dc.date.accessioned2019-08-02T03:48:04Z
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-31T19:05:01Z
dc.date.available2019-08-02T03:48:04Z
dc.date.available2023-05-31T19:05:01Z
dc.date.created2019-08-02T03:48:04Z
dc.date.issued2018-07
dc.identifierBlundo Canto, G., Bax, V., Quintero, M., Cruz Garcia, G. S., Groeneveld, R. A., & Perez Marulanda, L. (2018). The different dimensions of livelihood impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) schemes: A systematic review. Ecological Economics, 149, 160-183.
dc.identifier0921-8009
dc.identifierhttp://repositorio.uch.edu.pe/handle/uch/298
dc.identifierhttp://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.03.011
dc.identifierhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800917306006
dc.identifier10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.03.011
dc.identifierEcological Economics
dc.identifier2-s2.0-85044440864
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/6495618
dc.description.abstractThrough a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, this paper analyzes evidence of the livelihood impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES). Forty-six studies assessed PES livelihood impacts. The assessments presented more positive livelihood impacts than negative ones, focusing on financial benefits. Non-monetary and non-material impacts of PES were largely understudied. Most reviews focused on ES providers, hindering the understanding of broader societal impacts. The review yielded examples where participants lost from their participation or where improvements in one livelihood dimension paralleled deterioration in another. Consequently, we identified key research gaps in: i) understanding the social and cultural impacts of PES, ii) evaluating environmental and economic additionality from improving other ES at the expense of cultural ones, iii) and assessing PES impacts in terms of trade-offs between multiple livelihood dimensions. Moreover, increased knowledge is needed on the impact of PES on changes in household expenditure and choice, and on trade-offs between household income and inequality in ES provider communities. Finally, if PES schemes are implemented to sustainably improve livelihoods, targeting disaggregated populations, understanding equity and social power relations within and between ES providers and users, and better monitoring and evaluation systems that consider locally relevant livelihood dimensions are needed.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherElsevier B.V.
dc.relationEcological Economics
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.sourceRepositorio Institucional - UCH
dc.sourceUniversidad de Ciencias y Humanidades
dc.subjectCapacity building
dc.subjectComparative study
dc.subjectConservation management
dc.subjectDeforestation
dc.subjectEcological economics
dc.subjectEcosystem service
dc.subjectIncentive
dc.subjectIncome
dc.subjectLivelihood
dc.subjectResearch program
dc.titleThe different dimensions of livelihood impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) Schemes: A systematic review
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución