Professional Documents
Culture Documents
NRE
Prepared by Micael Junkov 2008/09 EPU/Danidas Environmental Programme The Biodiversity Component
M1L4S1
What have we seen in Lessons 1 to 3 of relevance to the value of biodiversity and ecosystem services
Sustainable development is an almost universally
accepted goal
Environmentally sustainable development
requires that critical resource stocks and ecological functions are safeguarded
Maintaining the flow of ecosystem services
stock that yields a flow of valuable goods or services into the future
Biodiversity is important because it supports
ecosystem processes and the provision of services vital to our society and human wellbeing
All our activities, including the global economy,
are made possible thanks to the diversity of services that nature provides
M1L4S3
Not all that is very useful commands a high value (water, for example) and not everything that has a high value is very useful (such as a diamond)
Adam Smiths Wealth of Nations (1776) (Paraphrased by TEEB 1)
M1L4S4
40 30 20 10 0
0% PreFrontier settlement Subsistence Intensifying Intensive 1700 Future Year 1900 2007
M1L4S5
Changing paradigms
The ecosystem services paradigm has enhanced
our understanding of how the natural environment matters to human societies Societys most fundamental assets include: natural; physical; human; social; and intellectual capital
However
Despite growing recognition of the importance
of ecosystem functions and services, they are often taken for granted and overlooked in planning and decision-making
M1L4S6
Lesson 4: Setting the What stage isfor the biodiversity value of ecosystem services?
Regulating Services
Benefits obtained from regulation of ecosystem processes
Cultural Services
Non-material benefits obtained from ecosystems
Climate regulation Pest regulation Runoff regulation Water purification Pollination Mitigate erosion Mitigate tsunamis
Spiritual & religious Recreation & ecotourism Aesthetic & inspirational Educational Cultural heritage Existence values
Supporting Services
Services necessary for the production of all other ecosystem services
Soil formation
Nutrient cycling
Primary production
Provision of habitat
Oxygen production
M1L3S7
Food
Conversion of solar Farming/aquaculture energy into edible plants (small/large scale) and animals Fodder and fertiliser Hunting, fishing, gathering of fruits, etc.
Role of ecosystems in bio-geochemical cycles Influence of land cover and biol. mediated processes on climate
UVb-protection by O3 Maintain good air quality Influence on climate (e.g. temperature, wind, rainfall, rainfall intensity) Storm/tsunami protection (e.g. coral reefs, mangroves) Flood mitigation (e.g. by forests and wetlands)
M1L4S8
Process
Role of biota in movement of pollen Role of vegetation & biota in removal or breakdown of nutrients and compounds Population control through trophicdynamic relations
Service
Pollination of wild plant species Pollination of crops Pollution control / detoxification Filtering of dust particles Mitigate noise Control of pests and diseases Reduction in crop damage
Regulating
Waste treatment
Biological control
M1L4S9
Non-Use Value
Option Value
Value of the option to maintain future use of:
Indirect Use
Functions/ services enjoyed directly
Quasi-Option
Value arising from expected new information from avoiding irreversible loss of:
Bequest Value
Value arising from leaving assets to future generations
Existence Value
Value arising from knowledge of continued existence
Shoreline Habitat protection Species Storm protection Decreasing ease Sediment regulation Nutrient retention Water quality maintenance External support of fish/habitat Groundwater discharge Microclimatic stabilization Carbon sink
of valuation
M1L4S10
M1L4S11
water, now housing development and runoff from roads and agriculture a threat In 1996 NYC two options: 1)Filtration system $2-6 billion + $300 million p.a. 2) Protect watersheds
From NRC, 2004.
M1L4S12
Memorandum Agreement
Federal, state, local
authorities, and NGOs NYC spend $250 million during 10-year buying undeveloped land (willing sellers)
M1L4S13
uncertainties exists in sustaining long-term high quality drinking water Provision through natural processes rather than human engineering offered estimate of value of restoring ecosystem service Replacement costs for natural processes providing clean water estimated to $2-6 billion ($4,000 to $12,000 per hectare) Relative specific policy question meant that currently available economic methods of ecosystem service valuation was sufficient to provide an estimate
From NRC, 2004.
M1L4S14
water through watershed conservation difficult because: 1. Filtration versus watershed protection provide same level of water quality and reliability? 2. No guarantee that protecting watershed continues to be successful 3. Replacement cost can only be used when alternatives exists to provide same service and least-cost applies (i.e. service will still be demanded) i. Value of providing clean water is only partial measure of the value of ecosystem services provided by watersheds ii. Replacement cost is rarely a good measure of the value of an ecosystem. M1L4S15
animal pollination to produce seeds Pollinators include in their ranks about 1,200 species of vertebrates and at least 200,000 species of insects Pollinators affect 35% of the worlds crop production, increasing output of 87 of the leading food crops worldwide Despite the utter centrality of pollination to terrestrial life, there is an extraordinary deficiency of dependable data on pollinator populations in general The status of pollinators is or should be a matter of great concern particularly since reports of apparent pollinator declines around the world over the past decade has led to a brewing international pollinator crisis.
M1L4S16
90 crops and amount to more than $15 billion per year. 1 According to a French/German study published 20092: Economic value of insect pollination for the world agriculture in 2005 was 153 billion (i.e. 9.5% of the total value of the world agricultural food production). Vegetables and fruits were the leading crop categories in value of insect pollination with about 50 billion each, followed by edible oil crops, stimulants, nuts and spices. Pollinator disappearance would translate into a consumer surplus loss estimated between 190 to 310 billion. Although this valuation clearly demonstrates the economic importance of insect pollinators, it does not take into account the strategic responses of the markets.
1 2
M1L4S17
services? Some 30 + ecosystem services referred to in scientific literature In 1997 an international team of economist valued 17 services from 16 ecosystems including:
Wetlands
Forests Grasslands
Estuaries
Other marine and terrestrial ecosystems
Costanza et al., 1997.
M1L4S18
Ecosystem Services
Water supply Food production Waste treatment Disturbances Gas Water Cultural values Nutrient cycling Raw materials Genetic resources Climate Erosion Biological control Pollination Recreation Soil formation
Regulating
Cultural Supporting
Costanza et al., 1997.
Habitat
M1L4S19
ecosystem type for each service and a willingness to pay estimate for the service Multiplying these estimates generated a per ha value of the ecosystem service for each ecosystem type Summed all services to establish a value per ha for each ecosystem type Finally, multiplied this per-ha value by the number of ha of each ecosystem type and summed across ecosystem types to derive the total value of ecosystem services
Costanza et al., 1997.
M1L4S20
planet ranged from $16 trillion to $54 trillion, with a mean estimate of $33 trillion. This value was notably higher than the value of global GDP (Gross Domestic Product) at the time ($18 trillion) i.e. almost twice the size.
Global Gross National Product (GNP)
M1L4S21
ecosystem services is infinite given that our economies would soon collapse without them Simple multiplication of a physical quantity by unit value cannot be done in natural systems Environment since they do not follow linear relationships Society The approach assumes that ecosystem service Sustainable production is scale -free Economy Development In one sense, it was a correct approach towards complete accounting. However, present understanding and methods is unlikely to accomplish it anytime soon
M1L4S22
Conclusions
The valuation of ecosystem services is an
evolving discipline which requires the integration of ecology and natural sciences with economy. Examples of approaches and interdisciplinary studies that provide such integration indicate successful beginnings The ability to generate useful information about the value of ecosystem services varies widely for case studies 1 For some policy questions, enough is known about ecosystem service valuation to help in decision-making.
1
NRC, 2004.
M1L4S23
Conclusions
Our constraints in supporting decision-making with reliable ecosystem values may arise from: 1. Insufficient ecological knowledge/information to estimate:
i. The quantity of ecosystem services produced; or ii. How ecosystem service production would change
under alternative scenarios 2. Existing economic methods may be unable to generate reliable and uncontroversial estimates of value for the provision of various levels of ecosystem services
3. Lack of integration of ecological and economic analysis.
1
NRC, 2004.
M1L4S24
Conclusions
Studies that focus on valuing a single ecosystem service
show promise of delivering results that can inform important policy decisions Even when the goal of a valuation exercise is focused on a single ecosystem service, a workable understanding of the functioning of large parts or possibly the entire ecosystem may be required Valuation of a single ecosystem service is easier than valuating multiple services. However, the interconnections among services may make it necessary to expand the scope of the analysis. Ecosystem processes are often spatially linked, especially in aquatic ecosystems The value of ecosystem services depends on underlying conditions.
M1L4S25
NRC, 2004.
Recommendations 1
There is no perfect answer to questions about the
existing institutional barriers that prevent ready and effective collaboration among ecologists and economists regarding the valuation of terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystem services.
Existing and future interdisciplinary programs
NRC, 2004.
M1L4S26
Single ecosystem service Providing clean drinking water (p. 132) Drinking water from ground water (p. 137) Valuation of fish production provided by coastal wetlands and estuaries (p. 141) Provision of flood control services (p. 143) Valuing multiple ecosystem services Fish production, irrigation waters, navigation, flood control, and clean drinking water (p. 146) Upstream vs. downstream water use (p. 149) Food production, recreational fishing, and provision of drinking water from lakes (p. 151)
1
NRC, 2004.
M1L4S27
Valuing ecosystems Oil spill (p. 154) Restoration of water resources (p. 156) Multiple services in multiple ecosystems (p. 159)
NRC, 2004.
M1L4S28
References
Berenbaum MR. 2007. The Birds and the BeesHow Pollinators Help Maintain Healthy Ecosystems. Testimony before the US House of Representatives, 26 June 2007. Chichilnisky G & Heal G. 1998. Economic returns from the biosphere. Nature 391 (6668), pp. 629-630. Costanza R, dArge R, de Groot R, Fabes S, Grano M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, ONeil RV,Pareulo J, Raskin R, Sulton P and van der Belt M. 1997. The value of the worlds ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 254-260. De Groot RS, Wilson MA & Boumans RMJ. 2002. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics 41:393-408. EC. 2008. The economics of ecosystems & biodiversity. An interim report. European Commission and the Germans Federal Environment Ministry.
M1L4S29
References
Foley JA, Defries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, Helkowski JH, Holloway T, Howard EA, Kucharik CJ, Monfreda C, Patz JA, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, and Snyder PK. 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570-574, 22 July 2005. Gallai N, Salles J-M, Settele J, Vaissiere, BE. 2009. Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecological Economics 68 (3), pp. 810-821. NRC. 2004. Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better Environmental Decision-Making. National Research Council. Water Science and Technology Board. National Academies Press. Washington, D.C. OECD. 2002. Handbook of biodiversity valuation. A guide for policy makers. Paris. Pereira, H.M. and Cooper, H.D. 2006. Towards the global monitoring of biodiversity change. TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution. Vol. 21, No. 3, March 2006. Spurgeon, 2002. Rehabilitation, conservation and sustainable utilization of mangroves in Egypt. FAO, Cairo.
M1L4S30
Thank you!
M1L4S31