An evaluation of the effectiveness of a direct payment for biodiversity conservation: The Bird Nest Protection Program in the Northern Plains of Cambodia
An evaluation of the effectiveness of a direct payment for biodiversity conservation: The Bird Nest Protection Program in the Northern Plains of Cambodia
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.biocon.2012.07.020
复制
发表时间：
2013-01-01
影响因子：
5.9
通讯作者：
Milner-Gulland, E. J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Clements, Tom;Rainey, Hugo;Milner-Gulland, E. J.
有人提议直接支付保护生物多样性的费用（一种支付环境服务费用的方式），作为实现养护成果的有效工具，同时也为当地人民带来发展惠益。使用影响评估框架，本文分析了一个直接付款计划，建立了9个全球受威胁的鸟类物种在柬埔寨的北方平原的有效性。该计划向当地人提供有条件的付款，以保护巢穴，因为大多数物种都受到收集蛋和小鸡的高度威胁。自2003年该计划开始以来，它已经保护了超过2700个巢超过2000公里（2）的栖息地，每年花费30，000美元，其中71-78%的费用直接支付给当地人。与对照地点相比，付款显着提高了保护巢的成功率，导致至少三个物种的人口增加。然而，付款并没有影响其他物种的威胁，如土地清理，并未能阻止至少一个物种的人口下降。每位保护者的平均付款对偏远农村的收入做出了重大贡献。然而，该计划只使一小部分人受益，造成了一些当地的骚乱和对筑巢鸟类的故意干扰。该计划表明，在付款正确针对生物多样性丧失原因的情况下，直接付款可以成为一种非常有效的保护工具。研究结果还表明，重要的是要考虑如何对受益人作出决定，特别是在生物多样性产权不明确的情况下，如果支付是社会可接受的。这对更普遍的保护付款计划的设计具有重要意义。(C)2012爱思唯尔有限公司保留所有权利。
Direct payments for the protection of biodiversity (a type of payment for environmental services) have been proposed as an effective tool for delivering conservation outcomes, in a way that also delivers development benefits to local people. Using an impact evaluation framework, this paper analyses the effectiveness of a direct payment program that was established for nine globally threatened bird species in the Northern Plains of Cambodia. The program provided conditional payments to local people to protect nests, since most of the species were highly threatened by the collection of eggs and chicks. Since the program's inception in 2003 it has protected >2700 nests over >2000 km(2) of habitat at a cost of $30,000 annually, with 71-78% of the costs paid directly to local people. Payments significantly improved the success rates of protected nests in comparison with control sites, leading to population increases for at least three species. However, payments did not influence other threats to species, such as land clearance, and have failed to arrest declines in at least one species' population. The average payment per protector was a significant contribution to incomes in remote rural villages. However, the program only benefited a small proportion of people, causing some local jealousies and deliberate disturbance of nesting birds. The program demonstrates that direct payments can be a highly effective conservation tool in those cases where payments correctly target the cause of biodiversity loss. The results also suggest that it is important to consider how decisions over beneficiaries are made, especially in situations where property rights over biodiversity are unclear, if payments are to be socially acceptable. This has important implications for the design of payment schemes in conservation more generally. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.