Payments for Environmental Services, Forest Conservation and Climate Change: Livelihoods in the REDD?
探讨了REDD+（减少毁林和森林退化所致排放）从理论到实施面临的现实挑战，包括产权不清、治理薄弱、碳数据缺失等问题，并质疑付费机制能否惠及穷人。
To paraphrase Angelson (2009), REDD+ is an apparently brilliant idea facing a serious reality check as it moves towards implementation. The idea is brilliant because deforestation and forest degradation are major contributors to global greenhouse gas emissions, so offering incentives for people to stop deforestation and enhance existing carbon stocks could be a relatively inexpensive way to mitigate global climate change. The reality check comes in the form of unclear property rights over forests, weak governance plagued by corruption, lack of data on existing carbon stocks and lack of systems to measure changes in carbon attributable to an incentive system. In other words, paying people to conserve forests is well and good, but who would you pay, how would they manage it and how would you know if the payment resulted in reduced carbon emissions? Other questions arise as well. Could payments for protecting forests and planting trees put enough money in recipients' pockets to make them want to participate in such a scheme, with all the land use restrictions it would imply? If the payments were high enough, would they benefit poor people or would the rich and powerful capture the benefits while the poor experienced mainly restrictions on their land use?