Top 58%
dans ce catalogue (917 pratiques notées)
Les scores se concentrent dans le haut de l’échelle ; la position au sein du catalogue est donc souvent plus parlante que le chiffre seul.
Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced1/3
PFES includes forest-carbon services and a national satellite biomass-monitoring database exists, but district-level (Lam Dong) evidence is the only documented case directly linking satellite verification to PFES payments, so outcome evidence is thin.
Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced1/3
PFES's service categories include landscape-beauty and biodiversity conservation, but no biodiversity outcome metrics (species counts, habitat condition) are reported in the sources reviewed.
Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control2/3
Hydropower operators and water utilities supply the large majority of PFES revenue (~VND 10,000bn, 2008-2018) explicitly to pay for watershed-protection services, giving this dimension the strongest financial evidence trail of the five.
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced0/3
Not applicable — the sources reviewed do not document a fire-resilience component of this scheme.
Governance, certification & transferability2/3
Institutionalised nationally since 2010 (Decree 99/2010), first in Asia, with transparent revenue accounting (~16% of the forest-protection budget) — but peer-reviewed evaluation literature explicitly flags weak ecological monitoring and evaluation, capping this below top marks.
Evidoria. Paiements pour services environnementaux forestiers au Viêt Nam — vérification satellitaire du couvert forestier. ID persistant: f8c5ed67-8353-42ae-ac8e-6a94ebb2c803.