pes, benefit sharing, and the nexus: value added or value subtracted?

PES, Benefit Sharing, and the Nexus:

Value added or value subtracted?

Dennis Wichelns

Institute of Water Policy

National University of Singapore

The Mekong Forum on

Water, Food, and Energy

Hanoi, November 13-14, 2012

Questions to Consider

1. What are the goals of our research?

2. What is the basis of our focus on

PES and Benefit Sharing?

3. Are these notions helpful in pursuing

our goals?

4. Is the notion of the Nexus something

new, enlightening, and helpful?

We likely care about

the environment,

resources, and

livelihoods.

Our goals likely

include reducing

poverty and

enhancing the care

and management of

natural resources.

We largely accept

that hydropower

development is

inevitable and we

endeavor to

minimize impacts.

We have been

guided to consider

PES and BSM in

this context.

Yet the prospect for

success is not fully

clear or guaranteed.

The conceptual

framework is partly

sound and the

evidence, to date, is

mixed.

There is an inherent

disconnect between the

buyers and the sellers...

and the public.

We have learned quite a

bit about resource

management in

communal settings.

We know also that for

every plan or

strategy, there will be a

response that might or

might not be expected.

The notion of a

nexus has been

with us for some

time.

Effective solutions

often rely on basic

relationships.

Summing up

Are we certain we are asking the

appropriate research questions.

Should we be keeping a closer eye on

established wisdom and experience.

Does the notion of a nexus involving

food, energy, and water add value to

our conceptual understanding or to

policy design and implementation.

Successful answers

to these questions

might determine a

future Nobel laureate.

In the meantime,

they might enhance

the livelihoods of

millions of deserving

households.