Your search found 3 records
1 Kurian, Mathew; Lestrelin, G.. 2005. Market integration, natural resource degradation and poverty perspectives from two upland watersheds in Thailand and Lao PDR. In Kheoruenromne, I.; Riddell, J. A.; Soitong, K. (Eds.). Proceedings of SSWM 2004 International Conference on Innovative Practices for Sustainable Sloping Lands and Watershed Management, Chiang Mai Hill Hotel, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 5-9 September 2004. Bangkok, Thailand: Department of Agricultural Extension. pp.292-307.
Watersheds ; Natural resources ; Resource management ; Irrigation water ; Land ownership ; Households ; Cultivation ; Poverty ; Farm income ; Food security ; Drinking water ; Sanitation / Thailand / Laos / Phrae Province / Luang Province
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: IWMI 333.91 G750 KUR, 333.91 G570 KHE Record No: H040248)
2 Suhardiman, Diana; Wichelns, D.; Lestrelin, G.. 2013. Payments of ecosystem services in Vietnam: market-based incentives or state control of resources. [Abstract only]. In German Aerospace Center (DLR); Germany. Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). Mekong Environmental Symposium, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, 5-7 March 2013. Abstract volume, Topic 02 - Hydropower development and impacts on economy. Wessling, Germany: German Aerospace Center (DLR); Bonn, Germany: Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). pp.32.
Ecosystem services ; Natural resources management ; Policy ; Poverty ; Development projects / Vietnam
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H045750)
http://www.mekong-environmental-symposium-2013.org/frontend/file.php?id=3020&dl=1
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H045750.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H045750.pdf
(0.08 MB) (2.09 MB)
We question whether payments for ecosystem services (PES) programs have the potential to enhance natural resource management in Vietnam, where the state essentially designs and implements the programs. In such settings, the welfare gains achieved through PES programs will be determined by how the state incorporates the programs into national development strategies and aligns them with other land use and environmental policies. We consider also whether PES programs can be relied on to reduce poverty and enhance livelihoods, either alone or in combination with other policy interventions. To these ends, we trace the development of PES programs within the context of forest conservation policies and in relation to watershed management. Taking Vietnam as our case study, we illustrate how PES programs are implemented within the context of a monopsonistic, non-competitive market. We conclude that in the absence of a competitive market structure and with appropriate regulations governments can reshape PES programs so that they function primarily as tools for strengthening state control over natural resources.
3 Suhardiman, Diana; Wichelns, D.; Lestrelin, G.; Hoanh, Chu Thai. 2013. Payments for ecosystem services in Vietnam: market-based incentives or state control of resources? Ecosystem Services, 5:e94-e101. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.06.001]
Natural resources management ; Ecosystems ; Watershed management ; Forest protection ; Policy ; Case studies ; Households / Vietnam
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H045911)
(0.30 MB)
Payments for ecosystem services often are viewed as an innovative approach toward improving natural resource management, while also providing opportunities for enhancing incomes and livelihoods. Yet not all PES programs are designed and implemented in ways that reflect voluntary transactions between buyers and providers of well-defined, measurable ecosystem services. When third-party interests, such as donors or governments, design PES programs to achieve goals that lie outside the conceptual scope of payments for ecosystem services, the improvements in resource management and enhancements in livelihoods can fall short of expectations. We examine this potential dissonance in PES program implementation, taking the case of PES in the forestry sector in Vietnam. We question whether PES in Vietnam has the potential to enhance forest protection and watershed management. We highlight the importance of institutions and governance (i.e., the policies, rules, and regulations) in determining program significance and we illustrate how PES programs are implemented as part of the government's subsidy scheme. We conclude that in the absence of a competitive market structure and appropriate regulations, governments can reshape PES programs to function primarily as tools for strengthening state control over natural resources.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
