Global Lesson Learnt PFES for Mangroves
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
0 gostou•386 visualizações
Presented by Phạm Thu Thuỷ on 9 November 2020 at "National workshop: Mangrove environmental services payments"
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (11)
Semelhante a Global Lesson Learnt PFES for Mangroves
Semelhante a Global Lesson Learnt PFES for Mangroves (20)
Mais de CIFOR-ICRAF
Mais de CIFOR-ICRAF (20)
Último
Último (20)
Global Lesson Learnt PFES for Mangroves
- 1. Phạm Thu Thủy GLOBAL LESSON LEARNT PFES FOR MANGROVES
- 2. Outlines • Pay for which service? • Who pay and the payment rate? • Pay to whom? • The payment collection and distribution mechanism?
- 3. Pay for which FES? 51% 1% 26% 11% 11% Bảo vệ nguồn nước Rừng ngập mặn Bảo tồn đa dạng sinh học Hấp thụ carbon Vẻ đẹp cảnh quan NO NATIONAL POLICY/ SCHEME IMPLEMENTED SO FAR
- 4. Pay for which service? 22.7 77.3 45.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Landscape beauty carbon sequestration aquaculture % VIETNAM GLOBAL
- 5. Who pay?
- 6. Who pay and the payment rate? ES of mangroves Pricing (USD/ha) Bán được trong thực tế Provision of food 5.75- 560.55 Water supply 212 - 6716 Supply of raw materials 12- 39,233 Waste and garbage treatment 72 – 11,000 Air conditioning 2.20 – 414.411 Erosion protection 38.5- 1340.60 Regulate extreme weather phenomena 16- 3116 Ensure soil sediment and circulating nutrition 640 Water flow regulation 540 - 660 Bio-diversity conservation 2.43- 200 Ensure conditions for migratory species 995- 4887 Landscape beauty 20- 37,927 Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/409061/fmars-05-00376-HTML/image_m/fmars-05-00376-t006.jpg 12 US/tCO2 is needed to offset the benefits collected from aquaculture products
- 7. Who pay? The mangroves and marine algae restored by green aquaculture farming- can increase carbon sequestration and reduce emissions
- 8. Pay to whom? Recipients Land owners with landuse right The poors and the vulnerables Customary Forest owner Emission eliminators Brokers Economically impacted groups
- 9. Collection mechanism? Direct Contract Operating license, Business license Fees (e.g.: ship parking fees, fees charged per kg of seafood harvested) Indirect End buyer/ market Trust Fund, Village Fund, Community Fund
- 10. HOW TO PAY? • Cash vs. non-cash (e.g. school fees, clean water supply service)? • Payment frequency?- periodically and in advance: promote broad participation but impacting negatively on the effectiveness and efficiency? One-time fixed payments or splitting into installments? Flexible or predetermined rate of payment? • Payment criteria: Inputs (e.g. patrolling? Number of trees planted) vs. outputs (e.g. carbon stock measured and verified, forest area rehabilitated after typhoon) • Effective use of the payments:
- 11. The first mangrove carbon project: Mikoko Pajoma (Kenya)
- 12. Key messages • Combined services • Policy should focusing on both creating finance and non- finance incentives • The importance is not only the payment rate but ensuring the factors that influence/ decide the willingness to pay sustainably • Participation of the local community, supervising and monitoring of the 3rd party independently • Sustainability, long-term and stability of mangrove services are heavily influenced by climate and natural change and are not under PES management scope -- fiducially risk strategy • Service providers and service buyers can be one and the same
Notas do Editor
- A carbon price of about 5–12 US$ tCO2e−1 is necessary to offset aquaculture profits. •Currently, this price can only be met on compliance (not voluntary) carbon markets. •Mangrove carbon accounting is subject to much methodological uncertainty. •The profitability of milkfish aquaculture is highly variable at 89–4029 US$ ha−1 yr−1. •Ultimately, the economic viability of blue carbon will be case-specific. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212041614000242 – Philippine)