem Services: Rife With Problems and Potential—For Transformation Towards Sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 110-122.

    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:eee:ecoser:v:34:y:2018:i:pb:p:206-217. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.