Research ArticleECOLOGY

Revealing pathways from payments for ecosystem services to socioeconomic outcomes

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  21 Mar 2018:
Vol. 4, no. 3, eaao6652
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aao6652
  • Fig. 1 Framework for analyzing the effects of PES programs on socioeconomic outcome through influencing different livelihood activities.

    An arrow represents a linkage through which the variable at the arrow tail affects the variable at the arrowhead. Black arrows are the ones that constitute the specified pathways linking PES programs and socioeconomic outcome. The blue arrow represents the unspecified pathway that links PES programs and socioeconomic outcome. Red arrows represent the linkages through which control variables affect other components in the framework. Different livelihood activities might be related, and the linkages among them may constitute additional pathways linking PES programs and socioeconomic outcome.

  • Fig. 2 Illustration of hypothesized linkages among PES programs, livelihood activities, control variables, and nonpayment income.

    We focused on analyzing the effects of the GTGP and GTBP on nonpayment income (income from sources other than direct payments from these two PES programs) because the direct contribution of payments from GTGP and GTBP to participating households’ income can be directly observed. Arrows in the diagram represent linkages. “+” and “−” refer to hypothetical positive and negative effects of the linkage, respectively. The black arrows represent the ones that constitute the specified pathways that link the GTGP or the GTBP with nonpayment income. The two blue arrows represent the unspecified pathways that link the GTGP and the GTBP with nonpayment household income, respectively. A complete list of variables considered in the Wolong demonstration study is found in table S2.

  • Fig. 3 Visualization of the structural equation model results.

    Arrows with different line types represent linkages whose effects are of different statistical significance levels. “+” or “−” indicates that the effect of the linkage is positive or negative. To keep clarity, the control variables were not presented in this diagram. Full model results are shown in table S4.

  • Table 1 The standardized coefficients of effects transmitted from the GTGP and the GTBP to nonpayment income in 2005 through different livelihood activities and other unspecified processes.

    The number of households included in the analysis is 202.

    Livelihood
    activities/processes
    DescriptionsCoefficients
    GTGPGTBP
    Crop productionCropland devoted for crop production in 2005−0.664***−0.563***
    Tourism participationWhether the household has members who directly participated in tourism activities in 2005: 1. Yes; 0. No0.0580.142
    Labor migrationWhether the household had labor migrants in 2005: 1. Yes; 0. No0.0090.048
    Other unspecified
    processes
    Other livelihood activities that are not observed in this study and/or other dimensions of the observed activities
    (that is, crop production, tourism participation, and labor migration) that are not captured by their proxies above
    −0.006−0.477
    TotalThe sum of all the effects transmitted through all the three livelihood activities and other unspecified processes−0.602*−0.850**

    *P ≤ 0.05.

    **P ≤ 0.01.

    ***P ≤ 0.001.

    †The effect transmitted through unspecified processes is represented by the coefficient of the unspecified pathway.

    Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary material for this article is available at http://advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/4/3/eaao6652/DC1

      section S1. Description of the demonstration site

      section S2. Model validation analysis

      fig. S1. Wolong Nature Reserve in Sichuan Province, southwestern China.

      table S1. General information about the PES programs and related livelihood activities under investigation in Wolong Nature Reserve.

      table S2. Summary statistics of variables used in constructing the structural equation model.

      table S3. Summary of validation results of the structural equation model.

      table S4. Results of the structural equation model.

      table S5. The effects of specified and unspecified pathways by which the GTGP and the GTBP affected nonpayment income.

      References (3740)

    • Supplementary Materials

      This PDF file includes:

      • section S1. Description of the demonstration site
      • section S2. Model validation analysis
      • fig. S1. Wolong Nature Reserve in Sichuan Province, southwestern China.
      • table S1. General information about the PES programs and related livelihood activities under investigation in Wolong Nature Reserve.
      • table S2. Summary statistics of variables used in constructing the structural equation model.
      • table S3. Summary of validation results of the structural equation model.
      • table S4. Results of the structural equation model.
      • table S5. The effects of specified and unspecified pathways by which the GTGP and the GTBP affected nonpayment income.
      • References (37–40)

      Download PDF

      Files in this Data Supplement:

    Stay Connected to Science Advances

    Navigate This Article