Who wants to pay for Pantanal? Experiences of payment for environmental services in the preservation of a single biome

被引:0
|
作者
Pompeu, Natalia [1 ]
Vilpouxb, Olivier Francois [2 ]
机构
[1] Fed Univ Mato Grosso Sul UFMS, Campo Grande, MS, Brazil
[2] Fed Univ Rondonopolis UFR, Rondonopilis, Mato Grosso, Brazil
关键词
Economic instruments; Ecosystem services; Organic products; Sustainability; Environmental conservation;
D O I
10.1016/j.envdev.2023.100903
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Environmental conservation standards in Brazil are insufficient and must be completed by economic instruments, such as Payments for Environmental Services (PESs). These instruments are at initial implementation stage in Pantanal, which is one of the world's greatest extensions of flooded areas. This biome undergoes increasing pressures for the exploitation of its natural resources. Thus, the objectives of the current research are to investigate PESs in Pantanal and to analyze their potential to be used for environmental protection purposes. Interviews were conducted with political authorities, NGO representatives and professional association members. Four PESs were identified. All counties in Pantanal region receive the Ecological ICMS, which is a percentage of a tax on commerce and services received by the State and redistributed to counties hosting Conservation Units. Another PES, called Private Natural Heritage Reserve (RPPN), enables the exemption of Territorial Tax. Despite protecting 250,000 ha, RPPNs only reach 1.7% of preserved areas in Pantanal. In addition to these PESs, which count on State participation, it was possible to find two mechanisms based on consumers' participation, organic meat and organic honey production. However, only two producers were certified to produce organic meat and one to produce organic honey. Although PESs are important mechanisms, they play limited role in Pantanal region. PESs between producers and consumers depend on incentive policies and on information about environmental benefits provided to consumers. Ecological ICMS should be subjected to rigorous selection process in choosing who can receive the benefits. Although RPPNs are often used as PESs, their incentives are insufficient and should be improved.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 4 条
  • [1] Perspectives of the socioecological approach in the preservation, utilization and the payment of environmental services of the temperate forests of Mexico
    Galicia, Leopoldo
    Manuel Chavez-Vergara, Bruno
    Kolb, Melanie
    Isela Jasso-Flores, Rosa
    Rodriguez-Bustos, Laura A.
    Elizabeth Solis, Lesly
    Guerra de la Cruz, Vidal
    Perez-Campuzano, Enrique
    Villanueva, Antonio
    [J]. MADERA Y BOSQUES, 2018, 24 (02)
  • [2] The Payment for Hydrological Environmental Services. Examining the Experiences of Costa Rica, Mexico, Ecuador and Colombia
    Rojas Sanchez, Angela Maria
    [J]. AMBIENTE Y DESARROLLO, 2015, 19 (36):
  • [3] Diagnosis and Assessment of Environmental Preservation's Efficiency in the State of Mato Grosso do Sul after the Inclusion of Payment for Environmental Services
    Pinto, Jorge de Souza
    Frainer, Daniel Massen
    Morbeck de Oliveira, Ademir Kleber
    de Souza, Celso Correia
    [J]. DESENVOLVIMENTO E MEIO AMBIENTE, 2015, 35 : 225 - 240
  • [4] Nicaraguan experiences in the implementation of financial payment mechanisms for environmental services focused on water, carbon capture and scenic beauty
    Juarez Martinez, Maria Encarnacion
    [J]. TECNOLOGIA EN MARCHA, 2008, 21 (01): : 64 - 76