Fair and green? (Nearly) 20 years of payments for ecosystem services (PES) in Costa Rica

1

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

Author nameDateIna Porras, SMG21/03/14

(Nearly) 20 years of PES in Costa RicaPresented by Ina Porras, IIED

Fair and green?

Innovations for equity in smallholder PES: bridging research and practice Conference. Edinburgh 21 March 2014

2

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

Context and people have changed…

3

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

4

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

5

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

6

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

PES not only about the environment…

• By Law;• For political buy• For reputation; • For mutual agreements;

7

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

Group contracts

• Between 1997-2002• One contract for group of

landowners. Reduced transaction costs, easier to manage.

• Did not work - not enough capacity to self-enforce.

• Evolved into group contract for technical advice

8

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

Indigenous groups

• Contracts only with legal association• No power on internal distribution of

funding;• Increasingly important in light of

REDD+ commitments• Some grumbles, but overall highly

effective when they work

9

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

Priority to areas with low development (SDI)

• Relatively useful (easy, roughly correlated with opportunity cost)

• But it is not measured against land ownership

• Large landowners benefit the most: over 1/3 have more than 100 ha, with average value of nearly US$900k.

• Too rough – lets in many who don’t need priority

10

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

Priority for small properties

• < 50 hectares• Good because high fixed entry costs;• Encourage small properties around

urban areas;• “Small” ≠ poor or vulnerable: land

prices widely vary: 50 ha @ $3.5 million in St Domingo and @$125k in Upala.

11

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

Who is who?

12

Author nameDate

DOCUMENT TITLE

But over 50% of contracts are now with corporations…

Who is being left out?