Effects of Ending Payments for Ecosystem Services: Removal Does not Crowd Prior Conservation Out

Lina Moros, M. Vélez, A. Pfaff, Daniela Quintero
{"title":"Effects of Ending Payments for Ecosystem Services: Removal Does not Crowd Prior Conservation Out","authors":"Lina Moros, M. Vélez, A. Pfaff, Daniela Quintero","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3754598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We implemented a decision experiment in the field with rural peasants in Colombia to test the effects of introducing then partially or totally removing Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES). We consider individual and collective payments and different rules for removal. We find that there is clearly no behavioral ‘crowding-out’ when a PES is created then ended. Even a simple pre-versus-post-PES comparison finds ‘crowding in’, if anything, with contributions higher after PES was removed than before PES was introduced. Comparing to a control, without PES, strengthens that conclusion. We discuss four possible mechanisms explaining these findings: recognition or gratitude; lack of negative emotions; pre-existing and persistent intrinsic motivations, and evocation of pro-environmental behavior.","PeriodicalId":231496,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"64 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3754598","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We implemented a decision experiment in the field with rural peasants in Colombia to test the effects of introducing then partially or totally removing Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES). We consider individual and collective payments and different rules for removal. We find that there is clearly no behavioral ‘crowding-out’ when a PES is created then ended. Even a simple pre-versus-post-PES comparison finds ‘crowding in’, if anything, with contributions higher after PES was removed than before PES was introduced. Comparing to a control, without PES, strengthens that conclusion. We discuss four possible mechanisms explaining these findings: recognition or gratitude; lack of negative emotions; pre-existing and persistent intrinsic motivations, and evocation of pro-environmental behavior.
终止生态系统服务支付的影响:移除不会挤占先前的保护
我们在哥伦比亚的农村农民中实施了一项决策实验,以测试部分引入或完全取消生态系统服务支付(PES)的效果。我们考虑个人和集体支付以及不同的解雇规则。我们发现,当PES创建然后结束时,显然没有行为上的“挤出”。即使是简单的PES前后对比也会发现“拥挤”,如果有的话,删除PES后的贡献比引入PES之前更高。与没有PES的对照组相比,加强了这一结论。我们讨论了解释这些发现的四种可能机制:认可或感激;没有负面情绪;预先存在的和持续的内在动机,以及亲环境行为的唤起。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信