Linking social norms to efficient conservation investment in payments for ecosystem services
- 14 July 2009
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
- Vol. 106 (28), 11812-11817
- https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0809980106
Abstract
An increasing amount of investment has been devoted to protecting and restoring ecosystem services worldwide. The efficiency of conservation investments, including payments for ecosystem services (PES), has been found to be affected by biological, political, economic, demographic, and social factors, but little is known about the effects of social norms at the neighborhood level. As a first attempt to quantify the effects of social norms, we studied the effects of a series of possible factors on people's intentions of maintaining forest on their Grain-to-Green Program (GTGP) land plots if the program ends. GTGP is one of the world's largest PES programs and plays an important role in global conservation efforts. Our study was conducted in China's Wolong Nature Reserve, home to the world-famous endangered giant pandas and >4,500 farmers. We found that, in addition to conservation payment amounts and program duration, social norms at the neighborhood level had significant impacts on program re-enrollment, suggesting that social norms can be used to leverage participation to enhance the sustainability of conservation benefits from PES programs. Moreover, our results demonstrate that economic and demographic trends also have profound implications for sustainable conservation. Thus, social norms should be incorporated with economic and demographic trends for efficient conservation investments.Keywords
This publication has 54 references indexed in Scilit:
- Global Biodiversity Conservation PrioritiesScience, 2006
- Global Consequences of Land UseScience, 2005
- Alleviating spatial conflict between people and biodiversityProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2003
- Biological vs. social, economic and political priority‐setting in conservationEcology Letters, 2003
- Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human economyProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2002
- Can We Afford to Conserve Biodiversity?BioScience, 2001
- Biodiversity hotspots for conservation prioritiesNature, 2000
- Balancing the Earth's accountsNature, 1999
- Biodiversity Hotspots and Major Tropical Wilderness Areas: Approaches to Setting Conservation PrioritiesConservation Biology, 1998
- Human Domination of Earth's EcosystemsScience, 1997