Andean grasslands (páramos) are highly valued for their role in regional water supply as well as for their biodiversity and large soil carbon stocks. Several Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) programmes promote either afforestation or alteration of traditional burning regimes under the assumption that these land management strategies will maximize páramo ecosystem services, including carbon storage. However, knowledge of the effects of incentivized land uses is limited. In an evaluation of how afforestation and elimination of burning affect carbon storage at a site in southern Ecuador, we found the highest above-ground biomass carbon levels at afforested sites (99.3–122.0 t C ha−1), while grassland sites reached 23.9 t C ha−1 after 45 years of burn exclusion. Soil carbon storage from 0–20 cm was high across all sites (172.8–201.9 t C ha−1), but was significantly lower with afforestation than with burn exclusion. These findings suggest that, although afforestation is generally favoured when carbon is the primary ecosystem service of interest, grasslands with infrequent burning have important potential as a land management strategy when both above-ground biomass and soil carbon are considered. These results are relevant to the development and adaptation of PES programmes focused on carbon as well as those focused on multiple ecosystem services.

Deforestation and forest degradation in the Peruvian Amazon represent a major threat to biodiversity-related ecosystem services and the global climate. In 2010, the Peruvian Ministry of Environment launched the National Forest Conservation Program for Climate Change Mitigation, an innovative approach to maintaining forest cover of over 54 million hectares of land in protected areas and indigenous and peasant communities. A key component is a payments for environmental services scheme encouraging investments in sustainable land and forest uses in community-controlled territories. We conducted an ex-ante assessment of how the program would play out in terms of conservation cost–effectiveness, income effects and distributional (equity) outcomes if payments were up-scaled, as intended, to all native communities in the Peruvian Amazon. Our spatially explicit impact assessment relied on remotely sensed deforestation data and field data-supported estimates of conservation opportunity costs. We found that the spatially heterogeneous distribution of forestland and economic returns to multiple land uses across communities results in important tradeoffs between hypothetical cost–effectiveness, poverty alleviation and equity outcomes. Nevertheless, our scenario analyses suggested that alternative design options for payment schemes could improve both cost–effectiveness and equity outcomes simultaneously.

In the article above the information on financial support was missed.