Cali's municipal environment agency DAGMA pays rural landowners to protect the city's water sources: 238 agreements signed by June 2026 covering 2,500+ hectares and ~1,000 water sources, building on a 2009–2014 pilot that paid US$697,555 to conserve 120 hectares.
US$697,555
2009-2014 pilot budget (2009-2014)
62%
Share of pilot budget from Fondo Patrimonio Natural and Dutch government (2009-2014)
120 ha
Hectares under conservation/restoration agreements (pilot) (2009-2014)
12
Community aqueducts served (pilot area) (2009-2014)
8,000+
Rural residents served by pilot-area aqueducts (2009-2014)
238
PSA agreements signed (by June 2026)
COP 3,500 million (~US$875,000)
Investment in 2026 PSA expansion (by June 2026)
2,500+ ha
Hectares under conservation (2026 expansion) (by June 2026)
~1,000
Water sources protected (2026 expansion) (by June 2026)
Details
Maturity
Scaling
Promoter
Alcaldía de Santiago de Cali — DAGMA
Period
2009–2026
Keywords
municipal government, watershed protection, rural livelihoods, water utility
Context
One of Colombia's earliest municipal payment-for-environmental-services pilots ran from 2009 to 2014 in the Cali river basin's Pichindé and Felidia sub-watersheds — an area with roughly 417 springs and 12 community aqueducts serving over 8,000 rural residents. The pilot, evaluated in a 2021 peer-reviewed study, was funded mainly by the Fondo Patrimonio Natural and the Dutch government (62% of a US$697,555 budget) and covered 120 hectares under conservation and restoration agreements.
Objectives
The Alcaldía de Cali's environmental agency, Dagma (Departamento Administrativo de Gestión del Medio Ambiente), later revived and scaled up the model to support water sources feeding both Cali's municipal aqueduct network and rural community water systems, aiming to strengthen 'economic incentives for the families that protect strategic areas' (Dagma director Lina Botía).
Activities
By June 2026, Dagma had signed 238 Payment for Environmental Services (PSA) agreements with rural families, representing an investment of roughly COP 3,500 million (~US$875,000), covering conservation of more than 2,500 hectares and the protection of approximately 1,000 water sources over a seven-month contract period.
Conclusions
As with many municipally-funded PES schemes, continuity depends on annual city budget allocations, and no independent, rigorous outcome evaluation (measured water yield or quality change) of the 2026 expansion was found — the available evidence documents financial and institutional commitment and hectare coverage rather than verified hydrological impact.
Implementation
Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k) — Pilot phase (2009-2014) budget of US$697,555, 62% from Fondo Patrimonio Natural and the Dutch government; 2026 expansion investment of roughly COP 3,500 million (~US$875,000).
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Pilot ran 2009-2014; programme was later revived and scaled by Dagma, reaching 238 signed agreements by June 2026, with individual PSA contracts running over a seven-month period.
Staffing & skills
DAGMA (Departamento Administrativo de Gestión del Medio Ambiente) municipal staff, rural landowner/family participants under PSA agreements
Conditions for success
Sustained municipal budget allocation across multiple years/administrations to maintain payments
Building on a rigorously evaluated pilot (2009-2014, peer-reviewed) before scaling up
Multi-donor funding at pilot stage (Fondo Patrimonio Natural, Dutch government) to establish proof of concept
Direct agreements with rural families covering strategic water-source areas
Common failure modes
Continuity depends on annual city budget allocations, creating funding risk from year to year
No independent hydrological outcome evaluation (water yield/quality) has been conducted for the 2026 expansion, limiting ability to verify environmental impact
Where it fits
Governance type
municipal government agency (DAGMA, Alcaldía de Cali)
Scale
city/watershed (Cali river basin)
Income level
upper-middle-income (Colombia)
Commonly funded by
National / regional programmes
Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.
Do you run this practice?
Claim it —
verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.
Data sources
Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.