Questioning the transformational potential of payment for ecosystem services in forest conservation: a case for greater connectivity in managing complex socio-ecological systems
Date
2015
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of Delaware
Abstract
For over two decades complex socio-ecological problems such as climate change and deforestation have been analyzed by a broad cross-section of sustainability stakeholders. The resultant accumulation of research has undoubtedly increased societal understanding of the complex social and ecological interdependencies underlying these challenging issues; it has also fueled development of a range of possible interventions. Payment for ecosystem services (PES) tops the list of current policy proposals due to its celebrated problem solving potential. According to the theory of post-sustainable development (Morse, 2008), however, proposed sustainability interventions will fall short of expected deliverables unless they facilitate mutual learning via a process of self-reflective, pluralistic engagement. Post-sustainable development suggests that resolving complex socio-ecological problems requires acknowledging and engaging the plurality of ideas and beliefs which both create unsustainable conditions and which drive the development of sustainability solutions. This research uses an impact assessment meta-analysis of evaluations conducted for select PES initiatives in Costa Rica, Brazil and Ecuador to question the capacity of PES for pluralistic, self-reflective engagement. Does PES promote processes that encourage post-sustainable development, e.g. pluralistic stakeholder engagement built on self-reflective dialogue and mutual learning? The PES impact assessment meta-analysis provides a first point of entry into an examination of the potential for pluralistic engagement which is then further considered within the context of Trinidad and Tobago and an examination of the practicalities of self-reflective engagement as proposed by a Sustainability Assessment framework. In each of the three case study contexts, a plurality of perspectives was identified, with distributional trends varying according to socio-ecological contexts and the strength of a diversity of stakeholder input. The impact assessment meta-analysis concluded that contextual variability across the examined case study countries influences PES expectations and quite often determines initiative design, implementation strategy, and evaluation criteria. Perspectives plurality, therefore, is a function of localized social, economic and political histories and interactions. In terms of practicalities of pluralistic engagement, stakeholder examination of the sustainability assessment framework concluded that broad stakeholder participation in policy processes does not guarantee self-reflective engagement of a plurality of PES and sustainability ideologies. In summary, this research suggests that the PES policy as currently applied in case studies investigated has not demonstrated a capacity for promoting new, transformative stakeholder engagement processes. A model of socio-ecological connectivity is proposed to advance a sustainability conceptualization which acknowledges and accepts the complexity challenges raised by post-sustainable development theory.