[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03235814.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia

Author

Listed:
  • Manon Authelet

    (Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech [Gembloux] - Université de Liège)

  • Julie Subervie

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - UM - Université de Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement)

  • Patrick Meyfroidt

    (ELI - Earth and Life Institute [Louvain-La-Neuve] - UCL - Université Catholique de Louvain = Catholic University of Louvain)

  • Nigel Asquith

    (John F. Kennedy School of Government - Harvard University)

  • Driss Ezzine-De-Blas

    (UPR Forêts et Sociétés - Forêts et Sociétés - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, Cirad-ES - Département Environnements et Sociétés - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement)

Abstract
The effectiveness of incentive-based conservation programs depends on how they influence and interact with multiple motivations of the participants. Here, we studied an incentive-based program for forest conservation in Bolivia – called "Reciprocal Watershared Agreements" – that mixes material compensations with pro-social and pro-environmental motivations as a way to reduce crowding-out of intrinsic motivations and to increase participation. Based on a sample of 470 households who were offered the program, we studied household characteristics that influenced (i) the probability of participation in the program, (ii) the intensity of the participation, measured as the area allocated in the agreement, and (iii) the modality of participation, measured as the probability of participation in the different types of agreements. We found that owning property titles, having large forested land with low conservation opportunity cost, agricultural equipment and off-farm incomes seem to favour participation. In addition, the probability of participation increases with some pro-social factors, such as a deeper or older integration into social networks, and greater compliance to social norms of reciprocity. We also found that a lack of trust in public institutions can increase both the likelihood and the intensity of participation, as can certain pro-environmental factors, such as awareness of environmental problems, knowledge about potential solutions to solve them and perception of the gains associated with the conservation of ecosystem services. Finally, we found that feeling some individual responsibility for environmental issues and some difficulty in performing pro-environmental options may increase participation into more restrictive agreements. Our results thus highlight the factors that could increase uptake and factors on which programs might focus in order to have a greater impact on pro-environmental behaviours. They also suggest that incentive-based program can be designed to take advantage of pro-social and pro-environmental motivations as strongly as of economic ones.

Suggested Citation

  • Manon Authelet & Julie Subervie & Patrick Meyfroidt & Nigel Asquith & Driss Ezzine-De-Blas, 2021. "Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia," Post-Print hal-03235814, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03235814
    DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105487
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-03235814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-03235814/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105487?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Third Party Punishment and Social Norms," IEW - Working Papers 106, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    2. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    3. Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
    4. Moros, Lina & Vélez, María Alejandra & Corbera, Esteve, 2019. "Payments for Ecosystem Services and Motivational Crowding in Colombia's Amazon Piedmont," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 468-488.
    5. Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Payments for environmental services and the poor: concepts and preliminary evidence," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 279-297, June.
    6. Alain Janvry & Ravi Kanbur, 2006. "Poverty, Inequality and Development: Micro-Macro Perspectives and Linkages," Economic Studies in Inequality, Social Exclusion, and Well-Being, in: Alain Janvry & Ravi Kanbur (ed.), Poverty, Inequality and Development, chapter 0, pages 1-8, Springer.
    7. Frey, Bruno S & Oberholzer-Gee, Felix, 1997. "The Cost of Price Incentives: An Empirical Analysis of Motivation Crowding-Out," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 746-755, September.
    8. Engel, Stefanie & Palmer, Charles, 2008. "Payments for environmental services as an alternative to logging under weak property rights: The case of Indonesia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 799-809, May.
    9. Rode, Julian & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Krause, Torsten, 2015. "Motivation crowding by economic incentives in conservation policy: A review of the empirical evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 270-282.
    10. Grillos, Tara, 2017. "Economic vs non-material incentives for participation in an in-kind payments for ecosystem services program in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 178-190.
    11. Samuel Bowles & Herbert Gintis, 2002. "Social Capital and Community Governance," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(483), pages 419-436, November.
    12. Pretty, Jules & Ward, Hugh, 2001. "Social Capital and the Environment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 209-227, February.
    13. Wunder, Sven & Angelsen, Arild & Belcher, Brian, 2014. "Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 1-11.
    14. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    15. Figueroa, Fernanda & Caro-Borrero, Ángela & Revollo-Fernández, Daniel & Merino, Leticia & Almeida-Leñero, Lucía & Paré, Luisa & Espinosa, Dulce & Mazari-Hiriart, Marisa, 2016. "“I like to conserve the forest, but I also like the cash”. Socioeconomic factors influencing the motivation to be engaged in the Mexican Payment for Environmental Services Programme," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 36-51.
    16. Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron J. & Smetschka, Barbara & Ringhofer, Lisa, 2016. "Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) in Latin America: Analysing the performance of 40 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 24-32.
    17. Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Corbera, Esteve & Lapeyre, Renaud, 2019. "Payments for Environmental Services and Motivation Crowding: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 434-443.
    18. Pagiola, Stefano & Arcenas, Agustin & Platais, Gunars, 2005. "Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-253, February.
    19. Grillos, Tara & Bottazzi, Patrick & Crespo, David & Asquith, Nigel & Jones, Julia P.G., 2019. "In-kind conservation payments crowd in environmental values and increase support for government intervention: A randomized trial in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Alain Janvry & Elisabeth Sadoulet, 2006. "Progress in the Modeling of Rural Households’ Behavior under Market Failures," Economic Studies in Inequality, Social Exclusion, and Well-Being, in: Alain Janvry & Ravi Kanbur (ed.), Poverty, Inequality and Development, chapter 0, pages 155-181, Springer.
    21. Levine, Jordan & Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre, 2015. "From rational actor to efficient complexity manager: Exorcising the ghost of Homo economicus with a unified synthesis of cognition research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 22-32.
    22. Seroa da Motta, Ronaldo & Ortiz, Ramon Arigoni, 2018. "Costs and Perceptions Conditioning Willingness to Accept Payments for Ecosystem Services in a Brazilian Case," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 333-342.
    23. Rob A. Cramb, 2005. "Social capital and soil conservation: evidence from the Philippines," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(2), pages 211-226, June.
    24. Neuteleers, Stijn & Engelen, Bart, 2015. "Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 253-260.
    25. Vatn, Arild, 2010. "An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1245-1252, April.
    26. Chen, Xiaodong & Lupi, Frank & An, Li & Sheely, Ryan & Viña, Andrés & Liu, Jianguo, 2012. "Agent-based modeling of the effects of social norms on enrollment in payments for ecosystem services," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 16-24.
    27. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    28. Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Sven Wunder & Paul J. Ferraro, 2010. "Show Me the Money: Do Payments Supply Environmental Services in Developing Countries?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(2), pages 254-274, Summer.
    29. Nikoleta Jones, 2010. "Investigating the influence of social costs and benefits of environmental policies through social capital theory," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 43(3), pages 229-244, September.
    30. Cramb, Rob A., 2005. "Social capital and soil conservation: evidence from the Philippines," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(2), pages 1-16.
    31. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(3), pages 489-520.
    32. Grieg-Gran, Maryanne & Porras, Ina & Wunder, Sven, 2005. "How can market mechanisms for forest environmental services help the poor? Preliminary lessons from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1511-1527, September.
    33. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    34. Vedeld, Paul & Angelsen, Arild & Bojo, Jan & Sjaastad, Espen & Kobugabe Berg, Gertrude, 2007. "Forest environmental incomes and the rural poor," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 869-879, April.
    35. Cranford, Matthew & Mourato, Susana, 2011. "Community conservation and a two-stage approach to payments for ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 89-98.
    36. Arne Henningsen & Ott Toomet, 2011. "maxLik: A package for maximum likelihood estimation in R," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 443-458, September.
    37. Bottazzi, Patrick & Wiik, Emma & Crespo, David & Jones, Julia P.G., 2018. "Payment for Environmental “Self-Service”: Exploring the Links Between Farmers' Motivation and Additionality in a Conservation Incentive Programme in the Bolivian Andes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 11-23.
    38. Woolcock, Michael & Narayan, Deepa, 2000. "Social Capital: Implications for Development Theory, Research, and Policy," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 15(2), pages 225-249, August.
    39. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    40. Zbinden, Simon & Lee, David R., 2005. "Paying for Environmental Services: An Analysis of Participation in Costa Rica's PSA Program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 255-272, February.
    41. Samuel Bowles & Sandra Polania-Reyes, 2012. "Economic Incentives and Social Preferences: Substitutes or Complements?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 50(2), pages 368-425, June.
    42. Groothuis, Peter A & Miller, Gail, 1997. "The Role of Social Distrust in Risk-Benefit Analysis: A Study of the Siting of a Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 241-257, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Victor Champonnois & Katrin Erdlenbruch, 2020. "Willingness of households to reduce flood risk in southern France," Working Papers hal-02586069, HAL.
    2. Andrews, Jeffrey & Borgerhoff Mulder, Monique, 2024. "The value of failure: The effect of an expired REDD+ conservation program on residents’ willingness for future participation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    3. Isyaku, Usman, 2021. "What motivates communities to participate in forest conservation? A study of REDD+ pilot sites in Cross River, Nigeria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    4. Viktor Koval & I Wayan Edi Arsawan & Ni Putu Santi Suryantini & Serhii Kovbasenko & Nadiia Fisunenko & Tetiana Aloshyna, 2022. "Circular Economy and Sustainability-Oriented Innovation: Conceptual Framework and Energy Future Avenue," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Connor, Jeffery D. & Summers, David & Regan, Courtney & Abbott, Hayley & Van Der Linden, Leon & Frizenschaf, Jacqueline, 2022. "Sensitivity analysis in economic evaluation of payments for water and carbon ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    6. Amadu, Festus O. & Miller, Daniel C., 2024. "The impact of forest product collection and processing on household income in rural Liberia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    7. Montero-de-Oliveira, Fernando-Esteban & Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2023. "Under what conditions do payments for environmental services enable forest conservation in the Amazon? A realist synthesis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    8. Cheng, Xiu & Li, Wenbo & Yang, Jiameng & Zhang, Linling, 2023. "How convenience and informational tools shape waste separation behavior: A social network approach," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(PB).
    9. Maca-Millán, Stefany & Arias-Arévalo, Paola & Restrepo-Plaza, Lina, 2021. "Payment for ecosystem services and motivational crowding: Experimental insights regarding the integration of plural values via non-monetary incentives," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    10. Silva-Muller, Livio, 2022. "Payment for ecosystem services and the practices of environmental fieldworkers in policy implementation: The case of Bolsa Floresta in the Brazilian Amazon," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    11. Naime, Julia & Angelsen, Arild & Rodriguez-Ward, Dawn & Sills, Erin O., 2024. "Participation, anticipation effects and impact perceptions of two collective incentive-based conservation interventions in Ucayali, Peru," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bottazzi, Patrick & Wiik, Emma & Crespo, David & Jones, Julia P.G., 2018. "Payment for Environmental “Self-Service”: Exploring the Links Between Farmers' Motivation and Additionality in a Conservation Incentive Programme in the Bolivian Andes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 11-23.
    2. Bauchet, Jonathan & Asquith, Nigel & Ma, Zhao & Radel, Claudia & Godoy, Ricardo & Zanotti, Laura & Steele, Diana & Gramig, Benjamin M. & Chong, Andrea Estrella, 2020. "The practice of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) in the Tropical Andes: Evidence from program administrators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    3. Grillos, Tara & Bottazzi, Patrick & Crespo, David & Asquith, Nigel & Jones, Julia P.G., 2019. "In-kind conservation payments crowd in environmental values and increase support for government intervention: A randomized trial in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Campanhão, Ligia Maria Barrios & Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima, 2019. "Guideline framework for effective targeting of payments for watershed services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-109.
    5. Liu, Zhaoyang & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2018. "Meta-Analysis of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services Programmes in Developing Countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 48-61.
    6. Ma, Zhao & Bauchet, Jonathan & Steele, Diana & Godoy, Ricardo & Radel, Claudia & Zanotti, Laura, 2017. "Comparison of Direct Transfers for Human Capital Development and Environmental Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 498-517.
    7. Lliso, Bosco & Pascual, Unai & Engel, Stefanie, 2021. "On the role of social equity in payments for ecosystem services in Latin America: A practitioner perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    8. Izquierdo-Tort, Santiago & Ortiz-Rosas, Fiorella & Vázquez-Cisneros, Paola Angélica, 2019. "‘Partial’ participation in Payments for Environmental Services (PES): Land enrolment and forest loss in the Mexican Lacandona Rainforest," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    9. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    10. Jones, Kelly W. & Powlen, Kathryn & Roberts, Ryan & Shinbrot, Xoco, 2020. "Participation in payments for ecosystem services programs in the Global South: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    11. Ola, Oreoluwa & Menapace, Luisa & Benjamin, Emmanuel & Lang, Hannes, 2019. "Determinants of the environmental conservation and poverty alleviation objectives of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) programs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 52-66.
    12. Teo Dang Do & Anchana NaRanong, 2019. "Livelihood and Environmental Impacts of Payments for Forest Environmental Services: A Case Study in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-22, August.
    13. Grillos, Tara, 2017. "Economic vs non-material incentives for participation in an in-kind payments for ecosystem services program in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 178-190.
    14. Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Bax, Vincent & Quintero, Marcela & Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S. & Groeneveld, Rolf A. & Perez-Marulanda, Lisset, 2018. "The Different Dimensions of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) Schemes: A Systematic Review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 160-183.
    15. Jones, Kelly W. & Avila Foucat, Sophie & Pischke, Erin C. & Salcone, Jacob & Torrez, David & Selfa, Theresa & Halvorsen, Kathleen E., 2019. "Exploring the connections between participation in and benefits from payments for hydrological services programs in Veracruz State, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 32-42.
    16. Maca-Millán, Stefany & Arias-Arévalo, Paola & Restrepo-Plaza, Lina, 2021. "Payment for ecosystem services and motivational crowding: Experimental insights regarding the integration of plural values via non-monetary incentives," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    17. Bremer, Leah L. & Farley, Kathleen A. & Lopez-Carr, David & Romero, José, 2014. "Conservation and livelihood outcomes of payment for ecosystem services in the Ecuadorian Andes: What is the potential for ‘win–win’?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 148-165.
    18. Thu-Ha Dang Phan & Roy Brouwer & Long Phi Hoang & Marc David Davidson, 2018. "Do payments for forest ecosystem services generate double dividends? An integrated impact assessment of Vietnam’s PES program," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-16, August.
    19. Jespersen, Kristjan & Gallemore, Caleb, 2018. "The Institutional Work of Payments for Ecosystem Services: Why the Mundane Should Matter," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 507-519.
    20. McWherter, Brooke & Bauchet, Jonathan & Ma, Zhao & Grillos, Tara & Asquith, Nigel & Rathjen, Meagan & Markos, Andrea, 2022. "Compliance under control: Insights from an incentive-based conservation program in rural Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03235814. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.