Análisis de la Política Nacional Brasileña de Pago por Servicios Ambientales y Buenas Prácticas Bibliográfica

Camargo Neto, Lauro de; Jorge, Nayara Luciana; Carvalho, Soraya Joussef; Brito, Luís Fernando Pereira de; Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima; Almeida, Maria Rita Raimundo e

doi:10.1590/1809-4422asoc00111vu28L3OA

home Sumário navigate_before Anterior Atual Seguinte navigate_next

home Sumário

Original Article • Ambient. soc. 28 • 2025 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4422asoc00111vu28L3OA linkcopiar

Análisis de la Política Nacional Brasileña de Pago por Servicios Ambientales y Buenas Prácticas Bibliográfica

Autoría SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Resumen

Con la Ley Federal nº 14.119/2021, Política Nacional de Pago por Servicios Ambientales (PNPSA), los esquemas de PSA practicados en Brasil han ganado respaldo legal. Sin embargo, es necesario comprobar si las buenas prácticas recomendadas en la literatura científica se incorporan a la legislación. El artículo analiza el PNPSA a la luz de las buenas prácticas en PSA y sugiere puntos clave para su regulación. Se estudiaron las principales buenas prácticas y se analizó la ley a partir de estas directrices. Se observó que la mayoría de las buenas prácticas señaladas no están incluidas en el texto legal, o su contenido es insuficiente, especialmente en las categorías de “Pago”, “Definición de áreas elegibles/prioritarias” y “Condicionalidad”. La ley atende mejor las buenas prácticas “Institucional” y “Tipo de afiliación”. El análisis demuestra la necesidad de alinear la normativa del PNPSA con las buenas prácticas para garantizar su eficacia.

Palabras-clave:
PSA; Ley Federal 14.119/2021; Servicios Ecosistémicos; Políticas públicas; Conservación ambiental

Best practice	Definition/Justification
Category 1: Institutional arrangement
Involvement and negotiation with stakeholders	Government participation, intermediary organizations (i.e., NGOs), and the local community (Adhikari; Agrawal, 2013; Wegner, 2016).
Clearly identified property rights	Clearly identified property rights are essential to ensure that environmental resources are properly managed (Adhikari; Agrawal, 2013; Meyer et al., 2015).
Technical and budgetary support to participants	Economic incentives, technology, and machinery increase the adoption and adaptation of PES schemes, especially for small landowners (Adhikari; Agrawal, 2013; Atmodjo; Lamers; Mol, 2017).
Strengthening trust, dialogue, and collaboration between scheme actors	Communication, dialogue, and collaboration strategies among stakeholders are essential to implement a PES scheme (Adhikari; Agrawal, 2013; Wunder, 2013).
Category 2: Payments
Payments higher than provision costs	Payments need to be higher than the costs to participate in the scheme (Lundberg et al., 2018; Wunder et al., 2020).
Varying payments	Differentiated payments for providers with varying provision costs make the scheme cost-efficient. These payments apply to different providers within the same project (Ezzine-de-Blas et al., 2016; Lundberg et al., 2018).
Category 3: Type of participation
Voluntary participation	Participation in the program must be strictly voluntary. When engagement involves a regulatory requirement (making participation mandatory or coerced), the instrument loses its purpose (Wunder, 2015).
Transparency of information in contracts	Transparency enhances the effectiveness of programs by enabling social oversight and monitoring of allocated resources (Adhikari; Agrawal, 2013; Mamedes et al., 2023).
Flexible and/or adaptable contracts	Contractual flexibility is essential to ensure environmental efficiency (Lundberg et al., 2018; Sattler; Matzdorf, 2013). It should encompass not only the ability to design different projects tailored to the local context but also the adaptability of contracts to accommodate social, environmental, or ecological changes, as well as new knowledge gained that justifies adjustments (Hiedanpää; Borgström, 2014).
Category 4: Definition of eligible/priority areas
Well-defined ecosystem services.	The need to assess and identify ES eligible for inclusion in PES programs, considering the importance of these services being quantifiable, are factors that influence program effectiveness and can be considered essential characteristics for a program to qualify as PES (Brouwer; Tesfaye; Pauw, 2011; Chinangwa; Gasparatos; Saito, 2017).
Additionality	Increased delivery of ES (Wunder, 2015) or the protection of areas facing some level of threat to providing an ecosystem service (Engel; Pagiola; Wunder, 2008).
Spatial segmentation	Prioritization of highly relevant areas for greater environmental benefits (e.g., biodiversity or deforestation hotspots) (Ezzine-de-Blas et al., 2016).
Category 5: Conditionality
Monitoring the ES provision or land-use proxies.	Monitoring is essential for the success of PES schemes. Clear indicators must be established to track the ecosystem services or the land use specified in the contract (Aquino; Lopes Netto; Assis, 2022; Engel; Pagiola; Wunder, 2008; Ezzine-de-Blas et al., 2016; Wunder, 2015).
Sanctioning the non-compliance with the provision of the ENS or activity provided for in the contract	Provision for enforcement and penalties in case of contract non-compliance (Ezzine-de-Blas et al., 2016).

Best practice	Related PNPSA article	Findings in the PNPSA and Analysis compared to Best Practices
Involvement and negotiation with stakeholders	Arts.4 X; 5 VIII; 15	The law vaguely provides for society’s participation in its objectives and guidelines, presenting it as a premise. The participation outlined in Article 15 is limited to the collegiate body of the PFPSA, with no mention of the need for involvement from the local communities of the projects.
Clearly identified property rights	Arts.6 II §4; 9 I, II, III and §sole paragraph	The law does not explicitly require proof of ownership, only that rural properties should be registered in the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR). However, the purpose of CAR is not to certify ownership but rather to verify the compliance of properties with the Native Vegetation Protection Law (LPVN).
Technical and budgetary support to participants	Art.11	Article 11 defines that “Public authorities will promote technical assistance and capacity building to foster environmental services (...),” thus indicating technical support for the participants.
Strengthening trust, dialogue, and collaboration between scheme actors	Arts.4 IX; 5 V; 14	One of the law’s objectives is to promote scientific research to validate the ecosystem services provided, which helps build trust among stakeholders. As a guideline, it also emphasizes the integration of policies, fostering collaboration between different stakeholders with the involvement of intermediaries.
Payments higher than provision costs	-	Not provided.
Varying payments	Art.5 XI	The law establishes only “ensuring proportionality in the payment for environmental services rendered” as a guideline.
Voluntary participation	Arts.2 IV; 5 VII	It is outlined in the definition of PES and in the guidelines.
Transparency of information in contracts	Arts.4 X; 5 VIII; 11; 12; 13; 16	Article 5, VIII: Establishes publicity and transparency as guidelines, but they do not appear among the contractual requirements. Article 11: Provides for public authorities’ role in offering technical assistance and capacity building, among other things, in the “public dissemination of information.” Article 12, III: Includes access by public authorities to the contracted area and data related to maintenance, restoration, and environmental improvement actions. However, it does not include contract publicity. Article 16: Establishes the CNPSA, which contains contract information in a unified database with public access, integrated with the National Environmental Information System (Sinima), the Brazilian Biodiversity Information System (SiBBr), and the Rural Environmental Registry System (Sicar).
Flexible and/or adaptable contracts	-	Not provided.
Well-defined ecosystem services	-	Although the law mentions carrying out activities that qualify as ENS (e.g., Article 7), it does not include the requirement for contracts to clearly define the ecosystem services to be covered by PES. This omission may make it difficult to check the achievement of results in such schemes.
Additionality	Arts.5 IV; 8; 9	Article 5 establishes as a guideline “the complementarity of PES regarding command-and-control instruments for environmental conservation,” which, in theory, would ensure additionality. However, Article 8, III, IV, and Article 9, III, sole paragraph, allow areas regulated by policies mandating environmental protection to be included as objects of PES, thereby compromising the principle of additionality.
Spatial segmentation	Arts.8; 9	Priority areas defined by public authorities and areas undergoing in areas affected by desertification or advanced fragmentation are considered eligible.
Monitoring the ES provision or land-use proxies.	Arts.4 IX and XI; 5 X; 11; 12 II; 15 IV	Article 11: Provides for the role of public authorities in “technical assistance and capacity building” and in defining metrics for valuation and monitoring. Article 12: defines that the criteria and indicators for the ENS quality, as well as the conditions and timelines for conducting inspection and monitoring, are mandatory clauses in PES contracts.
Sanctioning the non-compliance with the provision of the ENS or activity provided for in the contract	Arts.4 IX; 5 X; 12 II; 14	The law provides for the verification and confirmation of the actions stipulated in the contract through monitoring and inspection. However, it does not provide for sanctions.

vertical_align_top show_chart

more_horiz close
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

ANPPAS - Revista Ambiente e Sociedade Anppas / Revista Ambiente e Sociedade - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revistaambienteesociedade@gmail.com

rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[TFN1] Font: Adapted from Guerra and Ranieri, 2023.