PAYMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES: A BIBLIOMETRIC AND TEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF THE INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66104/qa4af413Keywords:
Payments for Environmental Services; Environmental Policy; Ecosystem Services; Systematic Review; SustainabilityAbstract
This study aims to analyze the international scientific production on Payments for Environmental Services (PES) from 2016 to 2022, with an interpretative update of the literature up to 2025, in order to identify trends, methodological approaches, and predominant analytical categories. The research is based on a systematic literature review conducted according to the guidelines of the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE), using data from Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Wiley Online Library, and Taylor & Francis Online. A total of 2,942 initial records were identified, resulting in a final sample of 107 articles after applying selection criteria. The results indicate relative stability in scientific production, with a predominance of empirical studies, particularly case studies, and a concentration of publications in environmental economics journals. The findings reveal a transition from conceptually oriented approaches to perspectives incorporating institutional, behavioral, and governance-related factors. The effectiveness of PES programs remains heterogeneous, being conditioned by factors such as additionality, institutional design, and territorial contexts. A recent trend highlights the integration of PES into environmental markets. As a contribution, this study provides a structured synthesis of the literature, identifying gaps and emphasizing the need for more integrated approaches combining environmental efficiency, social equity, and governance.
Downloads
References
ALIX-GARCIA, Jennifer et al. Environmental effectiveness of payments for environmental services. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 63, n. 1, p. 1–18, 2012.
ALIX-GARCIA, Jennifer et al. Payments for environmental services and forest conservation: evidence from Mexico. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, v. 10, n. 2, p. 1–36, 2018.
AGRAWAL, Arun et al. Economic contributions of forests. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, v. 40, p. 199–226, 2015.
BAYLIS, Kathy et al. Mainstreaming impact evaluation in nature conservation. Conservation Letters, v. 9, n. 1, p. 58–64, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12180
CAMARGO, Brigido Vizeu; JUSTO, Ana Maria. Iramuteq: um software gratuito para análise de dados textuais. Temas em Psicologia, v. 21, n. 2, p. 513–518, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9788/TP2013.2-16
CORBERA, Esteve; KOSOY, Nicolas; TUNA, Maria. Equity implications of marketing ecosystem services in protected areas and rural communities. Ecological Economics, v. 69, n. 6, p. 1272–1280, 2010.
ENGEL, Stefanie. The devil in the detail: a practical guide on designing payments for environmental services. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, v. 10, p. 131–177, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1561/101.00000076
ENGEL, Stefanie. Payments for environmental services: design and implementation challenges. Annual Review of Resource Economics, v. 10, p. 1–19, 2018.
ENGEL, Stefanie; PAGIOLA, Stefano; WUNDER, Sven. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice. Ecological Economics, v. 65, n. 4, p. 663–674, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.03.011
FALK, Armin; KOSFELD, Michael. The hidden costs of control. American Economic Review, v. 96, n. 5, p. 1611–1630, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.96.5.1611
FERRARO, Paul J. Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics, v. 65, n. 4, p. 810–821, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.07.029
FERRARO, Paul J.; PATTANAYAK, Subhrendu. Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. PLoS Biology, v. 4, n. 4, p. e105, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040105
FERRARO, Paul J.; SIMPSON, R. David. The cost-effectiveness of conservation payments. Land Economics, v. 78, n. 3, p. 339–353, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3146894
GAME, Edward T. et al. Conservation in a wicked complex world. Conservation Letters, v. 7, n. 3, p. 271–277, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12050
GRIMA, N. et al. An assessment of the impacts of payments for environmental services on environmental and social outcomes. Ecological Economics, v. 120, p. 1–10, 2016.
GRIMA, N. et al. Payments for ecosystem services: a systematic review of effectiveness and equity outcomes. Environmental Research Letters, v. 15, n. 6, 2025.
GROOM, Ben; PALMER, Charles. Cost-effective provision of environmental services: the role of incentives. Environmental and Resource Economics, v. 45, p. 133–152, 2010.
HANLEY, Nick; WHITE, Ben. Incentivizing the provision of ecosystem services. Environmental and Resource Economics, v. 58, p. 1–21, 2014.
JUNIOR, José et al. Análise fatorial de correspondência aplicada à pesquisa qualitativa. Revista Brasileira de Estatística, v. 69, n. 231, p. 459–476, 2008.
MITEVA, Daniela et al. Evaluation of biodiversity policy instruments: what works and what doesn’t? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, v. 28, n. 1, p. 69–92, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grs009
MURADIAN, Roldan et al. Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics, v. 69, n. 6, p. 1202–1208, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.006
NASCIMENTO, Adriano; MENANDRO, Paulo. Análise fatorial de correspondência em estudos qualitativos. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, v. 22, n. 1, p. 73–82, 2006.
PERSSON, Ulf; ALPIZAR, Francisco. Conditional cash transfers and payments for environmental services: a conceptual framework. Ecological Economics, v. 78, p. 52–61, 2013.
PULLIN, Andrew S.; STEWART, Gavin B. Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology, v. 20, n. 6, p. 1647–1656, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00485.x
REDFORD, Kent et al. What does it mean to successfully conserve a species? BioScience, v. 61, n. 1, p. 39–48, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.1.9
SUTHERLAND, William et al. The need for evidence-based conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, v. 19, n. 6, p. 305–308, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(04)00073-4
SUTHERLAND, William; WORDLEY, Claire. Evidence complacency hampers conservation. Nature Ecology & Evolution, v. 1, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0244-1
VILELA, Renato. Análise de nuvem de palavras como ferramenta de pesquisa qualitativa. Revista Científica, 2019.
WUNDER, Sven. Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics, v. 117, p. 234–243, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.08.016
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Maricléia Aparecida Leite Novak, Mônica Aparecida Bortolloti, Marinês Taffarel
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits the sharing of the work with proper acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal;
Authors are authorized to enter into separate, additional agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., posting in an institutional repository or publishing it as a book chapter), provided that authorship and initial publication in this journal are properly acknowledged, and that the work is adapted to the template of the respective repository;
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post and distribute their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their personal websites) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this may lead to productive exchanges and increase the impact and citation of the published work (see The Effect of Open Access);
Authors are responsible for correctly providing their personal information, including name, keywords, abstracts, and other relevant data, thereby defining how they wish to be cited. The journal’s editorial board is not responsible for any errors or inconsistencies in these records.
PRIVACY POLICY
The names and email addresses provided to this journal will be used exclusively for the purposes of this publication and will not be made available for any other purpose or to third parties.
Note: All content of the work is the sole responsibility of the author and the advisor.
