Environmental Protection Through Environmental Services Payments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X28455Keywords:
Water quality, Vegetation, Ecosystem.Abstract
To provide goods and services to human’s ecosystems need water like fish, timber, food, grains, among others. Similarly, are responsible for important services for the preservation of the quality and quantity of water available, such as the supply and maintenance of water flows and smoothing of natural disasters related to water, such as floods and droughts. This work was carried out to explain why the existence of this type of payment services in the pursuit of environmental protection exercised in several countries including environmental Brazil, based on the location of cases of payment for environmental services. Some countries have already practiced the payment for environmental services and the majority of services is related to water. Environmental service providers whose main goal that the business is profitable and remains. Payment for environmental service exists as an incentive to conserve the environment so profitable to the owner of rural land or forests ale smallholders and farmers.
Downloads
References
NATIONAL WATER AGENCY. "Water producer program". 2010. available at URL: < http://www.ana.gov.br/produagua >. Accessed on 20 July 2013.
ANTLE, J. M. and VALDIVIA, R. O. Modelling the Supply of Ecosystem Services from Agriculture: minimum-date approach. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 50, p. 1-15, 2006.
BRAZIL. ANA – NATIONAL WATER AGENCY. Operating Manual water Producer program. Ana, Brasilia, 67 p., 2009.
EXTREME. Municipal law paragraph 2,100, of 21 December 2005. "Creates the Conservative Project of water, authorizes the Executive to provide financial support to landowners and other arrangements". Available at: <http://www.valornatural.org.br/lei_n_%202100.pdf>. Access in 8/3/13.
FAO, Payment Schemes for Environmental Services in Watersheds, Land and Water Discussion Paper 3. Rome, 2004.
FUNDEMA- Fundação Municipal do Meio Ambiente de Joinville. Available at: www.fundema.sc.gov.br. Access in 20/02/2017.
KOSOY et al. Payments for Environmental Services in Watersheds: Insights from acomparative study of three cases in Central America. Ecological Economics . Vol. 61, no. 2-3, pp. 446-455, mar, 2006.
LANDELL-MILLS, N. and PORRAS, I.T. Silver bullet or fools’ gold? A global review of markets for forest environmental services and their impact on the poor. International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), London, 2002.
PERROT-MAÎTRE, D. (2006). The Vittel payments for ecosystem services: the "perfect" PES case?. Instruments for sustainable private sector forestry series. International Institute for Environment and Development, London, 2002.
POSTEL, SL; THOMPSON JR; BARTON, H. 2005. Watershed protection: capturing the benefits of nature's water supply services. Natural Resources Forum, London, v. 29, n. 2, p. 98-108, 2005.
SCHERR, S.; ANDY, W.; and ARVIND, K. with contribution of Mira Inbar and Augusta Molar. 2004. "For Services Rendered: The Current Status and Future Potential of Markets for the Ecosystem Services Provided by Tropical Forests." Yokohama, Japan: International Tropical Timber Organization (p. 30-31).
TNC-THE NATURE CONSERVANCY. Available in: < www.nature.org/wherewework/southamerica/brasil/press/press2776.html >. Access in 3/23/07.
WHATELY, M. and HERCOWITZ,M. Environmental services: knowing, valuing and caring: grants for watershed protection of São Paulo/Marussia Whately, Marcelo Hercowitz. -São Paulo: Instituto Socioambiental, 2008.
WUNDER, M. and ALBAN, M. Decentralized payments for environmental services: The cases of Pimampiro and PROFAFOR in Ecuador. Ecological Economics, v. 65, no. 4, p. 685-698., 2008.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
