Department of Ecological Economics, Ukrainian National ......Lviv in 20th century Львів у ХIХ ст. Lviv in 19th century Львів у ХVII ст. Lviv in 17th century Dresden,

1

Lyudmyla Zahvoyska

Department of Ecological Economics,

Ukrainian National Forestry University

Dresden, 28-29 October, 2015

Forest ecosystem services:

first steps to identification, perceptions

and valuation with a focus on Ukraine

Introduction

1. What are ecosystem services

2. Human perception of forest ecosystem

services

3. Integration of forest ecosystem values

into decision-making

ConclusionDresden, 28-29 October, 2015 2

History of ecosystem services (ES)(Gómez-Baggethun et al., 2009)

late 1970s - the origins of the concept, the utilitarian

framing of beneficial ecosystem functions as services

to increase public interest in biodiversity conservation (Westman,1977; Ehrlich and Ehrlich,1981;de Groot, 1987)

1990s - the mainstreaming of ES (Costanza and

Daly, 1992; Perrings et al., 1992; Daily, 1997) and

interest to valuation methods (Costanza et al., 1997);

2005 – a landmark MEA report put ES in the the

policy agenda: ES as benefits for people

2009 > TEEB reports: ES as a contribution to human

welfare.

Dresden, 28-29 October, 2015 3

Exponential growth of papers using the term “ecosystem

services” or “ecological services” (Fisher et al., 2009)


• ISI Web of Science search

through 2007

• Without “Environmental

services”

http://f1000.com/prime/search/evaluatedpubmed?query=Fisher+B&queryField=exactAuthor&filterBy=EVALUATED_ARTICLES

Conceptualisation of ES in

Ukraine

What are services?

Plurality of concepts

Thesis, papers, books


Identification of selected from 17 ecosystem

services (after Costanza et al., 1997)



Services provided by FES(Daly and Farley, 2004)

Gas regulation,

Climate regulation

Water regulation

Disturbance

regulation,

Water supply,

Waste absorption,

Erosion control,

Soil formation

Nutrient cycling

Pollination

Biological control

Habitat

Genetic resources

Recreation

Cultural values

Conceptualization of ES


Ecosystem services

Definition and Classification

Conceptual map of

approaches to the

characterization of

ecosystem goods and

services (Haines-Young

and Potschin, 2009)

2. Human perception of

forest ecosystem services

Case studies from Ukraine

Approaches to elicitation

of stakeholders’ perceptions

Identification of services and

stakeholders’ attitude to them;

Ranking of existing list of services.

Pros and cons of the approaches.



Conceptual Content Cognitive Mapping

and non-parametric statistics

Kearney and Kaplan, 1997

A. Kearney, G. Bradley, R. Kaplan and

S.Kaplan, 1999

S. Kant and S. Lee; 2004

Zahvoyska and Bas, 2009.

Richnau G. et al., 2013

Zahvoyska L., Bas T., 2013


Conceptual Content Cognitive Mapping

(3CM)

+ nonparametric statistics

A respondent verbalizes preferences regarding:

Own values and preferences;

Own stakeholder group

Own view on other stakeholders’ interests related to

multifunctional role of forest ecosystems services.

Application of non-parametric statistical methods.

Procedure of

the data

collection and

processing

using 3CM

open-ended

task:

3CM

exercise



Stakeholders

Local population,

Forest Industry,

Environmental NGOs,

City population.

These stakeholders were identified using criteria:

responsibility,

impact,

relationship,

dependence,

relevance (Hotulyeva et al., 2006).

14


Forest values

universe (Zahvoyska and Bas, 2013)


Cognitive map of preferences regarding FES,

p=0.95 (Zahvoyska and Bas, 2013)

Differences in the frequency of themes mention:

Local population vs. City population


Львів у ХХ ст.

Lviv in 20th century

Львів у ХIХ ст.


Львів у ХVII ст.



Краще ніж у бібліотеціBetter than in library

Стежка, дерева, роверPath, trees, bicycle

ТишаSilence

КонцентраціяConcentration

Краса життяBeauty of life Dresden, 28-29 October, 2015 19

Кам’яні ідолиThe stony idols

Каплиця – місце жертвоприношень ІІХ-Х ст.

Kapyshche – sacrificial place 9th – 10th century

Придорожні хрести

Road crosses

HISTORICAL

ENVIRONMENT


Військова могила УСС/УГА 1918р.

Military grave USS/UHA, 1918

Дерев’яна церква, ХVІІ ст.

Wooden church, 17th century

Церква Вознесіння, поч. ХХVoznesinnya (Ascension) church, beg. of 17th century

Museum of Folk

Architecture and

Custom

(Museum under the Sky)


Геологічна пам’ятка г. Лева

Geological site Leva (Lion) mountain

Ставок у старому кар’єрі

Lake in old quarrier

Такі близькі і приязні, завжди поруч

So close and friendly, always close to as

Ботанічна пам’ятка г. Хомець

Botanical site Khomec mountain Звична картина

Common picture

History of the Earth,

Botanical and

geological sites


Stakeholders’ preferences

regarding urban park (Preliminary map)

Values

Stake-

holders

Recrea

-tional

Environ-

mental

services

Aethe

-tical

Historical

and

cultural

Educational

values

Eco-

nomic

Local

government

1 2 2 1 3 -

Business

establishmen

ts

1 3 2 - - 3

NGO 1 2 2 4 2 -

Educational

establishmen

ts

1 1 2 3 - -

Local

population

1 1 2 2 - -

Mass media 3 1 1 2 4 -


Public evaluation of inanimate natural

components of landscapes (Nijnik et al., 2009)

analysis of public preferences through the

construction of aggregated indexes (Rozhko, 2000):

recreational,

aesthetical,

scientific,

cultural-historical

ecological value of inanimate nature objects.

24Dresden, 28-29 October, 2015

Relation between WTP

and aggregated indexes(Nijnik et al., 2009)

Coefficient t-Ratio

Significance

level

Constant −10.72 −1.07 0.36

The aggregated

index

0.98 2.95 0.06

25

Skolivski Beskydy National Park, Carpathian Mountains,

Ukraine


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837708000161

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837708000161


Stakeholders’ perceptions

of treeline ecosystem services

treeline ecosystem services (TES) as a

contribution of ecosystems, located in a

treeline zone, to human well being.

CICES V 4.3 classification (http://cices.eu/).


Provisioning ecosystem services of treeline

ecosystems: Ukrainian Carpathians case study

(Zahvoyska et al., 2014)


Regulation & Maintenance Ecosystem Services


Cultural Ecosystem Services:TES in Ukrainian Carpathians (Zahvoyska et al., 2014)


Stakeholders with highest benefits

or/and strongest threatens to TES


COMPARISON OF FOREST ECOSYSTEM QUALITY (Zahvoyska and Pelyukh, 2015):

mixed vs. pure stands (CICES V 4.3, 2014; Sign test, p = 99%)


SensFor Workshop at the James

Hutton Institute in Aberdeen, UK,

9-10 October, 2015 33

-2

0

1

1

2

-3

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

Planting forests to produce timber shouldbe a policy priority

The shortage of investment is the mainchallenge in treeline areas

I support the tree planting in treelineareas carried out for multiple purposes

Letting wildlife take care of itself shouldbe the main principle of advanced…

The rights of people to enjoy the beautyof treeline areas are more important…

Planting trees to create jobs is moreimportant than protecting wildlife &…

Conservationists

-3

1

2

0

1

-2

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3







Green Protectionists

3

4

-3

2

-2

3

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5







2

2

-1

-1

-4

2

-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3







Productivists Non-Green

Technocrats

4

-2

-2

-3

3

0

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5

Planting forests to produce timber should be apolicy priority


I support the tree planting in treeline areascarried out for multiple purposes

Letting wildlife take care of itself should be themain principle of advanced forest management

in treeline areas

The rights of people to enjoy the beauty oftreeline areas are more important than making

profits from the land

Planting trees to create jobs is more importantthan protecting wildlife & nature

Challengers

Q- method, Discources (Kopiy et al., unpub.)

3. Integration of forest

ecosystem values into

decision-making


Nature

Pre-analytical View of Ecological Economics(Farley et al., 2005)

Ecological Economic Paradigm

35

Society

Economy



CONCEPTUAL MODEL of social-ecological-economic systems co-

evolution

(Farley et al., 2005; Zahvoyska, 2010)


Service cascades (CICES v 4, 2013)

Biophysical

structure or

process

Functions

(e.g. slow

passage of

water, or

biomass) Benefit

(e.g.

contribution

to aspects of

well-being

such as health

and safety)

Value

(e.g. WTP for

woodland

protection or for

more woodland or

harvestable

products)

Service

(e.g. flood

protection or

harvestable

products)

Forest ecosystems:Biophysical structure:Forest landscapes

Forest ecosystem functions:

Emergent pheno –mena: processes

Forest ecosystems:Services , contribution to human well-being

Components

of human well-beings

e.g. safe aesthetic environ-

ment

Forest values:

FeelingInformationKnowledgeQuantitiesValuesPricesStake-

holders’ perception

of FES:- positions- conflicts

Political processes :localglobalregional

Institutes

and

institutions

- Formal

- Informal

- Indirect

impact

Compro-

mised

solutions:

- Legal- Political

- Econo

mic;

Antopogenic pressure on

forest ecosystems: state and dynamics

Cascade model of forest decision-making:

forest ecosystem services (FES) perspective(Haines-Young, Potschin, 2012; Zahvoyska, 2014)


Value of ecosystem services

Priceless

Costanza et al., 1997

Reliability of estimations?

Monetarisation? WTP?

Choice experiments?

Green infrastructure ?


Conclusion

Interdisciplinarity brings ambiguity into

definitions and classification schemes

Application defines relevant system

Integration of values of ecosystem

services is crucial .



Міждисциплінарна магістерська

програма “Економіка довкілля і

природних ресурсів” (три проекти

програми Tempus Tacis у 1996-2001рр.)

•1996 – 1997 – pre-project NARECO

•1997 – 2000 – joint project ENARECO (Environment and NAtural Resource

ECOnomics)

•2000 – 2001 – compact project Dissemination ENARECO

Essmann, H., N.Lust, D.Pettenella and Yu. Tunytsya (Eds.),

2000. ENARECO – new master-study course on environmental economics in

Ukraine. Ideas, objectives, contents.

41


Економіка довкілля і природних ресурсів:

Навчальні програми магістерського курсу підготовки

економістів-екологів.

За ред. Л.І. Максимів, Л.Д. Загвойської, М.Е. Матвєєва

(2002)Екологічна економіка

Економіка довкілля

природних ресурсів

Економічний аналіз

інвестиційних проектів

42


Lyudmyla Zahvoyska

Institute of Ecological Economics,

Ukrainian National Forestry University

Documents

Department of Ecological Economics, Ukrainian National ......Lviv in 20th century Львів у ХIХ ст. Lviv in 19th century Львів у ХVII ст. Lviv in 17th century Dresden,