Applying the ecosystem services concept to poverty alleviation: the need to disaggregate human well-being
Applying the ecosystem services concept to poverty alleviation: the need to disaggregate human well-being
复制标题
DOI：
10.1017/s0376892911000506
复制
发表时间：
2011-12-01
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
Pomeroy, Robert
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Daw, Tim;Brown, Katrina;Pomeroy, Robert
生态系统服务（ES）的概念，人类从生态系统中获得的好处，越来越多地应用于环境保护，人类福祉和扶贫，并为制定干预措施提供信息。生态系统服务付费（PES）通过从“赢家”到“输家”的货币补偿，含蓄地承认了维持ES的成本和收益的不平等分配。一些关于生态系统服务付费的研究审查了这些计划如何影响贫穷，而其他文献则讨论了不同生态系统服务之间的权衡。然而，许多不断发展的环境科学文献采用了人类及其福祉的综合视角，这可能会忽视扶贫的关键问题。本文以发展中国家沿海环境服务为例，确定了四个问题。首先，不同的群体从不同的环境服务中获得福利，随着环境服务的变化，产生赢家和输家。第二，动态的获取机制决定了谁可以受益。第三，个人的背景和需要决定环境服务如何促进福祉。第四，综合分析可能会忽视关键的减贫机制，如以现金为基础的生计。为了为制定有助于减贫的生态系统干预措施提供信息，需要进行分类分析，重点是谁从生态系统中获得哪些利益，以及这些利益如何促进穷人的福祉。这些问题对数据的提供以及如何和在何种尺度上进行分列的选择提出了挑战。分类可以在空间上应用，但也应包括社会群体，如性别、年龄和族裔，在不平等最严重的地方最为重要。现有的工具，如利益相关者分析和公平权重，可以提高环境服务研究与减贫的相关性。
The concept of ecosystem services (ES), the benefits humans derive from ecosystems, is increasingly applied to environmental conservation, human wellbeing and poverty alleviation, and to inform the development of interventions. Payments for ecosystem services (PES) implicitly recognize the unequal distribution of the costs and benefits of maintaining ES, through monetary compensation from 'winners' to 'losers'. Some research into PES has examined how such schemes affect poverty, while other literature addresses trade-offs between different ES. However, much evolving ES literature adopts an aggregated perspective of humans and their well-being, which can disregard critical issues for poverty alleviation. This paper identifies four issues with examples from coastal ES in developing countries. First, different groups derive well-being benefits from different ES, creating winners and losers as ES, change. Second, dynamic mechanisms of access determine who can benefit. Third, individuals' contexts and needs determine how ES contribute to well-being. Fourth, aggregated analyses may neglect crucial poverty alleviation mechanisms such as cash-based livelihoods. To inform the development of ES interventions that contribute to poverty alleviation, disaggregated analysis is needed that focuses on who derives which benefits from ecosystems, and how such benefits contribute to the well-being of the poor. These issues present challenges in data availability and selection of how and at which scales to disaggregate. Disaggregation can be applied spatially, but should also include social groupings, such as gender, age and ethnicity, and is most important where inequality is greatest. Existing tools, such as stakeholder analysis and equity weights, can improve the relevance of ES research to poverty alleviation.