2013年-世界发展银行全球_Brazils_Experience_with_Payments_for_Environmental_Services_20页_1mb

Summary of Brazil's Experience with Payments for Environmental Services

Core Content

This paper provides an overview of Brazil's experience with Payments for Environmental Services (PES) since 2006, highlighting the variety of approaches, programs, and lessons learned. Brazil has experimented with PES at multiple scales, from local to state-level, and in diverse contexts, including remote forest areas and periurban zones of large cities like São Paulo. The paper also discusses the different types of PES mechanisms, their funding sources, and the environmental services they aim to protect.

Main Points

1. Overview of PES in Brazil

• PES Growth: Since 2006, PES projects have exploded in Brazil, with efforts to pass PES laws at federal, state, and municipal levels.
• Scale and Context: PES has been applied at various scales, from microwatersheds to entire states, and in diverse contexts, from the Amazon to urban fringes.
• Funding Sources: PES mechanisms use a mix of funding approaches, including direct payments by users, sales to carbon markets, government funding, and combinations of these.

2. Types of PES Programs

• User-financed PES: These programs are preferred for their efficiency, as users provide both funding and monitoring. Examples include water-related PES programs.
• Government-financed PES: These programs are typically larger in scale but less efficient due to lack of direct user information and monitoring. Examples include the Bolsa Floresta in Amazonas and the PSAB in Mexico.

3. PES in Brazil: Key Programs

• Water Services: The majority of PES programs in Brazil focus on water-related services such as improving water quality, regulating flows, and reducing sediment loads.
  • Examples: Conservador das Águas (Extrema), Projeto Ecocréito (Montes Claros), Mina d'Água (São Paulo), and ProdutorES de Água (Espírito Santo).
• Carbon Services: Carbon-focused PES programs include CDM projects and voluntary carbon market initiatives. Examples include the AES-Tietê and Plantar projects.
• Biodiversity Services: While there are no direct PES mechanisms funded by biodiversity buyers, several programs have biodiversity as a secondary focus, such as the Carbono Seguro and Pau Brazil-Monte Pascoal Corridor projects.

4. State-level PES Programs

• Established Programs: Amazonas (Bolsa Floresta), Espírito Santo (ProdutorES de Água), Minas Gerais (Bolsa Verde), São Paulo (Mina d'Água), and others.
• Program Characteristics:
  • Payment Levels: Most Brazilian PES mechanisms use a formula to determine payments, often based on environmental service and benefit conditions, rather than flat per-hectare payments.
  • Payment Frequency: Payments are often divided into multiple installments, with some programs making monthly payments.
  • Land Management Plans: Detailed land management plans are often required for approval and modification, which can increase program costs but improve technical quality.

5. Challenges and Lessons

• Transaction Costs: The use of local authorities for implementation can lead to higher transaction costs due to lower economies of scale.
• Efficiency: While user-financed programs are more efficient, government-financed programs can cover larger areas but are less efficient in terms of targeting specific environmental services.
• Potential for Growth: There is significant potential for expanding PES programs aimed at conserving and restoring forests and soil, especially through water-related initiatives.
• Decentralization: Brazil's PES programs are likely to be more decentralized than those in other Latin American countries, due to the management of water revenue by basin committees rather than the central government.

Key Information

• PES Definition: PES involves conditional payments to land users for conservation practices that generate environmental benefits for others.
• Funding Sources:
  • User-financed: Payments from water users or carbon buyers.
  • Government-financed: Funding from national or state budgets, or earmarked taxes.
• Legal and Institutional Framework:
  • The Forest Reserve Quota (CRF) system allows landholders to meet their conservation obligations by contracting others.
  • Private Natural Heritage Reserves (RPPN) are created by landholders who voluntarily place land under conservation.
  • Extractive Reserves in Acre support sustainable production and biodiversity conservation.
• Current Status:
  • The total area under conservation in Brazilian PES programs is still relatively small, less than 50,000 ha.
  • The Bolsa Floresta in Amazonas is notable for its household-based payments and large coverage of over 10 million ha.
  • Many programs are still in the planning or pilot stages, with some state capitals and rural towns beginning to implement them.

Conclusion

Brazil has made significant strides in developing PES mechanisms, drawing from Latin American experiences while also innovating with unique approaches. The country's PES programs are diverse, with a strong emphasis on water and carbon services, and are increasingly being supported by both government and market-based funding. Despite challenges such as high transaction costs and limited scale, Brazil's PES experience provides valuable insights for future policy and program development.