i An update to this article is included at the end

Journal of Arid Environments 188 (2021) 104446

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Arid Environments

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jaridenv

Keeping people in the loop: Socioeconomic valuation of dry forest

ecosystem services in the Colombian Caribbean region
David Pérez-Sánchez a, Marelis Montes a, César Cardona-Almeida a, Luis Alberto Vargas-Marín b,
Tatiana Enríquez-Acevedo c, Andres Suarez a, *
a
Department of Civil and Environmental, Universidad De La Costa, Cl. 58#55-66, Barranquilla, Atlántico, 080002, Colombia
b
Research Center in Environment and Development (CIMAD), Universidad de Manizales, Cra. 9a #19-03, Manizales, Caldas, 170003, Colombia
c
Corporación Autónoma Regional de Caldas -CORPOCALDAS -GIRNMAC, Cl. 21 No. 23-22 Ed. Atlas, Manizales, Caldas, 170006, Colombia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Tropical dry forests (TDF) are one of the most endangered ecosystems in the world, especially in Colombia. One
Existence value way to promote TDF conservation is by upholding the valuation of the ecosystem services they provide.
Instrumental values Therefore, in order to deepen the understanding regarding the conservation of TDF from the perspective of local
Payment for ecosystem services
communities, we sampled two populations for our analysis: the first one consisted of people living inside a TDF
Protected area
protected area, while the second one was made up of urban inhabitants living near the TDF. Through a
Willingness to participate
contingent valuation study, we found that 71% of urban inhabitants were willing to pay 12,119 USD/year to the
protected area’s inhabitants to implement conservation strategies and also that 100% of the protected area’s
dwellers were willing to participate of the strategy. Hence, we proposed a payment for ecosystem services
scheme. Lastly, we observed that inhabitants’ high participation rates for the proposed strategy related to the
high importance given to TDF-provided ecosystem services.

1. Introduction 000 Ha of TDF in Colombia, just 46.4% corresponds to the natural forest
(García et al., 2014).
Tropical dry forest (TDF) conservation is a high priority due to their Anthropic activities such as livestock, agriculture, tourism, and even
many valuable species, and because of their rapid rate of degradation hydroelectrical and mining projects are the main drivers of TDF degra­
(Fajardo et al., 2013). It is well known that the TDF is among the most dation and have led to aridization, desertification and loss of fauna and
threatened tropical ecosystems worldwide (MacFarlane et al., 2015), flora (Montes, 2014; Vargas, 2014;Ulloa-Delgado., 2016). Despite this
because of its high deforestation rates, and its limited distribution vulnerability of the Colombian TDF, only about 5% of more than 700,
(Espírito-Santo et al., 2009). The reason for this degradation is because 000 Ha are under a national protection scheme (García et al., 2014).
humans prefer TDFs for use in their activities given their suitable climate Therefore, anthropic dynamics pose several challenges related to TDF
for farming, the slow growth of vegetation, and the relatively small conservation in Colombia.
stature and open structure of the forest (Schmerbeck and Fiener, 2015). The representativeness of today’s TDF in the Colombian National
According to Miles et al. (2006), it is estimated that 1,048,700 km2 of Protected Areas System is only 5%, with the contribution of the pro­
TDF remains and more than half of the forest area (54.2%) is mainly in tected areas of the National order being about, 2.2% and, 2.8% for local
South America. Tropical dry forest in South America is in Venezuela, and civil social reserves respectively (García et al., 2014). However,
Colombia, Ecuador, Perú, Bolivia, and Brazil, with the highest contin­ given the dimension of the Colombian National Parks System, the
uous length in the last two countries (Portillo-Quintero and contribution of the dry forest is only 0.12%, while the contribution for
Sánchez-Azofeifa, 2010). In the Colombian context, TDF degradation is regional-type protected areas is 0.88%; these data attest that the TDF is
remarkable. From the original 9 million hectares, currently about 8% neglected in the National System.
remain (García et al., 2014: pp. 243); it is noteworthy that about 717, Forests are ecosystems that provide society with multiple functions

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: dperez35@ex.cuc.edu.co (D. Pérez-Sánchez), marelismontes1@hotmail.com (M. Montes), ccardona5@cuc.edu.co (C. Cardona-Almeida),
lvargas@umanizales.edu.co (L.A. Vargas-Marín), tatianaenriquez@corpocaldas.gov.co (T. Enríquez-Acevedo), asuarez24@cuc.edu.co (A. Suarez).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2021.104446
Received 31 August 2020; Received in revised form 30 November 2020; Accepted 15 January 2021
Available online 3 February 2021
0140-1963/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
D. Pérez-Sánchez et al. Journal of Arid Environments 188 (2021) 104446

and benefits such as grazing, timber, and non-timber products, land 2. Methods
stabilization, carbon sequestration, shed and shelter, pollination and
outdoor recreation (Ricketts et al., 2004; Metzger et al., 2006; Al-Assaf, 2.1. Study area
2015). However, large-scale commercial agriculture, local subsistence
agriculture, infrastructure development, and mining cause deforestation The Caribbean region has the best remanence of TDF, since in this
in the tropics and subtropics. Besides, context-dependent land man­ region 55% of the total current TDF corresponds to natural forest. The
agement practices and pressures have led to forest loss (Zimbres et al., highest TDF values are in the departments of Atlántico (5.7%), César
2018). (4.9%) and Bolívar (4.1%). The study area is in the municipality of
The economic dimension in the valuation of ecosystem services is a Usiacurí in the department of Atlántico, located in the Caribbean region.
means to achieve conservation objectives but not as an end in itself The territory of the municipality1 is slightly broken with elevations that
(Spangenberg and Setelle, 2010), because limiting the valuation of do not exceed, 250 m above sea level, and its lands are included within
ecosystem services to monetary terms could generate insufficient ap­ the warm thermal flat. The municipality has a total extension of 103
proaches to the complexity of ecosystem services analysis since the km2, of which the extension of the urban area is 0.3 km2, and the
economic benefits are not the ultimate purpose of the valuation (Liu extension of the rural area is 102.7 km2. The altitude of the urban area
et al., 2010). (meters above sea level) is 95 m, and the average yearly temperature of
Assigning monetary values to ecosystem services can be useful pro­ the municipality is, 27.5 ◦ C.
vided that they are not used as the sole decision-making criterion According to the historical and economic development of the mu­
(Gómez-Baggethun and Ruiz-Pérez, 2011). Therefore the most impor­ nicipality, its main tradition are the handicrafts made from the palm of
tant use of economic valuation is to support decision making, provide Iraca (Carludovica palmata), which have been a tradition for generations.
technical support, and information (Laurans et al., 2013) that allows the The artisan production has given the artisans opportunities to sell their
construction of economic instruments that complement management products. Other economic activities at Usiacurí correspond to agricul­
processes and ecosystem services management. Thus, in order to obtain ture (i.e., corn, yucca, millet, sesame, melon, fruit trees, among others)
the economic valuation of ES, TEEB (2010) establishes a staggered and cattle raising.
approach to carry out the valuation process: (1) recognizing the value (i. At Usiacurí, there is a so-called Integrated Management District of
e., identifying why an ecosystem and its services are valuable); (2) Natural Resources2 area from Luriza (IMD-L). Fig. 1 shows the study
demonstrating the value (i.e. determining by valuation methods the area. IMD-L was created in, 2011 as a protected area, and several ac­
value of ecosystems and their services) and (3) capture the value (i.e. tivities have been carried out to preserve the TDF (CRA, 2015). IMD-L is
introducing mechanisms to incorporate the values). The aforementioned an 837.17 Ha TDF reserve, divided into four management areas:
approach supports the generation of ecosystem services economic Restoration Area (183.51 Ha), Preservation Area (475.94 Ha), Sustain­
valuation processes while involving additional dimensions to the able Use Area (176.11 Ha) and Public Use Area (1.61 Ha) (CRA, 2011).
monetization thereof. Recognizing value integrates the social dynamics The primary uses at IMD-L are conservation, protection, and recu­
of the ecosystem’s conception, which involves existence values and peration of ecosystems and water resources, whereas the allowed
intrinsic interdependence with cultural processes; demonstrating the conditioned uses are environmental education, research, ecotourism,
value supports these processes and harnessing it allows to generate and recovery of degraded areas. On the other hand, forbidden uses are
sustainable management processes for ecosystem services. mining, building, and other activities against the reserve’s conservation
In this sense, the Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) scheme has objectives. However, it is noteworthy that people were living within the
been widely used, and particularly several authors have applied the IMD-L before it was declared a protected area (just on the Restoration
willingness to pay approach to match the social interests in the context Area and in Sustainable Use Area there are reports of about, 20 owners),
of the payments for forest ecosystems conservation and economic and the several restrictions imposed to land uses by the IMD-L has led to
valuation (Obeng and Aguilar, 2018; Sgroi et al., 2016; Górriz-Mifsud social problems such as loss of productive capacity and underuse of the
et al., 2016; Bernués et al., 2014). On the other hand, some other authors land.
have identified the landowner’s willingness to participate in the context In order to identify the interaction between the populations living in
of forests PES (Mäntymaa et al., 2018; Ross, 2016; Bartczak et al., 2015), the area, we analyzed the socio-ecological characteristics of the IMD-L.
where they analyze the attitudes and factors influencing participation. This approach led us to understand the complex relations between social
However, little attention has been paid to matching both the willingness and ecological systems in the study area (Fig. 2). The socio-ecological
to pay and the willingness to participate tools in a PES scheme for forest system in the IMD-L was analyzed by considering four aspects: (1)
conservation. So, as presented above, these researches did not make identifying the ecological characteristics of the TDF in the protected
available an integrated analysis for TDF conservation from the area. Through secondary information, we reviewed some climatological
perspective of community involvement considering the TDF protected variables and some biodiversity data to highlight the characteristic of
area’s in-situ and their ex-situ inhabitants. the ecosystem in the IMD-L. Thereafter, (2) we identified the social ac­
Therefore, we provide insights into the willingness to pay for and tors in the district, and (3) characterized the actors’ positive or negative
participate in TDF conservation in order to propose a closed cycle in the role (actions and interventions) in IMD-L (local inhabitants - both in the
context of PES in a protected area. We also analyze the forest’s non-use district and the municipality- and local institutional and regional ac­
‘existence values’ in order to promote the TDF conservation (by urban tors). Finally, (4) we identified the ecosystem services provided by the
inhabitants). We have involved the concrete participation of the in­ IMD-L.
habitants who live inside the forest (rural inhabitants) in the TDF con­
servation strategy as well, both to improve their socioeconomic
characteristics and to conserve the TDF’s ecological structure to pro­
mote several ecosystem services for the future. Therefore, we aim to
highlight the importance of community participation in the manage­ 1
Information provided by Usiacurí’s web page: http://www.usiacuri-atlanti
ment of forests from a protected area in Colombia. To that end, the
co.gov.co.
following specific objectives are proposed: (1) to identify inhabitants’ 2
The IMD is a category of conservation that, due to environmental or so­
socioeconomic characteristics; (2) to identify the willingness to pay cioeconomic factors, is delimited within the criteria of sustainable develop­
(people outside the forest) for maintaining TDFs and (3) to design a ment; it is ordered, planned and regulated in the use and management of the
payment-for-ecosystem-services scheme to integrate the local popula­ renewable natural resources and the economic activities that are developed
tion (living within the forest) into TDF conservation. there.

2
D. Pérez-Sánchez et al. Journal of Arid Environments 188 (2021) 104446

Fig. 1. Study area.

We proposed two questionnaires: the first one related to the payment

for a non-use value (n = 107). The questionnaire’s structure was as
follows: (a) a context related to the ecosystem in the IMD-L; (b) The
Municipality’s inhabitant’s socioeconomic information; and (c) eco­
nomic valuation of the ecosystem’s maintenance with a willingness-to-
pay question related to the ‘existence value’ of the TDF, with specifi­
cations as to the payment range, and the maximum amount to pay
(Table 1). The question asked was: Would you be willing to pay to
maintain the ecosystem services from IMD-L dry forest? We asked about
monthly payments in several categories in order to encompass the wide
spectrum of WTP amounts: we considered a low range of values and high
values. The categories we proposed were <1.74 US$/month,3 1.74 to
3.48 US$/month; 3.48 to 6.9 US$/month; 7 to 17 US$/month; 18 to 34
US$/month; 35 to 174 US$/month and >174 US$/month. We projected
these values over the short term (one year) and the long term (five years)
to analyze the availability of monetary flux for the design of a payment
Fig. 2. Socio-ecological system identification (adapted from Martín-López for ecosystem services scheme. We chose five years according to decrees
et al., 2012). 1007/2018 and 953/2013, wherein the Colombian government regu­
lated the PES schemes in this lapse of time.
2.2. Contingent valuation method: willingness to pay/participate On the other hand, the willingness to participate questionnaire (n =
23) was as follows (Appendix 1): (a) socioeconomic information, (b)
In the present research, we used the contingent valuation method to ecosystem services context, (c) and willingness to participate in the
identify willingness to pay (WTP) for dry forest conservation. In the strategy. Regarding this questionnaire, the socioeconomic context
context of the ecosystem services valuation, we analyzed the WTP for involved variables such as age, employment, income, ecosystems uses,
maintaining the ecosystem’s structure (i.e., the conditions needed to quality perceptions, and chronic environmental problems from a given
produce a constant flux of ecosystem services) rather than final list. We proposed a list of Ecosystem services to IMD-L dwellers to
ecosystem services. We based this approach in the ecosystem services identify them, so that the respondents ranked the ecosystem services
cascade proposed by Haines-Young and Potschin (2018) and designed a according to the importance level (low, medium, high).
survey to find the payment amount from the inhabitants in the munic­ The willingness-to-participate question proposed the following sce­
ipality of Usiacuri, and the willingness to participate in conservation nario: If the inhabitants of Usiacurí were willing to pay for you to
activities by IMD-L dwellers in the context of a payment for ecosystem develop the following activities: (i) Surveillance to report negative ac­
services strategy. To that end, we sampled two populations: on the one tions; (ii) Participate in waste cleaning and tree planting campaigns and
hand, n = 107 from Usiacurí’s urban zone (simple random sampling; 9%
error, and 95% confidence); and on the other hand, n = 23 people from
IMD-L (snowball sampling). 3
US$ to $ 2866 COP. May 2018.

3
D. Pérez-Sánchez et al. Journal of Arid Environments 188 (2021) 104446

Table 1
Variables used in Usiacurí’s survey.
Variable Description Statistics

Gender Dichotomic variable: (male), (female) Descriptive

Age Categorical variable: (18–25), (26–35), (36–50), (>50)
Educational level Categorical variable: (low), (school), (medium), (high), (none)
Current occupation Categorical variable: (employee), (other), (unemployed)
Monthly incomes Categorical variable: (<1MCLW) *, (1-2MCLW), (3–4 MCLW), (>4MCLW)
Years living in the zone Open-ended question (years)
Knowledge about IMD Dichotomic variable: (yes), (no)
Visit the IMD Dichotomic variable: (yes), (no)
If the IMD is important to respondents Dichotomic variable: (yes), (no)
The motivation for visiting IMD Categorical variable (family), (job), (recreation)
Willingness to visit again IMD Dichotomic variable: (yes), (no)
Maintaining the ES for future Categorical variable (no interested), (a little interested), (indifferent), (interested), (very interested) Mann-Whitney U test
WPT scenario Dichotomic variable: (yes), (no) Logistic regression

(iii) Attend training workshops on environmental issues, would you be the Guájaro’s reservoir, as well as the massive amount of diversity of
willing to participate in performing these activities for a pay? We species of flora and fauna that inhabit this territory. As for the social
highlighted working conditions and involvement as follows: The component, we could establish that the stakeholders who influence this
participation would be for workdays - considering the respondent’s system are IMD-L inhabitants, Usiacurí’s population, regional and local
actual time availability - and the payment of the day would correspond authorities, the ecotourism association, the tourists, communal boards,
to around 8.72 US$/day (value of one working day according to the police inspection.
minimum legal wage in Colombia). The payment would be in a monthly Social stakeholders such as IMD-L inhabitants, institutions, and
basis and the respondents would have to report how they developed external visitors play an essential role in maintaining or depleting
each of the activities. Finally, with these two scenarios in mind, we ecosystem services. According to the questionnaire, the most common
projected a payment for ecosystem services scheme. environmental problem at the district is related to inadequate solid
waste management (60%), messy tourism (30%), logging (26%), and
2.3. Definition of payment for ecosystem services forest burning (13%). These problems are the results of harmful social
interventions (Table 3) when people benefit from the TDF in the pro­
We projected the Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) scheme tected area.
considering both willingness to pay by urban residents and the will­ It is noteworthy that some IMD-L inhabitants have property rights
ingness to participate by IMD-L inhabitants. We based the PES scheme over different pieces of land: some owners have small plots, whereas
on Wunder (2015) definition, where Payment for Ecosystem Services is a others have an interest in using these plots for conservation activities,
voluntary transaction between users of ecosystem services and pro­ while there also are owners interested in selling their plots. The above is
viders, which are conditioned under rules on ecosystem management to very important to understand the IMD-L dwellers’ willingness and
generate positive environmental externalities. In this case, we proposed availability to manage the ecosystem. On the other hand, a local insti­
the interaction between WTP and willingness to participate by making a tution such as Usiacurí’s and regional environmental authorities –CRA-
direct link between these two analyses and outcomes. We based our oversee IMD-L in order to promote environmental management in the
proposed PES scheme through a five-year projected payment in order to
ensure the financial flux to maintain the strategy and to comply with the
Table 2
Colombian legal framework. Socioeconomic characteristics of the two sampled population.
Variable Usiacurí IMD-Luriza
2.4. Data analysis
Frequency (%) Frequency (%)

We gathered the data through a questionnaire carried out during Gender

July 2016. We applied descriptive statistics to know the characteristics Female 52 49% 11 48%
Male 55 51% 12 52%
of the respondents. Moreover, we applied the Mann-Whitney U test (p <
Age (years)
0.05) in order to identify the association of different variables to the 18–25 18 17% 6 26,09%
levels given to the variable ‘Maintaining ES for the future.’ We per­ 26–35 22 21% 3 13,04%
formed this analysis as a proxy to the respondent’s awareness of the 36–50 27 25% 6 26,09%
IMD-L importance for the future generations. We also performed a Logit >50 40 37% 8 34,78%
Current occupation
Regression whit marginal effects (p < 0.05) to identify factors influ­ Employee 20 19% 1 4%
encing the willingness to pay. We used this analysis to explain how in­ Other 46 51% 6 26%
dependent socioeconomic variables predict the respondents’ answers to Unemployed 33 30% 16 70%
yes/no questions (dichotomous outcome) related to willingness to pay. Educational level
Low 30 28% 9 39,13%
We used the software STATA 14®.
School 54 50% 6 26,09%
Medium 13 12% 1 4,35%
3. Results High 5 5% 0 0%
None 5 5% 7 30,43%
3.1. The socio-ecological system in IMD-L Monthly income
<1 MLCWa 81 76% 23 100%
1-2 MLCW 25 23% 0 0%
By delimiting the socio-ecological system in IMD-L, we identified the 3-4 MLCW 1 1% 0 0%
ecological and social components and the interrelations between them Years living in the zone
(Table, 2, Table 3). The ecological component identified within the IMD- <30 37 35% 14 60,87%
70 65% 9 39,13%
L was the tropical dry forest ecosystem, the micro-watershed of river >30

Luriza, which crosses the entire area of the reserve and then flows into a
Minimum Legal Colombian Wage.

4
D. Pérez-Sánchez et al. Journal of Arid Environments 188 (2021) 104446

Table 3 quality regulation (95%), conservation of biodiversity (91%) and

Ecological Characteristics in IMD-L. (+) = Positive interventions; (− ) = negative tourism (87%), were the most common perceived services at IMD-L; the
interventions. less perceived ecosystem beneficial function was pest control (26%),
Ecological Units Social Actors Type of Interventions/ maybe because of the poor agricultural activities developed in there.
Variables interactions Finally, we asked the respondents if they were interested in preserving
Climate Warm IMD-L (+) Local awareness and the ecosystem services for future generations, to which 95.65%
semi-arid inhabitants traditional knowledge responded positively, whereas 4.35% said they did not feel any interest
(− ) Solid waste generation, in it. Moreover, respondents identified most ecosystem services with
logging, charcoal
high importance, mainly regulating services (52).
Relative 60–87% Tourist (+) Incomes in Usiacurí
humidity (− ) Solid waste generation,
messy tourism
Temperature 28 ◦ C Local and (+) Funding for conservation 3.2. Willingness to pay for/participate in dry forest ecosystem services
regional (− ) Lack of control and
authorities insufficient opportunities for
We asked the population of the municipality of Usiacurí (n = 107) if
sustainable management
Annual average 800 mm Ecotourism (+) Promoting the area and they knew about the existence of the IMD-L, and if they had ever gone to
rainfall NGO attracting tourists visit that area. The results show that 94% have knowledge about it, and
(− ) Lack of control and 66% have visited this area. The most common activities carried out
benefit distributions for locals when visiting IDM-L were family motivation (25%), tourism (23%), and
Floristic 141 Sp. Usiacurís (+) Promoting the area,
because of work reasons (14%); 38% did not answer. Furthermore, 90%
richness 19 Sp. inhabitants incomes generation to IMD-L
Amphibian 44 Sp. (− ) Logging, poaching, of the sampled people assigned high importance to IMD-L, and 93%
Fauna 140 Sp. charcoal production showed interest in maintaining their ecosystem services to the future.
Reptiles 43 Sp. Regarding the maintenance of ES for the future, we found a significant
Birds
association with variables such as ‘Whether the IMD is important to
Mammals
respondents’ (p = 0,0046); ‘Knowledge about IMD’ (p = 0,03); ‘Visiting
CRA & Ecoforest (1996); Alcaldía municipal de Usiacurí (2000); Fundación ESC the IMD’ (p = 0,04), and ‘Willingness to visit IMD again’ (p = 0,01).
(2011). On the other hand, we identified the Willingness to pay (WTP) for a
tropical dry forest ecosystem located in IMD-L. We asked about the WTP
through a hypothetical scenario, where IMD-L inhabitants conduct
Table 4
conservation activities. The results showed that 71% (n = 77) had a
Ecosystem Services identified by IMD-L inhabitants.
positive WTP (+), while the remaining 23% (n = , 22) had a negative
Ecosystem Ecosystem Frequency (%) Given importance WTP (− ). The most recurrent reason to say No was lack of money to
Functions/ Services (frequency)
process (final)
make the payment (70%), and local authorities should make the in­
High Medium Low vestment in conservation activities (14%). We noticed that the people in
Provision the sample had different levels in their WTP since 42% were willing to
Services pay less than 1.74 US$/month, 53% were willing to pay between 1.74
Water supply 23 100% 15 8 0
and 3.48 US$/month, and only 5% more than 3.48 US$/month. The
Food supply 18 78% 12 6 0
Fiber, 17 74% 15 1 1
mean value to pay was, 2.02 US$/month, while the minimum value to
timber, and pay was 0.87 US$/month and the maximum 5.23 US$/month.
wood supply With a logit regression (Table 5), we determined which of the vari­
42 15 1 ables analyzed within the inhabitants of Usiacurí influenced positive
Regulating
WTP (+). The main variables that influenced the WTP response were
Services
Air quality 22 95% 20 1 1 Years living in the zone (coef. = − .0587; p = 0.000); the level of
Biodiversity 21 91% 18 3 0 importance given to IMD-L (coef. 1.797; p = 0.070) and interest in
Soil fertility 17 74% 10 7 1 maintaining ecosystem services for the future (coef. = 1.125; p = 0.001).
Flood 10 43% 4 6 0 The results showed that the time that respondents has been living in the
Control
Pest Control 6 26% 0 4 2
municipality has a negative influence on their willingness to make this
52 21 4 payment. This finding means that the people who have lived there for a
Cultural long time were less likely to pay, while importance assigned to IMD-L
Services and interest in maintaining and preserving ecosystem services from
Tourism 20 87% 13 6 1
IMD-L count as variables that positively contribute to WTP. The logit
Education 17 74% 8 8 1
Spiritual 14 61 11 1 2
wellbeing Table 5
32 15 4 Logit regression with marginal effects for WTP.
WTP Coef. Std. Err. z P>z dx/dy
area. Years_zone -.0587403 .0159637 − 3.68 0.000* -.007
We obtained information regarding the relationships between the Know (yes) 1.517164 1.257584 1.21 0.228
ecosystem and the stakeholders and the IMD-L-activities they perform in Visit again .5344503 .5841199 0.91 0.360
Importance 1.797998 .9939061 1.81 0.070*** .23277
their daily lives (Table 4). Firstly, according to IMD-L inhabitants, 100%
Interest_ES future 1.125813 .3362166 3.35 0.001** .14571
took water from pits and said that water was mostly low quality (60%); , _cons − 4.768999 1.856098 − 2.57 0.010
27% of people develop agricultural activities, 39% of IMD-L dwellers LR chi2(5) 39.44
used timber to perform different activities such as charcoal production Prob > chi2 0.0000
Pseudo R2 0.3106
(29%), and firewood (64%). Within IMD-L, we highlight waste man­
Log likelihood = − 43.764502
agement, messy tourism, and forest cut down. IMD-L inhabitants iden­
tified ecosystem services as follows: Sig. *p < 0.01; p > 0.05; p > 0.10. The model is properly specified according to
From the ecosystem services identified, water supply (100%), air the errors (p > 0.05); Classify 83% of the answers, and according to the Hosmer-
Lemeshow test, the regression adjusts appropriately (p > 0.05).

5
D. Pérez-Sánchez et al. Journal of Arid Environments 188 (2021) 104446

marginal effects yield that the most years living in the zone, the prob­ strategy with the promotion of an alternative activity that ensures the
ability for a WTP (+) decreased in 7%, while importance increase the long-term sustainability of the beneficiaries as well as the conservation
probability in, 23%, and finally the most interest in maintaining ES for of the ecosystems.
the future, the probability increase 14% for WTP (+).
Regarding the willingness to participate survey we applied to the 4. Discussion
population (n = 23) living in the IMD-L, all of them (100%) answered
positively to the proposed scenario. After researchers provided further 4.1. Tropical dry forest and the context of socio-ecological systems
and detailed information related to payment conditions, type of activ­
ities needed, payment amount, and evidence of activities done, we stress TDF conservation is a priority because of their vulnerability and high
that 100% of people would be willing to participate. According to the importance in providing ecosystem services. However, to succeed in the
participation, we proposed scenarios with different days a month to conservation of TDF, it is necessary to understand the changing re­
work in the strategy as depicted in Table 6: lationships between society and the ecosystems (Whaley et al., 2010).
The results show that most respondents would participate between 6 Thus, the understanding of the socio-ecological complexity in the IMD-L
and 15 days/month (60%), whereas the percentage of people interested transcends the approaches that disintegrate social processes with the
in participating 1–10 days/month is lower (34%). Moreover, the po­ dynamics of natural systems, because societies and nature interact
tential financial contributions for the strategy represent about 37,572 reciprocally and form complex feedback loops (Enríquez-Acevedo et al.,
US$ for five years. 2020; Liu et al., 2010). This conception allows us to understand that
social and natural systems are strongly related due to the historical
3.3. Proposed payment scheme for ecosystem services co-evolution between them (Boakye-Danquah et al., 2018). In this sense,
ecological conditions in the IMD-L are the source to provide wellbeing to
Taking as a reference the mean WTP value (2.02 US$/month), the the populations IMD-L and Usiacuri through ecosystem services,
projection for the whole urban population (8450 urban inhabitants) particularly water, timber and food supply (Table 4); therefore, there
would rise to 17,069 US$/year. However, we proportionally disregarded exists a strong relationship between social stakeholders and IMD-L.
the negative responses in the WTP (29%), which resulted in 12,119 Moreover, the different stakeholders in the socio-ecological system
USD/year and 60,595 USD in five years. In this vein, the yearly sum interact in different ways and produce different interventions (Table 3),
required of IMD-L’s inhabitants would be 7514.4 USD/year, only 12% of which are critical to understand and manage.
the WTP’s potential economic influx, where 88% of the funds could be The inclusion of the community in forest management has widely
diverted to different social and ecological improvements, and PES been considered to sustain protected areas (Dolisca et al., 2006; Wali
management and operation. et al., 2017). Several studies have discussed the need to involve local
We proposed the payment for ecosystem services scheme to boost communities in forest protection areas and have concluded that com­
sustainability in IMD-L through social participation. At the beginning of munity access to resources has acted as safety nets and shock mitigators
the strategy, PES aims to address the processes of ecosystem services in times of upheavals (Mutekwa and Gambiza, 2017), and to gain ben­
degradation in IMD-L, for ecosystem services will tend to decline if the efits (Ward et al., 2018). Therefore, it is essential to promote TDF con­
strategy is not implemented. This first stage involves the views, per­ servation strategies (c.f. Alexiades et al., 2012; Burivalova et al., 2017),
ceptions, and capacities of the different stakeholders from Usiacurí and in such way that local stakeholders’ participation in the forest man­
the department of Atlántico to ensure active participation. At this stage, agement could be facilitated (Tekalign et al., 2018), and ecosystem
it is necessary to identify the current state of the ecosystem through an services provision and social conditions could be enhanced. Hence,
initial monitoring process. As is to be expected, once the economic effective, sustainable forest use depends on local resource users having
incentive is ongoing, the beneficiary has high levels of dependence on the appropriate skills and tools to manage the forests themselves
the PES incentives due to the change in productive activities related to (Alexiades et al., 2012). The above shows the potential for a figure such
the use of the ecosystems (e.g., wood for charcoal production to sale). as the IMD-L since the area facilitates the inclusion of people and sus­
Initially, the incentive should act as ‘risk capital’ to support decision tainable activities (see Study area description) in its management.
making regarding the shift and transformation of productive activities
towards more sustainable ones, for which dependence on the PES will 4.2. Ecosystem services provided by the IMD-L
decrease as these new activities support the income of IMD-L
inhabitants. As we found, IMD-L inhabitants identified and rated a series of
The importance of monitoring is high because it guarantees that the ecosystem services provided by the IMD-L. The rating process (Table 4)
program is generating benefits in both the conservation of ecosystems, is a proxy to understand the social values of the ecosystem services
as well as the social welfare of the beneficiaries. Thus, PES must achieve (Mastrangelo, 2018) because, as stated by Scholte et al. (2015), these
improvements in socioeconomic and TDF conditions. Later on, comes kinds of valuation are the importance people attribute to the ecosystem
the end of the strategy, which represents the end of receiving the services as individuals or as a group. Therefore, in line with previous
incentive for conservation and a third monitoring stage appears. At this studies, regulating services has a high valuation over the provisioning or
moment occurs the verification of the additionality (social and ecolog­ cultural ecosystem services (c.f. Zoderer et al., 2016). In connection to
ical) without payment. Finally, it is essential to accompany the PES the valuation, we point out that IMD-L inhabitants gave high importance
to the services provided by the TDF as a result of their assumption of the
Table 6 ecosystem as a provider of instrumental values for them (e.g., water,
Participation in a WTP scenario. food, timber, tourism). However, high importance was related to the
generation of intrinsic values too (e.g., biodiversity) or bequest reasons
Days working at Frequency (%) US US US$/5
strategy/month $/montha $/year year (95.65% interested in preserve the ecosystem services for future gen­
erations). Therefore, we identified that regarding the inhabitants’
1–5 3 14% 30,3 363.6 1818
6–10 7 30% 141.4 1696.8 8484
valuation of the ecosystem services provided by the TDF, there is conflict
11–15 7 30% 212.1 2545.2 1,2,726 in valuation languages (Arias-Arévalo et al., 2018), the reason why the
16–20 6 26% 242.4 2908.8 14,544 challenge is to integrate the pluralism in the ecosystem services
23 100% 626.2 7514.4 37,572 assessment.
a
Estimation with the higher values in the participation (i.e., five days, ten
days, 15 days 20 days).

6
D. Pérez-Sánchez et al. Journal of Arid Environments 188 (2021) 104446

4.3. Payment for ecosystem services and community participation a monthly fee of, 2.02 US$ for the maintenance of ecosystem services at
IMD-L. On the other hand, we recognized the existence of different de­
The payment scheme and participation have a strong basis in peo­ terminants for positive WTP (i.e., years living in the zone, the level of
ple’s willingness to participate in the strategy. We analyzed the partic­ importance given to IMD-L and interest in maintaining ecosystem ser­
ipation from the form of payment amounts by municipality and from vices for the future). Furthermore, we observed that the high rates
availability of IMD-L inhabitants to dedicate time to work in conserva­ participation of IMD-L inhabitants in the proposed PES strategy related
tion and environmental improvement strategies inside IMD-L (trans­ to the high importance given to the ecosystem services. The above shows
action). In this sense, the PES scheme proposed is not mandatory or the high potential of the local community living in the IMD-L to promote
regulated by local or national authorities; instead, it is a process that and develop TDF conservation strategies.
could integrate free and voluntary participation of different stakeholders Finally, we proposed the PES scheme to fill gaps through the incor­
in the municipality to conserve dry forest ecosystem services. We poration of several aspects. Based on the foregoing, we identified that
selected the study area because of the importance of the dry forest the PES must be complemented with effective economic and ecological
ecosystem in the region. IMD-L provides multiple ecosystem services to assessment processes of the ecosystem services, in order to generate
the local population, for which we identified people who live in Usia­ coherent approaches to the socio-ecological context. Hence, the partic­
curí’s urban zone as ecosystem services users (more than 8000 in­ ipation of the beneficiaries and stakeholders involved in general must be
habitants). Here, the providers of ecosystem services are IMD-L ensured around the implementation of the economic instrument. As a
inhabitants because some of them have property rights and influence final point, a fundamental element is the generation of monitoring
over the ecosystem in the area. Some owners have plots between 0.01 Ha processes for the impact generated by the strategy to transcend the
and 52.71 Ha, and those with a larger extension of land are willing to sell initial impulse of the projects. It means that the PES scheme herein
their plots because they cannot develop productive activities. Moreover, proposed not only focuses on the strategy while it is implemented but
IMD-L dwellers have several socio-economic characteristics that make seeks to find a way to guarantee the strategy’s success once it is over.
them vulnerable (see Table 2). Finally, the Payment to IMD-L in­
habitants who participate in the scheme must meet several requisites
Declaration of competing interest
(see the method section), which are the guarantee for payers. In this
sense, as we pointed out in the participation scenario, IMD-L inhabitants
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
will receive payments if they meet numerous conditions regarding
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
conservation, monitoring and reporting activities.
the work reported in this paper.
Paying for ecosystem services is a complex concept (Martin-Ortega
et al., 2018) and a contested tool for ecosystem conservation (Muradian
Acknowledgment
et al., 2013). Many PES-schemes found in the literature discuss the value
of the instrument: some discuss their ineffectiveness (Calvo-Alvarado
We thank the Universidad de la Costa, and the program in Envi­
et al., 2009), while others highlight their positive impacts (Alix-Garcia
ronmental Management. Moreover, we thank professors R. Manzolli and
et al., 2018; Andersson et al., 2018). Several studies focus on the ways of
L. Portz for their support.
ensuring the payment, building financial support or analyzing social or
ecological benefits while the scheme lasts (Newton et al., 2012; Mutoko
et al., 2015; Hayes and Murtinho, 2018; Rodríguez-Ortega et al., 2018; Appendix A. Supplementary data
Chu et al., 2019); however, this study proposes a general ex-ante strat­
egy to promote a PES scheme, considering the time of the payment and a Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
way to maintain conservation practices without payment after the end of org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2021.104446.
the strategy.
One problem related to the economic valuation of ecosystem services Ethical statement
is the existence of a gap between theory and practice (Marre et al.,
2016). In this sense, we provided a practical application of the outputs In the research, the authors fully informed the participants in the
related to the economic valuation of the TDF ecosystem services in a research about the aim and scope of the research. Also, the authors asked
specific context, so that the people who live in the IMD-L were willing to for respondents’ consent and the authors assured the privacy rights of
participate in the strategy under the terms we provided, not only the respondents.
because the inhabitants need to generate income (i.e., fewer days
worked means less monthly payment), but also because they have Authors contributions
bestowed high importance to the ecosystem services in the area. In this
sense, our results are valuable since the proposed payment seeks to All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material
contribute to the quality of life of the IMD-L inhabitants, and the preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by D. Perez
improvement of TDF in the area as a collateral impact. Thus, the final and M. Montes. The first draft of the manuscript was written by A.
purpose of the willingness to participate is a way to improve Suarez and all authors commented on previous versions of the manu­
socio-ecological conditions (Suarez et al., 2018), beyond highlighting script. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
resource management (Kosoy et al., 2008), financial structures (Ross,
2016; Sarkissian et al., 2017), the spatial dimension of the payments References
(Broch et al., 2013), or solely understanding motivations (Nielsen et al.,
Al-Assaf, A.A., 2015. Applying contingent valuation to measure the economic value of
2018).
forest services: a case study in Northern Jordan. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 22
(3), 242–250.
4.4. Implications for conservation Alcaldía Municipal De Usiacurí, 2000. Esquema de Ordenamiento Territorial.
Diagnóstico. Usiacurí, Atlántico.
Alexiades, M.N., Peters, C.M., Laird, S.A., Binnqüist, C.L., Castillo, P.N., 2012. The
We provide information about social, ecological, and economic missing skill set in community management of tropical forests. Conserv. Biol. 27 (3),
characteristics in a protected tropical dry forest area in Colombia. This 635–637.
information is topical for further research related to the management of Alix-Garcia, J.M., Sims, K.R., Orozco-Olvera, V.H., Costica, L.E., Medina, J.D.F.,
Monroy, S.R., 2018. Payments for environmental services supported social capital
this endangered ecosystem since our results showed that urban in­ while increasing land management. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am.,
habitants value the TDF for its existence, and people were willing to pay 201720873

7
D. Pérez-Sánchez et al. Journal of Arid Environments 188 (2021) 104446

Andersson, K.P., Cook, N.J., Grillos, T., Lopez, M.C., Salk, C.F., Wright, G.D., Mwangi, E., Metzger, M.J., Rounsevell, M.D.A., Acosta-Michlik, L., Leemans, R., Schröter, D., 2006.
2018. Experimental evidence on payments for forest commons conservation. Nat. The vulnerability of ecosystem services to land use change. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
Sustain. 1 (3), 128. 114 (1), 69–85.
Arias-Arévalo, P., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Martín-López, B., Pérez-Rincón, M., 2018. Montes, C., 2014. Biodiversidad Caribe y servicios ecosistémicos. Universidad del Norte,
Widening the evaluative space for ecosystem services: a taxonomy of plural values Barranquilla. J. Aldana Domínguez.
and valuation methods. Environ. Val. 27 (1), 29–53. Muradian, R., Arsel, M., Pellegrini, L., Adaman, F., Aguilar, B., Agarwal, B., et al., 2013.
Bartczak, A., Metelska-Szaniawska, K., 2015. Should we pay, and to whom, for Payments for ecosystem services and the fatal attraction of win-win solutions.
biodiversity enhancement in private forests? An empirical study of attitudes towards Conserv. Lett. 6 (4), 274–279.
payments for forest ecosystem services in Poland. Land Use Pol. 48, 261–269. Mutekwa, V.T., Gambiza, J., 2017. Forest protected areas governance in Zimbabwe: shift
Bernues, A., Rodríguez-Ortega, T., Ripoll-Bosch, R., Alfnes, F., 2014. Socio-cultural and needed away from a long history of local community exclusion. J. Environ. Manag.
economic valuation of ecosystem services provided by Mediterranean mountain 198, 330–339.
agroecosystems. PloS One 9 (7), e102479. Mutoko, M.C., Hein, L., Shisanya, C.A., 2015. Tropical forest conservation versus
Boakye-Danquah, J., Reed, M.G., Robson, J.P., Sato, T., 2018. A problem of social fit? conversion trade-offs: insights from analysis of ecosystem services provided by
Assessing the role of bridging organizations in the recoupling of socio-ecological Kakamega rainforest in Kenya. Ecosyst. Serv. 14, 1–11.
systems. J. Environ. Manag. 223, 338–347. Newton, P., Nichols, E.S., Endo, W., Peres, C.A., 2012. Consequences of actor level
Broch, S.W., Strange, N., Jacobsen, J.B., Wilson, K.A., 2013. Farmers’ willingness to livelihood heterogeneity for additionality in a tropical forest payment for
provide ecosystem services and effects of their spatial distribution. Ecol. Econ. 92, environmental services programme with an undifferentiated reward structure.
78–86. Global Environ. Change 22 (1), 127–136.
Burivalova, Z., Hua, F., Koh, L.P., Garcia, C., Putz, F., 2017. A critical comparison of Nielsen, A.S.E., Jacobsen, J.B., Strange, N., 2018. Landowner participation in forest
conventional, certified, and community management of tropical forests for timber in conservation programs: a revealed approach using register, spatial and contract data.
terms of environmental, economic, and social variables. Conserv. Lett. 10 (1), 4–14. J. For. Econ. 30, 1–12.
Calvo-Alvarado, J., McLennan, B., Sánchez-Azofeifa, A., Garvin, T., 2009. Deforestation Obeng, E.A., Aguilar, F.X., 2018. Value orientation and payment for ecosystem services:
and forest restoration in Guanacaste, Costa Rica: putting conservation policies in perceived detrimental consequences lead to willingness-to-pay for ecosystem
context. For. Ecol. Manag. 258 (6), 931–940. services. J. Environ. Manag. 206, 458–471.
Chu, L., Grafton, R.Q., Keenan, R., 2019. Increasing conservation efficiency while Portillo-Quintero, C.A., Sánchez-Azofeifa, G.A., 2010. Extent and conservation of tropical
maintaining distributive goals with the payment for environmental services. Ecol. dry forests in the Americas. Biol. Conserv. 143 (1), 144–155.
Econ. 156, 202–210. Ricketts, T.H., Daily, G.C., Ehrlich, P.R., Michener, C.D., 2004. Economic value of
Corporación Autónoma Regional del Atlántico (CRA) & ECOFOREST, 1996. Plan de tropical forest to coffee production. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A 101 (34),
Manejo Ambiental del Atlántico. Santa Fe de Bogotá. Documento interno. 12579–12582.
Corporación Autónoma Regional del Atlántico (CRA), 2011. Distrito Regional De Manejo Rodríguez-Ortega, T., Olaizola, A.M., Bernués, A., 2018. A novel management-based
Integrado Luriza - Municipio de Usiacurí. system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy.
Corporación Autónoma Regional del Atlántico (CRA), 2015. Bosques del Atlántico. Una Ecosyst. Serv. 34, 74–84.
mirada desde adentro. Barranquilla, Colombia. Amaranta Ltda. Ross, C.T., 2016. Sliding-scale environmental service payments and non-financial
Dolisca, F., Carter, D.R., McDaniel, J.M., Shannon, D.A., Jolly, C.M., 2006. Factors incentives: results of a survey of landowner interest in Costa Rica. Ecol. Econ. 130,
influencing farmers’ participation in forestry management programs: a case study 252–262.
from Haiti. For. Ecol. Manag. 236 (2–3), 324–331. Sarkissian, A.J., Brook, R.M., Talhouk, S.N., Hockiey, N., 2017. Asset-building payments
Fundación Ecosistemas Secos de Colombia, 2011. Plan de Manejo ambiental del Distrito for ecosystem services: assessing landowner perceptions of reforestation incentives
regional de Manejo Integrado - DMI - Luriza. Usiacurí – Atlántico. in Lebanon. For. Syst. 26 (2), 1.
Enríquez-Acevedo, T., Pérez-Torres, J., Ruiz-Agudelo, C., Suarez, A., 2020. Seed dispersal Schmerbeck, J., Fiener, P., 2015. Wildfires, ecosystem services, and biodiversity in
by fruit bats in Colombia generates ecosystem services. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 40 (6), tropical dry forest in India. Environ. Manag. 56 (2), 355–372.
1–15. Scholte, S.S.K., van Teeffelen, A.J.A., Verburg, P.H., 2015. Integrating socio-cultural
Espírito-Santo, M.M., Sevilha, A.C., Anaya, F.C., Barbosa, R., Fernandes, G.W., Sanchez- perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: a review of concepts and methods.
Azofeifa, G.A., Sampaio, C.A., 2009. Sustainability of tropical dry forests: two case Ecol. Econ. 114, 67–78.
studies in southeastern and central Brazil. For. Ecol. Manag. 258 (6), 922–930. Sgroi, F., Foderà, M., Dana, L.P., Mangiapane, G., Tudisca, S., Di Trapani, A.M., Testa, R.,
Fajardo, L., Rodríguez, J.P., González, V., Briceño-Linares, J.M., 2013. Restoration of a 2016. Evaluation of payment for ecosystem services in Mediterranean forest: an
degraded tropical dry forest in Macanao, Venezuela. J. Arid Environ. 88, 236–243. empirical survey. Ecol. Eng. 90, 399–404.
García, H., Orozco, G., Isaacs, P., Etter, A., 2014. Distribución y estado actual de los Spangenberg, J.H., Settele, J., 2010. Precisely incorrect? Monetising the value of
remanentes del bioma de bosque seco tropical en Colombia: insumos para su gestión. ecosystem services. Ecol. Complex. 7 (3), 327–337.
En: Pizano, C & García, H. El bosque seco tropical en Colombia. Insituto Alexander Suarez, A., Arias-Arévalo, P., Martinez-Mera, E., Granobles-Torres, J.C., Enríquez-
von Humboldt (IAvH), Bogotá, DC. Acevedo, T., 2018. Involving victim population in environmentally sustainable
Gómez-Baggethun, E., Ruiz-Pérez, M., 2011. Economic valuation and the strategies: an analysis for post-conflict Colombia. Sci. Total Environ. 643,
commodification of ecosystem services. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 35 (5), 613–628. 1223–1231.
Górriz-Mifsud, E., Varela, E., Piqué, M., Prokofieva, I., 2016. Demand and supply of TEEB, 2010. Biodiversity, ecosystems and ecosystem services. In: Kumar, P. (Ed.), The
ecosystem services in a Mediterranean forest: computing payment boundaries. Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: the Ecological and Economic
Ecosyst. Serv. 17, 53–63. Foundations. TEEB, pp. 4–63.
Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M.B., 2018. Common International Classification of Tekalign, M., Flasse, C., Frankl, A., Van Rompaey, A., Poesen, J., Nyssen, J., Muys, B.,
Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the Application of the Revised 2018. Forest cover loss and recovery in an East African remnant forest area:
Structure. understanding its context and drivers for conservation and sustainable ecosystem
Hayes, T., Murtinho, F., 2018. Communal governance, equity and payment for ecosystem service provision. Appl. Geogr. 98, 133–142.
services. Land Use Pol. 79, 123–136. Ulloa-Delgado, Andrés, Giovanni, 2016. Aspectos ecológicos del bosque seco tropical en
Kosoy, N., Corbera, E., Brown, K., 2008. Participation in payments for ecosystem el Caribe colombiano. Tropenbos Internacional Colombia & Fondo Patrimonio
services: case studies from the Lacandon rainforest, Mexico. Geoforum 39 (6), Natural, Bogotá.
2073–2083. Vargas, W., 2014. El bosque seco tropical en Colombia ¿Hacia dónde vamos? En:
Laurans, Y., Rankovic, A., Billé, R., Pirard, R., Mermet, L., 2013. Use of ecosystem Biodiversidad Caribe y servicios ecosistémicos. Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla.
services economic valuation for decision making: questioning a literature blindspot. J. Aldana Domínguez.
J. Environ. Manag. 119, 208–219. Wali, A., Alvira, D., Tallman, P., Ravikumar, A., Macedo, M., 2017. A new approach to
Liu, S., Costanza, R., Farber, S., Troy, A., 2010. Valuing ecosystem services. Theory, conservation: using community empowerment for sustainable well-being. Ecol. Soc.
practice, and need for transdisciplinary synthesis. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 54–78. 22 (4).
Martín López, Berta, González, José A., Vilardy, Sandra, 2012. Guía docente ciencias de Ward, C., Stringer, L., Holmes, G., 2018. Changing governance, changing inequalities:
la sostenibilidad. No. Doc. 26067. CO-BAC, Bogotá. protected area co-management and access to forest ecosystem services: a
MacFarlane, D.W., Kinzer, A.T., Banks, J.E., 2015. Coupled human-natural regeneration Madagascar case study. Ecosyst. Serv. 30, 137–148.
of indigenous coastal dry forest in Kenya. For. Ecol. Manag. 354, 149–159. Whaley, O.Q., Beresford-Jones, D.G., Milliken, W., Orellana, A., Smyk, A., Leguía, J.,
Mäntymaa, E., Juutinen, A., Tyrväinen, L., Karhu, J., Kurttila, M., 2018. Participation 2010. An ecosystem approach to restoration and sustainable management of dry
and compensation claims in voluntary forest landscape conservation: the case of the forest in southern Peru. Kew Bull. 65 (4), 613–641.
Ruka-Kuusamo tourism area, Finland. J. For. Econ. 33, 14–24. Wunder, S., 2015. Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecol.
Marre, J.B., Thébaud, O., Pascoe, S., Jennings, S., Boncoeur, J., Coglan, L., 2016. Is Econ. 117, 234–243.
economic valuation of ecosystem services useful to decision-makers? Lessons learned Zimbres, B., Machado, R.B., Peres, C.A., 2018. Anthropogenic drivers of headwater and
from Australian coastal and marine management. J. Environ. Manag. 178, 52–62. riparian forest loss and degradation in a highly fragmented southern Amazonian
Martin-Ortega, J., Waylen, K.A., 2018. PES what a mess? An analysis of the position of landscape. Land Use Pol. 72, 354–363.
environmental professionals in the conceptual debate on payments for ecosystem Zoderer, B.M., Stanghellini, P.S.L., Tasser, E., Walde, J., Wieser, H., Tappeiner, U., 2016.
services. Ecol. Econ. 154, 218–237. Exploring socio-cultural values of ecosystem service categories in the Central Alps:
Mastrangelo, M.E., 2018. Aproximaciones al estudio del comportamiento de los the influence of socio-demographic factors and landscape type. Reg. Environ.
productores agropecuarios en el Chaco Seco. Ecol. Austral 28 (2), 418–434. Change 16 (7), 2033–2044.

8
 Update
Journal of Arid Environments
Volume 191, Issue , August 2021, Page

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2021.104535
 Journal of Arid Environments 191 (2021) 104535

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Arid Environments

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jaridenv

Corrigendum to “Keeping people in the loop: Socioeconomic valuation of

dry forest ecosystem services in the Colombian Caribbean region” [J. Arid
Environ. 188 (2021) 104446]
David Pérez-Sánchez a, Marelis Montes a, César Cardona-Almeida a, Luis Alberto Vargas-Marín b,
Tatiana Enríquez-Acevedo c, Andres Suarez a, *
a
Department of Civil and Environmental, Universidad De La Costa, Cl. 58#55-66, Barranquilla, Atlantico, 080002, Colombia
b
Research Center in Environment and Development (CIMAD), Universidad de Manizales, Cra. 9a #19-03, Manizales, Caldas, 170003, Colombia
c
Corporacion Autonoma Regional de Caldas -CORPOCALDAS -GIRNMAC, Cl. 21 No. 23-22 Ed. Atlas, Manizales, Caldas, 170006, Colombia

The authors regret for the miscalculation in the aggregated WTP years. In this vein, the yearly sum required of IMD-L’s inhabitants would
value. First paragraph in section 3.3 must be as follows: be 7514.4 USD/year, only 5% of the WTP’s potential economic influx,
Taking as a reference the mean WTP value (2.02 US$/month), the where 95% of the funds could be diverted to different social and
projection for the whole urban population (8450 urban inhabitants) ecological improvements, and PES management and operation.
would rise to 17,069 US$/month. However, we proportionally dis­ Also, the aggregated value reported in the abstract is: 145,428 US
regarded the negative responses in the WTP (29%), which resulted in $/year.
12,119 USD/month (145,428 US$/year) and 727,114 US$ USD in five The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

DOI of original article: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2021.104446.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: asuarez24@cuc.edu.co, asagudelo88@gmail.com (A. Suarez).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2021.104535

Available online 11 May 2021

0140-1963/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.