pes in thailand cifor orapan_radda presentation_nov2014
TRANSCRIPT
Legal and Policy Framework for Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES)
in ThailandOrapan Nabangchang
Presented byRadda Larpnun
Regional workshop on Payment for Environmental ServicesHanoi, Vietnam24-25 November 2014
2
Outline of presentation• The experience of date• On-going PES Projects
in Thailand• 20 Steps in the design
and implementation process
• Legal aspects of PES in Thailand
• Conclusion
4
Wildlife Conservation
• Mai Khao Marine Turtle Conservation (Phuket)
• Adopting Elephant Project
• Gaur Conservation of Khao Pang Ma Conservation Network
• Hornbill Adoption prog. in Budo-Sungai Padi National Park
• Elephant Conservation by Elelphant Conservation Network in Kanchanaburi
Forest Conservation
• Carbon sequestration project in Inpaeng Community Network in Northeast (Carbon2 Markets Prog.2009)
• Klongrung Tree Bank in Chumphon province
• Restoration projects by private companies and state enterprise sector (Toyota Motor (TH), Coca-Cola, Petroleum Authority of Thailand (PTT), Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand)
PES-Like programs
in Thailand
Ecosystem Ecosystem
Benefit from ecosystem
services
Better Benefit from ecosystem services due to
Additionally conservation and
restoration activities
Conservation and
restoration Activities
Measurement
Service Provider& ES beneficiaries (potential buyers)
Agreement/ContractAdapted from Marit Kragt,Michael Renton and Gabriela Scheufele presentation, 2013
ELEMENT of PES
Transparency
Additionality Conditionality Voluntary
6
The experience to date• Most of the funding for natural resources conservation is primarily
CSR investments that result in producing ecosystems services. • Villagers involved in conservation activities are more like
wageworkers and not quite fitting the definition of service providers. • Challenge is to demonstrate the direct and indirect benefits of
ecosystems services so as to create real demands for the provision of ecosystems services which will be more difficult than fund raising for wildlife
• Inpaeng community project has all the components of a PES project That is, there are services providers involved in reforestation and sellers and there are baselines from which to measure the ‘additionally’. But why did this experience never take off elsewhere?
• Thailand doesn’t really have a ‘PES’ project
7
16 PES projects at the design stage
On-going PES Projects in Thailand (DNP)
Area Legal concerns Ecosystems services Project Proponent
Initial Source of Funding
Catalyzing Sustainability of Thailand’s Protected Area System Watershed forest about 300,000 rai in 3 villages (Mae Ga-Luang, Pa Morn, Khun Klang), Chiang Mai
Site located in protected area (Doi Inthanon National Park)
Watershed DNP UNDP-GEF
Nakhon SawanUthaitaniKampheng Phet
Site located in Klong Lan National Park and Huey Kha Kaeng Wildlife Sanctuary
Wildlife habitat DNP UNDP-GEF
Mae Wong National Park Wildlife habitatWatershed
DNP UNDP-GEF
Satun Province: Southern Region
Tarutao Marine National Park
Eco-tourism and recreational value
DNP UNDP-GEF
Eastern Forest Complex
3 Wildlife Sanctuaries and 5 National Parks
Wildlife habitat and watershed
DNP UNDP-GEF
8
9
On-going PES Projects in Thailand (REO)
Area Legal concerns Ecosystems services Project Proponent
Initial Source of Funding
Community Forestry Based Catchment Management Mae Sa watershed, Chiang Mai
Protected Area WatershedRecreation
REO UNDP-GEF
Lam Sebai Community Forest, Northeast Thailand
Community Forest, Water supply and water purification functions
REO UNDP-GEF
Tha Chin river outlet, Central Thailand
Private land Water quality improvement Mangroves’ coastal protection function; fish spawning ground and habitat
REO UNDP-GEF
Phangan Island, Southern Thailand
Site located in Marine National Park
WatershedCoastal resources
REO UNDP-GEF
10
On-going PES Projects in Thailand (BEDO)
Area Legal concerns Ecosystems services
Project ProponentInitial Source of
Funding
Ang Rue Nai Wildlife Sanctuary (ARNWS)
Site located in wildlife sanctuary therefore has high level of restriction regarding access
Wildlife habitat Biodiversity-Economy-Based Development Organization (BEDO)
Not yet identified
Klong prasong: Krabi Property rights unclear
Mangroves BEDO Local villagers who benefit
Thung Jor, Chiang Mai
Site located in wildlife sanctuary therefore has high level of restriction regarding access
Watershed BEDO Provincial Water Work
Pathiu district, Chumphon
Property rights unclear
Mangroves BEDO CPF a subsidiary of CP
Santisuk district, Nan Province
Property rights unclear
BEDO CPF a subsidiary of CP
11
On-going PES Projects in Thailand (ECO-BEST)
Area Legal concerns Ecosystems services
Project Proponent
Initial Source of Funding
Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai Complex
Site locate Protected Area therefore has high level of restriction regarding access
Watershed ECO-BEST EU, German Government, RTG, Helmholtz university
Klong Nadi, Nakhon Sri Thammarat
Property rights unclear
Watershed ECO-BEST EU, German Government, RTG, Helmholtz university
12
A detailed look at one of the pilot sites under CBFCM : MAESA Pilot Project
Target area and justification Watershed area in Pong Yang district which is the watershed of Mae Sa river Area is rich in biodiversity High risk of forest encroachment High risk of forest fires Intensifying problems of water contamination from agricultural chemicals in the upstream area and from elephant
sanctuary located in the midstream area Increasing competition for water use for agriculture, tourism and households
Ecosystems Services Watershed functionsRecreation-ecotourism
Activity Forest patrol to reduce rate of encroachment Making and maintaining forest fire lines Restoring watershed forests Increase efficiency in water usage (reduce water shortage downstream)
Indicator Reduced incidences of forest fire Increasing biodiversity Reduced area of degraded forests
Services Provider Local communities in Pong Yang Sub-district
Beneficiaries of ES (potential buyers) Water users in the midstream and downstream area (households, tourism sector)
Information gap There is inadequate baseline information on the status quo situation: Rate of deforestation Statistics on the incidences of forest fires Biodiversity resources Water flow Water quality Volume of water uses among different users
Economic Analysis of ES Needs to be undertaken both the benefits of ecosystems services as well as the costs, i.e., costs for undertaking conservation activities and opportunity costs for land use changes or changes in agricultural practices
Capacity Building Needs Technical skills in undertaking conservation activities Technical skills in collecting, compiling and analyzing the scientific information Training on economic valuation Management skills
Legal and Institutional issues Site is located in a Protected Area (Doi Suthep Pui National Park) and hence the issue of legitimacy of occupants and entitlement to be receiving reward and/or compensation
13
The 20 steps in the design and implementation process
Step The progress1 Selecting the geographical area2 Cataloging the ES to be supplied3 Identifying the sources of ES demand4 Identifying potential ES supply5 Defining the type and degree of agent6 Selecting the ES buyers7 Securing funds to pay for the ES8 Determining the types of returns to ES suppliers9 Bio-physical modeling
10 Estimating marginal benefits of supply
Source: Jeff Bennett. Crawford School Australian National University
14
The 20 steps (continued)Step The progress11 Estimating individual marginal cost12 Developing the payment system13 Selecting the ES suppliers14 Determining the payments from buyer15 Establishing the payment transfer mechanism16 Determining the supplier measure17 Establishing a monitoring18 Establishing a penalty non-compliance19 Contracting the ES20 Assessing the PES scheme
Source: Jeff Bennett. Crawford School Australian National University
15
16
Legal aspects of PES in Thailand
• There is at present, no legal framework that directly concerns PES.
• There are laws that are relevant to the specific types of land, which are likely to be PES sites.
• Almost all of the PES and PES-like projects are located in public land which are covered by different pieces of legislation and varying levels of protection
• Existing legal framework is not ‘enabling’ by nature. • Some amendments or exemptions will have to be made
to allow service providers to carry out measures in public areas where there are ‘legal’ entry restrictions.
17
• If the starting point is to pass a law, then it will be a long and drawn out process.
• However, the policy framework is supportive and there are laws which recognizes the role of local communities in natural resources management which can be used as references for ‘relaxing’ the restrictions imposed by the laws that aim first and foremost to protect the natural resources.
Legal aspects of PES in Thailand
18
Conclusion
• Though lagging behind other countries in this Region, Thailand has benefited from the PES experiences of other countries.
• The on-going projects, though in their very earlier stages, demonstrated the complexities involved and stakeholders are already starting their learning processes.
19
• Some of the projects discussed in this report, though called PES projects are essentially a modified form of CSR. There is nothing wrong with CSR projects, do not address missing markets, nor create incentives to undertake conservation measures on a sustainable basis.
• The existing legal framework though not explicitly endorsing the concept of creating incentives for service providers (particularly local communities), can be relaxed in specific cases if this would enable the implementation of pilot projects.
• Anticipating criticisms that PES can be used as a tool for legitimizing occupants in Protected Area, it must be made clear that payment is:• conditional,• Involvement does not in increase entitlement to property rights to land, or
rights of access to natural resources.
Conclusion
20
• There is critical need for target group specific capacity building from the national level down to local communities. Of critical need appears to be training needs for those who are involved as counterparts in both CATSPA and CBFCM projects
• One of the major challenges is to create recognition of the benefits from ecosystems service. • There is a need for a formal institutional framework to create
tangible incentives for the private sectors.• Without strategic and innovative approaches to involve the
private sectors, CSR investments is most likely to be spread so thin and serving publicity purposes of private companies with little tangible outcome in improving the environment.
Conclusion
21
• there is high potential for poverty alleviation with estimated number of forest-dependent people being between 1 to 2 million people
• All PES sites were selected primarily on considerations over the biophysical conditions of the sites.
• Although poverty alleviation was not the determining factor for sites selection, income effect is an expected outcome of all projects
Conclusion
22
• There is potential as well as need to use PES as a tool for biodiversity conservation.– At present, biodiversity conservation in Thailand relies
heavily on legal measures. Without effective control measures, various pieces of legislations cited earlier have their limitations.
Conclusion
