ECONOMIC PROPOSAL FOR THE COMPENSATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL GOODS AND SERVICES IN THE MOORS AND FORESTS OF THE PROVINCE OF CHIMBORAZO.
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article presents an economic proposal for the compensation of environmental goods and services in the páramos and forests of the province of Chimborazo. It is based on the recognition of the importance of these ecosystems in the provision of various environmental services, such as climate regulation and biodiversity conservation, among others; the proposal prioritizes water resources since they are threatened by various human activities, such as deforestation, extraction of natural resources and livestock and agricultural activity. Therefore, there is a need to establish a compensation mechanism for owners and communities that contribute to the conservation of these ecosystems and promote their sustainable use. The proposal presented in this article is based on the implementation of a system of payments for environmental services, through which owners and communities that commit to conserve and properly manage moorland and forest ecosystems would be compensated monetarily. The financing of this payment system would come from various mechanisms, such as public funds, international cooperation resources and contributions from the private sector.
The implementation of this economic proposal that aims to conserve 756 hectares through a payment of 596,836 through the implementation of projects would encourage the conservation of natural ecosystems in the province of Chimborazo and promote their sustainable use, generating benefits for both the environment and the people who depend on them.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Baquero FCMPF, Bustamante M, Juan AM-VPM, Torres FO. conservation.
Vallejo S. Accounts that count: rural producers in spaces destined to the conservation of nature. Indigenous peoples and climate change.
Benaouda M, González Ronquillo M, Molina LT, Castelán Ortega OA. State of research on enteric methane emissions and mitigation strategies in Latin America. Mexican Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2017;8( 4):965-74.
Landell-Mills N, Porras IT. Silver bullet or fools' gold?: a global review of markets for forest environmental services and their impact on the poor. 2002.
Pagiola S, Arcenas A, Platais G. Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An exploration of the issues and the evidence to date from Latin America. World development. 2005;33(2):237-53.
Porras IT, Grieg-Gran M, Neves N. All that glitters: A review of payments for watershed services in developing countries. 2008.
Singh VP, Jain S, Karn A, Kumar A, Dwivedi G, Meena CS, et al. Recent developments and advancements in solar air heaters: a detailed review. Sustainability. 2022;14(19):12149.
Engel S, Pagiola S, Wunder S. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecological economics. 2008;65(4):663-74.
Muradian R, Corbera E, Pascual U, Kosoy N, May PH. Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological economics. 2010;69(6):1202-8.
Wunder S. Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecological economics. 2015;117:234-43.
Calvet-Mir L, Corbera E, Martin A, Fisher J, Gross-Camp N. Payments for ecosystem services in the tropics: a closer look at effectiveness and equity. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 2015;14:150-62.
Brauman KA. Hydrologic ecosystem services: managing land cover to enhance water resources: Stanford University; 2010.
SEEHUSEN SE, PREM I. Why payments for environmental services. BECKER, Fatima; SEEHUSEN, Susan And Payments for Environmental Services in the Atlantic Forest: lessons learned and challenges Brasilia: MMA. 2011:15-53.
Farley J, Costanza R. Payments for ecosystem services: from local to global. Ecological economics. 2010;69(11):2060-8.
Shelley BG. What should we call instruments commonly known as payments for environmental services? A review of the literature and a proposal. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2011;1219(1):209-25.
Sánchez-Azofeifa GA, Daily GC, Pfaff AS, Busch C. Integrity and isolation of Costa Rica's national parks and biological reserves: examining the dynamics of land-cover change. Biological Conservation. 2003;109(1):123-35.
Ramirez LM. Payments for hydrological environmental services: beyond passive forest conservation. Editorial Board Gerardo BoCCo Verdinelli Center for Research in Environmental Geography, UNAM. 2011.
Pascual U, Balvanera P, Díaz S, Pataki G, Roth E, Stenseke M, et al. Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Current opinion in environmental sustainability. 2017;26:7-16.
Ferraro PJ, Simpson RD. The cost-effectiveness of conservation payments. Land economics. 2002;78(3):339-53.
Singh NM. Payments for ecosystem services and the gift paradigm: Sharing the burden and joy of environmental care. Ecological Economics. 2015;117:53-61.
Siamak Seyfi I. The gendered effects of statecraft on women in tourism: economic sanctions, women’s disempowerment and sustainability? Gender and Tourism Sustainability. 2023.
Johnson DE, Fisher K, Parsons M. Diversifying Indigenous Vulnerability and Adaptation: An Intersectional Reading of Māori Women’s Experiences of Health, Wellbeing, and Climate Change. Sustainability. 2022;14(9):5452.
González Á, Riascos E. Latin American panorama of payment for environmental services. Management and environment. 2007;10(2):129-44.
Corbera E, Brown K, Adger WN. The equity and legitimacy of markets for ecosystem services. Development and change. 2007;38(4):587-613.
Narváez Apráez AL. Precipitation in the Laguna de la Cocha wetland, Colombia, and its relationship in the sustainability of the region: University of Buenos Aires. Faculty of Exact and Natural Sciences; 2014.
Liu J, Li S, Ouyang Z, Tam C, Chen X. Ecological and socioeconomic effects of China's policies for ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences. 2008;105(28):9477-82.
Rendón F, Hernán K. Characterization of the dairy cattle production system at Hacienda Monte Carmelo: Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo; 2016.
Pérez Rosero MJ. Design of a dairy processing plant for contón chambo, Chimborazo province: Riobamba: Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo, 2011; 2011.
Monteros A. Potato yield in Ecuador First Cycle 2016. Directorate of Analysis and Information Processing, General Coordination of the National Information System Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Aquaculture and Fisheries. 2016.
SINAGAP. National Agricultural Information System. 2016.