Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
My talk from the World Conference on Ecological Restoration on 10/8/13 in Madison, WI. My argument is: efforts to concentrate on watershed needs and processes in ensuring greater ecological returns from restoration may not be so easily implemented when it comes to mitigation markets. Outcomes are likely to differ from region to region, however. PES promoters regularly call for spatially-explicit approaches to restoration, but on the ground their efforts run into resistance from the entrepreneurs at the heart of these markets. Their concerns are both economic and ecological. I make the argument by taking us through how restoration sites in the Oregon market are planned for, chosen, and evaluated, ending with a discussion of what the case may suggest for other markets.
Citation preview
Scaling up? Difficulties in the prioritization, selection, and evaluation of restoration sites for Oregon's ecosystem services market
Eric Nost Ph.D. Student
Department of Geography University of Wisconsin-Madison
Half Mile Lane
Half Mile Lane
Half Mile Lane
Half Mile Lane
THPRD future trail site
Half Mile Lane
THPRD future trail site
Half Mile Lane
THPRD future trail site
Half Mile Lane
THPRD future trail site
Why HML matters
Assessment of ecological functions “Stacking” multiple credit types
Watershed and landscape-focused site selection
“Ecosystem functions, the flow of ecosystem services, and the economic value to society and the economy are site specific…” -TEEB, 2013, 08
“We need to be able to pinpoint places on the landscape … and say these places are really the most important for supplying these benefits....” -Gretchen Daily, 2013
“We need to be able to pinpoint places on the landscape … and say these places are really the most important for supplying these benefits....” -Gretchen Daily, 2013
“The primary objective of the watershed approach included in today’s rule is to maintain and improve the quantity and quality of wetlands and other aquatic resources in watersheds through strategic selection of compensatory mitigation project sites.” -Federal Register, April 10, 2008, pg. 19598.
Value: “The importance or worth of a wetland function to societal needs. This includes public attitudes and the wetland’s opportunity to provide a given function based on its location.” -OR Dept. of State Lands, 2012
Restoration siting
3 moments
–Assessment –Regulatory –Market
3 difficulties
–Context –Categorization –Prioritization
3 moments
Assessment – use online mapping tools Regulatory Market
3 moments
Assessment Regulatory – categorize wetlands Market
3 moments
Assessment Regulatory Market – deploy trading ratios
“And now because of GIS and various resource censusing tools that we have, we can look at all these overlays and determine where all these priorities are.” OR regulator, 7-6-12
3 difficulties
How to assess site context How to categorize wetlands in regulation How to prioritize particular sites
Discussion
Move toward new metrics contested on both economic and ecological grounds Bankers haven’t taken up new projects Markets and plans vary
Conclusion
Watershed planning is likely to run into resistance, but it’ll differ place to place
Questions?
[email protected] @ericnost Thanks to: NSF Award BCS-12138277 (PIs: Martin Doyle, Rebecca Lave, Morgan Robertson), University of Kentucky Barnhardt-Withington Award, UW Human Environment Research Dynamic (HERD)
