IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i21p15649-d1274730.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Scientometric Analysis of Payments for Ecosystem Services Research: Mapping Global Trends and Directions

Author

Listed:
  • Changsu Song

    (Department of Social & Ecological Studies, Chinese Academy of Governance, Beijing 100091, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Yuqing Liu

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Longqing Liu

    (College of the Life and Environmental Science, Minzu University of China, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Chaofan Xian

    (State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Xuan Wang

    (School of Agriculture Economics and Rural Development, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China)

Abstract

Payment for ecosystem services (PES) is an innovative economic intervention to mitigate the decline of ecosystem services and biodiversity; it plays a key role in harmonizing protection and development. Based on numerous PES practices worldwide, PES has emerged as a research hotspot in the field of sustainability. This paper presents a comprehensive scientometric analysis of PES academic publications between 1987 and 2022. The study aims to characterize the intellectual landscape of PES by identifying and visualizing the evolution of the collaboration network, the co-citation network, and emerging research trends. The findings reveal a rapid increase in publications of this field, indicating its growing importance as an interdisciplinary research subject. In particular, PES has gained significant attention from numerous researchers since 2007. Environmental sciences and ecology (50.77%) have been the core subjects, followed by business economics (11.04%) and biodiversity conservation (9.58%). Engineering (3.52%) and water resources (3.40%) have emerged as new fields in recent years. Notably, productive authors and institutions in this domain are primarily located in the United States, China, and the United Kingdom. However, fewer stable collaborations were found between China and European countries. Regarding the keywords, the most popular keywords of this topic were “ecosystem service” (1423), “conservation” (1324), and “biodiversity” (1029). By synthesizing the literature, this paper identifies pressing topics related to the effectiveness of PES, including the evaluation of effectiveness, efficiency assessment, and equity. Through an in-depth analysis, this paper elucidates global trends and directions in PES research. It is important to create a fair and efficient market that boosts the motivation and initiative of society to engage in PES initiatives, to increase investment in comprehensive PES projects, which helps improve the efficiency of fund utilization, especially concerning climate change mitigation. It is proposed to integrate natural sciences and social sciences to comprehensively assess the effectiveness of climate-friendly PES, which contributes to the sustainable development of PES research and application.

Suggested Citation

  • Changsu Song & Yuqing Liu & Longqing Liu & Chaofan Xian & Xuan Wang, 2023. "A Scientometric Analysis of Payments for Ecosystem Services Research: Mapping Global Trends and Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-21, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:21:p:15649-:d:1274730
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/21/15649/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/21/15649/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simpson, Katherine & Armsworth, Paul R. & Dallimer, Martin & Nthambi, Mary & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2023. "Improving the ecological and economic performance of agri-environment schemes: Payment by modelled results versus payment for actions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    4. Sierra, Rodrigo & Russman, Eric, 2006. "On the efficiency of environmental service payments: A forest conservation assessment in the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 131-141, August.
    5. Stefanie Engel & Charles Palmer & Luca Taschini & Simon Urech, 2015. "Conservation Payments under Uncertainty," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(1), pages 36-56.
    6. Johst, Karin & Drechsler, Martin & Watzold, Frank, 2002. "An ecological-economic modelling procedure to design compensation payments for the efficient spatio-temporal allocation of species protection measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 37-49, April.
    7. Chaomei Chen, 2006. "CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(3), pages 359-377, February.
    8. Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 712-724, May.
    9. Shiliang Liu & Yuhong Dong & Hua Liu & Fangfang Wang & Lu Yu, 2023. "Review of Valuation of Forest Ecosystem Services and Realization Approaches in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    10. Assogba, Noel Perceval & Zhang, Daowei, 2022. "The conservation reserve program and timber prices in the southern United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    11. Wünscher, Tobias & Engel, Stefanie & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: A tool for boosting conservation benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 822-833, May.
    12. Rafaella Guimarães Porto & Rita Fernandes Almeida & Oswaldo Cruz-Neto & Marcelo Tabarelli & Blandina Felipe Viana & Carlos A. Peres & Ariadna Valentina Lopes, 2020. "Pollination ecosystem services: A comprehensive review of economic values, research funding and policy actions," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1425-1442, December.
    13. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    14. Hunt, Colin, 2008. "Economy and ecology of emerging markets and credits for bio-sequestered carbon on private land in tropical Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 309-318, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Reutemann, Tim & Engel, Stefanie & Pareja, Eliana, 2016. "How (not) to pay — Field experimental evidence on the design of REDD+ payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 220-229.
    2. Blackman, Allen & Woodward, Richard T., 2010. "User financing in a national payments for environmental services program: Costa Rican hydropower," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1626-1638, June.
    3. Aguilar-Gómez, Carlos R. & Arteaga-Reyes, Tizbe T. & Gómez-Demetrio, William & Ávila-Akerberg, Víctor D. & Pérez-Campuzano, Enrique, 2020. "Differentiated payments for environmental services: A review of the literature," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    4. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    5. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    6. 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.
    7. Ina, Porras & Bruce, Alyward & Jeff, Dengel, 2013. "Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries," MPRA Paper 47185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Pierre Mokondoko & Robert H Manson & Taylor H Ricketts & Daniel Geissert, 2018. "Spatial analysis of ecosystem service relationships to improve targeting of payments for hydrological services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, February.
    9. Legrand, Thomas & Froger, Géraldine & Le Coq, Jean-François, 2013. "Institutional performance of Payments for Environmental Services: An analysis of the Costa Rican Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 115-123.
    10. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    11. Kwayu, Emmanuel J. & Sallu, Susannah M. & Paavola, Jouni, 2014. "Farmer participation in the equitable payments for watershed services in Morogoro, Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 1-9.
    12. Vignola, Raffaele & McDaniels, Tim L. & Scholz, Roland W., 2012. "Negotiation analysis for mechanisms to deliver ecosystem services: The case of soil conservation in Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 22-31.
    13. Astrid Zabel & Karen Pittel & Göran Bostedt & Stefanie Engel, 2011. "Comparing Conventional and New Policy Approaches for Carnivore Conservation: Theoretical Results and Application to Tiger Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 287-301, February.
    14. Luca Corato & Michele Moretto & Sergio Vergalli, 2013. "Land conversion pace under uncertainty and irreversibility: too fast or too slow?," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 45-82, September.
    15. Saint-Cyr, Legrand D.F. & Védrine, Lionel & Legras, Sophie & Le Gallo, Julie & Bellassen, Valentin, 2023. "Drivers of PES effectiveness: Some evidence from a quantitative meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    16. Rodrigo A. Arriagada, & Paul J. Ferraro & Erin O. Sills & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Silvia Cordero-Sancho, 2012. "Do Payments for Environmental Services Affect Forest Cover? A Farm-Level Evaluation from Costa Rica," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 382-399.
    17. Xiaohui Ding & Chen Zhou & Volker Mauerhofer & Weizhou Zhong & Guoping Li, 2019. "From Environmental Soundness to Sustainable Development: Improving Applicability of Payment for Ecosystem Services Scheme for Diverting Regional Sustainability Transition in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-22, January.
    18. 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.
    19. Hao Li & Michael T Bennett & Xuemei Jiang & Kebin Zhang & Xiaohui Yang, 2017. "Rural Household Preferences for Active Participation in “Payment for Ecosystem Service” Programs: A Case in the Miyun Reservoir Catchment, China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, January.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:21:p:15649-:d:1274730. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.