Applying the ecosystem services concept to poverty alleviation: the need to disaggregate human well-being
Tóm tắt
The concept of ecosystem services (ES), the benefits humans derive from ecosystems, is increasingly applied to environmental conservation, human well-being and poverty alleviation, and to inform the development of interventions. Payments for ecosystem services (PES) implicitly recognize the unequal distribution of the costs and benefits of maintaining ES, through monetary compensation from ‘winners’ to ‘losers’. Some research into PES has examined how such schemes affect poverty, while other literature addresses trade-offs between different ES. However, much evolving ES literature adopts an aggregated perspective of humans and their well-being, which can disregard critical issues for poverty alleviation. This paper identifies four issues with examples from coastal ES in developing countries. First, different groups derive well-being benefits from different ES, creating winners and losers as ES, change. Second, dynamic mechanisms of access determine who can benefit. Third, individuals' contexts and needs determine how ES contribute to well-being. Fourth, aggregated analyses may neglect crucial poverty alleviation mechanisms such as cash-based livelihoods. To inform the development of ES interventions that contribute to poverty alleviation, disaggregated analysis is needed that focuses on who derives which benefits from ecosystems, and how such benefits contribute to the well-being of the poor. These issues present challenges in data availability and selection of how and at which scales to disaggregate. Disaggregation can be applied spatially, but should also include social groupings, such as gender, age and ethnicity, and is most important where inequality is greatest. Existing tools, such as stakeholder analysis and equity weights, can improve the relevance of ES research to poverty alleviation.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Dietz, 2009, Environmentally efficient wellbeing: rethinking sustainability as the relationship between human wellbeing and environmental impacts, Human Ecology Review, 16, 114
2007, Nature's Benefits in Kenya: An Atlas of Ecosystem Services and Human Wellbeing
2007, The State of Food and Agriculture 2007
Perrings, 2006, Ecological economics after the Millennium Assessment, International Journal of Ecological Economics and Statistics, 6, 8
2008, A Guide to World Resources 2008: Roots of Resilience-Growing the Wealth of the Poor
Marshall N. , Milledge S.A.H. & Afonso P.S. (2001) Stormy seas for marine invertebrates; trade in sea cucumbers, seashells and lobsters in Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique. TRAFFIC East/Southern Africa, Harare, Zimbabwe.
2010, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB
Pollnac, 2008, Happiness, well-being and psychocultural adaptation to the stresses associated with marine fishing, Human Ecology Review, 15, 194
Brown K. , Daw T. , Rosendo S. , Bunce M. & Cherrett N. (2008) Ecosystem services for poverty alleviation: marine and coastal situational analysis. Synthesis report. Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)/Department for International Development (DFID), UK.
2005, Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis
2003, Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment
Matsue N. (2009) Gender, trade and development in Kenya's marine fishery. MSc thesis, University of East Anglia, School of International Development, Norwich, UK.
Daily, 1997, Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems
Landell-Mills, 2002, Silver Bullet or Fools’ Gold? A Global Review of Markets for Forest Environmental Services and Their Impact on the Poor