Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12872/298
Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DC Valor Lengua/Idioma
dc.contributor.authorBlundo Canto, Genowefa Maria
dc.contributor.authorBax, Vincent
dc.contributor.authorQuintero, Marcela
dc.contributor.authorCruz García, Gisella Susana
dc.contributor.authorGroeneveld, Rolf Adriaan
dc.contributor.authorPérez Marulanda, Lisset
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-02T03:48:04Z
dc.date.available2019-08-02T03:48:04Z
dc.date.issued2018-07
dc.identifier.citationBlundo 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.en_PE
dc.identifier.issn0921-8009
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorio.uch.edu.pe/handle/uch/298
dc.identifier.urihttp://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.03.011
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800917306006
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.en
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherElsevier B.V.en_PE
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.relation.isPartOfEcological Economics
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.sourceRepositorio Institucional - UCHen_PE
dc.sourceUniversidad de Ciencias y Humanidadesen_PE
dc.subjectCapacity buildingen
dc.subjectComparative studyen
dc.subjectConservation managementen
dc.subjectDeforestationen
dc.subjectEcological economicsen
dc.subjectEcosystem serviceen
dc.subjectIncentiveen
dc.subjectIncomeen
dc.subjectLivelihooden
dc.subjectResearch programen
dc.titleThe different dimensions of livelihood impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) Schemes: A systematic reviewen_PE
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.03.011en_PE
dc.identifier.journalEcological Economicsen_PE
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85044440864
Aparece en las colecciones: Artículos científicos

Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato  
2018_Blundo-Canto.pdf1.77 MBAdobe PDFVisualizar/Abrir


Los ítems de DSpace están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.