SYMP 17-2 - Contradictory distributive principles and land tenure govern benefit-sharing of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) in Chiapas, Mexico

Background/Question/Methods
Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are market-based instruments that provide conditional economic incentives for conservation. Research has shown that when economic incentives are parachuted into rural communities, participation and benefits are collectively negotiated and shared. However, we know little about how benefit-sharing evolves over time in community-based PES. In this paper, we investigate the dynamic relationship between community-based distributive justice principles, local benefit-sharing outcomes, and policy objectives in Mexico’s PES programmes. Drawing on extensive field research in Selva Lacandona (Chiapas), we ask how communities understand and perform benefit-sharing of PES revenues in terms of the distributive principle, recipients of distribution, and benefit mode, and to what extent such sharing practices align with or contradict programme goals.



Results/Conclusions
Our analysis reveals patterns of both continuity and change in how communities share PES benefits, which reflect a suite of contradictory justice principles, including desert, need, and equality. The studied communities distribute PES benefits by providing differentiated compensation to diverse groups of landholders via private cash payments, whilst also attending non-landed community members through public infrastructure investments. We show that benefit-sharing is strongly influenced by pre-existing land tenure features and associated norms, which in the study area include three different types of individual and common-property. Yet, we also show that communities continuously adjust benefit-sharing arrangements to navigate distributional challenges emerging from programme engagement. Overall, we provide novel insights on the evolution, diversity, and complexity of distributive justice in community-based PES and we advocate for a context-sensitive, nuanced, and dynamic account of justice in market-based conservation.