Direct Payments as an Alternative Approach to Conservation Investment
Program Description
The world’s species are disproportionately concentrated in low-income nations. The citizens of these nations, however, have pressing needs for food and shelter, and thus have strong incentives to convert native ecosystems to other uses. To achieve meaningful conservation at a global scale, biodiversity advocates must provide landholders and other stakeholders in low-income nations with effective counter-incentives. International organisations and donors have contributed billions of dollars in attempts to provide such incentives, but the loss of habitat and species continues unabated. While donor frustration grows, an emerging debate rages among academics and practitioners as to the most effective policies for conservation. One side of the debate advocates an ‘indirect approach.’ ‘Integrated Conservation and Development Projects’, ‘Community-based Resource Management’ and similar ventures aim to protect ecosystems through targeted local development investments, and are the most widespread form of investment aimed at generating conservation incentives in low-income nations. The other side of the debate advocates a relatively new ‘direct approach,’ in which conservationists identify priority areas for conservation and pay those who control these areas to protect the ecosystem from degradation. The payments are explicitly tied to conservation outcomes. The underlying assumption of direct payment approaches is that those who gain value from ecosystem services, including biodiversity protection, should explicitly pay for those services, just as they would pay for any other goods or services that could be produced on the land.
What should conservation practitioners and donors do to make their contributions most effective in both conserving biodiversity and improving the lot of the poor? Indirect investment advocates argue that their approach is less costly over the long run, empowers local communities to conserve their own ecosystems and yields both conservation and economic development benefits. Direct payment advocates argue that their approach is more cost-effective, less complex and more likely to generate conservation results. This symposium will bring together scientists and practitioners to explore recent experiences with direct payment initiatives and debate their applicability to other areas of the world. Such sharing of experiences and open debate is required if the global conservation community is to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of its efforts to protect endangered ecosystems.