These slides cover the purposes for ecosystem service valuation (ESV), methods for valuation, examples of valuation studies, and government regulation and program related to ESV.
This is the 4th lesson of the course - Foundation of Environmental Management taught at the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka
Ecosystem services for biodiversity conservation and sustainable agricultureExternalEvents
Â
The presentation by Dr. Abigael Otinga (University of Eldoret) outlines the concept of âecosystem servicesâ and particularly their relevance not only for biodiversity conservation but also for ensuring sustainable production of healthy and abundant crops. The presentation was given at a national training workshops for stakeholders involved in the revision of the Kenya NBSAP that was held at ICRAF in Nairobi, 25-26 May 2016. More information on the event are available at: www.fao.org/africa/news/detail-news/en/c/417489/ .
Ecosystem services are the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems. They are indispensable to the well-being of all living organisms, everywhere in the world. They include provisioning, regulating, and cultural services that directly affect people, and supporting services needed to maintain the other services (Anon., 2005). From the availability of adequate food and water, to disease regulation of vectors, pests, and pathogens, human well-being depends on these services and conditions from the natural environment. Ecosystem services depend on ecosystem conditions, and if these are impacted via pressures, consequently ecosystem services will be as well (Daily G, 1997). Human use of all ecosystem services is growing rapidly. Approximately 60% of the ecosystem services (including 70% of regulating and cultural services) are being degraded or used unsustainably. Certain changes place the sustained delivery of ecosystem services at risk. Human activity is impairing and destroying ecosystem services. Services by the ecosystem are facing some serious threats from urbanization, climate change and introduction of invasive species and pathogens which have come into existence through human activities (Anon., 1997). Ecosystem evaluation is a tool used in determining the impact of human activities on an environmental system, by assigning an economic value to an ecosystem or its ecosystem services. Ecosystem values are measures of how important ecosystem services are to people â what they are worth. Economists classify ecosystem values into several types. The two main categories are use values and non-use, or passive use values. Whereas use values are based on actual use of the environment, non-use values are values that are not associated with actual use, or even an option to use, an ecosystem or its services (Brookshire, et al.,1983). There are several methods of valuation of environmental assets, goods and amenities, services and functions like market price method, productivity method, hedonic pricing method, travel cost method and contingent valuation method.
A look at how nature provides us with services and how valuing these services is important to well-being. Slideshow from Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, UNEP
This is the 4th lesson of the course - Foundation of Environmental Management taught at the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka
Ecosystem services for biodiversity conservation and sustainable agricultureExternalEvents
Â
The presentation by Dr. Abigael Otinga (University of Eldoret) outlines the concept of âecosystem servicesâ and particularly their relevance not only for biodiversity conservation but also for ensuring sustainable production of healthy and abundant crops. The presentation was given at a national training workshops for stakeholders involved in the revision of the Kenya NBSAP that was held at ICRAF in Nairobi, 25-26 May 2016. More information on the event are available at: www.fao.org/africa/news/detail-news/en/c/417489/ .
Ecosystem services are the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems. They are indispensable to the well-being of all living organisms, everywhere in the world. They include provisioning, regulating, and cultural services that directly affect people, and supporting services needed to maintain the other services (Anon., 2005). From the availability of adequate food and water, to disease regulation of vectors, pests, and pathogens, human well-being depends on these services and conditions from the natural environment. Ecosystem services depend on ecosystem conditions, and if these are impacted via pressures, consequently ecosystem services will be as well (Daily G, 1997). Human use of all ecosystem services is growing rapidly. Approximately 60% of the ecosystem services (including 70% of regulating and cultural services) are being degraded or used unsustainably. Certain changes place the sustained delivery of ecosystem services at risk. Human activity is impairing and destroying ecosystem services. Services by the ecosystem are facing some serious threats from urbanization, climate change and introduction of invasive species and pathogens which have come into existence through human activities (Anon., 1997). Ecosystem evaluation is a tool used in determining the impact of human activities on an environmental system, by assigning an economic value to an ecosystem or its ecosystem services. Ecosystem values are measures of how important ecosystem services are to people â what they are worth. Economists classify ecosystem values into several types. The two main categories are use values and non-use, or passive use values. Whereas use values are based on actual use of the environment, non-use values are values that are not associated with actual use, or even an option to use, an ecosystem or its services (Brookshire, et al.,1983). There are several methods of valuation of environmental assets, goods and amenities, services and functions like market price method, productivity method, hedonic pricing method, travel cost method and contingent valuation method.
A look at how nature provides us with services and how valuing these services is important to well-being. Slideshow from Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, UNEP
Why and how do we evaluate ecosystems, Nature is the source of much value to us every day, and yet it mostly bypasses markets, escapes pricing and defies valuation. This lack of valuation is an underlying cause for ecological degradation and loss of biodiversity. Globally, efforts are being made to assess impact of conservation or degradation of ecological resources and a new term Green Gross Domestic Product (GGDP) has also been coined to reflect the same.
Important conceptual concerns, economic foundations of environmental valuation, scarcity, useful approaches for different environmental problems, and cautions.
John Dixon
Healthy ecosystems provide a variety of such critical goods and services. Created by the interactions of living organisms with their environment, these âecosystem servicesâ provide both the conditions and processes that sustain human life. The awareness of ecosystem servicesâ importance in human life styles started more than 2500 years ago. Economists have developed different ways to measure the economic value of the nature, all of which required extrapolation or assumptions.
Ignorance, Institutions and Market Failure are the main reasons to the under-protected status of Ecosystem Services. The environment provides critically important services. Some of these are captured by markets, but many are not. They are positive externalities that are therefore regarded by the beneficiaries as free. As a result, many ecosystem services tend to be both under-conserved and undervalued. If beneficiaries had to pay for explicit service provision, however, governments would think differently about their policies and property owners would think very differently about sustainable land management practices. In basic economic terms, payments for ecosystem services (PES) seek to âget the incentives rightâ by capturing the positive externalities, by providing accurate signals to both service providers and users that reflect the real social benefits that ecosystem services deliver.
Voluntary agreements between buyers and sellers of ecosystem services for cash or other rewards creating markets for ecosystem services which provide incentives and finance to land and resource managers and thereby strengthening conservation and livelihoods are called as PES.
Wide range of potential buyers and sellers are available depending on the ecosystem service. When the market fails to reward on-site ecosystem service providers, or to compensate them for their costs (e.g. changing land use) charge off-site users for the benefits they enjoy (e.g. clean water) PES create a market for natural resources making conservation a more profitable land-use proposition. Information, technical barriers, policy and regulation and institutional barriers are the major challenges in implementing PES.
Creating economic incentives that encourage PES schemes, including environmental taxes and subsidies, transferable discharge permits and environmental labelling, developing specific PES projects with farmers, foresters and/or fisher folks in their region, or their watershed and providing incentives for the private sector to engage in PES schemes are some recommendations for a better PES system.
On 22 May, 2020, the International Day of Biological Diversity, the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) hosted an online event to discuss how we can translate the global ambition around nature-based solutions for climate change into local action.
This is a presentation given by Chip Cunliffe, sustainable development director at AXA XL.
More details: https://www.iied.org/nature-based-solutions-for-climate-change-global-ambition-local-action
The environment provides humans with everything we need to survive. This presentation looks at the services ecosystems deliver humanity and the importance of conserving plant biomass and diversity in order to maintain those services
http://www.fao.org/globalsoilpartnership
This presentation was made during the NENA Soil Partnership Conference that took place in Amman, Jordan 1-3 June 2015.
ŠFAO: http://www.fao.org
Why and how do we evaluate ecosystems, Nature is the source of much value to us every day, and yet it mostly bypasses markets, escapes pricing and defies valuation. This lack of valuation is an underlying cause for ecological degradation and loss of biodiversity. Globally, efforts are being made to assess impact of conservation or degradation of ecological resources and a new term Green Gross Domestic Product (GGDP) has also been coined to reflect the same.
Important conceptual concerns, economic foundations of environmental valuation, scarcity, useful approaches for different environmental problems, and cautions.
John Dixon
Healthy ecosystems provide a variety of such critical goods and services. Created by the interactions of living organisms with their environment, these âecosystem servicesâ provide both the conditions and processes that sustain human life. The awareness of ecosystem servicesâ importance in human life styles started more than 2500 years ago. Economists have developed different ways to measure the economic value of the nature, all of which required extrapolation or assumptions.
Ignorance, Institutions and Market Failure are the main reasons to the under-protected status of Ecosystem Services. The environment provides critically important services. Some of these are captured by markets, but many are not. They are positive externalities that are therefore regarded by the beneficiaries as free. As a result, many ecosystem services tend to be both under-conserved and undervalued. If beneficiaries had to pay for explicit service provision, however, governments would think differently about their policies and property owners would think very differently about sustainable land management practices. In basic economic terms, payments for ecosystem services (PES) seek to âget the incentives rightâ by capturing the positive externalities, by providing accurate signals to both service providers and users that reflect the real social benefits that ecosystem services deliver.
Voluntary agreements between buyers and sellers of ecosystem services for cash or other rewards creating markets for ecosystem services which provide incentives and finance to land and resource managers and thereby strengthening conservation and livelihoods are called as PES.
Wide range of potential buyers and sellers are available depending on the ecosystem service. When the market fails to reward on-site ecosystem service providers, or to compensate them for their costs (e.g. changing land use) charge off-site users for the benefits they enjoy (e.g. clean water) PES create a market for natural resources making conservation a more profitable land-use proposition. Information, technical barriers, policy and regulation and institutional barriers are the major challenges in implementing PES.
Creating economic incentives that encourage PES schemes, including environmental taxes and subsidies, transferable discharge permits and environmental labelling, developing specific PES projects with farmers, foresters and/or fisher folks in their region, or their watershed and providing incentives for the private sector to engage in PES schemes are some recommendations for a better PES system.
On 22 May, 2020, the International Day of Biological Diversity, the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) hosted an online event to discuss how we can translate the global ambition around nature-based solutions for climate change into local action.
This is a presentation given by Chip Cunliffe, sustainable development director at AXA XL.
More details: https://www.iied.org/nature-based-solutions-for-climate-change-global-ambition-local-action
The environment provides humans with everything we need to survive. This presentation looks at the services ecosystems deliver humanity and the importance of conserving plant biomass and diversity in order to maintain those services
http://www.fao.org/globalsoilpartnership
This presentation was made during the NENA Soil Partnership Conference that took place in Amman, Jordan 1-3 June 2015.
ŠFAO: http://www.fao.org
Blake Lapthorn green breakfast with URS GlobalBlake Morgan
Â
On Wednesday 6 November 2013, Blake Lapthorn's climate change hosted a green breakfast seminar. Guest Speaker Robert Spencer, Business Line Director - Sustainability at URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Ltd, talked about integrating eco system services and Natural Capital considerations into business planning and strategy.
Based on World Resources Report, "Ecosystem Services: A Guide for Decision Makers" (http://www.wri.org/publication/ecosystem-services-a-guide-for-decision-makers)
This covers the economics of energy efficiency focusing on the Energy Efficiency Gap and work by Allcott and Greenstone (2012) and Gillingham et al. (2009)
Dynamic Efficiency and Hotelling's Rulemaggiewinslow
Â
These slides cover present value calculations and then dynamic efficiency for non-renewable resource extraction. This is illustrated using a two-period model with examples using both graphs and Excel spreadsheets.
Dev Dives: Train smarter, not harder â active learning and UiPath LLMs for do...UiPathCommunity
Â
đĽ Speed, accuracy, and scaling â discover the superpowers of GenAI in action with UiPath Document Understanding and Communications Miningâ˘:
See how to accelerate model training and optimize model performance with active learning
Learn about the latest enhancements to out-of-the-box document processing â with little to no training required
Get an exclusive demo of the new family of UiPath LLMs â GenAI models specialized for processing different types of documents and messages
This is a hands-on session specifically designed for automation developers and AI enthusiasts seeking to enhance their knowledge in leveraging the latest intelligent document processing capabilities offered by UiPath.
Speakers:
đ¨âđŤ Andras Palfi, Senior Product Manager, UiPath
đŠâđŤ Lenka Dulovicova, Product Program Manager, UiPath
Slack (or Teams) Automation for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Soluti...Jeffrey Haguewood
Â
Sidekick Solutions uses Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Solutions Apricot) and automation solutions to integrate data for business workflows.
We believe integration and automation are essential to user experience and the promise of efficient work through technology. Automation is the critical ingredient to realizing that full vision. We develop integration products and services for Bonterra Case Management software to support the deployment of automations for a variety of use cases.
This video focuses on the notifications, alerts, and approval requests using Slack for Bonterra Impact Management. The solutions covered in this webinar can also be deployed for Microsoft Teams.
Interested in deploying notification automations for Bonterra Impact Management? Contact us at sales@sidekicksolutionsllc.com to discuss next steps.
Software Delivery At the Speed of AI: Inflectra Invests In AI-Powered QualityInflectra
Â
In this insightful webinar, Inflectra explores how artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming software development and testing. Discover how AI-powered tools are revolutionizing every stage of the software development lifecycle (SDLC), from design and prototyping to testing, deployment, and monitoring.
Learn about:
⢠The Future of Testing: How AI is shifting testing towards verification, analysis, and higher-level skills, while reducing repetitive tasks.
⢠Test Automation: How AI-powered test case generation, optimization, and self-healing tests are making testing more efficient and effective.
⢠Visual Testing: Explore the emerging capabilities of AI in visual testing and how it's set to revolutionize UI verification.
⢠Inflectra's AI Solutions: See demonstrations of Inflectra's cutting-edge AI tools like the ChatGPT plugin and Azure Open AI platform, designed to streamline your testing process.
Whether you're a developer, tester, or QA professional, this webinar will give you valuable insights into how AI is shaping the future of software delivery.
Essentials of Automations: Optimizing FME Workflows with ParametersSafe Software
Â
Are you looking to streamline your workflows and boost your projectsâ efficiency? Do you find yourself searching for ways to add flexibility and control over your FME workflows? If so, youâre in the right place.
Join us for an insightful dive into the world of FME parameters, a critical element in optimizing workflow efficiency. This webinar marks the beginning of our three-part âEssentials of Automationâ series. This first webinar is designed to equip you with the knowledge and skills to utilize parameters effectively: enhancing the flexibility, maintainability, and user control of your FME projects.
Hereâs what youâll gain:
- Essentials of FME Parameters: Understand the pivotal role of parameters, including Reader/Writer, Transformer, User, and FME Flow categories. Discover how they are the key to unlocking automation and optimization within your workflows.
- Practical Applications in FME Form: Delve into key user parameter types including choice, connections, and file URLs. Allow users to control how a workflow runs, making your workflows more reusable. Learn to import values and deliver the best user experience for your workflows while enhancing accuracy.
- Optimization Strategies in FME Flow: Explore the creation and strategic deployment of parameters in FME Flow, including the use of deployment and geometry parameters, to maximize workflow efficiency.
- Pro Tips for Success: Gain insights on parameterizing connections and leveraging new features like Conditional Visibility for clarity and simplicity.
Weâll wrap up with a glimpse into future webinars, followed by a Q&A session to address your specific questions surrounding this topic.
Donât miss this opportunity to elevate your FME expertise and drive your projects to new heights of efficiency.
Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey 2024 by 91mobiles.pdf91mobiles
Â
91mobiles recently conducted a Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey in which we asked over 3,000 respondents about the TV they own, aspects they look at on a new TV, and their TV buying preferences.
LF Energy Webinar: Electrical Grid Modelling and Simulation Through PowSyBl -...DanBrown980551
Â
Do you want to learn how to model and simulate an electrical network from scratch in under an hour?
Then welcome to this PowSyBl workshop, hosted by Rte, the French Transmission System Operator (TSO)!
During the webinar, you will discover the PowSyBl ecosystem as well as handle and study an electrical network through an interactive Python notebook.
PowSyBl is an open source project hosted by LF Energy, which offers a comprehensive set of features for electrical grid modelling and simulation. Among other advanced features, PowSyBl provides:
- A fully editable and extendable library for grid component modelling;
- Visualization tools to display your network;
- Grid simulation tools, such as power flows, security analyses (with or without remedial actions) and sensitivity analyses;
The framework is mostly written in Java, with a Python binding so that Python developers can access PowSyBl functionalities as well.
What you will learn during the webinar:
- For beginners: discover PowSyBl's functionalities through a quick general presentation and the notebook, without needing any expert coding skills;
- For advanced developers: master the skills to efficiently apply PowSyBl functionalities to your real-world scenarios.
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectKari Kakkonen
Â
My and Rik Marselis slides at 30.5.2024 DASA Connect conference. We discuss about what is testing, then what is agile testing and finally what is Testing in DevOps. Finally we had lovely workshop with the participants trying to find out different ways to think about quality and testing in different parts of the DevOps infinity loop.
Key Trends Shaping the Future of Infrastructure.pdfCheryl Hung
Â
Keynote at DIGIT West Expo, Glasgow on 29 May 2024.
Cheryl Hung, ochery.com
Sr Director, Infrastructure Ecosystem, Arm.
The key trends across hardware, cloud and open-source; exploring how these areas are likely to mature and develop over the short and long-term, and then considering how organisations can position themselves to adapt and thrive.
Connector Corner: Automate dynamic content and events by pushing a buttonDianaGray10
Â
Here is something new! In our next Connector Corner webinar, we will demonstrate how you can use a single workflow to:
Create a campaign using Mailchimp with merge tags/fields
Send an interactive Slack channel message (using buttons)
Have the message received by managers and peers along with a test email for review
But thereâs more:
In a second workflow supporting the same use case, youâll see:
Your campaign sent to target colleagues for approval
If the âApproveâ button is clicked, a Jira/Zendesk ticket is created for the marketing design team
Butâif the âRejectâ button is pushed, colleagues will be alerted via Slack message
Join us to learn more about this new, human-in-the-loop capability, brought to you by Integration Service connectors.
And...
Speakers:
Akshay Agnihotri, Product Manager
Charlie Greenberg, Host
Neuro-symbolic is not enough, we need neuro-*semantic*Frank van Harmelen
Â
Neuro-symbolic (NeSy) AI is on the rise. However, simply machine learning on just any symbolic structure is not sufficient to really harvest the gains of NeSy. These will only be gained when the symbolic structures have an actual semantics. I give an operational definition of semantics as âpredictable inferenceâ.
All of this illustrated with link prediction over knowledge graphs, but the argument is general.
Epistemic Interaction - tuning interfaces to provide information for AI supportAlan Dix
Â
Paper presented at SYNERGY workshop at AVI 2024, Genoa, Italy. 3rd June 2024
https://alandix.com/academic/papers/synergy2024-epistemic/
As machine learning integrates deeper into human-computer interactions, the concept of epistemic interaction emerges, aiming to refine these interactions to enhance system adaptability. This approach encourages minor, intentional adjustments in user behaviour to enrich the data available for system learning. This paper introduces epistemic interaction within the context of human-system communication, illustrating how deliberate interaction design can improve system understanding and adaptation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate the potential of epistemic interaction to significantly advance human-computer interaction by leveraging intuitive human communication strategies to inform system design and functionality, offering a novel pathway for enriching user-system engagements.
3. DIRECT USE VALUES INDIRECT USE VALUES NON-USE VALUES
Provisioning Regulating/Support Cultural
Crops/ Livestock Maintenance of air quality Existence value, Bequest value
Animal skins
Regional/ local/ global climate
regulation
Ethical and spiritual values
Capture fisheries/
Aquaculture
Water purification and waste
treatment
Educational and inspirational
values
Freshwater
Regulation of water timing
and flows
Timber and other wood
fibers/ Biomass
Erosion control and sediment
retention
Biochemicals, natural
medicines, and
pharmaceuticals / Genetic
Resources
Natural hazard mitigation
/Flood control
Ornamental resources Disease mitigation
Cultural Maintenance of soil quality
Recreation and ecotourism Pest mitigation / Pollination
Categorization of Ecosystem Services
4. Classifying Ecosystem Services â Some Fit
Multiple Categories
Stillwater Sciences. 2011. Overview of ecosystem services quantification tools and proposed format for site tool development. Prepared by
Stillwater Sciences, Berkeley, California for Sustainable Conservation, San Francisco, California.
5. Ecosystem Services Can Have Multiple Functions
http://agbiodiversity.com/AgBiodviersityProject/Howbiodiversitysupportsfarmprofits/tabid/133/Default.aspx
7. WRI Survey: Are Ecosystem Services Being
Addressed in Environmental Decision Making?
A 2010 online survey by WRI of 171 environmental
consultants, government employees, NGOs found:
⢠79% of respondents knew about ecosystem services
⢠40% have seen ecosystem services addressed in
environmental assessment
â Freshwater is the main service that is addressed
⢠Main perceived barrier is lack of guidance on
how to address ecosystem services
8. Importance of ES for Decision Makers
⢠Ecosystems are being degraded at a high rate â
climate change exacerbating this.
⢠Demand for ecosystem services is increasing
â Population growth
â Improved in living standards
⢠ES are growing scarcer
⢠What gets measured gets managed - Our policy
decisions often do not incorporate the value of
ecosystem services
⢠Ecosystem Service Valuation (ESV)
9. Multiple Purposes for ESV in Relation to
Policy Making
Monitor changes in natural capital and the impact
of this on human welfare ex. Natural Capital Accounting
Natural Resource Damage Assessment
Evaluation of proposed policies/developments
Cost-
Benefit
Analysis
Cost-
Effectivenes
s Analysis
Multi-
criteria
Analysis
10. Cost-Benefit, or Benefit-Cost, Analysis
Given that a policy will require some inputs and
produce some outputs, it will also have costs
and create benefits. Comparing the costs and
benefits in monetary terms is what benefit-
cost analysis amounts to.
Benefit-cost analysis can help determine which
policy/program/project is more efficient than
the other, or alternatively which one is more
cost-effective.
11. Example of ESV and CBA
⢠UK Cost Benefit Analysis of proposed marine
reserves
â 11 relevant ecosystem services identified
â 7 were valued due to available information
â Benefit transfer method
⢠NPV of benefits range â US$16.4 to $36.1 billion
⢠NPV of costs range â US$0.6 and $1.9 billion
⢠Benefit to cost ratio is ~10:1, not all benefits
even included
Hussain et al., 2010
13. Cost Effectiveness Analysis Example: A Watershed Approach to Improve
Water Quality: Case Study of Clean Water Servicesâ Tualatin River
Program, Clean Water Services (CWS), Portland ORâs public water
resources utility.
Faced with the need to lower effluent water temperatures
in order to maintain its permits to discharge water into the
Tualatin River, CWS considered two alternatives:
1. Build a new facility - $60
million, annual operating
costs of $2 million
Benefit: it does the job,
no environmental
benefits were identified
2. Ecosystem Restoration and
Maintenance - $5 million
Benefit â it does the job, it saved
money, 1.6 mil trees/shrubs
planted resulting in thermal
credits of 295 mil kilocalories per
day, restored salmon habitat,
upland scrub habitat, carbon
sequestration, increased
biodiversity, recreation
opportunities.
15. Historic U.S. Federal Use of ESV
Comprehensive Environmental Responses, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund): 1980 â allowed for
ecosystem damage assessment.
Executive Order 12911 (1981) required cost benefit analysis
be applied to new regulations
1991 EPA convened an Ecosystem Valuation Forum- focused
on how to improve linkages between ecology and economics
ESV used by USFS, mostly in CBA related to forest planning
and water resources
16. Federal Level Progress in ESV
⢠EPAâs National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE),
established 2000.
⢠Government sponsored $4.5 million tools competition
⢠USDAâs Office of Environmental Markets, which as of January
1, 2011 is part of the Office of the Chief Economist.
⢠Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses published by the
NCEE in 2011
17. PCAST Report 2011
SUSTAINING ENVIRONMENTAL CAPITAL:
PROTECTING SOCIETY AND THE ECONOMY
Executive Office of the President
Presidentâs Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
JULY 2011
18. PCAST Report: Federal agencies
thatimplementbiodiversity and ecosystem
conservation programs should prioritize
expenditures based on cost efficiency.
⢠Federal agencies collectively currently spend
more than $10 billion annually on ecosystem
restoration activities.
⢠Much more careful targeting could achieve
greater environmental benefits at the same
cost.
19. PCAST: Federal agencies with responsibilities
relating to ecosystems and their services (e.g.,
EPA, NOAA, DOI, USDA) should be tasked with
improving their capabilities to
â develop valuations for the ecosystem services affected by
their decision-making and
â factor the results into analyses that inform their major
planning and management decisions.
⢠The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), OSTP, and CEQ should ensure that the
methodologies are developed collaboratively across
agencies.
20. Example of Federal Requirement for
ESV
⢠In relation to federal infrastructure
investments: âall types of benefits and
costs, both market and non-market, should be
considered. To the extent that environmental
and other non-market benefits and costs can
be quantified, they shall be given the same
weight as quantifiable market benefits and
costs.â
- Executive Order 12893, 1994
21. California Water Quality Control Board
⢠Regulate activities in order to: âattain the
highest water quality which is reasonable,
considering all demands being made and to be
made on those waters and the total values
involved, beneficial and detrimental,
economic and social, tangible and intangible.â
22. HoweverâŚ
⢠There has been little enforcement of these
requirement to consider broader valuation of
ecosystem services.
23. International ESV Initiatives
â TEEB: The Economics of Ecosystems and
Biodiversity series â UNEP, European
Commission
â WAVES: Wealth Accounting and Valuation of
Ecosystem Services â World Bank, UN, many
national governments and NGO
â The Millennium Assessment, UNEP: ~2000
experts, 4 year project to survey the worldâs
ecosystemsâ health
Private:
â Companies calculating the value of their
impacts on ES â ex. Puma
24. Puma Environmental P&L Statement
2010
⢠⏠94 million of GHG emissions and water consumption
⢠⏠51 million caused by land use change for the production of raw
materials, air pollution and waste along its value chain.
Only ⏠8 million of the ⏠145 million total derive from PUMAâs core
operations such as offices, warehouses, stores and logistics while the
remaining ⏠137 million fall upon PUMAâs supply chain.
These costs, which will not affect PUMAâs net earnings, will serve as an
initial metric for the company when aiming to mitigate the footprint of
PUMAâs operations and all supply chain levels.
http://safe.puma.com/us/en/2011/11/puma-completes-first-environmental-profit-and-loss-
account-which-values-impacts-at-e-145-million/
25.
26. Local/Regional Policy-related Drivers of
Interest in ESV
(Scarlett & Boyd, 2011)
Revenue streams to
support conservation,
restoration and
sustainable practices
Savings for basic
community services such
as clean water,
protection from floods
and fires, erosion and
storm water control, etc.
Opportunities for cost-
effective regulatory
compliance Avoidance or
elimination of costs
associated with the
loss of ecosystems
and their services
Enhancement of the
resiliency of communities
in a changing world
27. Multi-Step Process in Ecosystem Service
Valuation Related to Policy Changes
Economic
Value of
Changes
Impact on
Human
Welfare
Changes in
Ecosystem
Services
Ecosystem
Impacts
Policy
Change
29. Methods for Assigning Monetary Value to Ecosystem
Services
Revealed-preference Stated-preference Cost-based
Market methods: Valuations are
directly obtained from what
people must be willing to pay for
the service or good.
Contingent valuation: People
are directly asked their
willingness to pay or accept
compensation for some change
in ecological service.
Replacement costs: The loss of a
natural system service is
evaluated in terms of what it
would cost to replace that
service.
Production approaches: Service
values are assigned from the
impacts of those services on
economic out-puts (e.g.,
increased shrimp yields from
increased area of wetlands).
Conjoint analysis: People are
asked to choose or rank different
service scenarios or ecological
conditions that differ in the mix
of those conditions. Also called
âchoice experimentsâ.
Avoidance or Damage costs: A
service is valued on the basis of
costs avoided, or of the extent to
which it allows the avoidance of
costly averting behaviors,
including mitigation.
Travel cost: Valuations of site-
based amenities are implied by
the costs people incur to enjoy
them
Hedonic methods: The value of
a service is implied by what
people will be willing to pay for
the service through purchases in
related markets, such as housing
markets. (from Farber et al. 2006, pg. 120)
30. Revealed Preference Methods Example: Water Quality
Violations and Avoidance Behavior: Evidence from Bottled
Water Consumption (Zivin et al. 2011)
⢠Looked at bottled water purchases in locations
that experienced water quality violations.
⢠They find a 22% increase in bottled water sales
from a microorganism violation, a 26% increase
in response to nitrate violations, and a 17%
increase from an element/chemical violation.
⢠Get an estimate of about $60 million a year of
avoidance behavior in the U.S.
31. Hedonic Pricing Method Example
⢠Author(s): Boxall, P. C., W. H. Chan and M. L.
McMillan
⢠Title: "The Impact of Oil and Natural Gas Facilities
On Rural Residential Property Values: A Spatial
Hedonic Analysis"
⢠Source of Study: Resource and Energy
Economics, 2005-01-01
⢠Web Link:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VFJ
-4FK42HM-
1/2/02a35e67e71d3242e00100177f37becc
32. Summary Boxall et al. 2005
⢠This study estimated the effect of oil and gas facilities
on rural residential properties near Calgary, Alberta.
⢠Data were gathered using real estate listing database
for the period January 1994 to March 2001.
⢠The average reduction in price levels associated with
industry characteristics ranged from (CDN 2001) $
3,487 - $ 20,942.
⢠The estimated reduction in property value ranged from
4 to 8 percent if property was located within 4 km of
industry facilities.
⢠This study has helped aid the decision making process
in siting of oil and gas facilities and provided merits for
compensation in lost property value.
35. Benefits or Value Transfer
Use the ecosystem service values from one or a
series of studies to estimate the values in a
similar area or situation.
36. Ex. Measuring Natural Capital: The Value of
New Jerseyâs Ecosystem Services and
Natural Capital, 2006
Using the benefits transfer approach:
⢠Wetlands â $9.4 billion/yr (2004 dollars) for freshwater wetlands and $1.2
billion/yr for saltwater wetlands
⢠Marine ecosystems â $5.3 billion/yr for estuaries and tidal bays and about
$389 million/yr for other coastal waters, excluding the value of fish and
shellfish
⢠Forests cover â $2.2 billion/yr, excluding the value of timber
⢠Urban green space covers â estimated $419 million of ecosystem services
annually, principally aesthetic and recreational amenities.
The total value of these ecosystem services is $19.4 billion/year.
Gund Institute, 2006
38. Databases for Benefit Transfer
⢠EVRI: Environmental
Valuation Reference
Inventory (Environment
Canada with support
from USEPA and DEFRA)
â Searchable database of
~2400 studies with
summaries included.
⢠EarthEconomics, non-
profit, Tacoma WA
â Researches Library
41. Current Web-based Tools
⢠InVEST: Integrated Valuation of Environmental Services and
Tradeoffs
⢠ARIES: Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services
42. Current Web-based Tools Cont.
⢠EarthEconomics:
â ESV: Ecosystem Valuation Toolkit
â SERVES: Simple and Effective Resource for Valuing
Ecosystem Services
⢠Others
â regionally focused or
â cover just one or two ecosystem services
⢠Consulting firms have proprietary tools â ex.
EcoMetrix, EcoAim, ESValue
43. Present Situation
⢠More tools under development
⢠Existing tools
â Not compatible
â Use different metrics
â Use different valuation techniques and philosophies
⢠EPA and other agencies are developing guidelines
for ESV
⢠Some services receive little attention
44. Policy Debate Over Using ESV
⢠Practical: Is some number better than no
number? How to deal with uncertainty?
â How much accuracy is needed?
â ESV helps inform decisions but does not
make decisions.
⢠Philosophical: Donât ecosystems have
untold value?
â But will these be included if no number is
attached?
45. Obstacles and Limitations
⢠Provisioning and flow of ES cut across policy-
relevant boundaries
⢠Challenging to conduct ES research that is
applicable in policy contexts.
â Requires integration of multiple disciplines
â Methodology issues can affect credibility of
valuation estimates
⢠CBA is sometimes precluded by legislative
standards
⢠Lack of consensus on goals of environmental
regulations
46. Final Thoughts
Ecosystem services are increasingly important
â˘Due to climate change â more floods, ocean surges,
drought
â˘Due to fresh water depletion
â˘Ecosystems being depleted/destroyed
â˘Population growth
Ecosystem service valuation is a decision support tool.
Mistake to think that ESV tools are just about quantifying and
producing numbers. There is a lot of strategy, framing,
training, tactics that must happen to support the numbers.
Can be useful even if it does not cover all relevant ecosystem
services.
47. Primary References
Bagstad, K.J., Semmens, D., Winthrop, R., Jaworski, D., and Larson, J. (2012). Ecosystem Services Valuation to
Support Decisionmaking on Public Lands â A Case Study of the San Pedro River Watershed , Arizona
Scientific Investigations Report 2012 â 5251. Arizona.
Barbier, E. B. (2011b). Challenges in valuing ecosystem services. World Forum 2011.
Carson, R. T., & Mitchell, R. C. (1993). The Value of Clean Water; The Publicâs Willingness to Pay for
Boatable, Fishable, and Swimmable Quality Water. Water Resources Research, 29(7), 2445â2454.
Daily, G. C., Polasky, S., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P. M., Mooney, H. a, Pejchar, L., Ricketts, T. H., et al. (2009).
Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(1), 21â
28.
Iovanna, R., & Griffiths, C. (2006). Clean water, ecological benefits, and benefits transfer: A work in progress at
the U.S. EPA. Ecological Economics, 60(2), 473â482. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.06.012
Liu, S., Costanza, R., Farber, S., & Troy, A. (2010). Valuing ecosystem services: theory, practice, and the need for
a transdisciplinary synthesis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1185, 54â78.
Scarlett, L., & Boyd, J. (2011). Ecosystem ServicesâŻ: Capabilities, (March).
Tallis, H., &Polasky, S. (2009). Mapping and valuing ecosystem services as an approach for conservation and
natural-resource management. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1162, 265â83.
Editor's Notes
Even using lowest benefit value, the b) An ex ante ecological economic assessment of the benefits arising from marine protected areas designation in the UK. Ecological Economics 69: 828â838
Competition - for âEnhancing Ecosystem Services from Agricultural Lands: Management, Quantification, and Developing Decision Support ToolsâLeadership by CEQ and OMB in 2010 of a series of conversations, which is useful for estimating the value of reduced health risks and improved environmental quality.
One example â the Federal Climate Change Adaptation Task Forceâs guiding principles for public and private decision makers includes a recommendation to apply ecosystem-based approaches that increase ecosystem resilience and protect critical ecosystem services (The White House, 2012).
(from Farber et al. 2006, pg. 120)
â basic bibliographic informationâ information about the location of the study along with population and site dataâ fields that describe the environmental asset being valued, the stressors on the environment, and the specific purpose of the studyâ technical information on the actual study, along with the specific techniques that were used to arrive at the resultsâ the monetary values that are presented in the study as well as the specific units of measure
Natural Capital Project (Stanford) â
Natural Capital Project (Stanford) â
We are making a value judgment if ecosystems will be affected by a policy decision. ESV makes this explicit.
PLUS âvaluing multiple ecosystem services typically multiplies the difficulty of evaluationâ Chief Challenge: âlies in providing an explicit description and adequate assessment of the links between the structure and functions of natural systems, the benefits (i.e., goods and services) derived by humanity, and their subsequent valuesâ (p. 73)