The Vittel case serves as a salient reference point in academic and policy discussions related to user-financed payments for ecosystem services (PES), but critical views are scarce. Part I introduces Vittel and outlines how discourses about model cases may shape PES theory and practice. Part II presents a review and analysis of 72 recent PES articles referencing Vittel, finding that just six mention any limitations, while 91% rely exclusively on a single, largely favorable report. Part III revisits the broader Vittel literature to challenge the dominant framing of the scheme as ideal in terms of its process, structure, or outcomes. It emphasizes how well-resourced actors can exert non-obvious influences over the terms of negotiations and suggests potential limitations for Coasean bargaining in the presence of large power differentials between parties. The paper concludes with a call for increased scrutiny of this famous case and greater integration between the English- and French-language literatures surrounding it.

在与用户资助的生态系统服务付款（PES）相关的学术和政策讨论中，Vittel案可作为重要参考点，但缺乏批评意见。第一部分介绍了Vittel，并概述了有关模型案例的论述如何影响PES理论和实践。第二部分提供了对最近引用Vittel的72篇PES文章的回顾和分析，发现只有6篇提到了任何限制，而91％的文章完全依赖于一份非常令人满意的报告。第三部分回顾了更广泛的Vittel文献，以其过程，结构或结果来挑战该方案占主导地位的理想框架。它强调了资源丰富的参与者如何在谈判条款上施加非显而易见的影响，并提出了在当事方之间存在巨大权力差异的情况下，对科ase讨价还价的潜在限制。本文的结尾呼吁对这个著名案例进行更严格的审查，并围绕该案例的英语和法语文献之间进行更好的融合。