How Eco-compensation contribute to poverty reduction: a perspective from different income group of rural households in Guizhou, China
Wu Le, Jin Leshan
Corresponding authors: Jin Leshan， e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol.275, 2020
Abstract: In recent years, eco-compensation in China, or more internationally termed as the payments for ecosystem services (PES) has emerged as an important policy instrument for not only environment management, but also poverty reduction. In the individual eco-compensation programs, there are usually some additional objectives other than ecosystem protection, among which poverty alleviation is the most important. In the policies on poverty alleviation, the central government of China lists eco-compensation as one of the five major approaches to alleviate poverty. However, there is little empirical evidence of the effectiveness of eco-compensation programs on poverty alleviation. This paper uses the field survey data of rural households in three poverty-stricken counties in Guizhou Province, China to evaluate the poverty alleviation effect of different eco-compensation programs on different income group of rural households. Research indicates that: for the eco-compensation programs with direct cash payment, the Sloping Land Conversion Program has a significantly positive impact on high-to-medium income group. The project of Ecological Forest Compensation Program has no significant impact on all income groups. The Ecological Job Offer Program has a great positive impact on the income of low-income households. Our research highlights that i) different eco-compensation programs might have different impacts on the same income group of households; ii) a specific eco-compensation might have different income impacts on different income groups of households; and iii) eco-compensation does not necessarily contribute to poverty reduction unless the eco-compensation scheme is purposely designed for it.
Keywords: Payments for ecosystem services; Eco-Compensation; PES; Poverty reduction; Household income
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122962