Logotipo do repositório
 

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

dc.contributor.authorCanova, Moara Almeida
dc.contributor.authorLapola, David M.
dc.contributor.authorPinho, Patrícia
dc.contributor.authorDick, Jan
dc.contributor.authorPatricio, Gleiciani B. [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorPriess, Joerg A.
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
dc.contributor.institutionStockholm University
dc.contributor.institutionNatural Environment Research Council–NERC
dc.contributor.institutionHelmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-06T15:28:02Z
dc.date.available2019-10-06T15:28:02Z
dc.date.issued2019-02-01
dc.description.abstractPayments 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 São 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.en
dc.description.affiliationCenter for Meteorological and Climatic Research Applied to Agriculture – CEPAGRI Universidade de Campinas
dc.description.affiliationStockholm Resilience Center – Researcher Graid Project Stockholm University
dc.description.affiliationCenter for Ecology and Hydrology Natural Environment Research Council–NERC, Bush Estate, Penicuik
dc.description.affiliationHelmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ
dc.description.affiliationDepartamento de Ecologia Universidade Estadual Paulista – Unesp
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartamento de Ecologia Universidade Estadual Paulista – Unesp
dc.description.sponsorshipCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
dc.description.sponsorshipFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.description.sponsorshipIdCAPES: 88881.030372/2013-01
dc.format.extent164-172
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.10.005
dc.identifier.citationEcosystem Services, v. 35, p. 164-172.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.10.005
dc.identifier.issn2212-0416
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85058626699
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/187183
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofEcosystem Services
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso aberto
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectCairngorms National Park
dc.subjectParticipatory methods
dc.subjectPayment for ecosystem services
dc.subjectPublic policies
dc.subjectSugarcane production
dc.titleDifferent ecosystem services, same (dis)satisfaction with compensation: A critical comparison between farmers’ perception in Scotland and Brazilen
dc.typeArtigo
dspace.entity.typePublication

Arquivos

Coleções