slide1
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Linus Hasselström Enveco Ltd.

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 38

Linus Hasselström Enveco Ltd. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 185 Views
  • Uploaded on

Markets for Ecosystem Services: An examination of alternative Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) structures for Mui Ca Mau National Park . Linus Hasselström Enveco Ltd. 2013-10-15, Hanoi . Key questions. Why do we want markets? What is the role of policy?

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Linus Hasselström Enveco Ltd.' - camila


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1
Markets for Ecosystem Services: An examination of alternative Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) structures for MuiCa Mau National Park

Linus Hasselström

Enveco Ltd.

2013-10-15, Hanoi

key questions
Key questions

Why do we want markets?

What is the role of policy?

What are the necessary preconditions?

What is the potential for markets in Mui Ca Mau?

What could be some promising options for wetland PES in Vietnam?

slide3
FORES 2012 Report
  • Reportfocuses on howtoexpand the use of markets
  • Published in June 2012
  • Was basis for a 90 minute roundtable discussion at the UNCSD (Rio+20) Conference

Scott Cole

[email protected]

+46702532883

www.eesweden.com

Linus Hasselström

[email protected]

+46704987820

www.enveco.se

Fanny Engkvist

[email protected]

+46701482835

www.fores.se

Tore Söderqvist

[email protected]

+46704937473

www.enveco.se

slide4
OUR PROJECT:

Piloting a model on payment for coastal wetland ecosystems of the Mui Ca Mau National Park in the context of climate change and contribute to reducing poverty for local community

PARTNERS:

BCA

ISPONRE

MONRE

FORWET

FORES

EnviroEconomics Sweden

(Enveco subcontracted by EES)

Daxam

slide5
Markets – whatarethey?

Transactionsbetweenbuyers & sellersthat benefit both

Twokeyfeatures:

Voluntary

Alignsincentives

slide6
Habitat/Conservation Banking in California (Madsen et al 2010)
    • BUYER: Developer that must compensate for environmental injuries (e.g., wetlands)
    • SELLER: Entrepreneur that invests in wetland restoration and sells the ”compensation credit” to developer or other organization
slide7
Market to address eutrophication in the Baltic Sea (Zandersen et al 2009)
    • BUYER: Wastewater treatment plant that must reduce Nitrogen emissions
    • SELLER: Mussel farmer that contributes to nitrogen uptake
slide8
Market for clean water in France (Perrot-Maitre, 2006)
  • BUYER: Mineral water producer that wants to avoid contaminated water sources
    • SELLER: Farmers that change their farming practices
slide9
Market for Forest Ecosystem Services (Lam Dong Province, Vietnam)
    • Payers: Hydropower, water supply, tourism industries
    • Service providers: Local landowners
slide10
Overview of policy instruments

Directregulation

Information

Support for research & development

Incentive-based instruments (”economic instruments”)

  • Markets for ecosystem services fall under Category 4.
  • …are one of many possible policy instruments
  • …and should complement rather than replace other instruments
slide11
Why markets?
  • Economicreasons
  • Rewards those who improve ES (e.g., planting trees)
  • Penalizes those who damage ES (cutting trees)
  • Provides environmentalprotection at lowestcosttosociety
  • Politicalreasons in Vietnam
  • Biodiversity Law, 2008
  • Decree 99 prefers market-basedapproaches, 2010
  • Vietnam’sBiodiversityStrategyto 2030
slide12
What creates and drives markets?

What creates and drives markets?

slide13
What creates and drives markets?
  • Compliance-driven
  • e.g., Habitat banking California, PFES in Vietnam
  • Based on gov’t regulations
  • Heavily dependent on level of env. objective set by the government
slide14
What creates and drives markets?
  • Kravuppfyllande
  • ex: Biodiversitetsmarknader i Kalifornien
  • Bygger på regleringar
  • Starkt beroende av de mål som sätts
  • Compliance-driven
  • e.g., Habitat banking California, PFES in Vietnam
  • Based on gov’t regulations
  • Heavily dependent on level of env. objective set by the government
  • Taxpayer-financed
  • e.g., subsidized mussel farming.
  • Heavily dependent on taxpayer funding
slide15
What creates and drives markets?
  • Kravuppfyllande
  • ex: Biodiversitetsmarknader i Kalifornien
  • Bygger på regleringar
  • Starkt beroende av de mål som sätts
  • Compliance-driven
  • e.g., Habitat banking California, PFES in VIetnam
  • Based on gov’t regulations
  • Heavily dependent on level of env. objective set by the government
  • Skattefinansiering
  • ex: blåmusselodlingar som subventioneras.
  • Starkt beroende av tillgängliga skattemedel
  • Taxpayer-financed
  • e.g., subsidized mussel farming.
  • Heavily dependent on taxpayer funding
  • Voluntary
  • e.g., drinking water in France
  • Dependent on that an ecosystemservice provides a private profit
  • Or benevolence & charity
slide16
Conclusions – Market pre-conditions
  • The report’s various conclusions underscore the importance of
  • Measurability
  • Clear markets rules (”social acceptance”)
  • Institutional capacity
  • Property rights
slide17
Policy Recommendations
    • Governments must clearly define market structure – both market goals and rules of the game .. Butletmature markets workwithouttoomuch intervention.
  • Report identifies 10 key things governments can do, including:
    • Stimulate Demand/Supply
    • Help reduce transaction costs
    • Maintain other regulatory policies
    • Inform market participants (about ES and about markets)
    • Create pilot studies/markets and evaluate outcomes before scaling up
description of the project
Description of the project

Develop a livelihood model (20 HH)

Develop a PES mechanism

Improve capacity building & public awareness

Create long-term partnership

partner contributions
Partner Contributions

FORWET (Vietnam)

  • Develop livelihood model & PES model

FORES (Sweden)

  • Critic PES model & suggest PES alternatives
    • Identify ecosystem services & their value
    • Identify benefits of markets
    • Focus on MCMNPwith International PES experience
fores project deliverables
FORES’ Project Deliverables
  • Capacity assessment (Activity 3.1)
  • Land use (Act 2.8)
  • Desk study of climate change impacts (Act 2.1)
  • Ecosystem service assessment (Act 2.6)
  • Valuation of ecosystem services (Act 2.7)
  • International PES case studies (Act 2.3)
  • Alternative PES Structures Report (Act 2.12)

Draft  late Oct

Final  Nov

alternative pes structures report
Alternative PES Structures Report

Objectives

Propose alternative PES structures in MCMNP

Identify economic criteria to evaluate PES

Assess PES alternatives with criteria

Provide recommendations for next phase in MCMNP

our 4 alternative pes structures
Our 4 Alternative PES structures:
  • PES #1a – Aquaculture & Agriculture livelihood
  • PES #1b – Eco-tourism/Homestay livelihood
  • PES #2 – Traditional with state as buyer
  • PES #3 – Carbon market
  • PES #4 – Eco-labeling
why these 4 pes alternatives
Why these 4 PES alternatives?
  • IllustratePES possibilities
  • Illustratebuyer&sellerpossibilities
  • Cover manyEcosystem Services in MCMNP
  • Cover many different geographicscales
    • Local
    • National
    • Global
  • Illustratepossibilitiestocombine/layer PES structures
is pes 1a sufficient
Is PES #1a sufficient?

Seller

Buyer

Payment:

Forest Protection

  • LUR to farmer
  • Tech assistance
  • Trees to plant
  • Small wage

Ecosystem

Services

(ES)

is pes 1a sufficient1
Is PES #1a sufficient?

Seller

Buyer

Payment:

Forest Protection

  • LUR to farmer
  • Tech assistance
  • Trees to plant
  • Small wage

A good livelihood model … but:

1. Many more beneficiaries out there …

2. Need buyers who can can/will pay

3. Sufficient incentive/income for HHsto protect forest?

slide33
Buyer

Buyer

/ Seller

Seller

PES

Input #2:

Knowledge

Livelihood

Ecosystem

Services

(ES)

Eco-Label Shrimp

Input #1:

ES

Now  HH has better economic incentive to protect forest

conclusions and recommendations 1
Conclusions and Recommendations(1)
  • MCMNP is a strong candidate for PES
  • All PES structures should be “tested – evaluated – improved” repeatedly
  • Some PES structures more likely to succeed than others. Key criteria to be met:
    • Voluntary transactions
    • Additionality
    • Include maximum number of beneficiaries
conclusions and recommendations 2
Conclusions and Recommendations(2)
  • PES #1b Eco-tourism
  • Should be expanded to include additional HHs
  • Strong focus on innovative marketing strategies
  • Potential effects on ES should be further discussed and evaluated
  • PES#2 (coastal protection) and PES #3 (carbon)
  • Suggest a PES structure that includes “layering” to improve income possibilities for HHs
conclusions and recommendations 3
Conclusions and Recommendations (3)
  • Combine PES #1a and PES#4
  • PES#1a is a good first step but is expensive
  • PES#4 Eco-labeling is the logical next step, as it identifies more potential buyers and creates improved incentives for HHs to protect the forest.
  • Eco-labeling is promising because:
    • Current shrimp production already meets “eco” standards – very important (!)
    • Can rely on existing contracts between HHs & NP
    • Good opportunity for piloting this PES #4 in 2014 when re-newing contracts
    • Self financing (after initial investment)
recommended next steps
Recommended next steps
  • Review PES #1a and #1b pilot before proceeding to next stage
  • Consider piloting our PES #4 alternative
  • Further investigation need for PES #2 and PES #3
  • Given trade-offs between PES alternatives, should consider the top policy priority:
    • Raising gov’t revenue?
    • Reducing poverty?
    • Improving ecosystem services?
thank you
Thank you!

Linus Hasselström

Enveco Ltd. Sweden

[email protected]

+46 70 498 78 20

ad