Publicado

2014-01-01

Implicancias territoriales de los esquemas de pago por servicios ambientales (PSA) en cuencas norandinas

Territorial Implications of Payment of Ecosystem Services (PES) Programs in the North Andean Watersheds

Implicações territoriais dos esquemas de pagamento por serviços ambientais (PSA) em bacias norandinas

Palabras clave:

capital natural, cuencas norandinas, implicancias territoriales, mercados verdes, pago por servicios ambientales (es)
natural capital, North Andean watersheds, territorial implications, green markets, payment for ecosystem services (en)
capital natural, bacias norandinas, implicações territoriais, mercados verdes, pagamento por serviços ambientais (pt)

Descargas

Autores/as

  • Ricardo Castro-Díaz Universidad de Buenos Aires
Tras la promoción del desarrollo sostenible, la pugna por la conservación de los espacios naturales o semi-intervenidos ha buscado programas que integren el crecimiento económico, los flujos ecosistémicos y el mejoramiento de las condiciones socioeconómicas de comunidades locales. Ante esto, las naciones latinoamericanas han creado marcos políticos de pago por servicios ambientales (PSA); empero,existe un vacío empírico en las implicaciones territoriales que tienen estos programas en determinados sistemas socioecológicos históricamente funcionales para el campesinado. Este artículo identifica los “supuestos” que fomentan los programas PSA en América Latina y analiza teóricamente las implicancias territoriales del cambio de uso del suelo sobre la titulación de tierras, el poder y el equilibrio, las estructuras comunitarias, la exclusión e inequidad social, la resignificación de los elementos territoriales y la lógica del nuevo mercado.
In the context of the promotion of sustainable development, the struggle for the conservation of natural or partially intervened spaces has fostered programs that integrate economic growth, ecosystem flows, and the improvement of the socioeconomic conditions of local communities. In view of this, Latin American nations have created policy frameworks for the Payment of Ecosystem Services (PES), but there is an empirical void regarding the territorial implications of these programs on certain socio-ecological systems that are historically functional for the rural populations. The article identifies the "assumptions" fostered by PES programs in Latin America and carries out a theoretical analysis of the territorial implications of changes in land use for land titling projects, power and equilibrium, community structures, exclusion and social inequality, the reattribution of meaning to territorial elements, and the logic of the new market.
Após a promoção do desenvolvimento sustentável, a luta pela conservação dos espaços naturais ou semi-interceptados vem buscando programas que integrem o crescimento econômico, os fluxos ecossistêmicos e o melhoramento das condições socioeconômicas de comunidades locais. Diante disso, as nações latino-americanas criaram referenciais políticos de pagamento por serviços ambientais (PSA); contudo, existe um vazio empírico nas implicações territoriais que têm esses programas em determinados sistemas socioecológicos historicamente funcionais para o campesinato. Este artigo identifica os "supostos" que fomentam os programas PSA na América Latina e analisa teoricamente as implicações territoriais da mudança de uso do solo sobre a titulação de terras, o poder e o equilíbrio, as estruturas comunitárias, a exclusão e inequidade social, a ressignificação dos elementos territoriais e a lógica do novo mercado.

Referencias

Adger, W. Neil. 2006. Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change 16 (3): 268-281.

Andersson, Erik, Stephan Barthel y Karin Ahrné. 2007. Measuring Social-Ecological Dynamics Behind the Generation of Ecosystem Services. Ecological Applications 17:1267-1278.

Bhalla, Ajit y Frédéric Lapeyre. 1997. Social Exclusion: Towards an Analytical and Operational Framework. Development and Change 28 (3): 413-433.

Cámara de Diputados del Honorable Congreso de la Unión. 2004. Ley de aguas nacionales. En DOF-29-04-2004. México: Cámara de Diputados del Honorable Congreso de la Unión.

Castiblanco, Carmenza. 2008. Manual de valoración económica del medio ambiente. Bogotá: Instituto de Estudios Ambientales-Universidad Nacional de Colombia.

Corbera, Esteve, Nicolas Kosoy y Miguel Martinez Tuna. 2007. Equity Implications of Marketing Ecosystem Services in Protected Areas and Rural Communities: Case Studies from Meso-America. Global Environmental Change 17 (3-4): 365-380.

Costa Rica. 2004. Ley Forestal n.° 7575 de 13/02/1996. En PGR 25/02/2004 http://www.dse.go.cr/es/02ServiciosInfo/Legislacion/PDF/Ambiente/Forestal/L-7575%20Foresta.pdf (consultado en mayo de 2012).

Costanza, Robert. 2008. Ecosystem Services: Multiple Classification Systems are Needed. Biological Conservation 141:350-352.

Costanza, Robert, Ralph d'Arge, Rudolf de Groot, Stephen Farber, Monica Grasso, Bruce Hannon, Karin Limburg, Shahid Naeem, Robert V. O'Neill, Jose Paruelo, Robert G. Raskin, Paul Sutton y Marjan van den Belt. 1997. The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital. Nature 387:253-260.

Cumming, Graeme S. 2011. Conceptual Background on Social-Ecological Systems and Resilience Spatial Resilience. En Spatial Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems, 7-33. Netherlands: Springer.

Chapin III, F. Stuart, Brian H. Walker, Richard J. Hobbs, David U. Hooper, John H. Lawton, Osvaldo E. Sala y David Tilman. 1997. Biotic Control Over the Functioning of Ecosystems. Science 277:500-504.

Chapin III, F. Stuart, Erika S. Zavaleta, Valerie T. Eviner, Rosamond L. Naylor, Peter M. Vitousek, Heather L. Reynolds, David U. Hooper, Sandra Lavorel, Osvaldo E. Sala, Sarah E. Hobbie, Michelle C. Mack y Sandra Diaz. 2000. Consequences of Changing Biodiversity. Nature 405:234-242.

Chichilnisky, Graciela y Geoffrey Heal. 1998. Economic Returns from the Biosphere. Nature 391:629-630.

Dale, Virginia H. y Stephen Polasky. 2007. Measures of the Effects of Agricultural Practices on Ecosystem Services. Ecological Economics 64:286-296.

Engel, Stefanie, Stefano Pagiola y Sven Wunder. 2008. Designing Payments for Environmental Services in Theory and Practice: an Overview of the Issues. Ecological Economics 65:663-674.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2003. Trade Reforms and Food Security, cap. 2. Roma: FAO.

Farber, Stephen C., Robert Costanza y Matthew A. Wilson. 2002. Economic and Ecological Concepts for Valuing Ecosystem Services. Ecological Economics 41:375-392.

Grieg-Gran, Maryanne, Ina Porras y Sven Wunder. 2005. How Can Market Mechanisms for Forest Environmental Services Help the Poor? Preliminary Lessons from Latin America. World Development 33 (9): 1511-1527.

Grime, John Philip. 1997. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function: The Debate Deepens. Science 29 (5330): 1260-1261.

Groot, Rudolf de. 2006. Function-Analysis and Valuation as a Tool to Assess Land Use Conflicts in Planning for Sustainable, Multi-Functional Landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 75:175-186.

Groot, Rudolf de, Matthew A. Wilson y Roelof M. J. Boumans. 2002. A Typology for the Classification, Description and Valuation of Ecosystem Functions, Goods and Services. Ecological Economics 41:393-408.

Howarth, Richard B. y Stephen Farber. 2002. Accounting for the Value of Ecosystem Services. Ecological Economics 41:421-429.

Jack, B. Kelsey, Carolyn Kousky y Katharine R. E. Sims. 2008. Designing Payments for Ecosystem Services: Lessons from Previous Experience with Incentive-Based Mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (28): 9465-9470.

Johnson, Kris H., Kristiina A. Vogt, Heidi J. Clark, Oswald J. Schmitz y Daniel J. Vogt. 1996. Biodiversity and the Productivity and Stability of Ecosystems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11 (9): 372-377.

Kerr, John. 2002. Watershed Development, Environmental Services, and Poverty Alleviation in India. World Development 30 (8): 1387-1400.

Kosoy, Nicolas, Miguel Martinez-Tuna, Roldan Muradian y Joan

Martinez-Alier. 2007. Payments for Environmental Services in Watersheds: Insights from a Comparative Study of Three Cases in Central America. Ecological Economics 61 (2-3): 446-455.

Landell-Mills, Natasha e Ina Porras. 2002. Silver Bullet or Fool's Gold? A Global Review of Markets for Forest Environmental Services and Their Impact on the Poor. Londres: International Institute for Environment and Development.

Limburg, Karin E., Robert V. O'Neill, Robert Costanza y Stephen Farber. 2002. Complex Systems and Valuation. Ecological Economics 41:409-420.

Machado, Absalón. 1998. La cuestión agraria en Colombia a fines del milenio. Bogotá: El Áncora.

Millenium Ecosystem Assesment (MEA). 2005. Ecosystem and Human Well-Being: Synthesis. Washington: MEA.

Secretaría General de la Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá. 2007. Ley 1151 de 2007. Diario Oficial 46700. Bogotá.

Ministerio del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. 1998. Ley del medio ambiente. El Salvador: Corte Suprema de Justicia de El Salvador.

Minujin, Alberto. 1999. ¿La gran exclusión?: vulnerabilidad y exclusión en América Latina. En Los Noventa. Política, sociedad y cultura en América Latina y Argentina de fin de siglo, comp. Daniel Filmus, 57-78. Buenos Aires: Eudeba.

Pagiola Stefano, Agustin Arcenas y Gunars Platais. 2005. Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America. World Development 33 (2): 237-253.

Paulson, Susan. 2001. Nature and Culture in the Andes. American Ethnologist 28 (4): 934-935.

Ravnborg, Helle, Mette Damsgaar y Kim Raben. 2007. Payments for Ecosystem Services - Issues and Pro-Poor Opportunities for Development Assistance. En DIIS Report2007: 6. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for International Studies.

República de Argentina. 2007. Ley 26331 Bosques nativos: presupuestos mínimos de protección ambiental de los bosques nativos. Argentina: Senado y Cámara de Diputados de la Nación Argentina.

República del Perú. 2001. Decreto Supremo n.° 038-2001-AG: Reglamento de la Ley de Áreas naturales protegidas. Perú.

Santos, Milton. 1994. Técnica, espaço, tempo: globalização e meio técnico-científico informacional. Brasil: Hucitec.

Schwartz, M. W., C. A. Brigham, J. D. Hoeksema, K. G. Lyons, M. H. Mills y P. J. van Mantgem. 2000. Linking Biodiversity to Ecosystem Function: Implications for Conservation Ecology. Review of Oecologia 122 (3): 297-305.

Southgate, Douglas y Sven Wunder. 2009. Paying for Watershed Services in Latin America: A Review of Current Initiatives. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 28 (3-5): 497-524.

Swift, M. J., A. Izac y M. Van Noordwijk. 2004. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Landscapes - are We Asking the Right Questions? Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 104 (1): 113-134.

Tirri R., J. Lehtonen, R. Lemmetyinen, S. Pihakaski y P. Portin. 1998.

Elservier´s Doctionary of Biology. E.U.: Mishawaka.

Turner, B. L., Roger E. Kasperson, Pamela A. Matson, James J. McCarthy, Robert W. Corell, Lindsey Christensen, Noelle Eckley, Jeanne X. Kasperson, Amy Luers, Marybeth L. Martello, Colin Polsky,

Alexander Pulsipher y Andrew Schiller. 2003a. A Framework for Vulnerability Analysis in Sustainability Science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100 (14): 8074-8079.

Turner, B. L., Pamela A. Matson, James J. McCarthy, Robert W. Corell, Lindsey Christensen, Noelle Eckley, Grete K. Hovelsrud-Broda, Jeanne X. Kasperson, Roger E. Kasperson, Amy Luers, Marybeth L. Martello, Svein Mathiesen, Rosamond Naylor, Colin Polsky, Alexander Pulsipher, Andrew Schiller, Henrik Selin y Nicholas Tyler. 2003b. Illustrating the Coupled Human-Environment System for Vulnerability Analysis: Three Case Studies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100 (14): 8080-8085.

Van der Hammen, Thomas. 2000. Aspectos de historia y ecología de la biodiversidad norandina y amazónica. Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias 24 (91): 231-245.

Wallace, Ken. 2008. Ecosystem Services: Multiple Classifications or Confusion? Biological Conservation 141 (2): 353-354.

Wallace, Ken J. 2007. Classification of Ecosystem Services: Problems and Solutions. Biological Conservation 139 (3-4): 235-246.

Wunder, Sven. 2008. Payments for Environmental Services and the Poor: Concepts and Preliminary Evidence. Environment and Development Economics 13 (3): 279-297.

Zilberman, David, Leslie Lipper y Nancy McCarthy. 2008. When Could Payments for Environmental Services Benefit the Poor? Environment and Development Economics 13 (3): 255-278.

Cómo citar

Implicancias territoriales de los esquemas de pago por servicios ambientales (PSA) en cuencas norandinas. (2014). Cuadernos De Geografía: Revista Colombiana De Geografía, 23(1), 61-74. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcdg.v23n1.32175

Licencia

Derechos de autor 2013 Autor - Revista Licencia de Creative Commons
Cuadernos de Geografía: Revista Colombiana de Geografía es publicada por la Universidad Nacional de Colombia y está licenciada bajo los términos de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional License.