The approach of this short literature review is to look firstly at what the literature has to say about wider social impacts of "investing in watershed services" (IWS) projects or programs and, secondly, to examine more specifically the gender issues. The term IWS is used in this paper as a convenient shorthand while realizing that this is a controversial term and that there is a case for using other terms such as "payments for watershed services", "reciprocal arrangements in watershed service provision" or "compensation for provision of watershed services." In the interest of brevity, this discussion is not entered into except to say that the term IWS is used here in a broad and inclusive way similar to "IWS-like schemes" as used in the Bellagio Conversations (Asquith & Wunder 2008).
Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)
Copyright 2013 Forest Trends.
IssueLab's Embeddable Widget
Use this super simple form to customize and generate the code you need to display this content in your own environment - no programming required. The feed will inherit more specific styles, like font face and font color, from your website.
Your widget code
Add to the Collection
Please use the form below to provide us with your recommendation, and we'll check it out. Include your name and email address along with your suggestion just in case we need to get in touch. Thank you for contacting us.