Different ecosystem services, same (dis)satisfaction with compensation: A critical comparison between farmers' perception in Scotland and Brazil

Author(s)

Canova, Moara Almeida ^[1] ; Lapola, David M. ^[1] ; Pinho, Patricia ^[2] ; Dick, Jan ^[3] ; Patricio, Gleiciani B. ^[4] ; Priess, Joerg A. ^[5]

Affiliation

^[1] Univ Estadual Campinas, Ctr Meteorol & Climat Res Appl Agr CEPAGRI, Campinas, SP - Brazil

^[2] Stockholm Univ, Stockholm Resilience Ctr, Researcher Graid Project, Stockholm - Sweden

^[3] NERC, Ctr Ecol & Hydrol, Bush Estate, Penicuik EH26 0QB, Midlothian - Scotland

^[4] Univ Estadual Paulista, Dept Ecol, Unesp, Ave 24 A, 1515 Bela Vista, BR-13506752 Rio Claro, SP - Brazil

^[5] UFZ Helmholtz Ctr Environm Res, Leipzig - Germany

• Document type: Journal article
• Source: ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; v. 35, p. 164-172, FEB 2019.
• Web of Science Citations: 2

Abstract

Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes have increasingly expanded to consider ecosystem services (ESS). In Brazil, the Forest Code permits PES but does not specify the scheme operationalization. The way ESS should be quantified and valued has not yet been implemented country-wide, nor has the funding source for PES. Through interviews with farmers in Rio Claro-SP, Brazil, and in Cairngorms National Park in the highlands and lowlands of Scotland, UK, we compared farmers' perspectives concerning ESS and PES, focusing on the PES implementation in sugarcane landscape in Sao Paulo state. While Scottish farmers perceived more cultural services, Brazilian farmers focused on regulating services, which we attribute to socio-political and landscape differences. Despite these differences, farmers in both areas preferred opportunity cost approach for ESS valuation because this method captures efforts to maintain ESS. Thereby, the opportunity cost should be considered for valuation in PES schemes, but conversely, budgetary constraints make it impossible to satisfy farmers with PES in regions of high productivity in the southeast of Brazil. Lessons learned concerning the PES subsidies in Scotland indicates the importance of co-designing schemes with stakeholders, minimizing trade-offs between the environment. Therefore, the participants as ESS providers, beneficiaries and intermediaries in the public policies arena was recognized for co-optimize the trade-offs between costs and effectiveness in PES. (AU)

• FAPESP's process: 14/08345-0 - Construction of compensation mechanisms for environmental services in the sugarcane belt of the paulista interior using participatory methods
• Grantee: Moara Almeida Canova Teixeira
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Master