Cash only? Unveiling preferences for a PES contract through a choice experiment in Chiapas, Mexico

[1]  Céline Dutilly,et al.  Payments for Environmental Services in a Policymix: Spatial and Temporal Articulation in Mexico , 2016, PloS one.

[2]  Katharine R. E. Sims,et al.  Only One Tree from Each Seed? Environmental Effectiveness and Poverty Alleviation in Mexico's Payments for Ecosystem Services Program , 2015 .

[3]  Adrian Martin,et al.  Payments for ecosystem services in the tropics: a closer look at effectiveness and equity , 2015 .

[4]  B. Thorsen,et al.  Forest owners' willingness to accept contracts for ecosystem service provision is sensitive to additionality , 2015 .

[5]  E. Gsottbauer,et al.  Towards a fair, constructive and consistent criticism of all valuation languages: : Comment on Kallis et al. (2013) , 2015 .

[6]  E. Corbera,et al.  How Effective Are Biodiversity Conservation Payments in Mexico? , 2015, PloS one.

[7]  Danny Campbell,et al.  Behavioral implications of providing real incentives in stated choice experiments , 2014 .

[8]  Susana Mourato,et al.  Credit-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Ecuador , 2014 .

[9]  Katharine R. E. Sims,et al.  Improving Environmental and Social Targeting through Adaptive Management in Mexico's Payments for Hydrological Services Program , 2014, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[10]  M. Koetse,et al.  Preferences for alternative fuel vehicles of company car drivers , 2014 .

[11]  Michiel C.J. Bliemer,et al.  Design considerations of a choice experiment to estimate likely participation by north Australian pastoralists in contractual biodiversity conservation , 2014 .

[12]  D. W. Mulatu,et al.  Farm households' preferences for collective and individual actions to improve water-related ecosystem services: The Lake Naivasha basin, Kenya , 2014 .

[13]  Claudia Sattler,et al.  Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success? , 2013 .

[14]  Sarah Schomers,et al.  Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries , 2013 .

[15]  Jon C. Lovett,et al.  Payments for ecosystem services and rural development: Landowners' preferences and potential participation in western Mexico , 2013 .

[16]  B. Swallow,et al.  Designing a payments for ecosystem services (PES) program to reduce deforestation in Tanzania: : An assessment of payment approaches , 2013 .

[17]  A. Velázquez,et al.  Rights to carbon and payments for services rendered under REDD+: Options for the case of Mexico , 2013 .

[18]  Kerrie A. Wilson,et al.  Farmers' willingness to provide ecosystem services and effects of their spatial distribution , 2013 .

[19]  Elizabeth Shapiro-Garza.  Contesting the market-based nature of Mexico’s national payments for ecosystem services programs: Four sites of articulation and hybridization , 2013 .

[20]  Luis Rico García-Amado,et al.  Motivation for conservation: Assessing integrated conservation and development projects and payments for environmental services in La Sepultura Biosphere Reserve, Chiapas, Mexico , 2013 .

[21]  D. Bray.  When the State Supplies the Commons: Origins, Changes, and Design of Mexico’s Common Property Regime , 2013 .

[22]  Martin J. Westgate,et al.  Adaptive management of biological systems: A review , 2013 .

[23]  P. Balvanera,et al.  Ecosystem services research in Latin America: The state of the art , 2012 .

[24]  Baruch Fischhoff,et al.  Task familiarity and contextual cues predict hypothetical bias in a meta-analysis of stated preference studies , 2012 .

[25]  Katharine R. E. Sims,et al.  Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program , 2012, Land Economics.

[26]  D. Whittington,et al.  Using contingent valuation in the design of payments for environmental services mechanisms: a review and assessment , 2012 .

[27]  J. Barsimantov,et al.  Community Forestry, Common Property, and Deforestation in Eight Mexican States , 2012 .

[28]  G. Grolleau,et al.  Designing watershed programs to pay farmers for water quality services: Case studies of Munich and New York City , 2012 .

[29]  Suzanne Elizabeth Vedel,et al.  Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences , 2012 .

[30]  L. Soto-Pinto,et al.  Agroforestry Systems and Local Institutional Development for Preventing Deforestation in Chiapas, Mexico , 2012 .

[31]  Subhrendu K. Pattanayak,et al.  Do Payments for Environmental Services Affect Forest Cover? A Farm-Level Evaluation from Costa Rica , 2012, Land Economics.

[32]  R. Brouwer,et al.  Meta-analysis of institutional-economic factors explaining the environmental performance of payments for watershed services , 2011, Environmental Conservation.

[33]  Craig W. Thomas,et al.  Evaluating the environmental impact of payments for ecosystem services in Coatepec (Mexico) using remote sensing and on-site interviews , 2011, Environmental Conservation.

[34]  M. Ramírez,et al.  A Spatially Explicit Estimate of Avoided Forest Loss , 2011, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[35]  J. Louviere,et al.  Tasmanian landowner preferences for conservation incentive programs: a latent class approach. , 2011, Journal of environmental management.

[36]  U. Pascual,et al.  Cost-effectiveness targeting under multiple conservation goals and equity considerations in the Andes , 2011, Environmental Conservation.

[37]  Y. Georgiadou,et al.  Alternative models for carbon payments to communities under REDD+: A comparison using the Polis model of actor inducements , 2011 .

[38]  J. Farley,et al.  Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global , 2010 .

[39]  A. Angelsen.  Policies for reduced deforestation and their impact on agricultural production , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[40]  L. P. Koh,et al.  REDD: a reckoning of environment and development implications. , 2010, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[41]  David Hoyos,et al.  The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments , 2010 .

[42]  A. Vatn.  An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services , 2010 .

[43]  E. Corbera,et al.  Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services , 2010 .

[44]  Arun Agrawal,et al.  Trade-offs and synergies between carbon storage and livelihood benefits from forest commons , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[45]  Michiel C.J. Bliemer,et al.  Constructing Efficient Stated Choice Experimental Designs , 2009 .

[46]  Subhrendu K. Pattanayak,et al.  Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods to Evaluate Participation in Costa Rica's Program of Payments for Environmental Services , 2009 .

[47]  S. Wunder,et al.  Paying for Watershed Services in Latin America: A Review of Current Initiatives , 2009 .

[48]  Peter R. Wilshusen.  Social process as everyday practice: the micro politics of community-based conservation and development in southeastern Mexico , 2009 .

[49]  A. Karsenty,et al.  External influences on and conditions for community logging management in Cameroon , 2009 .

[50]  E. Corbera,et al.  Institutional dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services: An analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme , 2009 .

[51]  E. Corbera,et al.  Participation in payments for ecosystem services: Case studies from the Lacandon rainforest, Mexico , 2008 .

[52]  Katharine R. E. Sims,et al.  Designing payments for ecosystem services: Lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[53]  Sven Wunder,et al.  Selling two environmental services: In-kind payments for bird habitat and watershed protection in Los Negros, Bolivia , 2008 .

[54]  P. Ferraro.  Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services , 2008 .

[55]  S. Wunder,et al.  Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues , 2008 .

[56]  S. Wunder,et al.  Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries , 2008 .

[57]  Sven Wunder,et al.  Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: A tool for boosting conservation benefits , 2008 .

[58]  Juan Manuel Torres,et al.  Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: Analysis, negotiations and results , 2008 .

[59]  D. Bray,et al.  The Mexican model of community forest management: The role of agrarian policy, forest policy and entrepreneurial organization , 2006 .

[60]  John M. Rose,et al.  Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer , 2005 .

[61]  David R. Lee,et al.  Paying for Environmental Services: An Analysis of Participation in Costa Rica’s PSA Program , 2005 .

[62]  Stanley Lemeshow,et al.  Multiple Logistic Regression , 2005 .

[63]  P. Horne.  Forest owners' acceptance of incentive based policy instruments in forest biodiversity conservation - A choice experiment based approach , 2004 .

[64]  David A. Hensher,et al.  A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit , 2003 .

[65]  B. D. Jong,et al.  Making global initiatives local realities: Carbon mitigation projects in Chiapas, Mexico , 2003 .

[66]  P. Boxall,et al.  Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach , 2002 .

[67]  Paul J. Ferraro,et al.  Direct Payments to Conserve Biodiversity , 2002, Science.

[68]  O. Masera,et al.  Community forest management in Mexico: carbon mitigation and biodiversity conservation through rural development , 2000 .

[69]  D. Hensher,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications , 2000 .

[70]  R. Brouwer,et al.  Agri-environmental policy valuation: Farmers’ contract design preferences for afforestation schemes , 2015 .

[71]  Leticia Merino-Pérez.  Conservation and Forest Communities in Mexico: Experiences, Visions, and Rights , 2013 .

[72]  T. Stevens,et al.  Estimated participation in U.S. carbon sequestration programs: A study of NIPF landowners in Massachusetts , 2012 .

[73]  Mickael Bech,et al.  Designing a stated choice experiment: The value of a qualitative process , 2012 .

[74]  J. Vos.  Una tierra para sembrar sueños : historia reciente de la Selva Lacandona , 2002 .

[75]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .