Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impacts of payment for ecosystem services of mountain agricultural landscapes on farming women in Nepal

  • Published:
GeoJournal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study assesses the potential impacts of Payment for Ecosystems Services (PES) of mountain agricultural landscapes, with a specific focus on the implications for Nepalese farming women, who have triple roles (managers, workers, and users) with ecosystems goods and services (ESs). It utilizes data of mixed sources: direct observations in the fields, discussions with farm and development workers and published materials. The assessment shows that the impacts of PES on the wellbeing of these women vary with input, process and output pathways. Many farm activities for promoting ESs increase uses of land and labour inputs which can exacerbate workload, health, financial and local food security problems, and hamper meeting the immediate needs of farming women. The extent of input pathway effects depends more on the choice of activity over the type of ES. The production, marketing, and policy-related processes of the PES enhance education, empowerment, entrepreneurship and leadership, and contribute to meeting the strategic needs of the women. The PES increases income, cash flow and employment and improves living environmental conditions. The outputs provide better social protection, offset the adverse effects associated with increasing input uses, and contribute to meeting the women’s basic and strategic needs. Improvement in ES conditions provides additional benefits for farming women over men due to specific requirements associated with their unique body physiology and reproductive function. Appropriate designing and serious implementation are, however, the preconditions of the policy to result in the positive impacts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

(Source: MoH)

Fig. 3

(Courtesy: Nischal Dhakal)

Fig. 4
Fig. 5

(Courtesy: Manika Raut)

Fig. 6

(Source: Nepal Trek)

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ames, N. P., Clarke, J. M., Dexter, J. E., Woods, S. M., Selles, F., & Marchylo, B. (2003). Effects of nitrogen fertilizer on protein quantity and gluten strength parameters in durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. var. durum) cultivars of variable gluten strength. Cereal Chemistry, 80(2), 203–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, P. (2007). A review of micronutrient problems in the cultivated soil of Nepal. Mountain Research and Development, 27(4), 331–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arora-Jonsson, S. (2014). Forty years of gender research and environmental policy: Where do we stand? Women’s Studies International Forum, 47, 295–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arriagada, R. A., Sills, E. O., Ferraro, P. J., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2015). Do payments pay off? Evidence from participation in Costa Rica’s PES program. PLoS ONE, 10(7), e0131544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arriagada, R. A., Sills, E. O., Pattanayak, S. K., & Ferraro, P. J. (2009). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods to evaluate participation in Costa Rica’s program of payments for environmental services. Journal of Sustain Forest, 28, 343–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baniya, C. B., Solhøy, T., Ole, A., & Vetaas, R. (2009). Temporal changes in species diversity and composition in abandoned fields in a trans-Himalayan landscape, Nepal. Plant Ecology, 201(2), 383–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. A. (2001). Social impact assessment. European Journal of Operational Research, 128(2), 311–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bee, B. (2019). Gendered spaces of payment for environmental services: A critical look. Geographical Review, 109(1), 87–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bee, B. A., & Basnett, S. B. (2016). Engendering social and environmental safeguards in REDD + Lessons from feminist and development research. Third World Quarterly (July), 38(4), 787–804.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, E. O., Ola, O., & Buchenrieder, G. (2018). Does an agroforestry scheme with payment for ecosystem services (PES) economically empower women in sub-Saharan Africa? Ecosystem Services, 31, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhatta, L. D., van Oort, B. E. H., Rucevska, I., & Baral, H. (2014). Payment for ecosystem services: possible instrument for managing ecosystem services in Nepal. International Journal of Biodiversity Sciences and Ecosystem Services Management, 10, 289–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briner, S., Huber, R., Bebi, P., Elkin, C., Schmatz, D. R., & Grêt-Regamey, A. (2013). Trade-offs between ecosystem services in a mountain region. Ecology and Society, 18(3), 35.

    Google Scholar 

  • CBS. (2008). Environmental statistics of Nepal 2008. Nepal: Central Bureau of Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • CBS (Central Bureau of Statistics). (2016). Compendium of environment statistics Nepal 2015. Kathmandu: Central Bureau of Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charkoudian, N., & Stachenfeld, N. (2014). Reproductive hormone influences on thermoregulation in women. Comprehensive Physiology, 4(2), 793–804.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements, T., & Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2015). Impact of payments for environmental services and protected areas on local livelihoods and forest conservation in northern Cambodia. Conservation biology: The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 29(1), 78–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbera, E. (2012). Problematizing REDD + as an experiment in payments for ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4(6), 612–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbera, E., Kosoy, N., & Tuna, M. M. (2007). Equity implications of marketing ecosystems services in protected areas and rural communities: Case studies from Meso-America. Global Environmental Change, 17(3–4), 365–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dangi, M. B., Pretz, C. R., Urynowicz, M. A., Gerow, K. G., & Reddy, J. M. (2011). Municipal solid waste generation in Kathmandu, Nepal. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(1), 240–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daw, T., Brown, K., Rosendo, S., & Pomeroy, R. (2011). Applying the ecosystems services concept to poverty alleviation: The need to disaggregate human wellbeing. Environmental Conservation, 38(4), 370–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daw, T. M., Coulthard, S., Cheung, W. W. L., Brown, K., Abunge, C., Galafassi, D., Peterson, G. D., McClanahan, T. R., Omukoto, J. O., & Munyi, L. (2015). Evaluating taboo trade-offs in ecosystems services and human well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 112, 6949–6954

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, I. K., Leakey, R., Clement, C. R., Weber, J., Cornelius, J. P., Roshetko, J. M., et al. (2014). The management of tree genetic resources and the livelihoods of rural communities in the tropics: non-timber forest products, smallholder agroforestry practices and tree commodity crops. Forest Ecology and Management, 333, 9–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhakal, B. (2014). The local environmental, economic and social tragedies of international interventions on community based forest management for global environmental conservation: A critical evaluation. The Open Journal of Forestry. 4(1), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojf.2014.41010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhakal, B. (2016). Can we get better information by any alternative to conventional statistical approaches for analyzing land allocation decision problems: A case study on lowland rice crop varieties? Land Use Policy, 54, 522–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhakal, B., Bigsby, H., & Cullen, R. (2011). Forests for food security and livelihood sustainability: Policy problems and opportunities for small farmers in Nepal. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 35(1), 86–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhakal, B., & Kattel, R. R. (2019). Effects of global changes on ecosystems services of multiple natural resources in agricultural landscapes. Science of the Total Environment, 676(1), 665–682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougill, A. J., Stringer, L. C., Leventon, J., Riddell, M., Rueff, H., Spracklen, D. V., et al. (2012). Lessons from community-based payment for ecosystem service schemes: from forests to rangelands. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 367(1606), 3178–3190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elli, L., Roncoroni, L., & Bardella, M. T. (2015). Non-celiac gluten sensitivity: Time for sifting the grain. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 21(27), 8221–8226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, E., & Mehrabi, Z. (2019). Half Earth: promises, pitfalls, and prospects of dedicating Half of Earth’s land to conservation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 38, 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engel, S., Pagiola, S., & Wunder, S. (2008). Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issue. Ecological Economics, 65(4), 663–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Dutilly, C., Lara-Pulido, J. A., LeVelly, G., & Guevara-Sanginés, A. (2016). Payments for environmental servicesina policy mix: spatial and temporal articulationin Mexico. PLoS ONE, 11(4), e0152514.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO. (2011). Payments for ecosystem services and food security. Rome, Italy: FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Froger, G., Boisvert, V., Méral, P., Coq J. F. L., Caron, A., & Aznar, O. (2015). Market-Based instruments for ecosystem services between discourse and reality: An economic and narrative analysis. Sustainability, 7(9), 11595–11611.

    Google Scholar 

  • García-Amadoa, L. R., Pérez, M. R., Escutia, F. R., García, S. B., & Mejía, E. C. (2011). Efficiency of payments for environmental services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a biosphere reserve in Chiapas, Mexico. Ecological Economics, 70(12), 2361–2368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gartaula, H., Niehof, A., & Visser, L. (2012a). Shifting perceptions of food security and land in the context of labour out-migration in rural Nepal. Food Security, 4, 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-012-0190-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gartaula, H. N., Visser, L., & Niehof, A. (2012b). Socio-cultural dispositions and wellbeing of the women left behind: A case of migrant households in Nepal. Social Indicator Research, 108(3), 401–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Getahun, T. D., & Villanger, E. (2018). Labour-intensive jobs for women and development: Intra-household welfare effects and its transmission channels. The Journal of Development Studies, 54(7), 1232–1252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grêt-Regamey, A., Brunner, S., & Kienast, F. (2012). Mountain ecosystems services: Who cares? Mountain Research and Development, 32(S1), S23–S34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grima, N., Singh, S., Smetschka, B., & Ringhofer, L. (2016). Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) in Latin America: Analysing the performance of 40 case studies. Ecosystem Services, 17, 24–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halberg, N., Peramaiyan, P., & Walaga, C. (2009). Is organic farming an unjustified luxury in a world with too many hungry people? In H. Willer & L. Kilcher (Eds.), The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics & Emerging Trends (pp. 95–101). Rheinbreitbach: FiBL IFOAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayat, R., Ali, S., Amara, U., et al. (2010). Soil beneficial bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion: A review. Annual Microbiology, 60, 579–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hecken, G. V., & Bastiaensen, J. (2010). Payments for ecosystems services: Justified or not? A political view. Environmental Science & Policy, 13, 785–792.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde, R., & Bull, G. (2011). Performance of an agro-forestry based payments-for-environmental-services project in Mozambique: A household level analysis. Ecological Economics, 71(1), 122–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hejnowicz, A. P., Raffaelli, D. G., Rudd, M. A., & White, P. C. L. (2014). Evaluating the outcomes of payments for ecosystem services programmes using a capital asset framework. Ecosystem Services, 9, 83–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holt, Alison R., Alix, A., Thompson, A., & Maltby, L. (2016). Food production, ecosystem services and biodiversity: We can’t have it all everywhere. Science of the Total Environment, 573, 1422–1429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, R., Rebecca, S., François, M., Brunner, S. H., Schmatz, D. R., & Finger, R. (2017). Interaction effects of multiple targeted agrienvironmental payments under climate change in a mountain region. Land Use Policy, 66, 49-60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jack, B. K., Kousky, C., & Sims, K. (2008). Designing payments for ecosystem services: Lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms. Proceeding of National Academic Science, 105(28), 9465–9470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jha, C. K., & Madison, J. (2011). Antecedent and sequalae issues of Nepalese women trafficked into prostitution. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 12(1), 79–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalzman, J. B., Purvis, D. L., Heled, Y., Lisman, P., Atias, D., Van Arsdale, S., et al. (2015). Women and exertional heat illness: Identification of gender specific risk factors. US Army Medical Departmental Journal, 58–66.

  • Kariuki, J., & Birner, R. (2016). Are market-based conservation schemes gender-blind? A Qualitative Study of Three Cases from Kenya. Society & Natural Resources, 29(4), 432–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kariuki, J., Birner, R. & Chomba, S. (2018). Exploring institutional factors influencing equity in two payments for ecosystem service schemes. Conservation and Society, 16(3), 320–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kc, A., Gan, C. C. R., & Dwirahmadi, F. (2019). Breaking through barriers and building disaster mental resilience: a case study in the aftermath of the 2015 Nepal earthquakes. International Journal of Environmental Resources and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16162964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kevany, K., Siebel, M., Hyde, K., Nazer, D., & Huisingh, D. (2013). Water, women, waste, wisdom and wealth—Harvesting the confluences and opportunities. Journal of Cleaner Production, 60, 4–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khadka, M., Karki, S., Karky, B., Kotru, R., & Darjee, K. (2014). Gender equality challenges to the REDD + Initia-tive in Nepal. Journal of Mountain Research and Development, 34(4), 197–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khadka, M., & Verma, R. (2012). Gender dimensions of biodiversity conservation and management in the Hindu Kush Himalayas: Towards equitable mountain development. Kathmandu, Nepal: ICIMOD.

  • Kolinjivadi, V., Adamowski, J., & Kosoy, N. (2015). Juggling multiple dimensions in a complex socioecosystem: The issue of targeting in payments for ecosystem services. GeoForum, 58, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosoy, N., & Corbera, E. (2010). Payments for ecosystems services as commodity fetishism. Ecological Economics, 69(6), 1228–1236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunwar, R. M., & Duwadee, N. P. S. (2003). Ethnobotanical notes on flora of Khaptad National Park (KNP), Far-Western Nepal. Himalayan Journal of Sciences, 1(1), 25–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lal, R. (2014). Soil conservation and ecosystem services. International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 2(3), 36–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, A. M., Solis, D., Duchelle, A. E., Stibniati, A. S., Pradnja, I. A., Teresa, R., et al. (2018). Gender lessons for climate initiatives: A comparative study of REDD + impacts on subjective wellbeing. World Development, 108, 86–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legwaila, G. M., Mojeremane, W., Madisa, M. E., Mmolotsi, R. M., & Rampart, M. (2011). Potential of traditional food plants in rural household food security in Botswana. Journal of Horticulture Forestry, 3(6), 171–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Llorente-Alonso, M., Fernández-Aceñero, M., & Sebastián, M. (2006). Gluten intolerance: Sex-and age-related features. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology, 20(11), 719–722.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mailer, G., & Hale, N. (2015). Decolonizing the diet: Synthesizing Native-American history, immunology, and nutritional science. Journal of Evolution and Health, 1(1).

  • March, C., Smyth, I., & Mykhopadhyay, M. (1999). A guide to gender analysis frameworks. Oxford: Oxfam Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mavhura, E., Manyena, B., Collins, A. E., & Manatsa, D. (2013). Indigenous knowledge, coping strategies and resilience to floods in Muzarabani, Zimbabwe. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 5, 38–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermotta, M., Mahanty, S., & Schreckenberg, K. (2013). Examining equity: A multidimensional framework for assessing equity in payments for ecosystem services. Environmental Science & Policy, 33, 416–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFarlane, R. A., Horwitz, P., Arabena, K., Capon, A., Jenkins, A., Jupiter, S., et al. (2019). Ecosystem services for human health in Oceania. Ecosystem Services, 39, 100976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystems Assessment (MEA) (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Island, Washington, DC.

  • Min-Venditti, A. A., Moore, G. W., & Fleischman, F. (2017). What policies improve forest cover? A systematic review of research from Mesoamerica. Global Environmental Change, 47, 21–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montagnini, F., & Finney, C. (2011). Payments for environmental services in Latin America as a tool for restoration and rural development. Ambio, 40(3), 285–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, S., & Blackwood, C. (2015). The ecology of the soil biota and their function. In Paul, E. (Ed), Soil microbiology, ecology and biochemistry (4th Edn., pp. 273–309). Burlington: Academic Press, Elsevier Inc.

  • Moss, B. (2008). Water pollution by agriculture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 363(1491), 659–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muravyev, A., Talavera, O., & Schäfer, D. (2009). Entrepreneurs’ gender and financial constraints: Evidence from international data. Journal of Comparative Economics, 37(2), 270–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaus, K., & Jetzkowitz, J. (2014). How does paying for ecosystem services contribute to sustainable development? Evidence from case study research in Germany and the UK. Sustainability, 6(5), 3019–3042.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nightingale, A. (2003). Nature-society and development: Social, cultural and ecological change in Nepal. Geoforum, 34, 525–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pant, B. (2018). Socio economic impact of undeclared blockade of India on Nepal. Research Nepal Journal of Development Studies, 1(1), 18–27. https://doi.org/10.3126/rnjds.v1i1.21270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascual, U., Phelps, J., Garmendia, E., Brown, K., Corbera, E., Martin, A., Gomez‐Baggethun, E., & Muradian, R. (2014). Social equity matters in payments for ecosystem services. BioScience, 64, 1027–1036.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pew Research Center, retrieved March. (2018). http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/29/remittances-from-abroad-are-major-economic-assets-for-some-developing-countries/. Accessed 20 March 2018.

  • Pokhrel, D., & Viraraghavan, T. (2005). Municipal solid waste management in Nepal: Practices and challenges. Waste Management, 25(5), 555–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poppy, GM., et al. (2014). Food security in a perfect storm: using the ecosystem services framework to increase understanding. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poudel, M., Thwaites, R., Race, D., & Dahal, G. (2015). Social equity and livelihood implications of REDD + in rural communities—A case study from Nepal. International Journal of the Commons, 9(1), 177–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, A. G. (2010). Ecosystem services and agriculture: tradeoffs and synergies. Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365(1554), 2959–2971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, A., Mäder, L. K., & Reher, S. (2018). With a little help from the people? The role of public opinion in advocacy success. Comparative Political Studies, 51(2), 139–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratsimbazafy, L. C., Harada, K., & Yamamura, M. (2011). Forest conservation and livelihood conflict in REDD: A case study from the corridor Ankeniheny Zahamena REDD project, Madagascar. International.

  • Resurrección, B. P., Goodrich, C. G., Song, Y., Bastola, A., Prakash, A., Joshi, D., Liebrand, J., & Shah, S. A. (2019). Chapter 14: In the shadows of the Himalayan mountains: Persistent gender and social exclusion development. In P. Wester, A. Mishra, A. Mukherji, A. B. Shrestha (Eds.), The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment: Mountains, Climate Change, Sustainability and People (pp. 491–516). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard, D. R., & Thompson, B. S. (2019). Urban ecosystems: A new frontier for payments for ecosystem services. People and Nature, 1(2), 249–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, R. (2010). Ecosystem services and food security: Economic perspectives on environmental sustainability. Sustainability, 2(11), 3520–3548. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2113520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rijal, D. K., Kadayat, K. B., Joshi, K. D., & Sthapit, B. R. (1998). Inventory of indigenous rainfed and aromatic rice landraces in seti river valley Pokhara, Nepal. LI-BIRD technical paper No. 2. Local initiatives for biodiversity, Research and Development (LI-BIRD), Pokhara, Nepal.

  • Robertson, G. P., Gross, K. L., Hamilton, S. K., Landis, D. A., Schmidt, T. M., Snapp, S. S., et al. (2014). Farming for ecosystem services: An ecological approach to production agriculture. BioScience, 64(5), 404–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rushton, L. (2003). Health hazards and waste management. British Medical Bulletin, 68(1), 183–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salzman, J. (2005). Creating markets for ecosystem services: Notes from the field. NYU Law Review, 80(3), 870–961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayer, J., Sunderland, T., Ghazoul, J.-L., Pfund, J.-L., Sheil, D., Meijaard, E., et al. (2013). Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. PNAS, 110(21), 8349–8356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaeffer, J. (2009). Evolutionary eating—What we can learn from our primitive past. Today’s Dietitian, 11(4), 36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, Gregory J. (2017). The role of women in payment for environmental services programs in Osa. Costa Rica, Gender, Place & Culture, 24(6), 890–910.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelef, O., Weisberg, P. J., & Provenza, F. D. (2017). The value of native plants and local production in an era of global agriculture. Frontiers In Plant Science. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.02069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrestha, K. K., & McManus, P. (2008). The politics of community participation in natural resource management: lessons from community forestry in Nepal. Australian Forestry, 71(2), 135–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavins, R. (2003). Experience with market-based environmental policy instruments. Handbook of Environmental Economics, 1, 355–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steel, P., Taras, V., Uggerslev, K., & Bosco, F. (2018). The happy culture: A theoretical, meta-analytic, and empirical review of the relationship between culture and wealth and subjective well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(2), 128–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steingraber, S. (2001). Having faith: An ecologist’s journey to motherhood. Cambridge: Perseus Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suich, H., Howe, C., & Mac, G. (2015). Ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: A review of the empirical links. Ecosystems Services, 12©, 137–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamang, S., Paudel, K., & Shrestha, K. (2014). Feminization of agriculture and its implications for food security in rural Nepal. Journal of Forest and Livelihood, 12(1), 20–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tengberg, A., Fredholm, S., Eliasson, I., Knez, I., Salzma, K., & Wetterberg, O. (2012). Cultural ecosystem services provided by landscapes: Assessment of heritage values and identity. Ecosystems, 2, 14–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas-Slayter, B., & Bhatt, N. (1994). Land, livestock, and livelihoods: changing dynamics of gender, caste, and ethnicity in a Nepalese village. Human Ecology, 22(4), 467–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thoms, C. A. (2011). Co-constructing community forests in Nepal: mutual constraint in a transnational aid network. Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research, 3(3), 303–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tschakert, P. (2007). Environmental services and poverty reduction: Options for smallholders in the Sahel. Agricultural Systems, 94(1), 75–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsutsumi, A., Izutsu, T., Poudyal, A. K., Kato, S., & Marui, E. (2008). Mental health of female survivors of human trafficking in Nepal. Social Science Medicine, 66(8), 1841–1847.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuladhar, R., Sapkota, C., & Adhikari, N. (2014) Effects of migration and remittance income on Nepal’s agriculture yield. Asian Development Bank, 63.

  • Turner, N. J., Plotkin, M., & Kuhnlein, H. V. (2013). Global environmental challenges to the integrity of Indigenous Peoples’ food systems. In Indigenous peoples’ food systems and well-being: interventions and policies for healthy communities (pp. 23–38). Rome: FAO and Centre for Indigenous Peoples’ Nutrition and Environment.

  • Twigg, J. (2015). Disaster risk reduction. London, England: Overseas Development Institute.

  • Ulber, L., Klimek, L. S., Steinmann, H., Isselstein, J., & Groth, M. (2011). Implementing and evaluating the effectiveness of a payment scheme for environmental services from agricultural land. Environmental Conservation, 38, 464–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN. (2013). Satoyama-Satoumi ecosystems and human well-being: socio-ecological production landscapes of Japan, UN. https://doi.org/10.18356/5d7e4936-en.

  • Westemeier, R., Brawn, J., Simpson, S., Esker, T., Jansen, R., Walk, J., et al. (1998). Tracking the long-term decline and recovery of an isolated population. Science, 282(5394), 1695–1698.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitten, S., Coggan, A., & Shelton, D. (Eds.). (2005). Markets for ecosystem services in Australia: Practical design and a case study. in emerging markets for environmental services. Canberra, Australia: ICFAI Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO. (2007). Population health and waste management—Scientific data and policy options (pp. 29–30). Rome, Italy: Report of WHO workshop.

    Google Scholar 

  • WLE (Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems). (2014). Gender strategy. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE).

  • Woroniecki, S., Wamsler, C., & Boyd, E. (2019). The promises and pitfalls of ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change as a vehicle for social empowerment. Ecology and Society, 24(2), 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yadav, B., Bigsby, H., & MacDonald, I. (2015). How can poor and disadvantaged households get an opportunity to become a leader in community forestry in Nepal? Forest Policy and Economics, 52, 27–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, H., Yang, W., Zhang, J., Connor, T., & Liu, J. (2018). Revealing pathways from payments for ecosystem services to socioeconomic outcomes. Science Advances, 4(3), eaao6652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. S., Zhao, Minjuan, & Yao, Shunbo. (2014). The implementation and impacts of china’s largest payment for ecosystem services program as revealed by longitudinal household data. Land Use Policy, 40(45), 55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarb, J., Ghorbani, R., Koocheki, A., & Leifert, C. (2005). The importance of microorganisms in organic agri-culture. Outlooks on Pest Management, 16(2), 52–55.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

One of the objectives of this work is to meet organizational objectives of Support for Development, New Zealand (SFD NZ) and Women Leading for Change in Natural Resources, Nepal (WLCN). We would like to thank Mr. Nischal Dhakal, Mr. Rishi Ram Dhakal, Mr. Rishi Ram Kattel and many other anonymous people who provided inputs, constructive comments and suggestions. A special thanks to Prof. John Horwood whose valuable inputs made the paper clear to understand and appealing to reader.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chritschurch Health and Development Study, Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago Christchurch and Support for Development (an independent not for profit organization), Christchurch, 8041, New Zealand

    Bhubaneswor Dhakal

  2. Women Leading for Change in Natural Resources Nepal (WLCN), Kathmandu, Nepal

    Manohara Khadka

  3. Bangor University, China Campus, Changsha, China

    Madan Gautam

Authors
  1. Bhubaneswor Dhakal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Manohara Khadka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Madan Gautam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bhubaneswor Dhakal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest on the presented information. However, some of the information in this study are based on researchers’ experiences from their farms, communities and jobs. The authors did the study voluntarily to elicit and share growing social and environmental problems in disadvantaged communities due to inappropriate interventions in mountain resource management by national and international development support organizations. The thoughts, views and opinions expressed in this paper are solely of authors and do not reflect to the author’s employer or other affiliated organizations.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dhakal, B., Khadka, M. & Gautam, M. Impacts of payment for ecosystem services of mountain agricultural landscapes on farming women in Nepal. GeoJournal 86, 1389–1423 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-019-10116-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-019-10116-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation