Presentation short abstract

This study examines how land tenure—individual vs. communal—shapes local perceptions of fairness in benefit sharing from PES and carbon projects in Peru and Kenya. It highlights how property regimes influence legitimacy, distribution preferences, and tensions around equity.

Presentation long abstract

Nature-based carbon and Payment for Ecosystem Service (PES) projects are reshaping land use practices of Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IPLCs), often in exchange for monetary or in-kind benefits. These shifts frequently alter intra- and inter-community dynamics, raising questions about who benefits and who is excluded. Central to these projects are benefit sharing mechanisms (BSMs), which determine how returns are distributed and who is recognized as legitimate beneficiaries.

Scholars and practitioners emphasize the need for BSMs to be locally embedded and co-designed-not only to enhance equity and legitimacy, but also to ensure long-term conservation outcomes. While many enabling factors for equitable benefit sharing are documented, little comparative, qualitative research explores how IPLCs perceive fairness and legitimacy in BSMs. Local ideas of fairness are shaped by histories, norms, and lived experience. Tensions often arise between competing allocation logics- rewarding performance, compensating costs, or prioritizing the poorest.

Drawing on nearly 450 interviews from 16 PES and carbon projects in Peru and Kenya, we examine how BSM preferences vary across land tenure regimes-communal and individual holdings-and how these intersect with governance, demographic factors, and local justice norms to shape perceived legitimacy and project outcomes. Preliminary findings show that most respondents favor combining individual performance-based rewards with allocations for vulnerable groups or those who have historically stewarded nature. However, these hybrid approaches can also reproduce inequalities or enable elite capture. This raises critical questions about whether BSMs can reconcile divergent fairness logics in socially differentiated landscapes.