Protecting people and the environment: Lessons learnt from Br azil’s Bolsa Verde,
China, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, South Africa and 56 other experiences
49
MMA.
41
Where applicable, the principles of the Social Protection Floors Recommendation, 2012 No. 202, are taken into consideration. The paper concludes with
some thoughts aimed at providing an answer to the initial research question on how to design pro-poor PES programmes that reach both social and environmental objectives.
6.1. General considerations regarding pro-poor PES programmes
In this concluding section, the initial question will be discussed: how to design a pro- poor PES programme that reaches both social and environmental objectives and how
potential tensions between these two objectives can be reduced. In general, PES schemes that include some form of targeting of poor and vulnerable populations will have short-
term impacts on poverty by increasing monetary income, as well as long-term impacts through restoring the environment and generating additional sources of employment and
income, especially in PES programmes that allow for asset building and the sustainable use of the forests. For example, a PES scheme that restores environmental conditions that lead
to increased land productivity or allows for the recovery of fish stocks will improve harvests or catches in the long run. Poverty can be simultaneously reduced if the assets
developed are accessible to the poor and sustainably exploited.
Based on the analysis of Bolsa Verde and the four other PES schemes in the case studies section, the different programmes can be classified according to whether they are
more strongly oriented towards pro-poor or pro-environmental objectives. This is illustrated in the spectrum in figure 3.
Figure 3. Spectrum of programme objectives
Figure 3 suggests that the programmes attach different priorities to social and environmental objectives. This can be explained through the choice of targeting criteria:
programmes that target providers according to the area in which they live are more pro- environmental; programmes that target according to social situation tend to be pro-poor;
and some programmes target according to both, attaching different weights to each dimension.
Targeting priorities are closely related to the key programme objectives and the original reasons for developing the programme itself. In Costa Rica, Mexico, and China,
the PES programmes were developed due to urgent environmental problems. Therefore, ecological criteria originally guided the targeting decisions. With the introduction of social
targeting criteria in Mexico and Costa Rica, the approach moved in the direction of more pro-poor objectives and both programmes became more inclusive over time. While in
Costa Rica the focus is still considered to be environmental the main part of the budget
41
A South-South Cooperation Project was signed between the Brazilian Government and the ILO on the promotion of sustainable development, decent work, and social protection on 14 November 2014.
Bolsa Verde Socio Bosque
PPSA SLCP
PSAH today PSAH originally
PPSA originally
Social protection pro-poor objectives Environmental objectives
