PAGAMENTOS POR SERVIÇOS AMBIENTAIS E ECOSSISTÊMICOS PARA PRODUÇÃO DE ÁGUA

Alexander Matos Leitão; Luciana  Ferreira da Silva

doi:10.31413/nativa.v10i2.12791

Authors

Alexander Matos Leitão alexanderleitao@gmail.com
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Agronegócios, Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados, Dourados, MS, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3192-6685
Luciana Ferreira da Silva luciana@uems.br
Universidade Estadual do Mato Grosso do Sul, Dourados, MS, Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3538-756X

DOI:

10.31413/nativa.v10i2.12791

Keywords:

revisão sistemática, bioeconomia, recursos hídricos, desenvolvimento agrícola, preservação ambiental

Abstract

Payments for Environmental Services (PES) are a growing topic in academia and in public policy formulations at a global level. This gives the theme, in addition to notoriety, the need to outline its state of the art and thus align world discussions with local scenarios. The aim of this study was to carry out a Systematic Review of PES, specifically those related to Water Production (PES – Water). A Science Mapping was carried out, based on a research protocol in international, open access articles, available in the Scopus and Web of Science databases, over a five-year period. Data were processed in R Studio®, Excel®, and Biblioshiny®. A total of 208 articles were selected, submitted to the Modified Methodi Ordinatio exclusion criteria. Content analysis used the 21 most relevant articles for this research. The results demonstrated, among others, the outstanding studies, their geographic distribution, and the trend topics. Thus, it can be concluded that despite the heterogeneity of research, the consensus is related to the global concern with the use and preservation of water resources and that the PES – Water programs, even with many challenges, are benefiting several local communities.

References

ADAMOWICZ, W.; CALDERON-ETTER, L.; ENTEM, A.; FENICHEL, E. P.; HALL, J. S.; LLOYD-SMITH, P.; OGDEN, F. L.; REGINA, J. A.; RAD, M. R.; STALLARD, R. F. Assessing ecological infrastructure investments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 116, n. 12, p. 5254-5261. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1802883116

AGUILAR, F. X.; OBENG, E. A.; CAI, Z. Water quality improvements elicit consistent willingness-to-pay for the enhancement of forested watershed ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, v. 30, p. 158-171, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.02.012

ALBUQUERQUE, B. Brasil passa pela maior crise hídrica desde 1931. PODER360. 2021. Disponível em: <https://www.poder360.com.br/governo/brasil-passa-pela-maior-crise-hidrica-desde-1931-diz-bento-albuquerque/>. Acesso em: 20 jun 2021.

ANA_Agência Nacional de Águas. Conjuntura dos recursos hídricos no Brasil 2019: informe anual/Agência Nacional de Águas. Brasília: ANA, 2019. 110p.

ANZALDI, G. A holistic ICT solution to improve matching between supply and demand over the water supply distribution chain. Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems, v. 2, n. 4, p. 362-375, 2014. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.13044/j.sdewes.2014.02.0029

ASBJORNSEN, H.; MANSON, R. H.; SCULLION, J. J.; HOLWERDA, F.; MUÑOZ-VILLERS, L. E.; ALVARADO-BARRIENTOS, M. S.; GEISSERT, D.; DAWSON, T. E.; MCDONNELL, J. J.; BRUIJNZEEL, L. A. Interactions between payments for hydrologic services, landowner decisions, and ecohydrological consequences: synergies and disconnection in the cloud forest zone of central Veracruz, Mexico. Ecology and Society, v. 22, n. 2, 2017, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09144-220225

BARDIN, L. Análise de Conteúdo. São Paulo, Edições. 2011. 229p.

BLADON, A. J.; SHORT, K. M.; MOHAMMED, E. Y.; MILNER-GULLAND, E. J. Payments for ecosystem services in developing world fisheries. Fish and Fisheries, v. 17, n. 3, p. 839-859, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12095

BOTTAZZI, P.; WIIK, E.; CRESPO, D.; JONES, J. P. G. Payment for environmental “self-service”: Exploring the links between Farmers' motivation and additionality in a conservation incentive programme in the Bolivian Andes. Ecological Economics, v. 150, p. 11-23, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.03.032

BRASIL. Lei nº 14.119, de 13 de janeiro de 2021: Institui a Política Nacional de Pagamento por Serviços Ambientais; e altera as Leis n° 8.212, de 24 de julho de 1991, 8.629, de 25 de fevereiro de 1993, e 6.015, de 31 de dezembro de 1973, para adequá-las à nova política. DOU. 2021

BREMER, L. L.; FARLEY, K. A.; CHADWICK, O. A.; HARDEN, C. P. Changes in carbon storage with land management promoted by payment for ecosystem ser Bremer ices. Environmental Conservation, v. 43, n. 4, p. 397-406, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892916000199

CHIODI, R. E.; MARQUES, P. E. M. Políticas públicas de Pagamento por Serviços Ambientais para a conservação dos recursos hídricos: origens, atores, interesses e resultados da ação institucional. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, v. 45, p. 81-104, 2018, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/dma.v45i0.48757

CHOI, I. C.; SHIN, H.; NGUYEN, T. T.; TENHUNEN, J.

Water policy reforms in South Korea: A historical review and ongoing challenges for sustainable water governance and management. Water, v. 9, n. 9, p. 717-739, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/w9090717

CRESWELL, J. W. Investigação Qualitativa e Projeto de Pesquisa: Escolhendo entre Cinco Abordagens. Porto Alegre: Penso Editora, 2014. 342p.

DEL ROSSI, G.; HECHT, J. S.; ZIA, A. A mixed-methods analysis for improving farmer participation in agri-environmental payments for ecosystem services in Vermont, USA. Ecosystem Services, v. 47, e101223, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101223

DEL VECCHIO, K.; BARONE, S. Has Morocco’s groundwater policy changed? Lessons from the institutional approach. Water alternatives, v. 11, n. 3, p. 638-662, 2018. ISSN: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01891804/

DESTA, H.; LEMMA, B. SWAT based hydrological assessment and characterization of Lake Ziway sub-watersheds, Ethiopia. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies, v. 13, p. 122-137, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2017.08.002

ERCOLE, F. F.; MELO, L. S.; ALCOFORADO, C. L. G. C. Revisão integrativa versus revisão sistemática. Revista Mineira de Enfermagem, v. 18, n. 1, p. 9-12, 2014. http://www.dx.doi.org/10.5935/1415-2762.20140001

FOVARGUE, R. E; REZAPOUR, S; ROSENDAHL, D; WOOTTEN, A. M; SABZI, H. Z; MORENO, H. A; NEESON, T. M. Spatial planning for water sustainability projects under climate uncertainty: balancing human and environmental water needs. Environmental Research Letters, v. 16, n. 3, e034050, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abdd58

GARCIA, A.; HIPEL, K.; OBEIDI, A. Water pricing conflict in British Columbia. Hydrological Research Letters, v. 11, n. 4, p. 194-200, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3178/hrl.11.194

GARCIA‐PRATS, A.; DEL CAMPO, A. D.; PULIDO‐VELAZQUEZ, M. A hydroeconomic modeling framework for optimal integrated management of forest and water. Water Resources Research, v. 52, n. 10, p. 8277-8294, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR018273

IGARASHI, W.; IGARASHI, D. C. C.; BORGES, B. J. Revisão sistemática e sua potencial contribuição em “negócios, gerenciamento e contabilidade”. Gestão & Regionalidade, v. 31, n. 91, p. 138-151, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13037/gr.vol31n91.2887

KARANDISH, F.; ŠIMŮNEK, J. An application of the water footprint assessment to optimize production of crops irrigated with saline water: A scenario assessment with HYDRUS. Agricultural water management, v. 208, n. 1, p. 67-82, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.06.010

KATKO, T. S. Finnish Water Services: Experiences in Global Perspective. Finland: Finnish Water Utilities Association, 2016. 289p.

KILKIŞ, Ş. Benchmarking South East European cities with the sustainable development of energy, water and environment systems index. Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems, v. 6, n. 1, p. 162-209, 2018. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.13044/j.sdewes.d5.0179

KOVACS, E. K.; KUMAR, C.; AGARWAL, C.; ADAMS, W. M.; HOPE, R. A.; VIRA, B. The politics of negotiation and implementation: a reciprocal water access agreement in the Himalayan foothills, India. Ecology and Society, v. 21, n. 2, p. 1-11, 2016. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-08462-210237

LANKFORD, B.; MAKIN, I.; MATTHEWS, N.; MCCORNICK, P. G.; NOBLE, A.; SHAH, T. A compact to revitalise large-scale irrigation systems using a leadership-partnership-ownership ‘theory of change’. Water Alternatives, v. 9, n. 1, p. 1-32, 2016. DOI: https://hdl.handle.net/10568/72602

LI, H.; BENNETT, M. T.; JIANG, X.; ZHANG, K.; YANG, X. Rural household preferences for active participation in “payment for ecosystem service” programs: A case in the miyun reservoir catchment, China. PloS One, v. 12, n. 1, p. 1-18, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192546

LIMA, L. S.; KRUEGER, T.; García-Marquez, J. Uncertainties in demonstrating environmental benefits of payments for ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, v. 27, n. 1, p. 139-149. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.005

MACDONALD, G. K.; D’ODORICO, P.; SEEKELL, D. A. Pathways to sustainable intensification through crop water management. Environmental Research Letters, v. 11, n. 9, p. 1-5, 2016. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/9/091001

NATYZAK, J. L.; CASTNER, E. A.; D'ODORICO, P.; GALLOWAY, J. N. Virtual water as a metric for institutional sustainability. Sustainability: The Journal of Record, v. 10, n. 4, p. 237-245, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/sus.2017.0004

NYONGESA, J. M.; BETT, H. K.; LAGAT, J. K.; AYUYA, O. I. Estimating farmers’ stated willingness to accept pay for ecosystem services: Case of Lake Naivasha watershed Payment for Ecosystem Services scheme-Kenya. Ecological Processes, v. 5, n. 1, p. 1-15, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-016-0059-z

PAGANI, R. N.; KOVALESKI, J. L; DE RESENDE, L. M. M. Avanços na composição da Methodi Ordinatio para revisão sistemática de literatura. Ciência da Informação, v. 46, n. 2, p. 161-187, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18225/ci.inf..v47i1.1886

PALM-FORSTER, L. H.; SWINTON, S. M.; REDDERC, T. M.; PINTO, J. V. D.; BOLES, C. M. W. Using conservation auctions informed by environmental performance models to reduce agricultural nutrient flows into Lake Erie. Journal of Great Lakes Research, v. 42, n. 6, p. 1357-1371, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2016.08.003

PAN, Y.; MARSHALL, S.; MALTBY, L. Prioritising ecosystem services in Chinese rural and urban communities. Ecosystem Services, v. 21, n. 1, p. 1-5, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.011

PYNEGAR, E. L.; JONES, J. P.G.; GIBBONS, J. M.; ASQUITH, N. M. The effectiveness of payments for ecosystem services at delivering improvements in water quality: lessons for experiments at the landscape scale. PeerJ, v. 6, p. 1-29, 2018. DOI: https://peerj.com/articles/5753/

RAO, K. C.; OTOO, M.; DRECHSEL, P.; HANJRA, M. A. Resource recovery and reuse as an incentive for a more viable sanitation service chain. Water Alternatives, v. 10, n. 2, p. 493-512, 2017. DOI: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/83457

REED, M. S.; ALLEN, K.; ATTLEE, A.; DOUGILL, A. J.; EVANS, K. L.; KENTER, J. O.; HOY, J.; MCNAB, D.; STEAD, S. M.; TWYMAN, C.; SCOTT, A. S.; SMYTH, M. A.; STRINGER, L. C.; WHITTINGHAM, M. J. A place-based approach to payments for ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, v. 43, n. 1, p. 92-106, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.12.009

SALEM, G. S. A.; KAZAMA, S.; SHAHID, S.; DEY, N. C. Impact of temperature changes on groundwater levels and irrigation costs in a groundwater-dependent agricultural region in Northwest Bangladesh. Hydrological Research Letters, v. 11, n. 1, p. 85-91, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3178/hrl.11.85

SOARES-FILHO, B.; RAJÃO, R.; MERRY, F.; RODRIGUES, H.; DAVIS, J.; LIMA L.; MACEDO, M.; COE, M.; CARNEIRO, A.; SANTIAGO, L. Brazil’s market for trading forest certificates. PLoS One, v. 11, n. 4, p. 1-17, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152311

PAIVA, R. F. P. S.; COELHO, R. C. O Programa Produtor de Água e Floresta de Rio Claro/RJ enquanto ferramenta de gestão ambiental: o perfil e a percepção ambiental dos produtores inscritos. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente. v. 33, p. 51-62, 2015. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/dma.v33i0.36702

TAFFARELLO, D.; CALIJURI, M. C.; VIANI, R. A. G.; MARENGO, J. A.; MENDIONDO, E. M. Hydrological services in the Atlantic Forest, Brazil: An ecosystem-based adaptation using ecohydrological monitoring. Climate Services, v. 8, n. 1, p. 1-16. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2017.10.005

TANIGUCHI, M.; BURNETT, K. M.; SHIMADA, J.; HOSONO, T.; WADA, C. A.; IDE, K. Recovery of lost nexus synergy via payment for environmental services in Kumamoto, Japan. Frontiers in Environmental Science, v. 7, n. 1, p. 1-28, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2019.00028

TEYTELBOYM, A. Natural capital market design. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, v. 35, n. 1, p. 138-161, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/gry030

WRI. Uma nova economia para uma nova era: elementos para a construção de uma economia mais eficiente e resiliente para o brasil. São Paulo: WRI BRASIL, 2020. 104 p.

WUNDER, S. 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

ZIEGLER, R. Viewpoint− Water innovation for a circular economy: the contribution of grassroots actors. Water Alternatives, v. 12, n. 2, p. 774-787, 2019. Available in: https://www.water-alternatives.org/index.php/alldoc/articles/vol12/v12issue2/494-a12-2-1