The Impact of Payments for Environmental Services in the Atlantic Forest: A Geospatial Study

Main Article Content

Ricardo Cerveira orcid
Nágela Bianca do Prado orcid
Gabriela Tonini orcid
Christiano França da Cunha orcid


Objective: this study aimed at understanding the impact of payment for environmental services (PES) programs in relation to environmental indicators in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest biome. Theoretical approach: the literary framework included three topics of discussion: payment for environmental services, program evaluation, and theory of change. In a broader way, the theme of evaluating programs in the agricultural area was articulated, considering the precepts of the theory of change. Method: geospatial data on land use, between 2016 and 2021, and amounts paid under the PES program with rural producers were collected to evaluate the impact on the increase or decrease in degraded and recovered areas. Data analysis included multivariate statistics, more specifically the comparison between groups and the relationship between variables through multiple linear regression. Results: the empirical results highlight that there is a significant difference in the increase in areas under recovery between producers who received PES values and producers not participating in this program. As for the types of PES, the one that pays for improvements in land use contributed most to the increase in the area under recovery. Conclusions: the study shows that evaluation methods for PES must be increasingly complex and measurable, as there are several possibilities for impacts depending on the objective of the program. The results are relevant to the theoretical, practical, and social spheres, in addition to helping to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Cerveira, R., Prado, N. B. do, Tonini, G., & Cunha, C. F. da. (2024). The Impact of Payments for Environmental Services in the Atlantic Forest: A Geospatial Study. Journal of Contemporary Administration, 28(3), e240020.
Theoretical-empirical Articles


Araújo, L. M. D. (2019). Dimensão espacial na análise econômica de esquemas de pagamento por serviços ambientais: O caminho para a eficácia [Dissertação de Mestrado]. Universidade de Brasília.
Bauchet, J., Asquith, N., Ma, Z., Radel, C., Godoy, R., Zanotti, L., Steele, D., Gramig, B. M., & Chong, A. E. (2020). The practice of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) in the Tropical Andes: Evidence from program administrators. Ecosystem Services, 45, 101175.
Bragança, A., Newton, P., Cohn, A., Assunção, J., Camboim, C., Faveri, D., Farinelli, B., Perego, V. M. E., Tavares, M., Resende, J., Medeiros, S., & Searchinger, T. D. (2022). Extension services can promote pasture restoration: Evidence from Brazil’s low carbon agriculture plan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(12).
Costa, F. L., & Castanhar, J. C. (2003). Avaliação de programas públicos: desafios conceituais e metodológicos. Revista de Administração Pública, 37(5).
Costedoat, S., Corbera, E., Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Honey- Rosés, J., Baylis, K., & Castillo-Santiago, M. A. (2015). How effective are biodiversity conservation payments in Mexico? PLOS ONE, 10(3), e0119881.
Cotta, T. C. (2014). Metodologias de avaliação de programas e projetos sociais: Análise de resultados e de impacto. Revista Do Serviço Público, 49(2), 103–124.
Escola Nacional de Administração Pública. (2022). Avaliação de Impacto de Programas e Políticas Sociais.
Engel, S. (2016). The devil in the detail: A practical guide on designing payments for environmental services. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, 9(1–2), 131– 177.
Eshoo, P. F., Johnson, A., Duangdala, S., & Hansel, T. (2018). Design, monitoring and evaluation of a direct payments approach for an ecotourism strategy to reduce illegal hunting and trade of wildlife in Lao PDR. PLOS ONE, 13(2), e0186133.
Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Wunder, S., Ruiz-Pérez, M., & Moreno-Sanchez, R. del P. (2016). Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services. PLOS ONE, 11(3), e0149847.
Ferreira M., S., Barcelos, C. P. D., Gomes, J. B. M., Souza Sobrinho, N. C. S., & Maciel, C. P. (2021). Captura de CO2 e Pagamento por Serviços Ambientais e Educação Ambiental: breve análise dos projetos “Olhos d’Água” e Conexão Mata Atlântica no Norte e Noroeste Fluminense. Educação Ambiental (Brasil), 2(1), 61–77.
Finkler, L., & Dellaglio, D. D. (2013). Reflexões sobre avaliação de programas e projetos sociais. Barbarói, 38. arttext&pid=S0104-65782013000100008
Formigoni, M. H., Xavier, A. C., & Lima, J. S. D. S. (2011). Análise temporal da vegetação na região do nordeste através de dados EVI do MODIS. Ciência Florestal, 21(1), 1–8.
Fox J., & Weisberg, S. (2020). An R Companion to Applied Regression. Sage Publications. Fundação de Empreendimentos Científicos e Tecnológicos. (2022). Casos de sucesso. projeto-conexao-mata-atlantica/
Game, E. T., Bremer L. L., Calvache, A., Moreno, P. H., Vargas, A., Rivera, B., & Rodriguez, L. M. (2018). Fuzzy models to inform social and environmental indicator selection for conservation impact monitoring. Conservation Letters, 11(1).
Gil, A. C. (2010). Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa (5ª ed). Atlas. Haces-Fernandez, F. (2022). Assessment of the financial benefits from wind farms in us rural locations. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 15(10), 423.
Hair, J., Jr., F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Sant’Anna, M. A. G. A. S. (2009). Análise Multivariada de Dados (6th ed.). Bookman.
Hajjar, R., Newton, P., Ihalainen, M., Agrawal, A., Alix-Garcia, J., Castle, S. E., Erbaugh, J. T., Gabay, M., Hughes, K., Mawutor, S., Pacheco, P., Schoneveld, G., & Timko, J. A. (2021). Levers for alleviating poverty in forests. Forest Policy and Economics, 132, 102589.
Hanley, N. (2014). Incentivizing the provision of ecosystem services. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, 7(3–4), 299–331.
Hasenack, H., Cordeiro, J. L. P., & Weber, E. J. (2015). Uso e cobertura vegetal do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul – situação em 2002 (1st ed.). UFRGS IB Centro de Ecologia.
Jack, B. K., & Jayachandran, S. (2019). Self-selection into payments for ecosystem services programs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(12), 5326–5333.
Kleiman, D. G., Reading, R. P., Miller, B. J., Clark, T. W., Michael, J., Robinson, J., Wallace, R. L., Cabin, R. J., Felleman, F., Clark, T. I. M. W., Scott, J. M., Robinson, J., Wallace, R. L., Cabin, R., & Fellemantt, F. (2016). Society for conservation Biology improving the evaluation of conservation programs linked references are available on jstor for this article. Improving the Evaluation of Conservation Programs. 14(2), 356–365.
Lankford, B. A., Makin, I., Matthews, N., Noble, A., McCornick, P. G., & Shah, T. (2016). A compact to revitalise largescale irrigation systems using a leadership-partnershipownership “theory of change.” Water Alternatives, 9(1), 1–32. alldoc/articles/302-a9-1-1/file
Lapeyre, R., Pirard, R., & Leimona, B. (2015). Payments for environmental services in Indonesia: What if economic signals were lost in translation? Land Use Policy, 46, 283– 291.
Lapola, D. M., Oyama, M. D., Nobre, C. A., & Sampaio, G. (2008). A new world natural vegetation map for global change studies. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, 80(2), 397–408.
Larson, S., Stoeckl, N., Jarvis, D., Addison, J., Prior, S., & Esparon, M. (2019). Using measures of wellbeing for impact evaluation: Proof of concept developed with an Indigenous community undertaking land management programs in northern Australia. Ambio, 48(1), 89–98.
Le Velly, G., & Dutilly, C. (2016). Evaluating payments for environmental services: Methodological challenges. PLOS ONE, 11(2), e0149374.
Low-Décarie, E., Chivers, C., & Granados, M. (2014). Rising complexity and falling explanatory power in ecology. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 12(7), 412–418.
Martin-Ortega, J., Ojea, E., & Roux, C. (2013). Payments for water ecosystem services in Latin America: A literature review and conceptual model. Ecosystem Services, 6, 122–132.
Martin-Ortega, J., Skuras, D., Perni, A., Holen, S., & Psaltopoulos, D. (2014). Chapter 10: The disproportionality principle in the WFD: how to actually apply it? (pp. 214–249). In T. Bournaris, J. Berbel, B. Manos, & D. Viaggi (Eds.), Economics of water management in agriculture. Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação. (2022). Conexão Mata Atlântica.
Morellato, L. P. C., & Haddad, C. F. B. (2000). Introduction: The Brazilian Atlantic Forest 1. Biotropica, 32(4b), 786–792.
Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Econômico. (2018). OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: The Consequences of Inaction. Pascual, U., Muradian, R., Rodríguez, L. C., & Duraiappah, A. (2010). Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: A conceptual approach. Ecological Economics, 69(6), 1237–1244.
Pereira, C. S. S., & Alves Sobrinho, T. (2017). World stage of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) for water conservation. Ambiência, 13(2).
Projeto MapBiomas. (2023). Coleção 7 da Série Anual de Mapas de Uso e Cobertura da Terra do Brasil.
Roberts, D. A., Cuadros, D., Vandormael, A., Gareta, D., Barnabas, R. V, Herbst, K., Tanser, F., & Akullian, A. (2022). Predicting the risk of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) acquisition in rural South Africa using Geospatial Data. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 75(7), 1224–1231.
Rodrigues, P., Sugahara, C. R., Branchi, B. A., & Ferreira, D. H. L. (2021). Teoria da mudança e metodologias de avaliação de projetos sociais nas organizações. Revista de Empreendedorismo, Negócios e Inovação, 6(1), 55–74.
Rosa, M. R. (2016). Comparação e análise de diferentes metodologias de mapeamento da cobertura florestal da mata atlântica. Boletim Paulista de Geografia, 95, 25–34.
Ruggiero, P. G. C., Metzger, J. P., Tambosi, L. R., & Nichols, E. (2019). Payment for ecosystem services programs in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: Effective but not enough. Land Use Policy, 82, 283–291.
Saccol, A. Z., Pedron, C. D., Liberali, G., Macadar, M. A., & Cazella, S. C. (2004). Avaliação do impacto dos sistemas ERP sobre variáveis estratégicas de grandes empresas no Brasil. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 8(1), 9–34.
Santos, E. P., Lima, F. G. S. F., Notaor, C. V. R., Lima, M. T. A., & Bologna, A. C. F. M. B. (2022). Painel de indicadores de mobilidade: Uma aplicação prática da teoria da mudança no grande Recife. 46º Encontro da Associação Nacional de Pós- Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração. ANPAD.
Santos, J. S., Leite, C. C. C., Viana, J. C. C., Santos, A. R., Fernandes, M. M., Abreu, V. de S., Nascimento, T. P., Santos, L. S., Fernandes, M. R. de M., Silva, G. F., & Mendonça, A. R. (2018). Delimitation of ecological corridors in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Ecological Indicators, 88, 414–424.
Sills, E., Pattanayak, S. K., & Ferraro, P. (2006). Abordagens analíticas na avaliação de impactos reais de programas de conservação. Mega Diversidade, 2(1-2).
Souza, C. M., Z. Shimbo, J., Rosa, M. R., Parente, L. L., A. Alencar, A., Rudorff, B. F. T., Hasenack, H., Matsumoto, M., G. Ferreira, L., Souza-Filho, P. W. M., Oliveira, S. W., Rocha, W. F., Fonseca, A. V., Marques, C. B., Diniz, C. G., Costa, D., Monteiro, D., Rosa, E. R., Vélez-Martin, E., … Azevedo, T. (2020). Reconstructing three decades of land use and land cover changes in brazilian biomes with landsat archive and earth engine. Remote Sensing, 12(17), 2735.
Sugahara, C. R., & Rodrigues, P. P. (2019). Avaliação de impacto de negócios sociais e teoria da mudança. Revista Nacional de Gerenciamento de Cidades, 7(46).
Tacconi, L. (2012). Redefining payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics, 73, 29–36.
Tengberg, A., & Valencia, S. (2018). Integrated approaches to natural resources management—Theory and practice. Land Degradation & Development, 29(6), 1845–1857.
Uhl, J. H., & Leyk, S. (2022). A scale-sensitive framework for the spatially explicit accuracy assessment of binary built-up surface layers. Remote Sensing of Environment, 279, 113117.
Wegner, G. I. (2016). Payments for ecosystem services (PES): A flexible, participatory, and integrated approach for improved conservation and equity outcomes. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 18(3), 617–644.
Wiik, E., Jones, J. P. G., Pynegar, E., Bottazzi, P., Asquith, N., Gibbons, J., & Kontoleon, A. (2020). Mechanisms and impacts of an incentive‐based conservation program with evidence from a randomized control trial. Conservation Biology, 34(5), 1076– 1088.
WRI Brasil. (2021). Como funciona o pagamento por serviços ambientais a quem protege e restaura florestas. primeiro ano da Década, no Congresso Nacional desde 2007
Wunder, S. (2007). The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation. Conservation Biology, 21(1), 48–58.
Wunder, S., Börner, J., Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Feder S., & Pagiola, S. (2020). Payments for environmental services: Past performance and pending potentials. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 12(1), 209–234.
Yablonovitch, E., & Deckman, H. W. (2023). Scalable, economical, and stable sequestration of agricultural fixed carbon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(16).