报 告 人：陈成
报告题目：Governance of Ecosystem Services: concept, instruments, innovations and research
报告地点：线下-静远楼1206、线上-腾讯会议（260 742 563）
陈成，德国莱布尼茨农业景观研究中心 Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF)研究员，德国柏林洪堡大学农业经济学博士。从事生态系统服务付费和生态补偿机制科研工作，尤其是市场化和基于激励机制的生态价值实现。作为课题负责人，主持中国自然科学基金（NSFC）与德国科学基金会（DFG）联合项目“SinoPES：生态补偿的市场机制和数字科技赋能研究”（2021-2023），主持中德农业科技合作“信息技术应用及农业环境生态治理创新”（2019-2020）。参与了多个欧盟及德国科研项目，在欧盟“Peatwise：泥炭地管理与气候变化研究”（2017-2021）项目中承担子课题5.1政策设计研究和5.2市场机制研究，在欧盟地平线2020的“InnoForest：森林生态补偿的治理创新”（2017-2020）中承担承担项目子课题4.3创新平台研究。在德国“DAKIS：数字化农业信息系统”（2018-2023）项目中承担项目管理。在德国“AgoraNatura：基于在线交易的生态产品价值实现”（2016-2021）项目中承担项目子课题3.1交易费用研究，该研究成果将为德国第一个生物多样性和生态系统服务的在线交易平台提供了可量化的生态评价标准和可执行的市场交易机制。近5年已发表SCI 论文中，Ecosystem Services (IF=6.33)2篇，Environmental Research Letters (IF=6.096)2篇，Science of the Total Environment (IF=6.551)1篇。担任包括Ecosystem Services, Global Ecology and Conservation等期刊审稿人。
Ecosystem service is an emerging scientific field that includes a variety of tools and involves a range of scientific disciplines. Market-based approaches for internalization of negative externalities of ecosystem services, particular the payments for ecosystem services (PES), have been considered new and innovative management instrument over the past decades. However, the term ‘ecosystem service governance’ has only recently emerged in the peer-reviewed literature in ecosystem services research. The studies in this field are highly diverse, focusing on different governance types, including mostly hybrid, market- and community-based approaches and, to a lesser extent, also hierarchical approaches.
Corresponding to this international trend, PES schemes in China are mostly described by the domestic term eco-compensation or value realization of eco-products. Both PES in Germany and eco-compensation in China face many similar challenges (e.g. insufficient funding, environmental effectiveness and social equity) in creating management mechanism for behavioural change. In both countries, the market-based approaches are still under development, sharing the same constrains of over-relying on governmental payments. In Germany, many attentions have been paid to the management of human behaviour through “soft” incentive-based measures combining with participatory management and collaborative decision making. In China, while the eco-compensation is predominantly relying on governmental financing and hierarchy structure, some recent innovative program such as horizontal eco-compensation cross neighboring provinces and digitally-driven approaches showed the promising potentials in facilitating alternative fund generating and wide participation.
In terms of studied governance challenges, interest was given to the institutional diversity of existing solutions and the fact that often very heterogeneous actors with diverging interests are involved. In view of governance, mostly qualitative and mixed methods and relatively less quantitative approaches were used. Presented methods will include qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), participatory social network analysis (SNA), stated preference analysis and economic experiments.