Monitoramento de pagamentos por serviços ambientais hídricos no Brasil

Lima, Ana Paula Morais de; Prado, Rachel Bardy; Latawiec, Agnieszka Ewa

Resumo

A redução de florestas tropicais pelo mundo tem gerado uma significativa perca de serviços ambientais. No Brasil, biomas importantes relacionados a provisão de água (como a floresta Atlântica e Savana) têm sido degradados, comprometendo os serviços ambientais hidrológicos. Pagamentos por serviços ambientais relacionados a água (PSA hídrico) têm sido implementados como uma ferramenta para estimular mudanças no uso e manejo dessas áreas. Muitos projetos de PSA água têm surgido no Brasil fazendo uso da restauração para melhorar serviços ambientais relacionados a água. Nesse contexto, o objetivo desse estudo foi identificar os tipos de monitoramento realizados nos projetos de PSA hídrico brasileiros, suas principais características e lacunas. Cinco projetos brasileiros foram selecionados como estudo de caso para análise. Em seguida, foram realizadas entrevistas com stakeholders dos projetos selecionados visando obter dados atualizados das práticas de monitoramento. Os dados da revisão de literatura, abordagem de estudos de caso e entrevistas foram analisados sob a perspectiva das recomendações dos guias de monitoramento para PSA selecionados. Diferentes aspectos como, objetivos, arranjos institucionais, tipos de monitoramento, indicadores e frequência de monitoramento. O estudo indicou que faltam métodos padronizados de monitoramento tornando difícil especificar os resultados das ações implementadas. A principal lacuna está relacionada ao monitoramento dos benefícios dos PSAs hídricos implementados. É preciso estabelecer um sistema de monitoramento holístico, abordando os ecossistemas como sistemas socio ecológicos complexos. Algumas perspectivas para resolver esses problemas foram propostas. Os resultados deste trabalho podem ajudar não apenas a melhorar os esquemas atuais e futuros de PSA no Brasil, mas também em outros países, especialmente países em desenvolvimento, dos quais populações vulneráveis dependem.

Palavras-chave:
indicadores; lacunas do monitoramento de PSA- água; perspectivas para o monitoramento de PSA-água

[1] ^*Corresponding author: Ana Paula Morais de Lima, e-mail: a.lima@iis-rio.org

Projects	Objectives	Type of monitoring	Related institutions*
Water Conservator	Effectively reduce erosion and sedimentation processes, Increase land cover, Improve the quality and quantity of the water resources, Ensure the socioeconomic and environmental sustainability of conservation practices	Ecosystem function, interventions, and benefits	UFLA, USP SP e USP Esalq, Unicamp, Embrapa Jaguariuna
Oásis Brumadinho	Preserve natural areas and springs, Stimulate sustainable practices of land use, Promote and increase in the area and quality of the land cover through ecological restoration, Contribute to improving the quality of life of the population involved in the PES	Ecosystem function, interventions, and benefits	Mineira association for environmental protection (AMDA) and O Boticario Foundation of Nature Protection
Water producer Camboriú	Preserve and restore riparian zones and areas with the potential to promote the regulation of water flows, Increase the quantity and quality of the water resources, Not compromise the socioeconomic context in which the community is inserted	Ecosystem function, interventions, and benefits	EMASA, Balneário Camboriú City Hall, EPAGRI (Agricultural Research and Rural Extension Company of Santa Catarina), TNC (The Nature Conservancy), ANA (Nacional Water Agency).
Water producer Pipiripau	Ensure water quantity and quality, Reduce erosion, Contribute to the regulation of the hydrological regime of rivers,	Ecosystem function, interventions, and benefits	UnB, WWF, IBRAM, Emater-DF
Water and forest producers Guandu	Improve the number of water resources in the Guandu Basin, Improve water-quality indicators, Reduce sedimentation, Increase land cover, Generate employment and income	Ecosystem function, interventions, and benefits	TNC (The nature conservancy) and Guandu Watershed Committee.

Type of monitoring	Indicators	Water Conservator*	Oásis Brumadinho	Water Producer Camboriú	Water Producer Pipiripau	Water and Forest Producers Guandu
Type of monitoring	Indicators	Frequency of monitoring
Ecosystem functions	Precipitation	m	NP	H	m	M
	Distribution of precipitation	NP	NP	NP	NP	M
	Accumulated distribution	NP	NP	NP	NP	M
	Number of rainy days	NP	NP	NP	NP	M
	Number of days without rains	NP	NP	NP	NP	M
	Number of days with rainy events	NP	NP	NP	NP	M
	Air temperature	m	NP	H	NP	NP
	Atmospheric pressure	NP	NP	H	NP	NP
	Wind speed	NP	NP	H	NP	NP
	Air moisture	NP	NP	NP	NP	NP
	Solar radiation	NP	NP	H	NP	NP
	Leaf wetting	NP	NP	H	NP	NP
	Water flow	m	SA	m	Q	M
	Water level	m	SA	H	Q	m
	Water turbidity	m	SA	H	Q	m
	Water temperature	B	SA	H	NP	NP
	Water total suspended solids	NP	NP	H	NP	M
	Water dissolved oxygen	B	SA	H	NP	NP
	Water pH	B	SA	H	NP	R
	Water electrical conductivity	B	SA	H	NP	R
	Water organic matter	NP	NP	H	NP	NP
	Water total phosphorus	NP	NP	H	NP	NP
	Water nutrients	NP	NP	H	NP	NP
	Water sediments	NP	NP	NP	NP	M
	Water infiltration	NP	NP	NP	NP	NP
	Electric conductivity	NP	SA	NP	NP	R
Ecosystem functions	Runoff	NP	NP	NP	NP	M
	Land use/cover	NP	NP	NP	NP	BA
	Groundwater level	NP	NP	NP	NP	NP
	Avifauna	NP	NP	BA	NP	BA
	Ictiofauna	NP	NP	BA	NP	BA
	Mastofauna	NP	NP	BA	NP	NP
	Herpetofauna	NP	NP	BA	NP	NP
	Carcinofauna	NP	NP	BA	NP	NP
Struture	Soil conservation	NP	SA	NP	Q	NP
	Permanent Preservation areas and legal reserves	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
	Presence of endangered species	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
	Presence of invasive species	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
	Vegetation stage	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
	Erosion control practices	NP	SA	NP	A	NP
	Use of native wood	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
	Sanitation condition	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
	Number of endangered species	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
	Use of native wood	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
	Class of agrochemical used	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
	Adoption of organic production	NP	SA	NP	NP	NP
Benefits	Jobs created with water PES	NP	NP	NP	NP	NP
	Perception of rural producers and agents involved in project management	NP	NP	BA	NP	NP
	Motivation of producers related to water PES	NP	NP	SA	NP	NP

Aspects	Status/Gaps	Perspectives
Objectives	The Brazilian water PES presents general objectives. "Without clear goals and objectives, Water Funds cannot determine what they are trying to achieve or whether they have been successful in achieving it (Higgins and Zimmerling, 2013, p. 6).	The project's objectives should be directly linked to the monitoring process. Given the limited project resources, the monitoring procedures have to capture the most relevant information. The objectives give support for the questions that the monitoring process has to answer with data collection and analysis (Higgins and Zimmerling, 2013; UNEP-WCMC and FEBA, 2020). Developing specific short and long-term goals with experts and stakeholders in the planning stage can direct the project monitoring actions on the timeline. Following the SMART framework, the objectives have to be: specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and Time-bound. This type of criteria is a guide to establish and organize project goals. Example of goal based on the SMART framework: Reduce sediment loads at downstream water intake points by 15 percent within ten years.
Institutional arrangement	The Brazilian water PES institutions working on monitoring do not have good data organization. Four of five (80 percent) case studies do not present an integration of the monitored data and do not have a common means of making data available for society.	Create a common platform for organizing and making data available to decision-makers related to water PES monitoring and society.
Methods	All 5 (100 percent) of the case studies have different methods to monitor the results of the project. This makes it difficult or even impossible to compare the results.	The PES water programs should recommend or establish the same methods in their projects. Methods should be simplified, easy-to-apply, and low-cost when possible.
Indicators (and baseline)	-Three of five (60 percent) case studies have not done baseline monitoring. -Significant variation between project indicators and monitoring frequency, indicating a lack of standardization. -The indicators focus on hydrological aspects (mainly related to ecosystem functions) and interventions and rarely include benefits indicators. - Hydrological-indicator monitoring is done at specific points of the watercourses, which hinders the integrated view of the basin. This practice can lead to distorted results, since the action at one point in the basin can affect all the drainage area (Odum, 2012ODUM, E. P. Ecologia. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan, 2012.).	-The first year of monitoring can be considered as a baseline, but this monitoring must be done as soon as possible so as not to distort the results. -Establish a standardization at least in the same program, using standard guides, recommended indicators, and frequencies aligned. This process will enable a comparison between the projects and results. -It is also essential to have a set of indicators for each category (structure, functions, and benefits), to have complete monitoring. - An integrated watershed monitoring can provide evidence where the sources of pollution that affect water quality are located.