19
Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental

Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in

2003-2004

Page 2: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Targetting:

• By type of forests

• By type of environmental service

• By level of poverty

• By risk of deforestation

Important: voluntary program implies selfselection.

Page 3: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Operational Rules for PSAH (2003-2004)

Primary Forestsy

Forests important for water

With potential future clients

Providing environmental

services

y

Overexploited acquifers

80% cobertura

H related natural disasters

High water scarcity zones

o

o

Cities > 5K

Priority Mountains

Natural protected areas

Page 4: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Challenges for PES

• Unexpected success: Three times as many applicatons as funds. (Excess demand)

• Analize results regarding targetting

Page 5: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Overexploited acquifers

Type of Acquifer

Nationwide (surface)

Nationwide (population)

Hectares benefited by PSAH in 2003

Hectares benefited by PSAH in 2003

Extreme Overexploitiation(+100% a +800%)

0.05 % 9.2% 0.02 % 0.00 %

Fuertemente Sobreexplotados(+50% a +100%)

0.04 % 19.5% 0.00 % 0.00 %

Sobreexplotación Moderada

(+5% a +50%)18.6 % 14.5% 13.3 % 9.61 %

En equilibrio(- 5% a +5%) 2.9 % 11.3% 0.01 % 0.00 %

Con margen de expansión

(< - 5%)65.1 % 45.4% 78.7 % 85.04%

Sin información 13.4 % 0.1% 8.0 % 5.3 %

TOTAL 100.00 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 %

Page 6: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Acquifers

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Superficie a nivel nacional Población en la zona Hectáreas beneficiadaspor PSAH en 2003

Hectáreas beneficiadaspor PSAH en 2004

% d

e la

sup

erfi

cie

Extremadamente Sobreexplotados (+100% a +800%) Fuertemente Sobreexplotados (+50% a +100%)

Sobreexplotación Moderada (+5% a +50%) En equilibrio (- 5% a +5%)

Con margen de expansión (< - 5%) Sin información

Page 7: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Surface water scarcityZona de

Disponibilidad de Agua*

Superficie a nivel nacional

(%)

Población que vive en la zona

(%)

Hectáreas beneficiadas por PSAH en

2003 (%)

Hectáreas beneficiadas por PSAH en

2004(%)

1 (mayor escasez) 0.3 18.2 4.0 2.9

2 0.8 9.9 1.1 0.8

3 5.8 10.0 1.0 3.2

4 15.0 10.5 15.6 14.8

5 11.3 7.9 9.8 6.2

6 21.4 15.8 23.9 10.3

7 21.9 11.2 12.2 27.9

8 17.0 10.2 25.1 26.49 (menor escasez) 6.0 5.7 7.3 7.5TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Page 8: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Water scarcity

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Superficie a nivelnacional

Población en la zona Hectáreasbeneficiadas porPSAH en 2003

Hectáreasbeneficiadas porPSAH en 2004

% d

e h

ec

táre

as

o p

ob

lac

ión

1 (mayor escasez) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 (menor escasez)

Page 9: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Poverty

MarginalityPSAH 2003 PSAH 2004

Total Nacional en Propiedades Sociales con >100 has de bosque

Hectáreas % Hectáreas % %

Muy Alta 25.0 21.5 69.1Alta 46.9 61.4 17.2

Media 18.1 7.9 8.6Baja 7.9 5.7 3.3

Muy Baja 2.1 3.4 1.8Total 100 100 100

Page 10: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Focalización: grado de marginación

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

PSAH 2003 PSAH 2004 NACIONALFORESTAL*

% d

e la

s lo

calid

ades

rur

ales

Muy Alta Alta Media Baja Muy Baja

Page 11: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Type of forest

Tipo de Vegetación

TODO MEXIC

O

PSAH 2003

PSAH 2004

"Elegibilidad" CONAFOR '04

Coniferous 37.8 60.1 43.9 46.4

Oaks 23.0 17.2 24.9 18

Cloudforest 3.4 6.8 16.3 6.6

Dry tropical forests 25.0 3.0 4.9 2.4

Rainforest 10.8 12.9 10.4 26.6

Total 100 100 100 100

Page 12: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Focalización: Tipo de Vegetación

Distribución de acuerdo al tipo de bosque

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

TODO MEXICO PSAH 2003 PSAH 2004 "Elegibilidad"CONAFOR '04

Bosque de Pino y Pino-Encino Bosque de Encino, Bosque de Oyamel

Bosque Mesófilo Selva Baja

Selva Alta y Selva Mediana

Page 13: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

RETOMANDO OBJETIVO INICIAL:

MAXIMIZAR PROTECCIÓN DE PROVISIÓN DE SERVICIOS AMBIENTALES A TRAVÉS DE REDUCIR DEFORESTACIÓN

MAYOR VALOR A USUARIOS DEL SERVICIO AMBIENTAL: MANTENER MÁS BOSQUES CON EL MENOR COSTO DADO LOS RECURSOS DISPONIBLES

Page 14: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

• La principal fuerza de la deforestación es el cambio de uso de suelo.

• Ocurre cuando son más rentables las actividades agropecuarias.

• Pueden serlo por la perspectiva a corto plazo forzada por la pobreza (Guevara:2002)

• Sigue patrones específicos, por el costo de transporte, la pendiente y la productividad agropecuaria potencial.

RETOMANDO OBJETIVO INICIAL:RIESGO DE DEFORESTACIÓN

Page 15: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

15

75

135

195

255

315

375

435

495

555

615

675+

Secundario sin cambio Secundario deforestado

Primario conservado Secundario regenerado Primario degradado

Primario deforestado

0%

Cambios de uso de suelo y distancia al poblado más cercano

MINUTOS

Page 16: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

primario sin cambios secundario regenerado primario degradado

secundario sin cambios secundario deforestado primario deforestado

Cambio de uso de suelo y pendiente*

*La pendiente es medida en porcentajes.

Pendiente (%)

% de los bosques de 1993/1994 ubicados en ese rango de

Page 17: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Risk of deforestation

Índice de Riesgo de

Deforestación

(por quintiles)

Bosques a nivel

nacionalPSAH 2003 PSAH 2004

Superficie Elegible CONAFOR

% % Ha % Ha Ha %

Muy Alto 20% 4% 5,922 11% 18,550 404,549 12%

Alto 20% 7% 11,034 17% 28,529 198,762 6%

Medio 20% 17% 28,446 20% 34,953 613,763 18%

Bajo 20% 30% 50,046 30% 50,940 856,519 25%

Muy Bajo 20% 42% 68,815 22% 37,133 1,350,704 39%Total 100% 100% 164,263 100% 170,105 3,424,297 100%

Page 18: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Focalización: Riesgo de deforestación

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Bosques a nivelnacional

PSAH 2003 PSAH 2004 SuperficieElegible

CONAFOR

% d

e la

s h

ectá

reas

Muy Bajo Bajo Medio Alto Muy Alto

Page 19: Program for the Payment of Hidrological Environmental Services of Forests: Implementation and targetting in 2003-2004

Ejercicio de priorización