1. TITLE
EVALUATION OF THE SUSTAINABILITY OF PAYMENT FOR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (PES): A CASE STUDY OF NAIVASHA WATER BASIN PhD proposal by Jacob Kwamina Dodoo Mobile:

2. BACKGROUND
PES - seen as an answer to shortfalls of the existing formal institutions.
PES mechanism - business case required entities which could enter into legal contractual agreement.
Water Allocation Plan - to align water abstractions with the status of water resources at any point in time
All property rights are assigned to the polluters/or abstractors;
High transaction cost; 60% of the farmers owned legal titles for their land;

3. STATEMENT OF RESEARCH PROBLEM
Water fluctuation;
The expected increase in population in Naivasha;
The resultant pressures on the lake;
PES has the potential to mitigate environmental degradation;
Hence the need to make PES work in Naivasha, in order to resolve water scarcity.

4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Why institutions are not involved in managing water abstraction/usage based on PES initiatives?
How does the policies or regulations promote the implementation of PES initiatives?
What are the effect of climate variability within the catchment areas from 2005, 2010 and 2015?

5. OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the sustainability of payment for ecosystem services (PES) in Naivasha.
To assess the role institutions play in the adoption of PES in managing water abstraction;
To examine the property rights regime adopted in the implementation of PES;
To compare the effect of climate variability within the catchment areas from 2005, 2010 and 2015;

6. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Jack, B. K., et al (2007) stated that individuals will tend to provide too little of the ecosystem service when some of the benefits go to others.
Institutional failure is problematic for implementation of a PES program, Clement, et al (2010). Hence, the concern about the roles institutions play confronting environmental changes, Young, (1999a).
Weak governance in developing countries for example Bayliss (2003), Budds and McGranahan (2003), K’Akumu (2004). Hence, the need for governmental regulation.
The development of effective property rights systems to manage natural resources is difficult irrespective of the type of property regime adopted (Johnson and Libecap 1982; Agustine, S., (2008).

7. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND ASSOCIATED THEORIES
Coase Theorem
Transaction cost
Benefits
The Coase Theorem states that if private property rights are clearly defined by enforceable contracts, then the generator and recipient of an externality can, through voluntary exchange, potentially reach an agreement that maximizes social welfare, Farley, J and Costanza, R (2010).

8. STUDY AREA- MAP

9. METHODOLOGY PRIMARY AND SECONDARY; FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION (FGD);
KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS (KII);

10. METHODOLOGY REGRESSION MODEL
Objective 1: will use regression models to explain relationships between different variables. (average farm size, household numbers, and water abstraction rate).
Objective 2: (proportion of land owners, those participating in PES and those who are not)
GIS AND DISTRIBUTED LAG MODEL
Objective 3: The importance to capture the sequence of successive measurements made over a time interval. (production and rainfall)

11. BUDGET Indicative budget Details of items Quantity Price Total
Stationeries
Printing 50
@10
500
Photocopy
450 @3
1350
Pencils 12
@30
360
Folders
@40
480
Flip charts 3
@1500
4500
Mask tape 1
@250
250
Markers
@180
1080
Erasers
@15
180
Transport
Nairobi – Naivasha (Scoping) 4
@500 for 3 people
6000
Nairobi – Naivasha (Actual data) 2
3000
Fuel/rent car for supervision
21 days *3000/day
36000
Actual data collection exercise
Enumerators 6
@1000 per day *21 days
126000
Supervisors
@2000 per day *21 days
Contact person
@500
Researcher (per DM)
@6500 per day * 21
136500
Communications (researcher)
@2000
2000
Communications (Supervisor)
1500
FGD
Meeting allowance 8
@200
1600
Refreshment 10
@50
Scoping study
@200 *2
3200
Local transport
@100 *3
1200
Miscellaneous
5000
Grand total
459200

12. Month/year – (June 2015 – July 2017)
WORKPLAN
Activity
Month/year – (June 2015 – July 2017)
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
Proposal development/ defense
Scoping survey, Analysis
Develop questionnaire
Final questionnaire
Train enumerators, Data collection
Follow up-interviews,
Data Analysis, write thesis Paper & research articles
Graduate