Integrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in China: a systematic review

Introduction: During the past two decades, payments for ecosystem services (PES) program has become a popular conservation paradigm for realigning socioeconomic costs and benefits among different stakeholders. As billions of investment flows into the natural capital pool, there is growing interest t...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Wu Yang, Qiaoling Lu
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Taylor & Francis Group 2018
Materias:	Effectiveness efficiency equity impact evaluation trade-off and synergy spillover effect Ecology QH540-549.5
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/0fc801bc799c4efaae22d40f1d503c53
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:0fc801bc799c4efaae22d40f1d503c53
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:0fc801bc799c4efaae22d40f1d503c532021-12-02T14:20:58ZIntegrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in China: a systematic review2096-41292332-887810.1080/20964129.2018.1459867https://doaj.org/article/0fc801bc799c4efaae22d40f1d503c532018-03-01T00:00:00Zhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20964129.2018.1459867https://doaj.org/toc/2096-4129https://doaj.org/toc/2332-8878Introduction: During the past two decades, payments for ecosystem services (PES) program has become a popular conservation paradigm for realigning socioeconomic costs and benefits among different stakeholders. As billions of investment flows into the natural capital pool, there is growing interest to understand the ecological, economic, and social outcomes of PES programs. China is one of the countries that extensively implements PES programs. Although there is a growing interest to perform impact evaluation of China’s massive PES programs, it is unclear that what existing literature has done, has not done, and should do in the future. Therefore, to guide further research and practices, we conduct a systematic review of studies on China’s PES programs. Results: Our review shows that there are growing impact evaluation studies of PES programs in China. However, the spatial and ecosystem distributions of existing studies are quite uneven. Most case studies were poorly designed, rarely quantified, and evaluated without sophisticated methods. Among the three dimensions of ecological effectiveness, economic efficiency, and social equity, economic efficiency is the least studied. Discussion and Conclusion: We further discuss the challenges and opportunities and provide insights for future research. To improve the understanding and management of natural capital, we call for mainstreaming impact evaluation of ecosystem service policies in China and beyond following the state-of-art procedures.Wu YangQiaoling LuTaylor & Francis GrouparticleEffectivenessefficiencyequityimpact evaluationtrade-off and synergyspillover effectEcologyQH540-549.5ENEcosystem Health and Sustainability, Vol 4, Iss 3, Pp 73-84 (2018)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Effectiveness efficiency equity impact evaluation trade-off and synergy spillover effect Ecology QH540-549.5
spellingShingle	Effectiveness efficiency equity impact evaluation trade-off and synergy spillover effect Ecology QH540-549.5 Wu Yang Qiaoling Lu Integrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in China: a systematic review
description	Introduction: During the past two decades, payments for ecosystem services (PES) program has become a popular conservation paradigm for realigning socioeconomic costs and benefits among different stakeholders. As billions of investment flows into the natural capital pool, there is growing interest to understand the ecological, economic, and social outcomes of PES programs. China is one of the countries that extensively implements PES programs. Although there is a growing interest to perform impact evaluation of China’s massive PES programs, it is unclear that what existing literature has done, has not done, and should do in the future. Therefore, to guide further research and practices, we conduct a systematic review of studies on China’s PES programs. Results: Our review shows that there are growing impact evaluation studies of PES programs in China. However, the spatial and ecosystem distributions of existing studies are quite uneven. Most case studies were poorly designed, rarely quantified, and evaluated without sophisticated methods. Among the three dimensions of ecological effectiveness, economic efficiency, and social equity, economic efficiency is the least studied. Discussion and Conclusion: We further discuss the challenges and opportunities and provide insights for future research. To improve the understanding and management of natural capital, we call for mainstreaming impact evaluation of ecosystem service policies in China and beyond following the state-of-art procedures.
format	article
author	Wu Yang Qiaoling Lu
author_facet	Wu Yang Qiaoling Lu
author_sort	Wu Yang
title	Integrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in China: a systematic review
title_short	Integrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in China: a systematic review
title_full	Integrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in China: a systematic review
title_fullStr	Integrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in China: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed	Integrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in China: a systematic review
title_sort	integrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in china: a systematic review
publisher	Taylor & Francis Group
publishDate	2018
url	https://doaj.org/article/0fc801bc799c4efaae22d40f1d503c53
work_keys_str_mv	AT wuyang integratedevaluationofpaymentsforecosystemservicesprogramsinchinaasystematicreview AT qiaolinglu integratedevaluationofpaymentsforecosystemservicesprogramsinchinaasystematicreview
_version_	1718391530868178944

Integrated evaluation of payments for ecosystem services programs in China: a systematic review

Ejemplares similares