Handbook on Implementing - IUCN · Proyecto Tacaná de la UICN. 59 p ages, 1,500 copies . Printed...

Handbook on Implementing Payment for Environmental Services (PES) Mechanisms

0


Based on the Experience of the IUCN Tacaná Project


1

Training document prepared by Victor Rodas Ramos (Project and Watershed Management Technician, Tacaná Project) and Byron Godínez Cifuentes (independent consultant) for use by the Tacaná Project of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The presentation of the material and the views expressed in this handbook do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IUCN. This publication was made possible thanks to the support of the Scaling-Up Project. Published by: Tacaná Project, the Water Management Unit, IUCN Regional Office for

Mesoamerica and Caribbean Initiative

© International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

This document was prepared for purposes of training key stakeholders and partners of the Tacaná II Project. Suggestions for improving the handbook are welcome.

The contents of this handbook may be partially or entirely used and/or reproduced as long as the source is cited.

Citation: Rodas Ramos, V. and Godínez Cifuentes, B. 2011 Handbook on

Implementing Environmental Payment Mechanisms, Based on the Experience of the IUCN Tacaná Project. Tacaná Project, IUCN. San Marcos, Guatemala.

Revision: M.Sc. Rocío Córdoba, Carlos Rosal and Ottoniel Rivera Editing, design and layout:

Ambiens Infinitus 00 (502) 5828 1528 San Marcos, Guatemala ISBN: First edition published in Spanish under the title Manual para la Implementación de Mecanismos de Pago por Sevicios Ambientales (PSA) basado en la experiencia del Proyecto Tacaná de la UICN. 59 pages, 1,500 copies Printed by: Improxela, Quetzaltenango, Guatemala.

San Marcos, Guatemala, February 2012.

All rights reserved:


2

No. Contents Page Introduction 3 Chapter 1: Basic Concepts

1.1 Ecosystem 6 1.2 Deforestation 6 1.3 Forest Degradation 7 1.4 The Water Cycle 7 1.5 Hydric Balance 8 1.6 Microwatershed 9

Chapter 2: Ecosystem Functions, Goods and Services 2.1 Ecosystem Functions 11 2.2 Ecosystem Goods 11 2.3 Ecosystem Services 12 2.4 Ecosystem services of Watersheds 16

Chapter 3: Payment for Environmental Services (PES) 3.1 Payment for Environmental Services 18 3.2 Types of PES 18 3.3 What is NOT a PES? 19 3.4 Characteristics of a PES 19 3.5 Components of a PES 20 3.6 Aspects that Can Motivate Creation of a PES 20 3.7 Ideal Conditions for a PES 21 3.8 Stakeholders in the Implementation of PES Mechanisms 21 3.9 Principles Underlying the Implementation of PES

Mechanisms 23

Chapter 4: Methodological Process for Implementing PES Mechanisms

4.1 Legal Backing 25 4.2 Information Gathering 27 4.3 Negotiation on the Formation of the Organizational

Structure 46

4.3 Design of the PES Mechanism 47 4.4 Negotiation with Stakeholders (Providers-Users) 52 4.5 Implementation of the PES mechanism 54

Bibliography 57

Contents


3

The importance of goods and services derived from the Earth’s ecosystems, including oxygen, food, water for different purposes (human consumption, irrigation, industry, etc.), climate regulation, fuels and the diversity of landscapes, is reflected in the search for strategies to achieve their management, protection and/or conservation. Currently, the implementation of experiences in mechanisms of payment for environmental services (PES) in Latin America has gained a great deal of importance as an innovative tool to promote management, protection and/or conservation of natural resources (primarily water, soil, and forest), as well to finance investments for the sustainable management of those resources. It has also been necessary to create instruments and/or methodologies for greater simplicity and practicality in the stages of information gathering, design and implementation of the PES initiative in a given area (watershed, microwatershed, protected area, forest, etc). This handbook has been prepared based on the compilation of information from different authors, mainly for writing the conceptual part, and what is most important, from the presentation of the main results obtained by the Tacaná Project of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in the pilot sites located in the municipalities of San Pablo and Tacaná, both in the department of San Marcos, Guatemala, where two experiences have been implemented in payment for environmental services. The first chapter contains the definitions of certain fundamental concepts, such as: what is an ecosystem? What does deforestation consist of? What is forest degradation? What does the water cycle consist of? and others. The second chapter describes ecosystem functions, goods and services, and the difference between them. It also provides simple examples for a better understanding of these concepts. Chapter three explains the main theme of this handbook (payment for environmental services): why it is, the types that can exist, characteristics, components, ideal conditions and principles underlying the implementation of a PES. It also presents aspects that can motivate the creation and possible stakeholders in creation of a PES mechanism. The last chapter looks at each step of the methodological process used by the IUCN Tacaná Project in implementing PES mechanisms based on water services that have been carried out in the San Pablo and Tacaná municipalities, specifically in the microwatersheds of the Negro and Chemealón rivers,

Introduction


4

respectively This chapter gives some examples of the instruments developed and/or implemented by the Tacaná Project to carry out this experience. The aim of this handbook is to provide a simple and clear explanation of the methodological process involved in implementing PES mechanisms in order to facilitate their application in other areas of the country or in some other country. We hope you enjoy reading it.


5

Chapter 1

Basic Concepts

La Igualdad Waterfall, San Pablo, S.M.


6

The MA is a shared initiative of multiple entities that provides decision makers and the public with scientific information pertaining to the situation of the ecosystems, the consequences of changes to them and possibilities for responding.

According to Rügnitz Tito, M. (2011), an ecosystem is an assemblage of communities associated with a physical environment where there is an exchange of

energy between the setting and its inhabitants. However, because the boundaries are arbitrary and depend on the focus of the interest or study, an ecosystem can range from a puddle to a swamp, or from a small patch of forest located in a microwatershed to large areas of the planet, such as the Amazon jungle.

According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) (MA, 2005), the main types of ecosystems at the world level are:

Forest (boreal, temperate and tropical) Drylands (temperate, Mediterranean

grasslands, tropical grasslands and savannahs, deserts) Continental waters Coasts Marine environment Islands Mountains Polar regions

Because ecosystems have no fixed limits, their parameters are established according to the scientific, political or management issue being examined. Depending on the objective of the analysis, a single lake, a watershed, a microwatershed or an entire region can be considered an ecosystem (Green Facts, 2007).

Deforestation is defined as the partial or total removal of forest cover in an area occupied by forest.

It is also known as the conversion of forest land to other types of land uses, such as agriculture, grazing, highways, etc., as a direct consequence of human activities in order to generate mainly economic benefits (FAO, 2003).

1.1 Ecosystem:

1.2 Deforestation:

Source: Taken from www.profesorenlinea.cl and www.didactalia.net

Fig. 1. Example of aquatic ecosystems

http://www.profesorenlinea.cl/

http://www.didactalia.net/


7

Every year Guatemala loses 73,148 hectares of forest (the highest rate in America) from different causes, particularly human activities. An 11% loss of the resource at the national level was recorded in a period of ten years.

According to FAO (2001, 2006), forest degradation is change in forest that negatively affects the structure or function of the stand or

site, lowering capacity to provide environmental products and/or services. As limit, for the definition of forest degradation, minimum canopy coverage must be over 10% (see definition of forest). In most cases, degradation does not represent a reduction in forest area, but a gradual process of declining biomass, changes in species composition and soil degradation.

Also called the hydrological cycle, this is the continual cyclical movement of water between the different places it is stored, from atmosphere to oceans to

land and back again to the atmosphere after being used by living beings in their metabolic processes. Thanks to this cycle, water is supplied to all terrestrial ecosystems. The main phases of the water cycle are evaporation, precipitation, retention, surface runoff, infiltration, evapotranspiration and ground runoff (www.botanical-online.com, 2011).

1.3 Forest degradation:

1.4 The Water Cycle:

Source: Taken from www.ecoadictos.blogspot.com

Fig. 2. Example of deforestation in forest

http://www.botanical-online.com/

http://www.botanical-online.com/

http://www.ecoadictos.blogspot.com/


8

Hydric balance in a given watershed makes it possible to analyze information about annual volume of water coming into the watershed and periods when there are excesses or shortages.

According to the Agrometeorological Network of the INIA, hydric balance is a method to record incoming and outgoing water flow within an area in a given period of time. It is based on the law of conservation of mass.

1.5 Hydric Balance:

Source: Taken from www.sawater.com.au

Fig. 3. Diagram of water cycle

Fig. 4. Diagram of the Hydric Balance

Hydric balance

Entries (+)

Outlays (-)

Source: Adapted fromhttp://www.mnr.gov.on.ca


9

For practical purposes the IUCN Tacaná Project defines a microwatershed as the territory delimited by the upper parts

(divide) whose surface waters drain toward the same waterway, having an area of less than 5000 ha (50 km2) and a population comprising at least 25 COCODE. For flat or little populated zones microwatersheds of greater area can be defined, but increasing the number of communities that participate is not recommended.

1.6 Microwatershed:

Source: Adapted from Guía para la elaboración de planes de manejo de microcuenca, IUCN, 2009

Fig. 5. Division of a watershed (subwatershed, watershed, microwatershed, others)

Nanowatershed Microwatershed

Secondary Current

Subwatershed

Aquifer

Main Current Sea

Watershed

Division


10

Chapter 2

Ecosystem Functions, Goods and Services

View of Tajumulco Volcano, S.M.


11

Environmental goods and services permit economic activities; they are the life support system of the planet and of the human being. They generate tangible and intangible benefits.

Interaction between the species of

flora and fauna in the ecosystems (resulting from their inherent dynamics), the space or physical environment (or abiotic) and solar energy gives rise to a series of ecosystem functions, also called ecological or environmental functions. The water cycle, nutrient cycle, and sediment retention are examples of these functions. A range of goods and services can emanate from this interaction.

An ecosystem good is a product of nature used directly by the human being. Water, wood, and medicinal substances

are examples of ecosystem goods. Ecosystem goods, also called environmental goods, have the basic characteristic of being tangible and can be quantified and commercialized. They may be used by human beings as production input (raw material) or final product. A market price can thus be ascertained for most of them, making it possible to obtain a precise calculation of income generated from their use.

2.2 Ecosystem Goods:

Source: the authors.

Fig. 6. Examples of ecosystem goods

2.1 Ecosystem Functions:


12

Ecosystem services do not need human beings to be produced; they are self-renewing and so far have not been substituted by human beings.

Ecosystem, or environmental, services are all of those benefits given by forests and productive systems to

humankind, such as protecting soil from erosion, maintaining rains and even regulating the local, regional and planetary climate. Put simply, we could say the ecosystem service is like “volunteer work” by forests and sustainable productive systems that benefits man and the functioning of the planet as a whole. The following table gives examples of ecosystem goods and services to help differentiate between them.

Ecosystems provide a broad range of services to human society, from flows of clean water, to productive land and carbon sequestration. People, business and society depend on these services for raw materials inputs, production processes and climate stability. Listed in the table below are ecosystem services emanating from certain functions of the ecosystems that have an effect on the wellbeing of human beings. In addition, figure 7 shows some examples.

Environmental Goods Environmental Services

Water for domestic use

Water for agricultural systems

Wood

Medicinal plants

Fuel wood and charcoal

Forest seeds

Plant food

Plants and fruits

Biological material

Animals

Water capture

Soil protection

Nutrient fixing

Food control

Sediment retention

Carbon fixing

Scenic beauty

Watershed protection

2.3 Ecosystem Services:

Source: taken from Barzev, R. 2008

Table 1. Ecosystem Goods and Services that Forests Generate


13

.

No.

ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS AND SERVICES

COMPONENTS AND PROCESSES OF THE ECOSYSTEMS

EXAMPLES OF GOODS AND SERVICES

Regulatory Function Provides a Regulation of Ecosystems Processes

1 Regulation of gas Role of the ecosystem in biogeochemical cycles (e.g. CO2/O2, balancing of the ozone layer, etc.).

UVB protection by O3. Maintenance of air quality. Influences on climate. Maintenance of favorable climate (e.g., temperature, precipitation, etc.). CO2/O2 balance. SOx levels

2 Regulation of climate Influence of ground cover and biologically moderated processes on climate

Regulation of greenhouse gases

3 Mitigation of disturbances Influence of the ecosystem structure in buffering environmental disturbances

Protection from storms. Mitigation of floods. Recovery from drought and other aspects in response to environmental variability of habitat controlled mainly by the structure of vegetation.

4 Regulation of water Role of ground cover in the regulation of runoff and river discharges

Natural drainage and irrigation. Means of transportation.

5 Water supply Filtration, retention and storage of fresh water

Provides water for consumption

6 Soil retention Role of plant roots and soil biota in retaining soil

Maintenance of arable lands. Prevention of damages from erosion/sedimentation.

7 Soil formation Weathering of rocks, accumulation of organic material.

Maintenance of the productivity of arable lands. Maintenance of the soil’s natural productivity. Maintenance of soil health and productive ecosystems.

8 Nutrient regulation Role of biota in storage and (re)cycling of nutrients.

N and P fixing in the nutrient cycle and other elements

9 Waste water treatment Role of vegetation and biota in the elimination or decomposition of nutrients and compounds

Control of pollution/detoxification. Filtering of dust particles.

10 Pollination Role of biota in the movement of flower gametes

Pollination of native wild plants. Pollination of crops

11 Biological control Population control through the dynamics of trophic relationships

Control of pests and plagues. Reduction of herbivores (crop damages) from top predators.

Habitat Function Provides Habitat for Wild Plant and Animal Species

12 Shelter function Suitable living space for wild plants and animals

Maintenance of biological and genetic diversity (and hence the foundation for many other functions). Maintenance of commercially harvested species.

13 Nursery function Suitable reproductive habitat Hunting, sports, gathering fish, fruit, etc. Small-scale subsistence crops and aquaculture

Production Function Provides Natural Resources

14 Foods Conversion of sunlight in edible plants and animals

Building and manufacturing (e.g., woods, skins, etc.)

15 Raw materials Conversion of sunlight in biomass for human constructions and other uses

Fuels and energy (e.g., fuel wood, organic material). Forage and fertilizers (e.g. krill,

Table 2. Ecosystem Services Emanating from the Functions of Ecosystems


14

leaves, bedding 16 Genetic resources Genetic evolution and materials in wild

plants and animals Improve crop resistance to pathogens and plagues. Chemical models and tools. Test and trial organisms

17 Medicinal resources Variety in (bio)chemical substances and other medicinal uses in natural biota

Medications and pharmaceutical products

18 Ornamental resources Variety of biota in natural ecosystems with (potential) ornamental use.

Resources for fashion, crafts, jewelry, pets, worship, decoration, gifts (e.g., furs, feathers, ivory, orchids, butterflies, aquariums, fishes, mollusks, etc).

Information Function Provides Opportunities for Cognitive Development

19 Aesthetic information Attractive landscape features Enjoyment of scenery (scenic routes, etc.).

20 Recreation Variety of landscapes with potential recreational use

Trips to natural ecosystems for ecotourism, trips to the open air, sports, sport fishing, etc.

21 Cultural and artistic information

Variety of natural characteristics and artistic values

Use of nature as motifs in books, movies, paintings, songs, national symbols, architecture, publicity, etc.

22 Cultural and historical information

Variety in natural features with spiritual and historical value

Use of nature for religious or historical purposes (e.g., value of the heritage of the natural ecosystem and its characteristics)

23 Science and education Variety in nature with scientific and educational value

Use of the natural system for school trips. Use of nature for scientific research.

Source: Adapted from Barrantes and Castro, 1999

Fig. 7. Examples of Environmental Services

Source: by authors


15

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) has typified ecosystem services based on the following categories:

a) Production (or provisioning) services are the products or goods obtained from ecosystems.

b) Regulating services are benefits related to regulation of ecosystem processes, such as regulation of climate, water and certain diseases that affect the human being.

c) Cultural services are non-material services that people obtain through spiritual

enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation and aesthetic experiences, such as knowledge systems (popular), social relations and aesthetic values.

Essential or support services are the ones necessary for producing all of the other ecosystem services. Some examples are biomass production, oxygen production, soil formation and retention, the nutrient cycle, the water cycle and provision of habitat (Green Facts, 2007).

Categories of Services Types of Services

Maintenance services Soil formation, nutrient cycle, primary production

Provisioning services Food, drinking water, fuel wood, fiber, biochemical, genetic resources

Regulating services

Climate, disease, water regulation and purification

Cultural services Spiritual and religious, recreational, aesthetic, educational, cultural heritage

Table 3. Categories and types of ecosystem services according to the MA


16

Watershed services derive from the ecosystem functions or processes that directly or indirectly provide flows of benefits to human beings,

which can include:

Fresh water for consumption (to drink or for domestic, agricultural and industrial use)

Fresh water for non-consumptive uses (hydroelectric generation, refrigeration and navigation)

Regulation of flows and filtration. For example, they maintain the quality of water stored in soils, watersheds and flood plains, and which can buffer flows during flooding and droughts; control erosion and sedimentation; control aquifer levels that can bring salinity to the surface; and maintain watersheds, riparian habitats, fisheries and other wildlife habitats important for hunting and migratory birds, for rice-growing areas, and for fertilizing flood plains. Natural flood regimens are also important elements in mangrove development and in maintaining natural processes of coastal zones and estuaries, which are critical habitats for important fishing species as well as other marine species. Transport of normal sediment loads also protects coastal areas from erosion, as occurs when sediment is retained behind dams, and can reduce storm damage.

2.4 Ecosystem services of watersheds:

Fig. 8. Examples of Ecosystem Goods and Services within a Watershed

Source: Taken from http://www.girobi.com.

http://www.girobi.com/


17

Chapter 3

Payment for Environmental Services (PES)

View of the municipal seat of Tacaná S.M.


18

A PES system can be a sustainable long-term mechanism if generated from local resources based on solution of a population’s concrete problem.

Now that we know about the environmental services that forest and other land uses (ecosystems) provide us, we’ll discuss how their conservation can be linked with payment systems for the use of these services.

This is a flexible mechanism of monetary retribution or compensation that can be adapted to different conditions for the purpose of maintaining or providing an

environmental service, from users of the service and destined to providers. PES in watersheds normally centers on water services—availability and/or quality of water. It is also said that the basis for payment of environmental services or ecosystem services, is that users of the services pay providers of those services so they conserve and/or restore the ecosystems providing those services.

According to Smith, de Groot, and Bergkamp (2006), there are three possible types of PES projects:

a) Private PES projects: Autonomous projects between private entities, with the following characteristics:

a. Direct payments by beneficiaries to service providers for protection or restoration of watershed services;

b. Cost-sharing among stakeholders; c. Land is purchased and then leased back to the former owner to safeguard

the watershed services originating from that land; or d. Purchase of land use rights that are separated from property rights

b) Cap and trade projects:

a. Establish a cap (a maximum total amount) on pollutants that can be released or on water extraction;

b. Allocate pollution or extraction permits by dividing the total allowable among water users; and

c. Allow participants to trade permits: those who don’t need them can sell the permit to those who require a higher allocation than authorized.

c) Public PES projects:

a. In government-promoted PES schemes, participants include public entities and involve user fees, land purchase and concession of use rights to natural resources, as well as fiscal mechanisms based on taxes and subsidies.

3.1 Payment for environmental services:

3.2 Types of PES:


19

Payment for environmental services is a mechanism of economic retribution through which beneficiaries or users of the service compensate its providers or

b. Each PES transaction will be unique, depending on the context and needs of the direct stakeholders. Nevertheless, all have certain features in common. For example, because the benefits related to water derived from land management are local (upstream waters and downstream waters), the watershed services are usually limited to localized markets. In addition, benefits must be quantifiable, significant, and directly attributable to the watershed protection actions, and costs should not be higher than the value of the positive impacts assessed.

It is not a gift in order to sit and do nothing. It is not a government award for being located in water recharge zones. It is not the result of a global mandate. It is not a subsidy provided by the State, with nothing done in exchange. It is not a bureaucracy created by the central government.

A voluntary human act to conserve natural capital A long-term commitment to society and the environment Can help sustain local economic activities Consolidates local institutions with legitimacy

New rules of the game: society-environment

Creation of markets for eco-services Develop ecological models coupled with the local

economy Can help reduce migration from the countryside to

the city Contributes human and financial capital for conservation Valuate the environment, payment in cash or kind

3.3 What is NOT a PES?

3.4 Characteristics of a PES:


20

The PES systems compensate enhanced quality and quantity of environmental services; PES is not a payment for the environmental resources themselves.

Area Scope Instruments

Conceptual Define the Environmental Service (ES), understand ES demand-supply

Surveys of key stakeholders, methodological approach of quantification or qualification

Technical Identify, quantify and increase the value of the ES. Support supply and demand of ES.

Hydric studies, carbon quantification methodology, management plans, eco-models, etc.

Legal Support for charging-paying for ES. Resolve conflicts.

Laws, contracts, collection system.

Financial Source-use of funds, rates, financial sustainability.

Collection rates, portfolios, models, etc.

Institutional Architecture of the PES, role of each player, legitimacy, alliances

M&E, contract-management, roundtable for dialogue, etc.

Some general factors that have encouraged the rising interest in PES initiatives are:

Growing threats, or perceptions of them, has increased beneficiaries’ interest in watershed services, with an accompanying willingness to pay for those services.

The creation of economic incentives for users of upstream land to carry out conservation efforts and ensure the provision of environmental services within the watersheds

The existence of inadequate regulations that by themselves aim to assure the provision of environmental services in the watersheds;

The development of more affordable approaches to achieve regulatory standards

To help reduce poverty and urban/rural disparities, for example, aimed at inequities in cost and benefit sharing within watershed environmental services

Create flows of secure funding for the management and protection of areas located in upstream areas

Voluntary participation of providers generally depends on whether the incentives offered are sufficient to cover opportunity costs.

3.5 Components of a PES:

3.6 Aspects that can Motivate Creation of a PES:

Table 4. Classification of the components of a PES mechanism

Source: the authors


21

The existence of producers (suppliers) and consumers (demanders) of

environmental services, prepared and willing to make a transaction for such services

Contractual relation between producers and consumers of environmental services.

Determination of quantities and qualities of the service to be transacted Determination of a value (fee or price) per unit of service in time Efficient and equitable system of collection and payment for environmental

services, or in other words, in allocating and distributing economic resources

a) Donors Donors supply financial resources for the provision of water-related environmental services, and are usually: The government (which provides municipal and national financing) The private sector (which makes voluntary and mandatory payments for water

environmental services) Private individuals (who pay fees on water use for domestic and agricultural

purposes) Charitable institutions (which make donations of their funds)

b) Beneficiaries The beneficiaries are the private or public entities that require the provision of water–related environmental services. There is often an overlap between beneficiaries and donors.

c) Providers In order of importance, the providers of water-related environmental services are usually: Private owners (individual owners with clear and indisputable property rights on

the land) Community/ejido members (farmers who live in or obtain their livelihoods from

communal property) Private reserves, whether held by an individual or group), and private entities

registered as reserves and committed to environmental conservation are the third most common provider of environmental services.

Governments or nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) with conservation ends

3.7 Ideal Conditions for a PES:

3.8 Stakeholders in the Implementation of PES Mechanisms:


22

Informal occupants of public lands (farmers that live on public lands), often designated as protected areas, that can have longstanding rights on the land.

d) Intermediaries Intermediaries (government entities, international agencies or NGO) can put donors, beneficiaries and providers of water environmental services in contact and help in the development, administration or functioning of a PES scheme. The specific functions of intermediaries include: Scientific advising for project developers, especially with respect to identifying

expected water services downstream Design of payment mechanisms, feasibility studies, management plans and

monitoring systems; Facilitation of negotiations between direct stakeholders Creation of land management capacities Collection of hydrological data Administration of contracts, allocation of funds and payments Provision of purchase-sell services as intermediary

Fig. 9. Meeting of producers and consumers of water resources in the microwatershed of Chemealón River, Tacaná.

Source: Tacaná Project 2008


23

3.9 Principles Underlying the Implementation of PES mechanisms

Voluntary Transaction Refers to voluntary

negotiations and agreements on contracts

among the parties, no influence by a national or international regulation

and/or agreement.

Sold by (at least) one provider

The provider must establish the validity of

property rights to prevent the risk of players being

supplanted.

Defined ecosystem service

The environmental service must be

measurable and comply with the principle of

additionality (exercises a fairly large and

accumulative effect in order to make a

difference from the start). For this, the

baseline environmental situation on which the service is added must

be established.

Bought by (at least) one user

The purchaser should be the beneficiary and compliance with the

agreement (service flow) must be monitored.

Conditionality Establishment of the

contract conditions under which the provider assures

continuity of the environmental service;

clauses indicating estimated duration and

stipulating when the agreement is violated.

Chart 1. Principles for Implementation of PES Mechanisms

Source: Based on Wunder (2006), Ruiz et al. (2007)

Fig. 10. Farmer located in the recharge zone of the microwatershed of the Chemealón River, Tacaná Source: Tacaná Project, 2008


24

Chapter 4 Methodological Process for Implementing PES Mechanisms

Affluent of the Chemealón River, Tacaná, S.M.


25

This chapter will describe, step by step, the methodological process used by the IUCN Tacaná II Project in the implementation of payment for environmental services mechanisms based on water services that have been developed in the San Pablo and Tacaná municipalities, department of San Marcos (see figure 11), specifically in the microwatersheds of the Negro and Chemealón Rivers, respectively.

In Guatemala there is no legislative and institutional framework that regulates or spells out aspects related to payment for

environmental services. In fact, none of the articles in the main laws on natural resource management and conservation (Law on Protection and Improvement of the Environment, legislative decree 68-86; Forest Law, legislative decree 101-96; Law on Protected Areas, legislative decree 4-89 and subsequent modifications, legislative decrees 18-89 and 110-96; and the regulatory Law on Areas of Territorial Preserves of the State of Guatemala, legislative decree 126-97) mention this theme in any way.

1. Legal backing

2. Information Gathering •Identification of ES •Prioritization of pilot site •Identification of stakeholders •Assessment of current institutional

framework •Preparation of technical study •Preparation of socioeconomic study •Preparation of study on potential and

payment capacity •Preparation of study on late payments

3. Negotiation for the formation of the

organizational structure

4. Design of the PES mechanism •Creation of the

administration system •Design of contracts •Design of monitoring,

follow-up and evaluation system

5. Negotiation process with stakeholders (providers-users)

6. Implementation of the PES mechanism

4.1 Legal Backing:

Source: the authors

Fig. 11. Tacaná Project model for implementation of PES mechanisms

Model of implementation of PES mechanisms, IUCN

Tacaná Project


26

For this reason, proposals by Guatemalan environmental experts are based on the development of direct economic mechanisms that primarily promote forest conservation on private land (payment for the environmental services of forests). As a result, Guatemala’s Forest Law, created in October 1996, established direct payments for reforestation, management and conservation of forest. These payments are administered by the National Forest Institute, which gives incentives to owners of land dedicated to reforestation projects and maintenance of lands with forest vocation, and for management of natural forests (through the different forest incentives programs). However, the incentives are recognized as compensation or payment for the use/protection of the environmental services. All of the above points to the importance of promoting creation of a municipal-level agreement, wherein the municipality that will be involved in implementing the PES mechanism establishes that it recognizes the importance of conserving the environmental goods and services of the municipality (see figure 12).

The Decentralization Law in force in Guatemala opens opportunities for municipalities to implement PES mechanisms: two of its principles have to do with municipal autonomy and the re-establishment and conservation of environmental balance and human development.

Source: Municipality of San Pablo, San Marcos. 2008

Fig. 12. Municipal agreement for the implementation of PES mechanisms in the municipality of San Pablo, San Marcos

… DECIDES: I) To create the Municipal Program of Payment for Environmental Services (PES) for the Municipality of San Pablo, department of San Marcos, as a mechanism of support to conservation and management of natural resources in the Municipality. The Program entails recognition and monetary compensation to actors who invest in conservation and sustainable management of municipal natural resources (water, soil, forest, landscape, etc.). II) The Program of Payment for Environmental S i (PES)


27

This is one of the initial steps in implementing an experience in PES

mechanisms. Application of this stage is very important since it will yield the guidelines necessary for deciding on implementation of an experience of this type. This stage contemplates the following steps: Identification of the environmental services for which the compensation or

payment will be made Prioritization of pilot sites in areas of interest Identification of stakeholders (both providers and consumers of the environmental

service) Assessment of the institutional and legal frame in force Preparation of a technical (biophysical) study of the area where the

environmental service is provided Preparation of a socioeconomic study Conduct study on potentiality and payment capacity Preparation of a study on water payments in arrears

a) Identification of the environmental service for which compensation or payment will be made

As explained in the chapter on environmental functions, goods and services, while there is a range of environmental services, four are in greater demand or more common with respect to PES mechanisms: 1) carbon sequestration and storage, 2) conservation of biodiversity, 3) protection of watersheds and water quality, and 4) scenic beauty and recreation. In general, in the area of watershed management payment for environmental services centers on water services, water quantity/quality or reduction of flood damage. In the Tacaná II Project, the focus has been on the first two areas. A double entry matrix is suggested in order to define the importance of the environmental service and assess different criteria for selecting the targeted environmental service, as illustrated below:

While there are other environmental services that could be integrated in a PES program, the environmental service targeted most in Latin America is water provision emanating from watershed protection.

4.2 Information Gathering:


28

Environmental good or service

Ecos

yste

m v

ision

Neg

ativ

e en

viro

nmen

tal i

mpa

ct

Com

petit

ion

over

soil

use

Dem

and

with

pay

men

t cap

acity

Impa

ct o

n in

com

e ge

nera

tion

Inst

itutio

nal a

nd le

gal f

acili

ty

Exist

ence

of i

nstit

utio

naliz

ed

mec

hani

sms

Resp

onse

to d

evel

opm

ent a

nd

cons

erva

tion

stra

tegy

Reco

mm

enda

tions

Biodiversity protection

Regulation of greenhouse gases

Hydrological regulation and water quality

Scenic beauty and recreation

Genetic material

Response criteria YES/

NO

NU

LL/L

OW

/M

EDIU

M/

HIGH

N

ULL

/LO

W/

MED

IUM

/ HI

GH

NU

LL/L

OW

/M

EDIU

M/

HIGH

N

ULL

/LO

W/

MED

IUM

/ HI

GH

NU

LL/L

OW

/M

EDIU

M/

HIGH

YES/

NO

YES

/NO

YES

/NO

Each criteria responded must have a basis

b) Prioritization of pilot sites in areas of interest To analyze water services, the IUCN Tacaná Project used the watershed as physical-geographic unit. However, for purposes of implementing a PES program it is important to determine the areas most relevant for water recharge. In other words, identify the areas with greatest importance for producing water service, and also if there is some level of use of these resources by clearly identified users/consumers. Certain selection criteria were used to rank these areas in a watershed or microwatershed. The four categories of criteria commonly used are:

Prioritizing sites for the implementation of PES mechanisms responds to the combination of different environmental and social criteria, as well as the source of available financing.

Source: Adapted from Barrantes, 2004

Table 5. Example of a double entry matrix to define the importance of the environmental service


29

Ecological criteria Importance of the Environmental Goods and Services (EGS) in contributing to

the sustainable development of the area of interest Socioeconomic criteria Technical and logistical criteria (availability of information)

Table 6. Ecological criteria

Criteria Description The PES proposed is for the EGS coinciding with the greatest vocation of the pilot site selected.

Sites for which PES mechanisms can be developed are ranked, in which the EGS selected coincide with current soil use.

The EGS of this area are representative of the entire region.

The sites with the most important EGS for the ecosystem and/or nearby ecosystems will be prioritized.

Source: Adapted from Barzev, R. 2008. Table 7. Importance of the EGS for the area of interest

Criteria Description

The effect of the EGS transcends borders in the study area and affects areas and stakeholders throughout the province.

The EGS are strategic for the region of interest because they could generate economic opportunities.

The communities will benefit from use of the EGS.

The producers of the EGS will receive amounts in return for PES; but local communities can also be involved/employed in the new productive activities.

The EGS generate economies of scale in the region.

The present or future economic activities based on these EGS generate economy of scale in the region (value added is generated)

Source: Adapted from Barzev, R. 2008 In some ways, socioeconomic criteria are the most relevant for this type of study (see table 8). The detailed development of these aspects makes it possible to design the PES mechanisms. The basic assumption is that the EGS are inputs in human economic activities. Supply and demand for the EGS are quantified. Benefits from the use of those EGS are calculated, key players in the implementation of conservation mechanisms are identified, property rights on the recharge zones for the EGS being analyzed are determined, and finally, the institutional structure for developing and implementing the PES mechanisms is proposed.


30

Table 8: Socioeconomic criteria

Criteria Description EGS are inputs for concrete economic activities (currently developed or will be shortly).

EGS are direct inputs for specific economic activities (e.g., water for hydro-energy, scenic beauty for tourism, etc.).

Use of EGS already generates income for society.

These economic activities already generate income for the society (and can generate more if the EGS are managed sustainably).

Demand is clearly identified. There are users/consumers that benefit from the use of the EGS; they are identified and consumption can be measured so as to establish environmental fees.

Supply is clearly identified. Producers of EGS are known in order to develop PES schemes with them.

There are concrete pressures on the resource.

The main users placing pressure on the EGS of interest are recognized.

There is social organization for management and use of the resource.

Local organizations exist that can facilitate the implementation of Payment for Environmental Services and Management of the Environmental Fund.

There are financial resources for management and conservation of the EGS.

A priori willingness on the part of main users in investing in conservation of EGS; other financing sources have also been identified that will feed into the Environmental Fund.

There is clarity in land tenure and property rights.

Clearly established property rights permit the use of contracts between the Environmental Fund and owners of the EGS recharge area; compensation for conservation is obtained, ensuring their future sustainability.

There is institutional structure that can support conservation initiatives.

There is support at the central level on PES implementation, as well as state and private institutions in the territory supporting the initiative; there is a legal framework for implementation of the PES.

Source: Adapted from Barzev, R. 2008 Table 9. Technical and Logistical Aspects

Criteria Description Existence of information There is enough secondary bio-physical and economic

information to do valuation studies (generate economic indicators) for the PES mechanisms; if there is no information, techniques need to be applied to generate necessary statistical data. Sufficient hydrometeorological information is also available for trusting data calculated on hydric balance.

Accessibility of the information Existing information is accessible; institutions that have the information are committed to facilitating it to consultants for the benefit of the initiative.

Existence of management plan or other official document that identifies the EGS as priority.

Technical documents exist on the study areas and the EGS of interest; there are data to determine the study area, flows of EGS and costs of conservation.


31

Financial and legal mechanisms exist for this type of EGS.

There are financial mechanisms, legal instruments and political will that can facilitate implementation of the PES.

There is infrastructure allowing use of the EGS.

Infrastructure exists allowing use of the EGS (e.g., tourism development requires roads, hotels, trails, equipment, qualified personnel, etc., in order to take advantage of the scenic beauty existing in the region; making use of water supply requires works for management of recharge area, piping, dams, treatment plants, drains, sewers, meters, etc.).

Source: Adapted from Barzev, R. 2008 In short, many of the aspects mentioned in the tables above will be developed in greater detail further on in this handbook. The criteria presented are thus more descriptive and qualitative, although they can be adjusted when concrete indicators are generated. c) Identification of stakeholders (providers and consumers of the environmental

service) Here we need to identify the providers of the environmental service, or the people, protected areas and communities (normally situated in the water recharge zones) located in the areas where the environmental service is generated and which directly or indirectly have to do with its conservation. In this regard, it is important to identify the property rights or diversity of uses of the areas that provide the environmental service. In this process of identification use of the “rapid rural appraisal" matrix (Martínez, 2008) is suggested, or a similar scheme to estimate the perception of the multiple stakeholders (see table 10).

Direct stakeholders that can benefit from a payment for environmental services scheme include individuals, collective social entities, public or private businesses, and government and nongovernmental entities.

Fig. 13. Sheep producers located in the water recharge zone of the microwatershed of the Chemealón River, Tacaná

Source: Tacaná Project, 2008


32

Participatory landscape analysis

Evaluation of land uses, analysis of secondary information and landscape analysis on the part of stakeholders

Land tenure Revision of the list of potential stakeholders regarding land tenure and property rights Access to markets Rapid evaluation of markets and opportunity costs associated with environmental services

Analysis of change in land use

Changes in access to markets (physical access, increase or reduction of market barriers), spatial analysis of recent changes and current trends within the focal area and its broader context (accessibility). This last as a preliminary assessment of whether PES implementation can affect access to land and its use for some people.

Priority themes

Key factors of change Environmental services in question Changes in

Agroforestry Technology

Changes in Infrastructure or Market Access

Hydrological Services

Scenic Beauty and Recreation

Carbon Sequestration

Local technical values and knowledge

Benefits/weakness perceived and options for participatory technological development

Local expectations Local interviews Local interviews Soil and plant

typology

Knowledge of ecological values, perceptions and values

Perceived benefits / weakness, through interviews, data collection

Macroeconomic elements leading to access to commodities market

Interviews, data collection

Interviews, data collection

Eligibility for voluntary mechanisms and assessment of transaction costs

Models for greater ecological knowledge

Evaluation of the technical sustainability of forestry arrangements in terms of soil, nutrients, balance of water or biological interactions

Value chain analysis

Hydrological models of the landscape

Surveys to determine visitor preferences

Measurement of carbon stocks

In addition, beneficiaries can be characterized and grouped by: 1. Type of environmental service they benefit from 2. Geographic area: in or outside the ecosystem or political administrative area 3. Degree and type of dependence of the ES in relation to subsistence or

commercial exploitation 4. Access to other sources for provision of the ES

Source: Adapted from Van Noordwijk et al. 2007 and Martínez, 2008

Table 10. Example of Rapid Rural Appraisal Methodology


33

5. Ownership type and rights or titles to the area where ES is produced 6. Demographic composition, gender, ethnicity and occupation 7. Type of groups and forms of social organization

Another important step in this aspect is to identify consumers of the environmental service: determine who is benefiting from provision of the environmental good or goods. They can be individuals, public and private businesses, social collectives, private intermediaries, government sectors, donor agencies, NGOs, etc. We could say that the consumers or users of the environmental service is everyone willing to pay for the environmental service from which they benefit. The table shows potential buyers of the PES mechanisms according to the environmental service supplied.

Environmental Services Potential Buyers

Carbon sequestration and storage

Local, regional and national governments; national carbon funds (Italian Carbon Fund, services of the Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM) of the Netherlands); businesses; high-risk funds and investor groups; groups of international organizations (World Bank: Global Environment Fund-BioCarbon Fund); foundations dedicated to conservation of natural spaces

Biodiversity National and international NGOs; private companies (compensations); national and international pharmaceutical industry

Watershed protection and water quality

Municipalities: hydroelectric companies; public and private water providers; water bottling companies; agricultural organizations; fishermen (contamination); farmers (salinity); irrigation committees

Scenic beauty and recreation

Tourism companies; park visitors: national and international NGOs

d) Evaluation of the current institutional and legal framework The implementation of payment for environmental services schemes requires the existence of institutional infrastructure and ad hoc legislation, since payment agreements need to be considered within the context of a global trend of institutional changes resulting from the decline in provision of environmental services (Tognetti, et al. 2004). In the legal aspect, in addition to legal framework for implementing PES mechanisms (addressed in numeral 1), the legality of the land tenure of the environmental service providers (state or municipal lands, communal lands, private property or protected area) is another key issue. This assessment allows us

Source: Taken from Figueroa E., et al. 2009

Table 11. Potential Buyers of PES Mechanisms


34

to ascertain whether potential providers have legal rights over the areas that provide environmental services, as well as establish all of the players that can or cannot appear at an initial negotiation and be incorporated in the payment for environmental services program. One of the main factors that can affect adequate implementation of a PES scheme is lack of clarity in the normative framework by which functions and competencies are assigned to public entities. In some cases the normative frame may be sufficient but because there are no unified criteria of interpretation, new and innovative environmental management instruments are not applied. For this reason, even when regulatory framework exists it is important to specify the spheres of authority, given that within the actual PES scheme individuals or entities under public or private law can participate. In relation to the institutional framework required for establishing the PES system, this is defined by scale, or the spatial and temporal dimension of the program. In the case of a PES scheme to protect water resources such as the one developed by the IUCN Tacaná Project, the most logical scale is local since the limits do not go beyond the municipal level. In general, the institutional context must be fostered and constructed (through municipal legislation or agreements) in Guatemala if there is interest in developing a PES scheme, since there are no specific institutions at the government level or other type designed exclusively for the execution, monitoring and accompaniment of this type of initiative. For this reason, in the institutional design it is important to recognize and take into account the different organizations or institutions that can have an influence on the development of markets for PES and provision of the water service. This relation must further the encounter between supply and demand and thereby set up a market where interactions are established between supply of the resource and the actors providing it, and demand for that resource and users of the environmental service (Alpizar, 2004). There should also be a great deal of clarity about the competencies of the institutions and stakeholders involved. This makes it easier to assign responsibilities when the PES scheme is implemented. Given all of the above, the IUCN Tacaná Project promoted the construction of an administrative entity for the PES mechanism, called the “Fund for Participatory

It is also important to have an appropriate legal frame with clear regulations, and institutions that ensure compliance with agreements in terms of management and use of water resources.


35

Water Management” (Fondo para la Gestión Hídrica Participativa-FOGESHIP). More detail about the fund can be found in section 4.4 of the chapter, “Design of the Payment for Environmental Services Mechanism”.

e) Preparation of a technical study (biophysical) of the area where the environmental services emanates Conducting a biophysical study is of utmost importance to determine the current natural resources situation in the area producing the environmental service. This allows us to identify the technological changes required to protect and conserve those zones (water recharge zones, in the case of the Tacaná Project). This information is obtained through visits to the water recharge zone, tours of the microwatershed, secondary information (previous studies and cartography prepared), and interviews with local municipal and institutional players. Below is a systematic description of the technical study’s main aspects: Description of the microwatershed or study area: The description should

include location, elevation, territorial extension, access routes, populated areas, and data on population, climate, life zones, etc. See below for part of the information generated on the microwatershed of the Chemealón River, Tacaná, San Marcos.

Fig. 14. Map of the microwatershed of the Chemealón River, Tacaná, San Marcos


36

Location of the Microwatershed The microwatershed of the Chemealón River is located in southwestern Guatemala, on the Pacific slope, to the north of the department of San Marcos, in the watershed of the Coatán River (upper part), within the territory consisting of the municipality of Tacaná, 4 kilomerters south of the municipal seat on the road leading from the municipality of Tacaná toward the departmental seat of San Marcos. It is also located 66 kilometers from the departmental seat of San Marcos and 316 km from the capital city (see fig. 1). Coordinates are: 15° 12’ 28.6” latitude north and 092° 04’ 38.4” west longitude.

Elevation and Territorial Extention The microwatershed has elevations ranging from 2,153 (location of Cantón 12 de Mayo, town of Cunlaj) to 2,841 meters above sea level where the canton of Chemealón is located, town of Sujchay. The territorial extension of the microwatershed is 32.193 km2.

Access Route The main access route is the road leading from the departmental seat of San Marcos to the municipality of Tacaná, which is paved for a 66-km stretch and can be travelled all year round. Access routes to the different communities located in the microwatershed are dirt roads (approximately 14 km), passable most of the year except to certain communities during the rainest part of the year or during storms, when 4-wheel drive is required.

Life Zones

Two life zones are identified in the micwatershed: 1. Lower Montane Subtropical Wet Forest 2. Lower Montane Subtropical Wet Forest

Climatology

Climate: Semi-cold climate predominates in the microwatershed (BB’3 according to the Thornwhite classification).

Temperature: Minimum absolute temperature is -05º C; maximum absolute temperature is 30º C and average annual temperature is 16.5º C.

Duration of the rainy season and pluvial precipitation The region's rainy season runs from May to September, with average annual rainfall of 2.065 mm.

Frost incidence There are 3 to 4 frosts a year in the area of the microwatershed, occurring mostly between November and February.

Microwatershed of the Chemealón River

Chart 2. Example of information to include in the description of the study area

Source: the authors


37

Analysis of land use capacity: Serves as a decision-making tool when considering the data it contributes in proposals for reducing overuse of soil resources and thereby stabilizing natural resource management in the medium term. This process is important since it allows us to visualize a strategy for the “territorial ordering” of a watershed.

Analysis of current soil use: Allows a more detailed visualization of the environmental goods provided by the study area and, indirectly, potential beneficiaries from implementation of the PES mechanism. It also allows us to construct an analysis of soil use according to its vocation.

Fig. 15. Land use capacity in the microwatershed of the Chemealón River

Source: Taken from Orozco, D. 2011

Fig. 16.Currect land use in the microwatershed of the Chemealón River


Ironically, in our country the most common crops are those NOT suited to our lands, due to poor use of soil vocation.


38

Analysis of the intensity of soil use: Allows us to identify the type of human use in the study area, including urbanization and edification. We can also see utilized and underutilized areas.

Identification of water recharge zones in the microwatershed: Essential for initiatives where the environmental service is connected with water services (water quantity and quality), since it allows us to identify the zones where protection and conservation actions will be focused in order to maintain constant water service. To generate this information, the Tacaná project has made use of methodology to determine forest land for water capture and regulation developed by the National Forests Institute and validated by the Institute of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment of Universidad Rafael Landívar.

Fig. 17. Current land use in the microwatershed of the Chemealón River

Fig. 18. Water recharge zones in the microwatershed of

Chemealón River

Source: Taken from Castillo, L. 2008



39

Determination of the hydric balance of a microwatershed: Allows us to compare the quality of water going out of a watershed, calculated based on observations of runoff during a given period, and the quantity of rainfall in the watershed during this same period.

No Microwatershed Extension Ha

Entry Losses Availability

Rainfall m³/year

Actual Evapotranspiration

m³/year

Retention m³/year

Runoff m³/year

Water Recharge m³/year

1 Chemealón 3,220 61,781,778 14,968,143 9,211,541 511,366 36,282,414 24.23% 15.11% 0.83% 58.73%

2 Negro 5,143 63,261,211 15,383,632 9,553,817 1,777,206 36,546,556

24.32% 15.10% 02.81% 57.77%

Identify water quantity and quality: The water resource analysis should take

place from the following three optics: a. The water as resource: Quantity (balance of water resources in the study area) Quality (problems of overuse, infiltration and contamination, proposing

possible measures that can be adopted to address them Vulnerability (risk of droughts, deforestation, dumping of toxic

substances, risk of floods and/or landslides, etc.) b. The water as receiver medium for residues and its self-purifying capacity c. The water as ecosystem: conservation merits or intrinsic value

Identify the problem linked with the water resource and possible solutions: This

can be done using a SWOT and double entry matrix, in which the most relevant aspects are indicated and actions are proposed for maximization (of strengths and opportunities) and minimization (of weaknesses and threats).

Determine conservation measures and costs: This aspect is important because

it allows us to determine simple and low-cost practices for conserving and maintaining water recharge areas that provide the environmental service. For example, based on the characteristics of the microwatershed of the Chemealón River and information obtained about conflicts over water use, in particular, the Tacaná Project identified conservation costs and measures, as follows:

Water recharge occurs naturally when rain filters through soil or rock toward the aquifer.

Table 12. Hydric balances of the microwatersheds of the Chemealón, Tacaná and Negro Rivers, San Pablo.

Source: Taken from Ávalos, O, Rodas, V. and Visoni, F. 2011


40

Conservation measures: 1) Lower part of the microwatershed:

Contour sowing for clean crops like corn and beans Reforestation Living grass barriers Hillside ditches with soiling crop

2) Lower and middle part of the microwatershed Contour sowing for clean crops like corn and beans Maintain trees along river banks Reforestation Living grass barriers Hillside ditches with soiling crop Agroforestry crops with deciduous fruit trees following land

contours 3) Middle and upper part

Agroforestry crops: mainly fruit trees and basic grains, following land contours

Maintain trees along river banks Clean crops (corn and beans) on contours Living grass barriers Hillside ditches with soiling crop Reforestation

4) Upper part of the microwatershed

Clean crops on contours Living grass barriers Hillside ditches with soiling crop Reforestation

Description of the measures and/or practices recommended (3

examples): Contour sowing For all of the crops grown in the microwatershed, but especially clean crops such corn, beans, vegetables, etc. This practice consists of tracing crop rows following the contour lines of the land.

Living grass barriers

This practice consists of rows of forage grass of species like napier or setaria, which are planted along contour lines at a distance of 10 and 20 meters between each one, depending on the slope of the terrain.


41

This not only helps reduce soil erosion but also provides inhabitants with fodder for their animals.

Hillside ditches with soiling crop Basically consists of the same practice as above, with the addition of a trench approximately 40 cm wide and 30 cm deep permitting drainage of runoff water occurring within the area between one ditch and another. The grass is planted in the low part of the trench or ditch. In general, use of “good cultivation practices” should be promoted in both microwatersheds, such as: (1) associated crops, (2) crop rotation, (3) contour sowing, (4) manual weed control, (5) agroforestry systems and others. All of these practices sustainably contribute to conserving the microwatershed’s natural resources.

Cost of implementing measures

Contour sowing It is generally proposed that the rows marked from one contour to another be spaced 10 meters apart, although this can vary depending on the slope of the terrain.

The costs of this practice are determined only by the value of labor and fabrication of an easel (includes a mason’s level).

No. Description Unit Unit Cost Quantity Cost/Ha

1 Fabrication of easel Easel Q.120.00 1 Q.120.00*

2 Preparation of stakes Stake Q.0.12 1000 Q.120.00**

3 Sowing of stakes Day wages Q.40.00 8 Q.320.00

Total Q.560.00

Cost not including easel Q.440.00

* The easel can be used for the entire community. (If this cost is not taken into account as a tool that can be used on many hectares, the cost will only be Q. 440.00/ha). ** The stakes can also be re-used in other areas after the first hectare is marked out.

Table 13. Costs of implementing contour sowing

Source: Taken from PES technical study, IUCN, 2008

Most of the conservation measures often used for controlling runoff are not only designed to slow the speed of water running on the surface; their effect is closely connected with improving infiltration and therefore increasing soil moisture.


42

Does not include the initial cost of clearing the land since this is considered part of the production costs of the crop being planted within the contours.

Living grass barriers This practice is very similar to the one above, except that this one includes planting rows of grass of species such as napier or setaria.

While the distance between barriers depends on the slope of the terrain, 10 meters is proposed for the purpose of calculating costs.


1 Fabrication of easel Easel Q.120.00 1 Q.120.00*

2 Preparation of stakes Stakes Q.0.12 1000 Q.120.00**

3 Planting of stakes Day wages Q.40.00 8 Q.320.00

4 Grass seed Sack 12

tillers

Q.20.00 55.5 Q.1,110.00

5 Sowing grass Day wages Q.40.00 8 Q.320.00

Total Q.1,990.00

Cost of the 2nd ha (without cost of easel or stakes) Q.1,750.00

* El easel can be used to mark out several parcels.

** The stakes can be re-used for marking out other parcels.

Hillside ditches with soiling crop The difference from the previous practice is the construction of a ditch 40 cm wide and 30 cm deep.


1 Fabrication of easel Easel Q.120.00 1 Q.120.00

2 Preparation of stakes Stakes Q.0.12 1000 Q.120.00

3 Plant stakes Day wages Q.40.00 8 Q.320.00

4 Grass seed Sack 12

tillers

Q.20.00 55.5 Q.1,110.00

5 Sow grass Day wages Q.40.00 8 Q.320.00

6 Construct ditch Day wages Q.40.00 20 Q.800.00

Table 14. Costs of implementing live grass barriers

Table 15. Costs of implementing hillside ditches with soiling crop



43

Total Q.2,790.00

Cost of the 2nd ha (without cost of easel or stakes) Q.2,550.00

f) Conduct a socioeconomic study

Socioeconomic data help in designing the for PES mechanism proposal. In this sense, all of the elements identified in this part will relate to the financial and legal mechanisms of a PES further on. Aspects to determine at this stage include:

Human Health Secondary data available at the municipality and health centers on diseases occurring in the municipality are analyzed to determine which have a relation to the quality of environmental services.

Population Analysis of the quantity of population by sex, age, educational level, EAP and social strata to help determine demand for water services and other environmental goods and services generated in the municipality.

Foundation of economic development The main productive and service activities are analyzed to identify potential contributors to the PES program. Agricultural, industrial and service activities will be classified and income estimated, along with benefits from use of water services.

Housing and infrastructure This information reinforces the analysis about economic development in the municipality, population distribution and the types of households that exist, and access to the different areas in the municipality.

Drinking water It is important not only to quantify total demand for water according to the quantity of population and associated uses, but also to identify/classify the sources used. Wells, tapping of rivers and piping systems are identified to analyze the situation of drinking water distribution. Likewise, the legal and regulatory frame connected with this theme is examined in order to develop PES mechanisms.

Land Tenure Analysis of this aspect is critical for clarity about property rights. To be able to establish contracts with land owners in recharge areas under the PES program,


The costs of “not doing anything”: before doing a cost-benefit analysis, it is important to know the costs of maintaining the status quo over time (“business as usual”). The most relevant information in this sense includes the possible impacts that the status quo could cause on users downstream. For example, how much do they have to invest to reduce/eliminate sediments? Or what amount of their losses is due to low production associated with sedimentation?


44

it is important to have prior knowledge about the legal status of these lands. The first contracts will be with owners (or water service producers) whose land titles are in order. In some cases the areas of interest may be public domain, which will entail another form of administering conservation measures.

Typology of producers In addition to finding out the legal situation of the land, it is very important to determine soil use. Each type of producer should be identified to determine if their productive activities are sustainable and in line with conservation of the water resource, especially when located within the greatest recharge areas. Indeed, one of the first steps when a PES program is designed is preparation of “management plans at the farm level” deriving from the “microwatershed management plan,” in order to certify hectares under sustainable management on each property subject to compensation through PES mechanisms. On the other hand, a general inventory of environmental goods and services emanating from the different areas is useful. It is important to know what other environmental goods and services are produced in the public and private areas of interest.

Productive systems When identifying soil uses in general categories, more detailed characterization is also required of the different productive systems and the number of producers for each. Keep in mind that some of them will be identified as “producers” of environmental services since they are located in recharge areas, while others will be identified as “consumers /users” of those environmental services. The former will be subject to incentives and compensation, while the latter must pay to ensure the flow of the environmental foods and services of interest.

g) Conduct a study on potentiality and payment capacity

This study is vital since it defines consumer perception of the environmental service and whether or not there is interest in contributing monetarily or in kind to the conservation of that particular environmental service. As we know, an individual’s consumption of a good or service depends on the price, the cost of complementary or substitute goods, and the individual’s income and preferences, which reflect personal characteristics. In addition, the maximum value an individual is willing to pay for the provision of a good or service depends on the price and his or her yearly income, as well as personal preferences.

In short, with bio-physical and socioeconomic data a PES program proposal can be worked on. The former serve to quantify supply and demand in physical terms and the latter to quantify environmental costs and benefits and design the legal and institutional frame for operation of the actual program.


45

Chart 3 shows a possible form for obtaining the information required for this study in the frame of applying a PES for water services such as the one implemented by the Tacaná Project.

Chart 3. Survey form (1-3) and visual material used (4) in the municipality of Tacaná, San Marcos

Situation without conservation

Situation with conservation measures


46

h) Preparing a study on water payments in arrears The purpose of this study is to determine collection levels for payment of fees for domestic, industrial, agricultural and other ends. This will require communicating with the unit that administers the resource (in most cases the municipal treasuries or municipal water departments/offices), and analyze the number of people that are paid up and the percent of those who are not. It is suggested this be done in groups: less than one year, 1-3 years, 4-5 years, 5-10 years and over 10.

The main idea at this stage is to try and approach and carry out initial negotiations with the different organized groups (municipal, civil society and private sector) connected with the use of the ecosystem goods and services in the municipalities where the pilot experience is to be implemented. The major activities in this context relate to holding meetings with organized and recognized groups in the municipalities for negotiation prior to implementing the experience in payment for environmental services, and including these groups in the Fund for Participatory Water Management (Fondo para la Gestión Hídrica Participativa –FOGESHIP-), the organizational/administrative entity that will be formed as described in the next section. For example, in the municipality of San Pedro, San Marcos, separate meetings were held with the San Pablo Municipal Council, the Community Development Council (COCODE) of the urban area, Asociación para el Desarrollo Integral “Pablenses Unidos” (ASODEPU), four cooperatives (Cooperativa Integral Agrícola “La Bendición RL”, Cooperativa Integral Agrícola “21 de Octubre RL”, Cooperativa Integral Agrícola “San Pablo RL”, and Cooperativa Integral Agrícola “La Igualdad”) and the microwatershed association of Río Negro (Asociación Consejo de Microcuenca Río Negro). In the case of the Tacaná municipality, San Marcos, meetings were held with the Tacaná Municipal Council, the COCODE of the urban area, Asociación de Desarrollo Integral de Tacaná (ADITA), Asociación de Comerciantes del Mercado Central (ACMEC), Asociación Visión con Valores de Tacaná (ASOVIVAT) and Asociación Consejo de Microcuenca del Río Chemealón. Parallel meetings were held with the different government institutions and nongovernmental groups connected with natural resources to present the proposal and plan for designing the PES mechanism, in order to begin preliminary negotiations

4.3 Negotiation on the Formation of the Organizational Structure:


47

for their accompaniment in the preparation of the design and technical assistance in the phase of implementation and monitoring of the PES pilot project. Institutions included: Asociación Nacional del Café; World Vision; the departmental delegation of the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources; the departmental delegation of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food; Federación de Cooperativas Agrícolas de Productores de Café de Guatemala RL; MOSCAMED; Mi Cuenca Project (CARE-IUCN-CRS consortium); Helvetas and the National Forest Institute.

This part is essential to ensure subsequent good execution in implementation of the PES mechanism. Steps include:

Creation of the administration system of the PES mechanism Design of the contract Design of the monitoring, follow-up and evaluation system

a) Creation of the administration system of the PES mechanism

At the previous stage of analyzing the evaluation of the current institutional and legal framework, it was noted that Guatemala does not have specific government-level institutions designed exclusively for execution, follow-up and accompaniment of payment for environmental services initiatives. To account for this deficiency, the IUCN Tacaná Project II promoted the construction of such an administrating entity, called the “Fund for Participatory Water Management” (Fondo para la Gestión Hídrica Participativa-FOGESHIP)”, a legally recognized body (association) made up of various players (municipality, organized civil society and the private sector) and technically supported by the government and non-governmental entities having a direct influence on the geographic area where the experience was to be implemented, including the Municipal Forest Office, CARE, MOSCAMED, INAB, MARN, MAGA, World Vision, ANACAFÉ, and others. It should be noted that all of the actors connected with the FOGESHIP have direct participation in its assembly and board. Figures 19 and 20 show the structure of the AFOGESHIP in greater detail.

4.4 Design of the PES Mechanism:


48

Fig. 19. Organizations forming AFOGESHIP Agua Viva, San Pablo municipality

Source: the authors

Fig. 20. Organizational chart of Asociación Fondo para la gestión Hídrica Participativa “AFOGESHIP Agua Viva,” San Pablo, San Marcos (second-level organization)

Source: the authors

Municipality of San Pablo

AFOGESHIP Management

GO and NGO

San Pedro urban COCODE

Supervisory Board

Technical Assistance

MUNICIPALITY

PRIVATE SECTOR

ORGANIZED CIVIL SOCIETY

TECHNICAL SUPPORT

MUNICIPALITY

PRIVATE SECTOR

ORGANIZED CIVIL SOCIETY

TECHNICAL SUPPORT

General Assembly

Board of Directors


49

In addition to the above, the collection scheme needs to be defined, as well as the process of project administration and execution of the administering entity. For the experience of the IUCN Tacaná Project in San Marcos, this is represented by AFOGESHIP. Figure 21 shows the AFOGESHIP collection, administration and project execution system.

Legal recognition (see figure 22) of this type of organization (as association) is accomplished through its registration in:

1. Registry of Legal Entities of Guatemala

2. Superintendence of Tax Administration

3. Also need to attempt to obtain cuentadancia banking account arriangements? of the organization, which will allow management at the level of state funds for the organization’s strengthening or projects in the water recharge zones providing the environmental service.

Fig. 21. Collection, Administration and Execution Scheme of Projects

Source: the authors

Fig. 22. Registration of the AFOGESHIP Agua Viva in the Guatemala Registry of Legal Persons

Source: REPEJU, 2010

Registration of the entity ASSOCIATION OF THE FUND FOR PARTICIPATORY WATER MANAGEMENT “AGUA VIVA,” which may also be abbreviated AFOGESHIP, under entry number 25975, page 25975 of book 1 of the Single System Electronic Registry of Legal Entities, Guatemala, 12/02/2010. Request SIRPEJU No. 51100211140

General

Board of Directors

Fund Management

Supervisory Board

Technical Assistance

Collection through billing system set up in the municipalities contemplating services based on EGS, signature of agreements with

Administrative and Planning Management (Fund manager and work team)

Execution of conservation works- Finance management plans compensate EGS


50

Design of the contract

In this step it is important that contracts specify the conditions and characteristics of the selected lands, owners’ responsibilities, and obligations of the administering entity in making payment (periodicity and form of payments, technical assistance, training, projects, etc.), as well as define who will be responsible for monitoring, evaluation and certification of what was agreed, and of course, sanctions for noncompliance. The contract must contain, at minimum, the following elements:

Background Affidavits of the parties (accreditation of the legal identity of the parties

signing the contract) Characteristics of the area that will be covered by the project (as precise as

possible) Indicate the date of constitution and other general contract/agreement

information (including dates of finalization, monitoring, evaluation and verification)

Contact data of the parties Clauses on responsibilities, obligations and sanctions for each party Payment terms Third-party roles permitted Actions that should be taken into account in case of unforeseen events Rules for contract acceptance or modification

c) Design of the monitoring, evaluation and follow-up system

A precise system of monitoring, evaluation and follow-up (M&E) will tell us whether or not the PES agreement is meeting its objectives or expectations. It also gives providers of the environmental service information on how to improve its management. Clarity on who carries out M&E during the period of the PES contract is vital. This role can be assigned to the representative of the microwatershed communities, an independent outside body (in the San Marcos experience this is the AFOGESHIP), the buyer (or designated representative of the buyer), or government institution or other organization, The key is for everyone to be clear on who is responsible for M&E.

The fund or payment for environmental services account should be managed based on a legal framework that guarantees suitable functioning.


51

Accordingly, it is important for the M&E system to be well defined before the project’s execution is launched. Ideally, all parties connected with the PES mechanism participate in designing the M&E system to ensure agreement on the parameters or monitoring indicators, and also on evaluation and modification (if necessary) of the M&E system as the project advances. Below are the main aspects of monitoring that should be included in the design phase: Define who selects indicators and who informs who

(socialization mechanism) Selection of the actual indicators; they should be:

Relevant for the PES project Measurable Sensitive to environmental changes Included in the rest of the M&E scheme Reliable

Creation of a “model of the conceptual process of the local ecosystem (microwatershed)” that: Traces out cause-effect relations occurring in the microwatershed (linkage

between providers and users) Indicates what specific characteristics of the watershed are monitored

Selection of monitoring sites (the most common practice is a technique of “stratified random sampling”) that: Reflects the general distribution of the area covered by the project Assures that monitoring sites are sufficiently spread out

The monitoring sites should be permanent for as long as the PES agreement is in force so that the information gathered about trends is reliable. Also, the strategy of permanent sites allows independent verifiers to more easily locate the appropriate sites for making interventions. It is essential to establish a baseline in order to demonstrate that the project is generating new and/or “additional” benefits with respect to the original situation. Although very few organizations executing projects are willing to do the baseline, there are research organizations or public agencies with oversight authority that can be good partners for carrying out this activity. Along with these key elements of a PES monitoring scheme and the type of environmental services (e.g., watershed management linked with water

Monitoring is always important in order to determine the project’s effectiveness and make corrections midway if proven necessary. The need for monitoring is particularly great in pilot conservation projects, which are expected to guide future projects.


52

availability and quality, carbon sequestration, increased biodiversity, etc.), there are other aspects of interest to the parties, such as: Total cost of the project Punctuality of payments and disbursements Intervention of other support services or financial intermediaries Protection of assets in the local ecosystem Equality in local sharing of benefits from the PES project Specific benefits at the family, community and microwatershed level

Follow-up consists of visits to the providers of the microwatershed’s environmental services to ensure the practices they committed to are being carried out adequately. These visits should also serve to determine need for technical assistance, training or other types of practices for adapting to changes produced by the project. Remember that this is a long-run process that must continue adapting to the new context and situations that can arise (economic, social, political or environmental changes). It is also important to document and systematize experiences since PES mechanisms are recent in Guatemala and offer great potential for replication in other areas or countries. To conclude, keep in mind that M&E activities make it possible to identify what has been achieved and how to improve the project’s management or execution. The results of M&E work should be made available to the buyers, intermediary institutions and general public to enhance the project’s transparency and legitimacy.

After the stage of designing the PES mechanism, the negotiation phase begins. This should be an open, participatory and voluntary process so that PES implementation has the backing of all stakeholders (providers, consumers, and intermediaries).

When dealing with services such as provision of water resources, where other providers of the service near the water recharge zones can be involved, negotiations need to include representation of the providers and consumers of the environmental service. The main steps making it possible to carry out the negotiation process are:

4.5 Negotiating with Stakeholders (Providers-Users):

Monitoring is essential to ensure compliance with the commitments acquired by the parties, making it a key piece in the implementation of PES.


53

Approaching the owners of the land where the environmental good or service is located to present the program and ascertain their willingness to participate. If the process was initiated beforehand, it is particularly important that the municipal corporation present the program to potential beneficiaries, stressing the relation between agricultural management/natural resource conservation and water quality.

Approach the population and COCODE of the urban center to publicize and inform about the municipality’s actions with respect to the environmental services program. Similarly, the municipal council needs to endorse this process through its participation in these awareness meetings.

Hold a series of workshops to inform the population in the urban area about problems related to water sources with respect to quality and quantity, and actions that can be taken to address those problems.

Prepare and present the PES proposal to different government organizations, nongovernmental organizations, private organizations or international cooperation agencies to establish cooperation and coordination actions or alliances for implementation of the PES mechanism.

When the parties arrive at negotiations, it is important they reach consensus about the type of methodologies that will be applied to obtain the proposed results, entities that will be executing and guaranteeing the development of the PES mechanism designed, the duration of the mechanism and the sanctions pledged if any of the parties to the agreement fail to comply. Finally, before entering into negotiations with a possible buyer, and even before identifying support institutions and partners, the potential seller or group of sellers should assess: The costs that can be incurred during implementation of the PES mechanism

deriving from the projects implemented, intangible benefits (such as training, technical assistance, etc.) that can be obtained, potential risks and responsibilities.

Options for types of payment. Main forms of payment for environmental services include: Direct financial payments, generally compensation for opportunity costs

for loss of livelihoods incurred from protection of the environmental service, such as conversion of arable or farmland to natural forest

Coverage of the buyers’ transaction and management costs, such as research conducted to carry out the PES agreement, or resources required for converting degraded lands to forest, agroforestry or forest plantations


54

Financial support for specific community goals, such as the construction of a school or clinic in remuneration for the environmental services provided

In-kind payments, such as the direct implementation of projects: energy-saving wood-burning stoves, establishment of forest nurseries, construction of biodigestors, etc.

The implementation phase of a PES should not start until all of the previous stages have been completed (the information required in the different studies has been compiled and analyzed, the implementation design is finalized, and negotiation processes have concluded with positive agreements). The implementation stage consists of operationalizing or launching all of the agreed activities set out in the management plans prepared. In carrying out this part, qualified personnel should be contracted for this purpose. To prevent hitches in this process and avoid creating false expectations, actors involved in the provision of environmental services must be clear about the objectives and functioning of the PES mechanism before initiating implementation. When the providers are small producers, bear in mind that in many cases they will have to introduce changes in how they use and manage natural resources and land. Incorporating these innovations in their productive systems takes time and requires ongoing technical assistance to make sure they are done correctly. The mechanism chosen for transferring payment must have the approval of all involved. While it can be long and costly in many instances, this procedure is essential for the success of the experience. Figure 23 shows the implementation of a PES mechanism and its interrelations.

4.6 Implementation of the PES Mechanism:


55

Financial mechanisms for conservation

Pay opportunity cost to EGS producers

Execute management plans

Environmental Fund (FOGESHIP)

Monitoring committee for conservation programs

Demand for natural resources • Drinking water • Timber, minerals • Agriculture, fishing • CO2 fixing, biodiversity • Etc

EGS Administrator

Conservation Programs Executing Bodies

Supply of EGS •Ecosystem conservation •Management of

contamination •Reduction of pressure •Reduction of risks

Ecosystem

Economic Flow

Flow of Environmental Services

Commercial transactions on the

resource

Finally, in this or the previous phase, negotiations can be initiated with new actors that can contribute to the environmental fund set up (to the AFOGESHIP in this case), as can be observed in figures 24 and 25 depicting negotiations and inputs currently being made by the municipality and coffee growers’ cooperatives in the municipality of San Pablo, San Marcos.

Fig. 23. Implementation of a PES Scheme

Source: Taken from Barzev, R. 2008


56

In most PES projects, for the buyer it is essential that the money invested in the project produce the expected results (clean water, control of deforestation or conservation of biodiversity). If not, buyers will stop investing and the PES mechanism will not be sustainable in the long term.

Fig. 24. Certification of the municipality of San Pablo, San Marcos

Fig. 25. Certification of Cooperativa integral agrícola “La Bendición” de San Pablo, San Marco

Source: Municipal Secretariat of San Pablo, 2010

Source: Cooperativa La Bendición Minute Book, 2010

…coordinate activities between the Municipality of San Pedro, San Marcos, and the association AFOGESHIP “Agua Viva” with the end of giving priority to the programs and projects for the Conservation of the Water Resources of the Municipality, especially in the upper part of the municipality where the springs are located that supply the projects of this vital liquid, the population and other…

…… THIRD: It was agreed to enter into the record in order to clarify item d), of the point six of minutes 57-2-2010, in which the contribution that the cooperative “La Bendición” will make to association AFOGESHIP corresponds to a new Payment of Environmental Services fee for each quintal of coffee produced as cherry, which has been set …


57

1. Alpizar, F. 2004. Propuesta de una metodología estandarizada para el diseño e implementación de un esquema de PSA a nivel local. El caso del servicio de protección del recurso hídrico. 29 p.

2. Ávalos, O., Rodas, V. and Visoni, F. 2011. Estudio de calidad y cantidad de agua en las microcuencas Esquichá, Chemealón, Tojguech, Sibinal, Negro and Gramal. Tacaná Project of the IUCN. San Marcos, Guatemala. p. 64-67.

3. Barrantes and Castro, E. 1999. Generación de ingresos mediante el uso sostenible de los servicios ambientales de la biodiversidad en Costa Rica. SEED, INBIO.

4. Bishop, J. and Landell-Mills, N. 2002. Los servicios hidrológicos del Bosque. In Pagiola, S., N. Landell-Mills and J. Bishop (eds.), Selling Forest Environmental Services: Market-based Mechanisms for Conservation and Development. Earth-scan Publications Ltda, London. 299 p.

5. Barrantes, G. 2004. Informe Final Programa de Pago por Servicios Ambientales para el desarrollo y la conservación de la Reserva de Biosfera del Sureste de Nicaragua. Caso de estudio: Municipio San Carlos. Fundación Instituto de Políticas para la Sostenibilidad (IPS), Costa Rica. 69 p.

6. Barzev, R. 2002. Valoración económica integral de los bienes y servicios ambientales de la reserva del hombre y la Biosfera de Río Plátano. Mesoamerican Biological Corridor. 53 p.

7. Barzev, R. 2008. Propuesta de un programa de PSA en el municipio de San Pablo, sitio piloto microcuenca de Río Negro. IUCN Tacaná Project. San Marcos, Guatemala. 88 p.

8. Castillo, L. 2008. Delimitación de las zonas de recarga hídrica natural de las microcuencas asociadas al Proyecto Mi Cuenca. INAB, Mi Cuenca. San Marcos, Guatemala. 124 p.

9. Cordero, D., et al. 2008. Manual para el desarrollo de mecanismos de pago/compensación por servicios ambientales. GTZ. Ecuador. 111 p.

10. Dixon, J., Scura, L. F., Carpenter, R., and P. Sherman. 1994. Análisis económico de impactos ambientales. CATIE, Turrialba, 249 p.

11. MA, 2005. Evaluación de los Ecosistemas del Milenio. Informe de Síntesis (Final Draft, March 2005).

12. MA, 2005A. Ecosistemas y Bienestar Humano. Oportunidades y desafíos para las empresas y la industria.

13. FAO, 1999. Los productos forestales no madereros y la generación de ingresos. Unasylva 198. Revista internacional de silvicultura e industrias forestales.

14. Figueroa, E. et al. 2009. Manual de capacitación: Pago por servicios ambientales en Área Protegidas en América Latina. Programa FAO/OAPN. 46 p.

Bibliography


58

15. Forest Trenda and Grupo Katoomba. 2008. Paso a paso: Un manual para diseñar transacciones de servicios ecosistémicos. 74 p.

16. Green Facts, 2007. Hechos sobre la salud y el medio ambiente. Glosario. 17. Greiber, Thomas (Editor). 2010. Pagos por Servicios Ambientales. Marcos Jurídicos

e Institucionales. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 318 p. 18. Instituto Nacional de Ecología. 2005. Manual para el desarrollo de programas de

pago por servicios ambientales hidrológicos locales. 77 p. 19. Marin X., et al. 2006. Elementos metodológicos para la implementación de

pagos por servicios ambientales hídricos a nivel municipal en Centroamérica. Tegucigalpa, Honduras. 38 p.

20. Madrigal, R; Alpizar, F. (2008). Diseño y gestión adaptativa de un programa de pagos por servicios ecosistémicos en Copán Ruinas, Honduras. Investigación Agraria: Sistemas y Recursos Forestales 17(1), 79-90.

21. Martínez, R. 2008. Guía Conceptual y Metodológica para el Diseño de Esquemas de pagos por Servicios Ambientales en Latinoamérica y el Caribe. 67p.

22. Orozco, D. 2011. Situación actual de la microcuenca del Río Chemealón, Tacaná, San Marcos, Guatemala. IUCN Tacaná Project. San Marcos, Guatemala. 124 p.

23. Pagiola, S., et al. 2004. Pago por servicios de conservación de la biodiversidad en paisajes agropecuarios. 50 p.

24. Tacaná Project. 2009. Guía para la elaboración de planes de manejo de microcuencas. Basada en la sistematización de la experiencia del Tacaná Project desarrollada en San Marcos, Guatemala. Primera edición. Guatemala City, Guatemala. 68 p.

25. Rodas Ramos, V., López, R. and Godínez, B. 2010. Plan de manejo de la microcuenca del río Chemealón, de la cuenca del río Coatán, ubicada en el municipio de San Marcos, departamento de San Marcos, Guatemala. San Marcos, Guatemala. 89 p.

26. Ruiz, M.; C. García, C.; Sayer, J. 2007. Los servicios ambientales de los bosques. In Revista Ecosistemas 16 (3). September 2007.

27. Rügnitz Tito, M. 2011. Aprendiendo sobre pagos por servicios ambientales. Fundamentos para la elaboración de carbono forestal. Forest Trends. 55 p.

28. Smith, M., de Groot, D., Bergkamp, G. 2006. Pay – Establishing Payments for Watershed Services. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland

29. Tognetti et al. 2004. Guía para el desarrollo de opciones de pago por servicios ambientales (PSA) de las cuencas hidrológicas.

30. Van Noordwijk, M, et al. 2007. Criteria and Indicators for Environmental Services Compensation and Reward Mechanisms: Realistic, Voluntary, Conditional and Pro-poor. Nairobi, Kenya: CES Scoping Study Issue Paper no. 2 ICRAF. Working Paper No. 37. World Agroforestry Centre, 2007.

31. Wunder, S., 2006. Pagos por servicios ambientales: principios básicos esenciales. Centro Internacional de Investigación Forestal (CIFOR). 32 p.

Handbook on Implementing - IUCN · Proyecto Tacaná de la UICN. 59 p ages, 1,500 copies . Printed...

Documents

Transcript of Handbook on Implementing - IUCN · Proyecto Tacaná de la UICN. 59 p ages, 1,500 copies . Printed...