4.0 Principles for Natural-ecosystem Restoration and Sustainable Regeneration A considered review of risks and challenges in literature is illuminating; they are manifest in short-term behaviour, distrust, subterfuge, and abuse of the system. A values-based approach, with upfront alignment amongst the stakeholders – and a viable horizon that allows success to occur – comes across as simple yet powerful mitigation. This, then, is about establishing intent and building trust amongst PES intervention actors. An evaluation of the Vittel PES scheme in France concluded that“trust building through the creation of an intermediary institution that was locally based and led by a champion sympathetic to the farmers' cause” was the fundamental condition of its success(Perrot-Maître 2001). 4.1 Values-based principles Different PES actors should adhere to principles that form the guiding framework for PES intervention amongst partners and collaborators. These principles should be the basis for the intervention which are then built upon, prior to delineating the activities of that specific intervention. This will, more often than not, meet and even surpass objectives of PES and Eco-DRR outlined earlier. 4. DRR as an outcome is incorporated at the design stage and followed through by an empowering process of community engagement for social behaviour change. 5. Collaboration with both'Community' and 'Communities of Practice' is essential to jointly address obstacles to normative and social transformations. This concerted effort is key to instilling predictability in PES practice and should be an integral part of the investment strategy. Raising awareness about a wide-ranging array of benefits beyond just PES can significantly contribute to social buy-in. 6. Technical expertise does not take over. Local knowledge and learned wisdom should not be ignored. 7. Skilling, knowledge transfer, and systems management are to be conducted via an equal, non­hierarchical, two-way interaction between local communities and domain experts. 8. Copy/paste approaches should not be adopted; local context needs to be incorporated in scheme design. 1. The ecosystem subsumes the financial economics of the system and not vice-versa. Monetary valuation of natural ecosystems should not be the starting point of a PES project, instead a'Responsible Capitalism' approach is to be adopted(FIRST Responsible Capitalism, 2023). 2. The stakeholders – local communities, domain experts, investors and funders, government and civic authorities, and social enterprises – should collectively develop a set of goals and vision for the outcomes of the PES project, with a fundamental realignment of mindsets and narratives. 3. The grassroots community will be central to, and an equal participant in the intervention. 9. The learnings and methods are to be placed in an open-source domain. 10. PES actors should not wait for government and policy interventions or support, but maintaining full compliance with the laws of the land is essential. The government and its agencies will remain informed of the programme on an ongoing basis, and the on-the-ground PES team, will continually encourage government agencies to participate, both financially and non­financially, with an aim to leverage policies. 11. Measurement, Verification, Reporting, and Improvement – M/V/R/I – of impact metrics: effective and reliable measurement of service provisioning should be adopted with continual and periodic assessment, reporting, and improvement. 15 Payments for Ecosystem Services