Do environmental services buyers prefer differentiated rates?: a case study from the Colombian Andes

Flat user fees in payment for environmental services (PES) schemes promote administrative ease, and are sometimes perceived as egalitarian. However, when environmental service (ES) buyers are heterogeneous in their income and water consumption levels, this may not be optimal, as total payments becom...

Full description

Autores:
Moreno Sánchez, Rocío del Pilar
Maldonado, Jorge Higinio
Wunder, Sven
Borda Almanza, Carlos Andrés
Tipo de recurso:
Work document
Fecha de publicación:
2009
Institución:
Universidad de los Andes
Repositorio:
Séneca: repositorio Uniandes
Idioma:
eng
OAI Identifier:
oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/8135
Acceso en línea:
http://hdl.handle.net/1992/8135
Palabra clave:
PES
WTP
Environmental services
Colombia
Watershed protection
Gestión ambiental - Colombia - Estudio de casos
Control ambiental - Colombia - Estudio de casos
Política ambiental - Colombia
Desarrollo sostenible - Colombia - Estudio de casos
Q56, Q25, Q5, Q51, C25, D10, D12, D61, D63
Rights
openAccess
License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Description
Summary:Flat user fees in payment for environmental services (PES) schemes promote administrative ease, and are sometimes perceived as egalitarian. However, when environmental service (ES) buyers are heterogeneous in their income and water consumption levels, this may not be optimal, as total payments become too low and services are under-supplied. This paper identifies ES buyer preferences and estimates their willingness to pay (WTP) differentiated fees in an ongoing PES initiative in an Andean watershed in Colombia. Small, flat user payments have recently been introduced to implement incipient watershed protection upstream. Environmental service users fall into two highly heterogeneous categories: smallholder peasants and owners of recreational houses. We performed a contingent valuation analysis in a representative stratified sample of 218 user households. For improved water services, ES buyers on average were willing to pay a monthly US$1 premium over current flat PES rates. Owners of recreational houses were willing to pay about US$1.50 more; smallholders only US$0.5. 85% of ES buyers also agree to pay differentiated fees. Of these, 41% would prefer fees differentiated by water consumption, 23% by household income, 30% criteria combination, and 6% by other criteria. Spatial variables, such as distance to the water distribution point and to the town center, importantly influenced WTP. The results may help designing users-driven PES schemes in accordance with efficiency and equity objectives.