MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998464116 · doi:10.1002/eet.1876

Payments for ecosystem services and conditional cash transfers in a policy mix: Microlevel interactions in Selva Lacandona, Mexico

2019· article· en· W2998464116 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Policy and Governance · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaSt. Cross College, University of Oxford
KeywordsPublic economicsConditional cash transferLivelihoodEcosystem servicesPolicy mixRevenuePaymentEconomicsBusinessPolicy analysisCash transfersPovertyEconomic growthFinancePolitical sciencePublic administrationAgricultureGeographyEcologyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Payments for ecosystem services (PES) programs have been increasingly studied with a policy mix perspective. So far, the focus has been on PES' interplay with other conservation instruments and resulting environmental outcomes at meso‐ and macrolevels. Though PES often operate among “poor” forest‐dwelling communities in the Global South, our knowledge on PES' interactions with poverty alleviation policies is scarce, especially at the microlevel. This article examines PES' interactions—in terms of joint coverage, management, and spending of revenues, and socioeconomic effects of participation—with a conditional cash transfer (CCT) program in a case study of six communities in Selva Lacandona, Chiapas, Mexico. The article builds a dual framework combining policy mix analysis with an actor‐oriented approach focused on participants' microagency, and is based on in‐depth, qualitative research. Results reveal widespread joint PES and CCT coverage, and patterns of specialization between different household members regarding the management and spending of program revenues. Results also show positive, multilevel policy interactions as participants combine resources to pursue individual and collective socioeconomic strategies. The article highlights the creative ways in which local stakeholders integrate individual policies within their broader livelihoods, and how coordination failures among policy‐implementing institutions and deficient public services limit participants' ability to achieve sustained livelihood improvements. The article also highlights how a focus on microlevel policy interactions complements meso‐ and macrolevel analyses for a better understanding of PES' role in a policy mix and concludes by providing some recommendations for building implementation synergies and improving program design.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it