010 esercitazione4 ecoservices assessment_2015

Valutazione economica dei servizi ecologici
Ecoservices Economic Assessment.
PROGETTAZIONE ECOLOGICA PER LA QUALITÀ
AMBIENTALE
PROGETTAZIONE URBANA SOSTENIBILE
PIANIFICAZIONE TERRITORIALE
2014/2015

Luca Marescotti 2 / 57
Ecosystems and Biodiversity
In slideshare.net/ & academia.edu /Luca Marescotti
sono disponibili altri moduli sulla valutazione della
qualità aria acqua suolo
[Titolo generale 010_Esercitazione_Elementi]
In questa esercitazione si parlerà su come valutare i
servizi svolti dagli ecosistemi
The Economics of Ecoservices and Biosphere TEEB
&
Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services CICES

LOCAL & GLOBAL
Envirnoment needs a cross scaling vision,
Is referred to a multidisciplinary approach
so that we can cover and merge
a multiplicity of points of views

LOCALE & GLOBALE
LOCALE le leggi urbanistiche nazionali
(per esempio la L 765/1967 e i successivi decreti ministeriali
sugli standard)
&
GLOBALE i cicli geofisici e chimi della biosfera
(servizi ambientali, la ricchezza della biosfera)

LOCALE & GLOBALE
nelle esercitazioni
LOCALE COMUNE
&
GLOBALE PROVINCIA REGIONE

LOCALE & GLOBALE
DUE PROBLEMI:
COME VALUTARE LA QUALITÀ AMBIENTALE,
COME PESARE OMOGENEAMENTE IL VALORE DI
SUOLI, che sono
EDIFICABILI, AGRICOLI, BOSCATI COLTIVATI, BOSCATI
FORESTALI PROTETTI

LOCALE & GLOBALE
IL SENSO DELLA BIOSFERA NELL'URBANISTICA
E LA LIMITATEZZA DEL PIANETA
LOCAL & GLOBAL
THE MEANING OF BIOSPHERE IN LAND USE PLANNING
AND THE EARTH'S LITTLENESS

INTEREZZA E ARMONIA
IL SENSO DEGLI STANDARD URBANISTICI
WHOLENESS AND HARMONY
THE MEANING OF STANDARDS IN LAND USE PLANNING

FROM Local agenda 21 RIO Conference
AND FROM
MA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003), Ecosystems and Human
Well-being: A Framework for Assessment, Washington D.C., Island
Press.
MA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005), Ecosystems and Human
Well-being: Synthesis, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Washington
D.C., Island Press.
TO
TEEB - The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
http://www.teebweb.org/
CICES - Common International Classification of Ecosystem
http://www.cices.eu

FROM Local agenda 21 RIO Conference
MA - Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
http://www.millenniumassessment.org/
http://www.teebweb.org/
CICES - Common International Classification of Ecosystem
http://www.cices.eu
TO Urban and Regional Planning Standards

TEEB:
TEEB – The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity / Heidi Wittmer,
Haripriya Gundimeda (a cura di), TEEB for Local and Regional Policy
Makers, TEEB, 2010.
TEEB – The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity / Augustin
Berghöfer (Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ) (a cura
di), TEEB Manual for Cities: Ecosystem Services in Urban Management,
TEEB, 2011.

TEEB:
TEEB - The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (2013): Guidance
Manual for TEEB Country Studies. Version 1.0.
Sukhdev, P., Wittmer, H., and Miller, D., “The Economics of Ecosystems
and Biodiversity (TEEB): Challenges and Responses”, in D. Helm and C.
Hepburn (eds), Nature in the Balance: The Economics of Biodiversity.
Oxford: Oxford University Press (2014).
TEEB http://www.teebweb.org/

2011 p.4

2011 p.9
KEY MESSAGES FOR SPATIAL PLANNING

2011 p.9
• Seeing the forest for the trees. The overriding benefit of spatial planning
is that it can encompass the cumulative impacts of incremental decisions on
ecosystems and their services. It examines the ‘parts’ to make decisions that
affect the ‘whole.’
• Knowledge really is power. An effective planning framework can make
the policy and planning process transparent and inclusive, assessing who
benefits from which ecosystem service, helping to avoid conflicts, especially
if different stakeholder groups are part of the planning process.
• Early thinking enables opportunities and management of changes.
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) can contribute to the integration of biodiversity issues
and ecosystem services in local and regional planning. This safeguards
livelihoods, illuminates impacts on ecosystem services and highlights the
risks and opportunities associated with changes.

• Start locally to think globally. A good strategy considers both local
and global systems and stakeholders. Spatial planning, supported by
EIA and SEA, may form a basis for sustainable, economically and
socially appropriate responses, for example, to climate change.
• Getting more than you bargained for, can be a good thing. The
proactive inclusion of ecosystem services allows environmental
assessment to identify the economic potentials, rather than simply the
constraints, associated with development that supports biodiversity.
2011 p.9

Alcuni riferimenti a: /some references to: LA21
For next slides
Quoted from:
www.curriculum-press.co.uk Number 203
UNDERSTANDING THE AGENDAS

Case Study: Mumbai’s Brown Agenda
In contrast to the Green Agenda, the Brown Agenda is important in developing
world cities, especially where they are growing rapidly.
This is the case in Asia and parts of Africa and Latin America Mumbai
(formerly Bombay), in India’s Maharashtra State has a population of 16 million
people (at least 20 million if connected suburbs are taken into account), and
this is expected to grow to 22-25 million by 2010.
Mumbai is a classic expanding megacity, and its citizens have to contend with
the issues of the Brown Agenda on a daily basis. Think of the Brown Agenda
as a list of environmental health problems that need to be solved:

• Up to 60% of Mumbai’s population live in informal, slum housing (called
Zopadpattis). 60% of buildings are non-engineered (built by people
themselves).
• Slums housing covers about 10% of Mumbai’s area, but holds 60% of its
people.
• There is an average of 0.03 acres [121.41 square meters] of open space
per person in Mumbai.

• In August 2005, floods caused $700 million in damage and killed 400
people; most of the city is only metres above sea level.
• Mangroves, which protect the city from floods, are being destroyed by
urbanisation. 40% have been lost in the last 10 years.
• Mumbai generates 2225 million litres of sewage per day, most of which
runs untreated into the sea.
• 97% of Mumbai’s population is exposed to suspended particulate matter air
pollution above WHO guidelines.
• Whilst Mumbai is the 4th largest urban agglomeration in the world, it
ranked 124th out of 130 cities in terms of quality of life in the 2005 EIU
Economist Intelligence Unit survey.

Can we harmonize the agendas?

2011 p.9

Section 1: An introduction to ecosystem services and cities
1.1 The Value of Nature for Cities
1.2 Ecosystem services: definitions and examples
1.3 A focus on ecosystem services: helping cities to achieve their goals
2011 contents [p. iii]

TEEB 2011, p.1
“Cities depend on a healthy natural environment that continuously provides a
range of benefits, known as ecosystem services. Some examples of ecosystem
services include drinking water, clean air, healthy food, and protection
against floods.
Healthy ecosystems are the foundation for sustainable cities, influencing and
affecting human well-being and most economic activity.”
[TEEB 2011, p.1]

“The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) is an international
initiative to draw attention to the benefits provided by biodiversity
(encompassing ecosystems, species and genes).
It has compiled and synthesized the available evidence to highlight the values
of biodiversity and ecosystem services, the growing costs of biodiversity loss
and ecosystem degradation, and the benefits of action addressing these
pressures.”
[TEEB 2013, p.11]

Section 2: How to include ecosystem services in decision making
and policy – The TEE B stepwise approach
Step 1: Specify and agree on the problem or policy issue with stakeholders
Step 2: Identify the most relevant ecosystem services that can help to solve the
problem or policy issue
Step 3: Determine what information is needed and select assessment methods
Step 4: Assess (future changes in) ecosystem services
Step 5: Identify and compare management/policy options
Step 6: Assess the impacts of the policy options on the range of stakeholders

Section 3: Applying the TEE B stepwise approach within
city management
3.1 Communicating to decision makers and other line functions
3.2 Budget cycle
3.3 Spatial planning
3.4 Concluding remarks
Glossary
References and bibliography

TEEB and TEEB related studies and assessments (in red) are currently underway
in several regions and countries.
2014 p.9

See case studies in
TEEB- TheEconomicsof EcosystemsandBiodiversity(2013): Guidance
Manual for TEEBCountryStudies. Version1.0.
2013 Chapter 2, boxes 2.1-2.11

2013 p.15

2011 p.31

Proposal for a Common International Classification of Ecosystem Goods
and Services (CICES) for Integrated Environmental and Economic
Accounting
Paper prepared by Centre for Environmental Management, University of
Nottingham, United Kingdom
Haines-Young, R. and Potschin, M. (2013): Common International
Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4,
August-December 2012. EEA Framework Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003
[Download at www.cices.eu or www.nottingham.ac.uk/cem]
CICES
COMMON INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF ECOSYSTEM

1. The aim of this document is to propose a Common International
Classification for Ecosystem Services (CICES). The need for CICES
arises because despite recent efforts, there is no accepted definition or
classification of ecosystem goods and services and as a result it is difficult
to integrate and compare different data sources.
2. The proposal for CICES has been based on the proposition that any
new classification has to be consistent with accepted typologies of
ecosystem goods and services currently being used in the international
literature, and compatible with the design of Integrated Environmental
and Economic Accounting methods being considered in the revision of
Socio-Economic and Environmental Assessments SEEA 2003.
CICES

3. Ecosystem goods and services are defined here as the contributions
that ecosystems make to human well-being, and arise from the
interaction of biotic and abiotic processes.
Following the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the term ‘services’ is
generally taken to include both goods and services. While this is a
convenient shorthand, in this proposal we distinguish the material and
energetic outputs from ecosystems as ‘goods’ and the non-material
outputs as ‘services’.
4. The general structure of CICES is shown in Table E.1, and described
in more detail in Table E.2.
5. Three broad thematic categories are suggested as the basis of CICES.
These cover the provisioning, regulating and cultural outputs from
ecosystems. These widely recognised types of ecosystem output are
further subdivided into nine generic classes, which nest into the major
‘functions of natural capital’ identified by the SEEA 2003 (Table E.1).
CICES

Warning: Tables E1 / E2
Nelle pagine seguenti dopo le tabelle originali sono riportate le variazioni
per l'integrazione con le valutazioni socio-economiche e ambientali
strategiche SEEA Socio-Economic and Environmental Assessments

CICES
Table E.1

CICES

CICES
Table E.2

CICES

Warning: Tables E1 / E2
Check the differences!

6. The generic naming of the proposed groups allows CICES to be cross
referenced to the existing standard classifications for activities and
products used in the System of National Accounts, namely: the
International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic
Activities (ISIC V4), the Central Products Classification (CPC V2),
and the Classification of Individual Consumption by Purpose
(COICOP). An indicative crosstabulation for each of them is presented.
7. The cross tabulation of CICES groups with international standard
classifications for products and activities assists in identifying the ‘final
outputs’ of ecosystems, and potentially helps overcome the problem of
‘double counting’ in valuation studies. By focusing on ’final products’
arising from ecosystems, the scheme does not cover supporting services,
which are assumed to be embedded within each of the categories included
in CICES.
CICES

CICES

It's a long way to go to environmental standards in planning
1) The consistence of Italian urban standards,
2) How to measure air-soil-water's qualities,
3) How to see and evaluate human impacts,
4) How to measure ecoservices
5) RE-THINK STANDARDS IN URBAN AND REGIONAL
PLANNING!

It's a long way to go to environmental standards in planning
TOOLS
STRUMENTI

FORESTRY HERITAGE INVENTORY
Inventario del patrimonio forestale
I-TREES
i-Tree is a state-of-the-art, peer-reviewed software suite from the USDA
Forest Service that provides urban forestry analysis and benefits
assessment tools.
The i-Tree Tools help communities of all sizes to strengthen their urban
forest management and advocacy efforts by quantifying the structure of
community trees and the environmental services that trees provide.
https://www.itreetools.org

FORESTRY HERITAGE INVENTORY
Inventario del patrimonio forestale
Un'applicazione i-Tree in Europa
Lydia Chaparro, Jaume Terradas, Ecological Services of
Urban Forest in Barcelona, CREAF Centre de Recerca
Ecològica i Aplicacions Forestals [www.creaf.uab.cat],
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, 2009

Le foreste italiane
Italian Forestry
CRA Consiglio per la ricerca e la sperimentazione in agricoltura
[http://sito.entecra.it]
Il contenuto di carbonio nelle foreste italiane. Inventario nazionale delle
foreste e dei serbatoi forestali di carbonio- INFC 2005

Buono studio
A settimana prossima

010 esercitazione4 ecoservices assessment_2015

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to 010 esercitazione4 ecoservices assessment_2015

Similar to 010 esercitazione4 ecoservices assessment_2015 (20)

More from Luca Marescotti

More from Luca Marescotti (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

010 esercitazione4 ecoservices assessment_2015