Summary
Payments for Environmental Service (PES) schemes are increasingly discussed as a possibility to promote the conservation of natural resources. However, these pilot schemes are frequently small in size and face high transaction costs, leading to the exclusion of smallholders. Solutions could be to use collectively bundled contracts or existing community resource management arrangement structures. Using the example of the institution of the community conservation agreements (CCA) in Central Sulawesi we assess whether a community arrangement can provide the framework conditions to implement a PES project. Four points are necessary: an organisational structure representing the village households; participation of the resource users in the institutional implementation; monitoring and enforcement by the institution of the forest usage regulations; and, finally, the institutions’ ability to administer funds. Our findings show that the CCAs are backed up by an organisational structure, the village conservation council. However, in most villages the community members were not involved and did not know of the agreement negotiation. A monitoring entity has been constituted. The awareness for nature conservation has increased only in the recent past, but resource extraction has left its marks, and the participants perceived environmental problems to be growing. Finally, compensation payments are regarded on the one hand as a good reimbursement for desisting from using the forest resources. On the other hand, due to the negative experiences with corruption, a clear organisational structure for the administration of such a project is necessary, which does not seem to be given with the current institutional arrangements. Therefore, we recommend using existing community arrangements because established structures can be used. However, these need to be enriched to fulfil the requirements of a PES project. It is of major importance to involve the community members in the management of natural resource projects to increase compliance with regulations.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Antle JM, Stoorvogel JJ (2008) Agricultural carbon sequestration, poverty, and sustainability. Environment and Development Economics 13 (03): 327–352
Burkard G (2002) Natural Resource Management in Central Sulawesi: Past Experience and Fitire Prospects. Discussion Paper Series 8. Göttingen: STORMA. http://ufgb989.uni-forst.gwdg.de/DPS/index.htm
Cacho OJ, Marshall GR, Milne M (2003) Smallholder Agroforestry Projects: Potential for Carbon Sequestration and Poverty Alleviation. ESA Working Paper 03–06. Agriculture and Economic Development Analysis Division, FAO.
de Jong TR, Tipper R, Montoya-Gomez G (2000) An economic analysis of the potential for carbon sequestration by forests: evidence from southern Mexico. Ecological Economics 33 (2): 313–327
Grieg-Gran M, Porras I, Wunder S (2005) How can market mechanisms for forest environmental services help the poor? Preliminary lessons from Latin America. World Development 33 (9): 1511–1527
Hanna S (1995) Efficiencies of user participation in natural resource management. In Property Rights and the Environment: Social and Ecological Issues, edited by S. Hanna and M. Munasinghe. Washington D.C.: Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics and the World Bank
Jindal R, Swallow B, Kerr J (2008) Forestry-based carbon sequestration projects in Africa: Potential benefits and challenges. Natural Resources Forum 32 (2): 116–130
Krueger RA (1994) Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. 2nd Edition ed. London, New Delhi: Thousand Oaks.
Maertens M, Zeller M, Birner R (2006) Sustainable agricultural intensification in forest frontier areas. Agricultural Economics 34 (2): 197–206
Mappatoba M, Birner R (2004) Co-Management of Protected Areas - The Case of Community Agreements on Conservation in the Lore Lindu National Park, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Eschborn: Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit.
Matta J, Kerr J (2006) Can Environmental Services Payments Sustain Collaborative Forest Management? Journal of Sustainable Forestry 23 (2): 63–79
Mayring P (2007) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken. 9. Aufl., Dr. nach Typoskript ed, UTB für Wissenschaft ; 8229 P¨adagogik. Weinheim u.a.: Beltz
Michaelowa A, Jotzo F (2005) Transaction costs, institutional rigidities and the size of the clean development mechanism. Energy Policy 33 (4): 511–523
Pagiola S, Bishop J, Landell-Mills NE (2002) Selling forest environmental services market-based mechanisms for conservation and development. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd
Palmer C (2007) Background paper: Community forest use and conservation agreements in Lore Lindu, Indonesia. Zürich: ETH.
Pfaff A, Kerr S, Lipper L, Cavatassi R, Davis B, Hendy J, Sanchez-Azofeifa GA (2007) Will buying tropical forest carbon benefit the poor? Evidence from Costa Rica. Land Use Policy 24 (3): 600–610
Reetz S (2008) Data from A4 village survey 2008.
Seeberg-Elverfeldt C, Schwarze S, Zeller M (2008) Payments for Environmental Services - Incentives through Carbon Sequestration Compensation for Cocoa-based Agroforestry Systems in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. University of Hohenheim. http://www.uni-hohenheim.de/i490a/dps/2008/dp022008.pdf
Smith J, and Scherr SJ (2003) Capturing the Value of Forest Carbon for Local Livelihoods. World Development 31 (12): 21432160
Smith RJ, Muir RDJ, Walpole MJ, Balmford A, Leader-Williams N (2003) Governance and the loss of biodiversity. Nature 426 (6962): 67–70
Steyaert S, Lisoir H (2005) Participatory Methods Toolkit. A practitioner’s manual; Method: Focus Group. King Baudouin Foundation and the Flemish Institute for Science and Technology Assessment.
Transparency International 2007. TI Corruption Perceptions Index
van Asselt Marjolein BA, Rijkens-Klomp N (2002) A look on the mirror: reflection on participation in Integrated Assessment from a methodological perspective. Global Environmental Change 12: 167–184
van Edig X (2005) Measurement of Absolute Poverty and Indicators of Poverty Among Rural Households in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Diplomarbeit, Department of Geography, University of Göttingen, Göttingen
Wunder S (2008) Payments for environmental services and the poor: concepts and preliminary evidence. Environment and Development Economics 13 (3): 279–297
Young OR, Agrawal A, King LA, Sand PH, Underdal A, Wasson M (1999) Institutional Dimensions of Global Environmental Change - Science Plan. IHDP Report No. 9. Bonn, Germany: International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Seeberg-Elverfeldt, C., Schwarze, S., Faust, H. (2010). Institutions for environmental service payment programmes - evidence of community resource management arrangements in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. In: Tscharntke, T., Leuschner, C., Veldkamp, E., Faust, H., Guhardja, E., Bidin, A. (eds) Tropical Rainforests and Agroforests under Global Change. Environmental Science and Engineering(). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00493-3_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00493-3_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-00492-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-00493-3
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)