Estudios de caso sobre valores sociales compartidos asociados al manejo de bosques
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21829/myb.2025.312673Palabras clave:
juegos de política pública, metodologías participativas, negociación simulada, pago por servicios ambientales, valores sociales y culturales, zoonosisResumen
El manejo planificado del bosque es una estrategia esencial para alcanzar objetivos de conservación y restauración de ecosistemas. Dentro de este, los programas de pago por servicios ambientales (PSA) se han consolidado como una política pública predominante para promover la conservación forestal y, más recientemente, para el control de vectores zoonóticos. Sin embargo, los PSA suelen fundamentar su diseño en metodologías económicas que priorizan el valor de mercado de los ecosistemas, excluyendo valores no económicos (sociales y culturales) que las comunidades atribuyen a su entorno natural. Este artículo presenta dos casos de estudio en los que se implementaron herramientas de investigación deliberativa para identificar valores no económicos asociados a los ecosistemas. En Veracruz, México, se diseñó un programa hipotético de PSA, mientras que, en Maine, Estados Unidos, se exploraron decisiones sobre el manejo de vectores de enfermedades zoonóticas, incluyendo un programa de PSA. Ambos casos revelaron la importancia de considerar valores no económicos dentro del diseño de PSA y otras estrategias de manejo de bosque, como por ejemplo la protección ambiental, la responsabilidad compartida, la confianza entre actores sociales e institucionales, y el valor intrínseco del bosque y los recursos naturales. En este trabajo se discute cómo las metodologías deliberativas pueden fomentar la identificación de estrategias de manejo forestal alineadas con los valores locales. Asimismo, se resalta la necesidad de incluir la participación de actores locales en el diseño e implementación de PSA para abordar problemáticas ambientales y de salud pública.
Descargas
Citas
Alejandro, A., Maertens, L., Cheli, Z., Fragnière, A., & Sarrasin, O. (2024). Designing role-play simulations for climate change decision-making: A step-by-step approach to facilitate cooperation between science and policy. Environmental Science and Policy, 152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.103650 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.103650
Alix-Garcia, J., De Janvry, A., Sadoulet, E., & Torres, J. M. (2009). Lessons learned from Mexico’s payment for environmental services program. En L. Lipper, T. Sakuyama, R. Stringer, & D. Zilberman (Eds.), Payment for environmental services in agricultural landscapes (pp. 163–188). Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-72971-8_8
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., & Adrian Bruijnzeel, L. (2017). 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, 22(2), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09144-220225 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09144-220225
Baird, J., Plummer, R., Haug, C., & Huitema, D. (2014). Learning effects of interactive decision-making processes for climate change adaptation. Global Environmental Change, 27(1), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.019
Bétrisey, F., Bastiaensen, J., & Mager, C. (2018). Payments for ecosystem services and social justice: Using recognition theories to assess the Bolivian Acuerdos Recíprocos por el Agua. Geoforum, 92, 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.04.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.04.001
Binot, A., Duboz, R., Promburom, P., Phimpraphai, W., Cappelle, J., Lajaunie, C., Goutard, F. L., Pinyopummintr, T., Figuié, M., & Roger, F. L. (2015). A framework to promote collective action within the One Health community of practice: Using participatory modelling to enable interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral and multi-level integration. One Health, 1, 44–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2015.09.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2015.09.001
Brady, R. M., Lemieux, C. J., & Doherty, S. T. (2022). Linking visitor perceptions and behaviours related to ticks and lyme disease to risk management strategies in a protected areas context. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 39(October 2021), 100515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2022.100515 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2022.100515
Bremer, L. L., Nelson, S., Jackson, S., Izquierdo-Tort, S., Lansing, D., Shapiro-Garza, E., Echavarría, M., Upton, C., Asquith, N., Isyaku, U., Asiyanbi, A., He, J., & Pascual, U. (2023). Embedding local values in Payments for Ecosystem Services for transformative change. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 64, 101354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101354 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101354
Carter Berry, Z., Jones, K. W., Gomez Aguilar, L. R., Congalton, R. G., Holwerda, F., Kolka, R., Looker, N., Lopez Ramirez, S. M., Manson, R., Mayer, A., Muñoz-Villers, L., Ortiz Colin, P., Romero-Uribe, H., Saenz, L., Von Thaden, J. J., Vizcaíno Bravo, M. Q., Williams-Linera, G., & Asbjornsen, H. (2020). Evaluating ecosystem service trade-offs along a land-use intensification gradient in central Veracruz, Mexico. Ecosystem Services, 45, 101181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101181 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101181
Castelblanco-Martínez, D. N., Moreno-Arias, R. A., Velasco, J. A., Moreno-Bernal, J. W., Restrepo, S., Noguera-Urbano, E. A., Baptiste, M. P., García-Loaiza, L. M., & Jiménez, G. (2021). A hippo in the room: Predicting the persistence and dispersion of an invasive mega-vertebrate in Colombia, South America. Biological Conservation, 253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108923 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108923
Centro para el Control y Prevención de Enfermedades [CDC] (2022). Lyme Disease. https://www.cdc.gov/lyme/index.html
Connors, J. P., & Short Gianotti, A. (2021). Becoming killable: White-tailed deer management and the production of overabundance in the Blue Hills. Urban Geography, 44(10), 2121-2143. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2021.1902685 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2021.1902685
Conte, C. E., Leahy, J. E., & Gardner, A. M. (2021). Active forest management reduces blacklegged tick and tick-borne pathogen exposure risk. EcoHealth, 18(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-021-01531-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-021-01531-1
Cooper, N., Brady, E., Steen, H., & Bryce, R. (2016). Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services.’ Ecosystem Services, 21, 218–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.014
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design (Fourth). SAGE publications.
Dandy, N., Ballantyne, S., Moseley, D., Gill, R., Quine, C., & van der Wal, R. (2012). Exploring beliefs behind support for and opposition to wildlife management methods: A qualitative study. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 58(4), 695–706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-012-0619-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-012-0619-1
Dawson, N., Coolsaet, B., & Martin, A. (2018). Justice and equity: Emerging research and policy approaches to address ecosystem service trade-offs. En K. Schreckenberg, G. Mace, & M. Poudyal (Eds.), Ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: Trade-offs and governance (pp. 22–38). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429507090 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429507090
Decker, D. J., Evensen, D. T. N., Siemer, W. F., Leong, K. M., Riley, S. J., Wild, M. A., Castle, K. T., & Higgins, C. L. (2010). Understanding risk perceptions to enhance communication about human-wildlife interactions and the impacts of zoonotic disease. ILAR Journal, 51(3), 255–261. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.51.3.255 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.51.3.255
Doddema, M. (2019). Employing a role playing game and debriefing approach to validate practices and identify variations in response dynamics. MethodsX, 6, 143–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2018.12.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2018.12.008
Edwards, D. M., Collins, T. M., & Goto, R. (2016). An arts-led dialogue to elicit shared, plural and cultural values of ecosystems. Ecosystem Services, 21, 319–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.09.018 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.09.018
Eisen, L., & Stafford, K. C. (2021). Barriers to effective tick management and tick-bite prevention in the United States (Acari: Ixodidae). Journal of Medical Entomology, 58(4), 1588–1600. https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjaa079 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjaa079
Elias, S. P., Stone, B. B., Rand, P. W., Lubelczyk, C. B., & Smith, R. P. (2021). History of deer herd reduction for tick control on Maine’s offshore Islands. Maine Policy Review Volume, 30(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.53558/OYWU2247 DOI: https://doi.org/10.53558/OYWU2247
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226206868.001.0001
Engel, S., Pagiola, S., & Wunder, S. (2008). Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecological Economics, 65(4), 663–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.03.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.03.011
Evans, R. (2011). Case study method in sustainability research. En A. Franklin, & P. Blyton (Eds.), Researching sustainability: A guide to social science methods, practice and engagement (pp. 54–70).
Fanning, R. M., & Gaba, D. M. (2007). The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. En Simulation in Healthcare, 2(2), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539
Feliciano, D., Bouriaud, L., Brahic, E., Deuffic, P., Dobsinska, Z., Jarsky, V., Lawrence, A., Nybakk, E., Quiroga, S., Suarez, C., & Ficko, A. (2017). Understanding private forest owners’ conceptualisation of forest management: Evidence from a survey in seven European countries. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 162–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.06.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.06.016
Fletcher, R., & Büscher, B. (2017). The PES conceit: Revisiting the relationship between payments for environmental services and neoliberal conservation. Ecological Economics, 132, 224–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.11.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.11.002
Fletcher, R., & Büscher, B. (2019). Neoliberalism in denial in actor-oriented PES research? A rejoinder to van Hecken et al. (2018) and a Call for Justice. Ecological Economics, 156, 420–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.007
Funtowicz, S., & Ravetz, J. (2018). Post-normal science. En N. Castree, M. Hulme, & J. D. Proctor (Eds.), Companion to Environmental Studies. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315640051-89
Goodwin, J., & Horowitz, R. (2002). Introduction: The methodological strengths and dilemmas of qualitative sociology. Qualitative Sociology, 25(1), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014300123105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014300123105
Grima, N., Singh, S. J., Smetschka, B., & Ringhofer, L. (2016). Payment for ecosystem services (PES) in Latin America: Analysing the performance of 40 case studies. Ecosystem Services, 17, 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.010
Haug, C., Huitema, D., & Wenzler, I. (2011). Learning through games? Evaluating the learning effect of a policy exercise on European climate policy. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 78(6), 968–981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.12.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.12.001
Hayes, T., Grillos, T., Bremer, L. L., Murtinho, F., & Shapiro-Garza, E. (2019). Collective PES: More than the sum of individual incentives. Environmental Science and Policy, 102(September), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.09.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.09.010
He, J. (2020). Situated payments for ecosystem services: Local agencies in the Implementation of the Sloping Land Conversion Programme in Southwest China. Development and Change, 51(1), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12539 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12539
Hirsch, C. (2017). Makers and shapers of environmental policy making: Power and participation in forest legislation in Bolivia. Journal of Rural Studies, 50, 148–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.11.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.11.013
Hopkins, D. (2010). The emancipatory limits of participation in planning: Equity and power in deliberative plan-making in Perth, Western Australia. Town Planning Review, 81(1), 55–81. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2009.24 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2009.24
Ihemezie, E. J., Nawrath, M., Strauß, L., Stringer, L. C., & Dallimer, M. (2021). The influence of human values on attitudes and behaviours towards forest conservation. Journal of Environmental Management, 292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112857 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112857
Irvine, K. N., O’Brien, L., Ravenscroft, N., Cooper, N., Everard, M., Fazey, I., Reed, M. S., & Kenter, J. O. (2016). Ecosystem services and the idea of shared values. Ecosystem Services, 21, 184–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.001
Izquierdo-Tort, S., Corbera, E., Barceinas Cruz, A., Naime, J., Angélica Vázquez-Cisneros, P., Carabias Lillo, J., Castro-Tovar, E., Ortiz Rosas, F., Rubio, N., Torres Knoop, L., & Dupras, J. (2021). Local responses to design changes in payments for ecosystem services in Chiapas, Mexico. Ecosystem Services, 50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101305 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101305
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014
Jones, K., Avila-Foucat, S., Pischke, E. C., Salcone, J., Torrez, D., Selfa, T., & Halvorsen, K. E. (2019). Exploring the connections between participation in and benefits from payments for hydrological services programs in Veracruz State, Mexico. Ecosystem Services, 35, 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.11.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.11.004
Jones, K., Mayer, A., Von Thaden, J., Berry, Z. C., López-Ramírez, S., Salcone, J., Manson, R. H., & Asbjornsen, H. (2020). Measuring the net benefits of payments for hydrological services programs in Mexico. Ecological Economics, 175, 106666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106666 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106666
Jones, K., Powlen, K., Roberts, R., & Shinbrot, X. (2020). Participation in payments for ecosystem services programs in the Global South: A systematic review. Ecosystem Services, 45, 101159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101159 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101159
Kenter, J. O. (2016). Integrating deliberative monetary valuation, systems modelling and participatory mapping to assess shared values of ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 21, 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.06.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.06.010
Kenter, J. O., O’Brien, L., Hockley, N., Ravenscroft, N., Fazey, I., Irvine, K. N., Reed, M. S., Christie, M., Brady, E., Bryce, R., Church, A., Cooper, N., Davies, A., Evely, A., Everard, M., Fish, R., Fisher, J. A., Jobstvogt, N., Molloy, C., …, & Williams, S. (2015). What are shared and social values of ecosystems? Ecological Economics, 111, 86–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.01.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.01.006
Leimona, B., Bingham, L. R., Jarungrattanapong, R., & van Noordwijk, M. (2023). Auctions in payments for ecosystem services and the plural values of nature. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 64, 101334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101334 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101334
Lliso, B., Pascual, U., Engel, S., & Mariel, P. (2020). Payments for ecosystem services or collective stewardship of mother earth? Applying deliberative valuation in an indigenous community in Colombia. Ecological Economics, 169, 106499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106499 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106499
López-Ramírez, S. M., Sáenz, L., Mayer, A., Muñoz-Villers, L. E., Asbjornsen, H., Berry, Z. C., Looker, N., Manson, R., & Gómez-Aguilar, L. R. (2020). Land use change effects on catchment streamflow response in a humid tropical montane cloud forest region, central Veracruz, Mexico. Hydrological Processes, 34(16), 3555–3570. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13800 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13800
Lubelczyk, C. B., Elias, S. P., Rand, P. W., Holman, M. S., Lacombe, E. H., & Smith, R. P. (2004). Habitat associations of Ixodes scapularis (Acari: Ixodidae) in Maine. Environmental Entomology, 33(4), 900–906. https://doi.org/10.1603/0046-225X-33.4.900 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1603/0046-225X-33.4.900
Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention [Maine CDC] (2022). Lyme and other tickborne illnesses annual report (July). Department of Health and Human Services.
Manfredo, M. J. (2008). Who Cares About Wildlife?. Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77040-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77040-6
Mayer, A., Jones, K., Hunt, D., Manson, R., Carter Berry, Z., Asbjornsen, H., Wright, T. M., Salcone, J., Lopez Ramirez, S., Ávila-Foucat, S., & von Thaden Ugalde, J. (2022). Assessing ecosystem service outcomes from payments for hydrological services programs in Veracruz, Mexico: Future deforestation threats and spatial targeting. Ecosystem Services, 53, 101401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101401 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101401
McAfee, K. (2012). Nature in the market-world: Ecosystem services and inequality. Development, 55(1), 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2011.105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/dev.2011.105
McAfee, K. (2016). Green economy and carbon markets for conservation and development: a critical view. International Enviornmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 16(3), 333–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-015-9295-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-015-9295-4
McElwee, P., Huber, B., & Nguyễn, T. H. V. (2020). Hybrid outcomes of payments for ecosystem services policies in Vietnam: Between theory and practice. Development and Change, 51(1), 253–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12548 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12548
Muñoz-Piña, C., Guevara, A., Manuel, J., & Braña, J. (2008). Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico’s forests: Analysis , negotiations and results. Ecological Economics, 65, 725–736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.07.031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.07.031
Muñoz-Piña, C., Rivera, M., Cisneros, A., & García, H. (2011). Retos de la focalización del Programa de Pago por los Servicios Ambientales en México. Revista Española de Estudios Agrosociales y Pesqueros, 228(11), 87–113.
Nava-López, M., Selfa, T. L., Cordoba, D., Pischke, E. C., Torrez, D., Ávila-Foucat, S., Halvorsen, K. E., & Maganda, C. (2018). Decentralizing payments for hydrological services programs in Veracruz, Mexico: Challenges and implications for long-term sustainability. Society & Natural Resources, 31(12), 1389–1399. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2018.1463420 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2018.1463420
Nelson, S. H., Bremer, L. L., Meza Prado, K., & Brauman, K. A. (2020). The political life of natural infrastructure: water funds and alternative histories of payments for ecosystem services in Valle del Cauca, Colombia. Development and Change, 51(1), 26–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12544 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12544
Osborne, T., & Shapiro-Garza, E. (2018). Embedding carbon markets: complicating commodification of ecosystem services in Mexico’s forests. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 108(1), 88–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2017.1343657 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2017.1343657
Ostfeld, R. S. (2011). Lyme Disease: The ecology of a complex system. Oxford University Press.
Ostfeld, R. S., Cepeda, O. M., Hazler, K. R., & Miller, M. C. (1995). Ecology of Lyme disease: Habitat associations of ticks (Ixodes scapularis) in a rural landscape. Ecological Applications, 5(2), 353–361. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1942027
Ozawa, C. P., & Susskind, L. (1985). Mediating science-intensive policy disputes. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 5(1), 23–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.4050050102
Peterson, C. L., & Vaske, J. J. (2017). Colorado residents’ familiarity, aesthetic evaluations, and approval of forest management practices. Journal of Forestry, 115(1), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.5849/jof.2016-029 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5849/jof.2016-029
Ranger, S., Kenter, J. O., Bryce, R., Cumming, G., Dapling, T., Lawes, E., & Richardson, P. B. (2016). Forming shared values in conservation management: An interpretive-deliberative-democratic approach to including community voices. Ecosystem Services, 21, 344–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.09.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.09.016
Rodriguez, K., & Ávila-Foucat, S. (2013). Instrumentos económicos voluntarios para la conservación: una mirada a su surgimiento y evolución en México. Sociedad y Economía, 25, 75–106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25100/sye.v0i25.3965
Rodríguez-Piñeros, S., Sabogal-Aguilar, D. M., & Villarraga-Flórez, L. F. (2022). Assessing economic and shared social values of forest conservation to improve water availability: A case study of the protected forest reserve of El Quinini, Colombia. Small-Scale Forestry, 21(3), 437–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-022-09505-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-022-09505-z
Rumore, D., Schenk, T., & Susskind, L. (2016). Role-play simulations for climate change adaptation education and engagement. Nature Climate Change, 6(8), 745–750. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3084 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3084
Salzman, J., Bennett, G., Carroll, N., Goldstein, A., & Jenkins, M. (2018). The global status and trends of Payments for Ecosystem Services. Nature Sustainability, 1(3), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0033-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0033-0
Santangeli, A., Arroyo, B., Dicks, L. V, Herzon, I., Kukkala, A. S., Sutherland, W. J., & Moilanen, A. (2016). Voluntary non-monetary approaches for implementing conservation. Biological Conservation, 197, 209–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.03.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.03.013
Selfa, T., & Endter-Wada, J. (2008). The politics of community-based conservation in natural resource management: A focus for international comparative analysis. Environment and Planning A, 40(4), 948–965. https://doi.org/10.1068/a39160 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/a39160
Selfa, T., Urcuqui-Bustamante, A. M., Cordoba, D., Avila-foucat, V. S., Pischke, E. C., Jones, K. W., Nava-lopez, M. Z., & Torrez, D. M. (2022). The role of situated knowledge and values in reshaping payment for hydrological services programs in Veracruz, Mexico: An actor-oriented approach. Journal of Rural Studies, 95, 268–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.09.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.09.012
Setyowati, A. B. (2020). Making territory and negotiating citizenship in a climate mitigation initiative in Indonesia. Development and Change, 51(1), 144–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12541 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12541
Shapiro-Garza, E. (2020). An alternative theorization of payments for ecosystem services from Mexico: Origins and influence. Development and Change, 51(1), 196–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12552 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12552
Shapiro-Garza, E., McElwee, P., Van Hecken, G., Corbera, E., Hecken, G. Van, & Corbera, E. (2020). Beyond Market Logics: Payments for ecosystem services as alternative development practices in the Global South. Development and Change, 51(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12546 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12546
Sims, K. R. E., Alix-Garcia, J. M., Shapiro-Garza, E., Fine, L. R., Radeloff, V. C., Aronson, G., Castillo, S., Ramirez-Reyes, C., & Nez-Pagans, P. Y. A. (2014). Improving environmental and social targeting through adaptive management in Mexico’s Payments for Hydrological Services Program. Conservation Biology, 28(5), 1151–1159. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12318 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12318
Stafford, K. C., Williams, S. C., & Molaei, G. (2017). Integrated pest management in controlling ticks and tick-associated diseases. Journal of Integrated Pest Management, 8(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmx018 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmx018
Stinchcomb, T. R., Ma, Z., & Nyssa, Z. (2022). Complex human-deer interactions challenge conventional management approaches: the need to consider power, trust, and emotion. Ecology and Society, 27(1). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12899-270113 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12899-270113
Stokes, L. C., & Selin, N. E. (2016). The mercury game: evaluating a negotiation simulation that teaches students about science-policy interactions. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 6(3), 597–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-014-0183-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-014-0183-y
Susskind, L. (2014). Transforming high-stakes policy negotiations: understanding the impact of role-play simulations. En Teaching Negotiation: Understanding The Impact Of Role-Play Simulations (pp. 11–15). Harvard Law School. https://www.pon.harvard.edu/free-reports/get-report/?topic=59733
Urcuqui-Bustamante, A. M., Leahy, J. E., Sponarski, C., & Gardner, A. M. (2024). Collaborative modeling of the Tick-Borne Disease Social-Ecological System: A conceptual framework. EcoHealth, 453–467. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-023-01669-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-023-01669-0
Urcuqui-Bustamante, A. M., Leahy, J. E., Sponarski, C., & Gardner, A. M. (2025a). Don’t Just Tick the Box: Encouraging Dialogue on Complex Animal and Human Health Issues - Role Play Simulation. University of Illinois Chicago. Base de datos. https://doi.org/10.25417/uic.29090954.v1
Urcuqui-Bustamante, A. M., Leahy, J. E., Sponarski, C., & Gardner, A. M. (2025b). Don’t Just Tick the Box: Encouraging Dialogue on Complex Animal and Human Health Issues - Workshop Survey. University of Illinois Chicago. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.25417/uic.29091077.v1
Urcuqui-Bustamante, A. M., McGinnis, I., McCarty, T., Ashcraft, C. M., Atallah, S. S., & Selfa, T. L. (2021). The Crystal River Payment for Hydrological Services Role-Play Negotiation Workshop Survey Instruments. Faculty Publications. 1237. https://scholars.unh.edu/faculty_pubs/1237
Urcuqui-Bustamante, A. M., Perry, K. C., Leahy, J., Gardner, A., & Sponarski, C. (2024). Factors influencing private woodland owners’ land management decisions on Lyme disease mitigation in Maine. Trees, Forests and People, 17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2024.100603 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2024.100603
Urcuqui-Bustamante, A. M., Selfa, T., Ashcraft, C. M., Asbjornsen, H., Jones, K. W., Manson, R. H., & Mayer, A. (2023). Using science-based role-play simulations to inform payment for hydrological services program design in Mexico. Environmental Science and Policy, 139, 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.10.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.10.016
Urcuqui-Bustamante, A. M., Selfa, T. L., Hirsch, P., & Ashcraft, C. M. (2021). Uncovering stakeholder participation in payment for hydrological services (PHS) program decision making in Mexico and Colombia. Sustainability, 13(15), 862. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158562 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158562
Urcuqui-Bustamante, A. M., Selfa, T. L., Jones, K. W., Ashcraft, C. M., Manson, R. H., & Asbjornsen, H. (2022). Learning impacts of policy games: investigating role-play simulations (RPS) for stakeholder engagement in payment for hydrological services program in Veracruz, Mexico. Socio-Ecological Practice Research, 4(4), 305–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-022-00131-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-022-00131-9
Van Hecken, G., Kolinjivadi, V., Windey, C., McElwee, P., Shapiro-Garza, E., Huybrechs, F., & Bastiaensen, J. (2018). Silencing agency in payments for ecosystem services (PES) by essentializing a neoliberal ‘monster’ into being: A response to Fletcher & Büscher’s ‘PES Conceit.’ Ecological Economics, 144, 314–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.10.023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.10.023
Villamor, G. B., Palomo, I., Santiago, C. A. L., Oteros-Rozas, E., & Hill, J. (2014). Assessing stakeholders’ perceptions and values towards social-ecological systems using participatory methods. Ecological Processes, 3(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-014-0022-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-014-0022-9
Vizcaíno-Bravo, Q., Williams-Linera, G., & Asbjornsen, H. (2020). Biodiversity and carbon storage are correlated along a land use intensity gradient in a tropical montane forest watershed, Mexico. Basic and Applied Ecology, 44, 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2019.12.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2019.12.004
Von Thaden, J., Manson, R. H., Congalton, R. G., López-Barrera, F., & Jones, K. W. (2021). Evaluating the environmental effectiveness of payments for hydrological services in Veracruz, México: A landscape approach. Land Use Policy, 100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105055 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105055
Von Thaden, J., Manson, R. H., Congalton, R. G., López-Barrera, F., & Salcone, J. (2019). A regional evaluation of the effectiveness of Mexico’s payments for hydrological services. Regional Environmental Change, 19(6), 1751–1764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-019-01518-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-019-01518-3
Wells, G., Ryan, C., Fisher, J., & Corbera, E. (2020). In defence of simplified PES designs. Nature Sustainability, 3(6), 426–427. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0544-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0544-3
Wunder, S. (2015). Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics, 117, 234–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.08.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.08.016
Wunder, S., Brouwer, R., Engel, S., Ezzine-de-Blas, D., Muradian, R., Pascual, U., & Pinto, R. (2020). Reply to: In defence of simplified PES designs. Nature Sustainability, 3(6), 428–429. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0545-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0545-2
Wunder, S., Brouwer, R., Engel, S., Muradian, R., Pascual, U., & Pinto, R. (2018). From principles to practice in paying for nature’s services. Nature Sustainability, 1, 145–150. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0036-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0036-x
Youatt, R. (2015). Counting species: Biodiversity in global environmental politics (1a ed.). University of Minnesota Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5749/minnesota/9780816694112.003.0001
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
-
Resumen205
-
PDF80
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Madera y Bosques
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
Madera y Bosques por Instituto de Ecología, A.C. se distribuye bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional.
