Efectos del pago por servicios ambientales y la certificación forestal en el desempeño ambiental y socioeconómico del manejo de bosques naturales en Costa Rica

The forestry sector in Costa Rica is currently discussing vividly the viability of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) of natural forests. Detractors argue that SFM is unattractive for small-scale forest management units (FMU). Others argue that the benefits from SMF also accrue to national and international society and the forest managers should be compensated for opportunities lost while generating those benefits. Between 1999 and 2001, two mechanisms were promoting SFM; nonetheless, one of which, Payment for Environmental Services (PES), was suspended. The other, Forest Certification (CF) has been criticized for its high transaction costs, making it inaccessible for small operators. This study contributes to the discussion on whether these mechanisms help promote the SFM or not by evaluating their ecological and socio-economic impacts. 24 FMU were evaluated using a standard of Criteria and Indicators developed for this purpose. The FMU were grouped into four treatment groups: Control (management according to national legal standards); PES (FMU that followed the national legal standards and received PES); FC (FMU that were certified within the FSC-scheme) and PES+FC (FMU that both received PES and were certified). Uni- and multivariate analysis were applied to the results, comparing treatments, grouping FMU according to their general and ecological performance, and relating performance to FMU and planning characteristics. All FMU complied with the Costa Rican standard for SFM. However, PES and CF improved forest management above business-as-usual FMU, particularly when combined. The impact on ecological performance was significant as FMU with mechanisms showed less damage to the vegetation and better protection of water courses than management without these mechanisms. The socio-economic impact showed through an improved access to financial and technical services, improved land tenure security and a greater perception of the different benefits of forest ecosystems. The mechanisms, however, are too new to expect substantial economic benefits. The good ecological performance was strongly related to the access to financial and technical support, and may have been influenced by NGO support received in the supervision of FMU. Further research is recommended, especially for the analysis of the supporting role of both mechanisms in SFM policies. (Résumé d'auteur)