Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The economic value of nature?
Pricing habitats and species- Possibilities and constraints
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Ivan Olsson and Stefan Jendteg
Outline- An introduction to ecosystem services and cost-benefit analyses (CBA)- The Fyledalen case study- Methods used- Cost estimates- Benefit estimates- Preliminary results
- Problems encountered:BiodiversitySpecies without commercial valuesHabitats without recreational values (mires, he he …?)Robustness of variables used by CBA´s
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Cost-Benefit Workshop
- Workshop exercise
Introduction
1) Providing/producing (eg goods; food, timber)2) Regulating (eg pollination, predators regulating herbivores)3) Supporting (eg hydrological cycle, transport of nutrients…)4) Cultural (eg recreational, hunting, angling)
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Ecosystem services = goods and service provided by the ecosystem (beneficial for us).
Unio crassus filtering water, reducing nutrients
Threats …
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Sources responsible for loss of ecosystem services:
Habitat destruction (eg pollution, the impact of invasive species) Fragmentation (eg alteration of habitats resulting in loss of connectivity) - Loss of mechanisms driving ecosystems (pacific salmon as a “nutrient carrier”) - Loss of biodiversity and genetic diversity
Are traditional “ecological variables” (eg extinction rates, levels of pollutions, diversity index)- powerful enough for changing the negative trends (human behavior)?
In cases they are not…
The impact of canalizing; increase in extreme flooding events, nutrient transport, loss of diversity etc
The CBA as an additional (stronger?) tool describing, in monetary terms:
- the negative effects of having non-functional ecosystems- the positive effects of having functional ecosystems
…Pricing and valuing ecosystem services by CBA´s may create an economic motivationfor its protection… and for restoring habitats and re-introduction of species…
How about Cost-Benefit Analyses, CBA´s ?
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
The Case study in Fyledalen
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Improved water quality
Increased biodiversity
Objectives
To learn a lot…
Recreation, post-hocTo disseminate a lot The Baltic perspective
Post-LIFE-conditions-Poor water quality, habitats-Poor aquatic biodiversity
The value of a mussel?
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
As a pedagogue, indicator and symbol - but also as a threatened “species” and filter feeder…
Methods
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Transforming responding variables (objectives) into monetary values (SEK)before and after implementation of actions:
Biodiversity ???
Knowledge gained ???
Dissemination, catalyst effect ???
P-reduction, per kg = 1 023 SEKN-reduction, per kg = 31 SEK
Willingness to pay amongst visitors, but no fee (350 SEK per visit)
Salmonids, 108 SEK per kgOther species, 9 SEK per individual
Water quality
Recreation
Fish production
Filtering/storage capacity 0.1 – 1.2 g P per mussel (?)Mussel filtering
CBA Results - Recreation
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024
Acc
um
ula
ted
co
sts
vs b
en
efit
s (S
EK
) Costs10% of RV
50% of RVRecreation Value (RV)
Action costs c. 6MSEKBenefits: Willingness to pay 350 SEK per visit, annually 20 000 visits in Fyledalen Willingness to pay for Action costs (50% of RV), 175 SEK ? – Balance 2015 Willingness to pay for Action costs (10% of RV), 35 SEK ? – Balance 2023
The study (questionnaire) will be repeated the following years for “new” RV and accurate “willingness to pay” numbers for actions…
CBA Predicted Results - Water quality
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024
Acc
um
ula
ted
co
sts
vs b
en
efit
s (S
EK
)
Costs P-reduction
N-reduction
P-Mussels
Tot reduction
Action costs c. 6MSEKBenefits: P-reduction (range: -20 to 80 kg per month [1023 SEK per kg]) by floodplain actions N-reduction (range: 100 to 300 kg per month [31 SEK per kg]) by floodplain actions P-reduction by mussels (range 0.1 to 1.2 g per individual and year). Population density will level out 2030 (Carrying capacity 3 M)
Benefits will balance costs 2021 ?
CBA Predicted Results - Fish
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024
Time (YEARS)
Acc
um
ula
ted
co
sts
vs b
en
efit
s (S
EK
) Costs
Salmonids
other fish sp
Action costs c. 6MSEKBenefits: Fish, annual production (range: 200 – 10000, 9 SEK/fish):Benefits: Salmonids, annual production (range: 100 – 250 kg, 108 SEK/kg)
Benefits will balance costs 2070
CBA Costs vs benefits, predicted (total)
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020
Acc
um
ula
ted
co
sts
vs b
en
efit
s (S
EK
)
Costs
Benefits, total
Benefits = (recreation + water quality improvements + increased fish production) balance project costs by 2018…
Conclusions
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Possible to value:CostsImprovements of recreation value +++Improvements in water quality ++Increased fish production +
Not possible to value(?):BiodiversityDisseminationGained knowledge
We were able to predict the time for when benefits balanced costsWe were able to estimate the benefits of having Unio crassus re-introducedRobustness of variables/predictions(?), validation through monitoring(before-after-impact-control-design)
Future LIFE-projects?
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Each proposal containing concrete conservation actions must also include an action aimed to assess the socio-economic impact of the project actions on the local economy and population, as well as on the ecosystem functions"
THANKS
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Workshop exercise
@UC_4LIFE
WWW.UCFORLIFE.SE
Thematic (rivers and lakes, wetlands/bogs, grasslands, forest) groups?:
The tasks:
1) Define potential ecosystem services that are influenced by your project actions
2) Quantify, in monetary terms, ecosystem services (benefits) affected by your project actions (optimal €/unit).
3) Define positive impacts on ecosystem services, not possible to quantify in monetary terms. Why isn't it possible?
4) When should we use the concept of ecosystem services and cost- benefit analyses? Why?
