This document summarizes the legal and policy framework for payment for ecosystem services (PES) in Thailand. It outlines several ongoing PES projects in the country focused on forest conservation, wildlife conservation, and watershed protection. It also describes the 20 steps involved in designing and implementing PES projects. Legally, there is no framework directly for PES in Thailand, but existing laws could allow for relaxed restrictions to enable PES pilot projects. Overall, PES potential in Thailand is high but capacity building is still needed, and challenges remain in quantifying ecosystem services benefits and engaging the private sector.

1. Legal and Policy Framework
for Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES)
in Thailand
Orapan Nabangchang
Presented by
Radda Larpnun
Regional workshop on Payment for Environmental Services
Hanoi, Vietnam
24-25 November 2014

2. Outline of presentation
• The experience of date
• On-going PES Projects
in Thailand
• 20 Steps in the design
and implementation
process
• Legal aspects of PES in
Thailand
• Conclusion
2

3. 4
Wildlife
Conservation
• Mai Khao Marine
Turtle Conservation
(Phuket)
• Adopting Elephant
Project
• Gaur Conservation of
Khao Pang Ma
Conservation Network
• Hornbill Adoption
prog. in Budo-Sungai
Padi National Park
• Elephant Conservation
by Elelphant
Conservation Network
in Kanchanaburi
Forest
Conservation
• Carbon sequestration
project in Inpaeng
Community Network
in Northeast (Carbon2
Markets Prog.2009)
• Klongrung Tree Bank in
Chumphon province
• Restoration projects
by private companies
and state enterprise
sector (Toyota Motor
(TH), Coca-Cola,
Petroleum Authority of
Thailand (PTT), Electricity
Generating Authority of
Thailand)
PES-Like
programs
in Thailand

4. ELEMENT of PES
Ecosystem Ecosystem
Benefit from
ecosystem
services
Better Benefit
from ecosystem
services due to
Additionally
conservation and
restoration
activities
Conservation
and
restoration
Activities
 Service Provider& ES
beneficiaries (potential
buyers)
Adapted from Marit Kragt,Michael Renton  Agreement/Contract
and Gabriela Scheufele presentation, 2013
 Transparency
 Additionality
 Conditionality
 Voluntary

5. The experience to date
• Most of the funding for natural resources conservation is primarily
CSR investments that result in producing ecosystems services.
• Villagers involved in conservation activities are more like
wageworkers and not quite fitting the definition of service providers.
• Challenge is to demonstrate the direct and indirect benefits of
ecosystems services so as to create real demands for the provision
of ecosystems services which will be more difficult than fund raising
for wildlife
• Inpaeng community project has all the components of a PES project
That is, there are services providers involved in reforestation and
sellers and there are baselines from which to measure the
‘additionally’. But why did this experience never take off elsewhere?
• Thailand doesn’t really have a ‘PES’ project
6

6. 16 PES projects
at the design stage
7
BEDO (Thung Jo – water
stream)
CBFCM(Mae Sa)
CATSPA (Doi Intanon
National Park)
CATSPA
(Klong-lan National Park)
CATSPA
(Huai Kha Khaneng Wildlife
Sanctuary)
BEDO–Klong Prasong,
Krabi province (Man-grove
Forest)
CATSPA
(Tarutao National Park)
BEDO–Chumporn
province (Mangrove
Forest)
CBFCM Project
(Koh Phangnan)
ECOBEST
CBFCM Project –
(Tha Chin River)
CBFCM Project
(Lam Se Bai) Ubon Ratchathani
province
ECOBEST (Dong
Phayayen-Khao Yai)
BEDO (Ang Rea Nai
Wildlife Sanctuary)
CATSPA (Eastern Forest)
Nakorn Pathom &
Samutsakorn Provincet
THAILAND’S
NATIONAL PARKS,
WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES
AND NON-HUNTING AREAS
National Park
Wildlife Sanctuary
Marine National Park
Non-Hunting Area
Map Design & Artwork © David Unkovich 1999
Modif ed from a Royal Forest Departement Map

7. On-going PES Projects in Thailand (DNP)
Area Legal concerns Ecosystems services Project
Proponent
Initial
Source of
Funding
Catalyzing Sustainability of Thailand’s Protected Area System
Watershed forest
Site located in protected
about 300,000 rai
area (Doi Inthanon
in 3 villages
National Park)
(Mae Ga-Luang, Pa
Morn, Khun Klang),
Chiang Mai
Watershed DNP UNDP-GEF
Nakhon Sawan
Uthaitani
Kampheng Phet
Site located in Klong Lan
National Park and Huey
Kha Kaeng Wildlife
Sanctuary
Wildlife habitat DNP UNDP-GEF
Mae Wong National Park Wildlife habitat
Watershed
DNP UNDP-GEF
Satun Province:
Southern Region
Tarutao Marine National
Park
Eco-tourism and
recreational value
DNP UNDP-GEF
Eastern Forest
Complex
3 Wildlife Sanctuaries
and 5 National Parks
Wildlife habitat and
watershed
DNP UNDP-GEF
8

8. On-going PES Projects in Thailand (REO)
Area Legal concerns Ecosystems services Project
Proponent
Initial Source
of Funding
Community Forestry Based Catchment Management
Mae Sa
watershed, Chiang
Mai
Protected Area Watershed
Recreation
REO UNDP-GEF
Lam Sebai
Community Forest,
Northeast Thailand
Community Forest, Water supply and
water purification
functions
REO UNDP-GEF
Tha Chin river
outlet, Central
Thailand
Private land Water quality
improvement
Mangroves’ coastal
protection function; fish
spawning ground and
habitat
REO UNDP-GEF
Phangan Island,
Southern Thailand
Site located in Marine
National Park
Watershed
Coastal resources
REO UNDP-GEF
9

9. On-going PES Projects in Thailand (BEDO)
10
Area Legal concerns Ecosystems
services
Project Proponent
Initial Source of
Funding
Ang Rue Nai Wildlife
Sanctuary (ARNWS)
Site located in
wildlife sanctuary
therefore has high
level of restriction
regarding access
Wildlife habitat Biodiversity-
Economy-Based
Development
Organization
(BEDO)
Not yet identified
Klong prasong: Krabi Property rights
unclear
Mangroves BEDO Local villagers
who benefit
Thung Jor, Chiang
Mai
Site located in
wildlife sanctuary
therefore has high
level of restriction
regarding access
Watershed BEDO Provincial Water
Work
Pathiu district,
Chumphon
Property rights
unclear
Mangroves BEDO CPF a
subsidiary of CP
Santisuk district,
Nan Province
Property rights
unclear
BEDO CPF a
subsidiary of CP

10. On-going PES Projects in Thailand (ECO-BEST)
11
Area Legal concerns Ecosystems
services
Project
Proponent
Initial Source
of Funding
Dong Phayayen-
Khao Yai Complex
Site locate
Protected Area
therefore has
high level of
restriction
regarding access
Watershed ECO-BEST EU, German
Government,
RTG,
Helmholtz
university
Klong Nadi,
Nakhon Sri
Thammarat
Property rights
unclear
Watershed ECO-BEST EU, German
Government,
RTG,
Helmholtz
university

11. A detailed look at one of the pilot sites under CBFCM
: MAESA Pilot Project
12
Target area and justification
Watershed area in Pong Yang district which is the watershed of Mae Sa river
 Area is rich in biodiversity
 High risk of forest encroachment
 High risk of forest fires
 Intensifying problems of water contamination from agricultural chemicals in the upstream area and from elephant
sanctuary located in the midstream area
 Increasing competition for water use for agriculture, tourism and households
Ecosystems Services Watershed functions
Recreation-ecotourism
Activity  Forest patrol to reduce rate of encroachment
 Making and maintaining forest fire lines
 Restoring watershed forests
 Increase efficiency in water usage (reduce water shortage downstream)
Indicator  Reduced incidences of forest fire
 Increasing biodiversity
 Reduced area of degraded forests
Services Provider Local communities in Pong Yang Sub-district
Beneficiaries of ES (potential buyers) Water users in the midstream and downstream area (households, tourism sector)
Information gap There is inadequate baseline information on the status quo situation:
 Rate of deforestation
 Statistics on the incidences of forest fires
 Biodiversity resources
 Water flow
 Water quality
 Volume of water uses among different users
Economic Analysis of ES Needs to be undertaken both the benefits of ecosystems services as well as the costs, i.e., costs for undertaking
conservation activities and opportunity costs for land use changes or changes in agricultural practices
Capacity Building Needs  Technical skills in undertaking conservation activities
 Technical skills in collecting, compiling and analyzing the scientific information
 Training on economic valuation
 Management skills
Legal and Institutional issues Site is located in a Protected Area (Doi Suthep Pui National Park) and hence the issue of legitimacy of occupants and
entitlement to be receiving reward and/or compensation

12. The 20 steps in the design and
implementation process
Step The progress
1 Selecting the geographical area
2 Cataloging the ES to be supplied
3 Identifying the sources of ES demand
4 Identifying potential ES supply
5 Defining the type and degree of agent
6 Selecting the ES buyers
7 Securing funds to pay for the ES
8 Determining the types of returns to ES suppliers
9 Bio-physical modeling
10 Estimating marginal benefits of supply
Source: Jeff Bennett. Crawford School Australian National University 13

13. The 20 steps (continued)
14
Step The progress
11 Estimating individual marginal cost
12 Developing the payment system
13 Selecting the ES suppliers
14 Determining the payments from buyer
15 Establishing the payment transfer mechanism
16 Determining the supplier measure
17 Establishing a monitoring
18 Establishing a penalty non-compliance
19 Contracting the ES
20 Assessing the PES scheme
Source: Jeff Bennett. Crawford School Australian National University

14. 15

15. Legal aspects of PES in Thailand
• There is at present, no legal framework that directly
concerns PES.
• There are laws that are relevant to the specific types
of land, which are likely to be PES sites.
• Almost all of the PES and PES-like projects are
located in public land which are covered by different
pieces of legislation and varying levels of protection
• Existing legal framework is not ‘enabling’ by nature.
• Some amendments or exemptions will have to be
made to allow service providers to carry out measures
in public areas where there are ‘legal’ entry
restrictions.
16

16. • If the starting point is to pass a law, then it will
be a long and drawn out process.
• However, the policy framework is supportive
and there are laws which recognizes the role
of local communities in natural resources
management which can be used as references
for ‘relaxing’ the restrictions imposed by the
laws that aim first and foremost to protect the
natural resources.
17
Legal aspects of PES in Thailand

17. Conclusion
• Though lagging behind other countries in this
Region, Thailand has benefited from the PES
experiences of other countries.
• The on-going projects, though in their very
earlier stages, demonstrated the complexities
involved and stakeholders are already starting
their learning processes.
18

18. • Some of the projects discussed in this report, though called
PES projects are essentially a modified form of CSR. There is
nothing wrong with CSR projects, do not address missing
markets, nor create incentives to undertake conservation
measures on a sustainable basis.
• The existing legal framework though not explicitly endorsing
the concept of creating incentives for service providers
(particularly local communities), can be relaxed in specific
cases if this would enable the implementation of pilot projects.
• Anticipating criticisms that PES can be used as a tool for
legitimizing occupants in Protected Area, it must be made
clear that payment is:
• conditional,
• Involvement does not in increase entitlement to property rights to
land, or rights of access to natural resources.
19
Conclusion

19. • There is critical need for target group specific capacity building from
the national level down to local communities. Of critical need
appears to be training needs for those who are involved as
counterparts in both CATSPA and CBFCM projects
• One of the major challenges is to create recognition of the benefits
from ecosystems service.
• There is a need for a formal institutional framework to create
tangible incentives for the private sectors.
• Without strategic and innovative approaches to involve the
private sectors, CSR investments is most likely to be spread so
thin and serving publicity purposes of private companies with
little tangible outcome in improving the environment.
20
Conclusion

20. • there is high potential for poverty alleviation with
estimated number of forest-dependent people being
between 1 to 2 million people
• All PES sites were selected primarily on considerations
over the biophysical conditions of the sites.
• Although poverty alleviation was not the determining
factor for sites selection, income effect is an expected
outcome of all projects
21
Conclusion

21. • There is potential as well as need to use PES as
a tool for biodiversity conservation.
– At present, biodiversity conservation in Thailand relies
heavily on legal measures. Without effective control
measures, various pieces of legislations cited earlier
have their limitations.
22
Conclusion

22. Khob Khun Ka : Thank You : Ca’m O’n
orapann@gmail.com
radda.Larpnun@undp.org