Valuing marine ecosystem

services and benefits

Mel Austen

Valuing marine ecosystem services and benefits • Why do we need valuation? • Setting the scene – ecosystem services, assessment

frameworks, valuation • Application of ecosystem services approach • Marine ecosystem valuation and examples • Challenges • Examples of valuation of marine ecosystems to support policy

across the EU • Research needs

Current and

emerging

pressures are

multiple and

interacting

Energy

Devices

Environmental

Changes

(including

climate change)

Discharges

Exploitation of

living resources

Concerns Outbreaks

Invasives

Changes in

productivity

Transport

Tourism & Leisure

• EU policies

• Commercial/Regulation/Management

− licencing

− planning for conflicting uses

• Environment

− environmental protection

EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive

Valuation of ecosystem services and benefits

to support:

IMO Convention on Ballast Water Management

Common Fisheries Policy

Invasive Alien Species Strategy (forthcoming) Marine Planning Directive

Biodiversity Strategy

EU Maritime Policy

What do ecosystems do for people?

Biodiversity and

natural resources

Ecosystem

processes and

functions

Ecosystem

services

Ecosystem

benefits and

values

Millenium Ecosystem Assessment

Ecosystem services distinguished from ecosystem benefits including distinction of ES and intermediate ES Fisher et al, Boyd and Bahnhof

Ecosystem service typology

Framework for application

Environmental (abiotic) vs ecosystem services (e.g. Atkins et al)

Incorporating DPSIR (e.g. Atkins et al)

Application to policy refinement of framework and typology

National e.g. UK

National Ecosystem Assessment

Natural Capital Committee

National Ecosystem Assessment Follow on

International

SEEA

TEEB UN

EU

CICES

Evolving

frameworks and

classifications

PROVISIONING 1a: Food provision -

Wild capture sea food

1b: Food provision -

Farmed sea food

2a: Biotic raw material

- Genetic resources

2b: Biotic raw material

- Medicinal resources

2c: Biotic raw material -

Ornamental resources

REGULATING 3: Air purification

4: Climate regulation

5: Disturbance prevention

and moderation

6: Regulation of water

flows

7: Waste treatment and

assimilation

8: Coastal erosion

prevention

9: Biological Control (checks

& balances)

HABITAT 10: Migratory and

nursery habitat

11: Gene pool

protection

CULTURAL 12: Leisure, recreation

and tourism

13: Aesthetic experience

14: Inspiration for

culture, art and design

15: Cultural heritage

16: Cultural diversity

17: Spiritual experience

18: Information for

cognitive development

VECTORS ecosystem services typology

Hattam et al. Marine ecosystem services:

linking indicators to their classification. Ecol.

Indicators (In press)

Biophysical

structure or

process

(e.g. nutrient

cycling or Net

Primary

Productivity)

Function*

(e.g. slow

water

passage,

biomass)

Ecosystems & Biodiversity

Service

(e.g. flood-

protection,

waste

treatment)

Benefit(s)

(e.g. food,

fuel, tourism

etc) (econ) Value

(e.g. WTP for

protection or

products)

Human wellbeing

(socio-cultural context)

Institutions & human

judgments determining

(the use of) services

Management/

restoration Feedback between

value perception

and use of eco-

system services

* Subset of biophysical structure or

process providing the service

Modified from TEEB:

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (2010)

(inc. abiotic components)

Ecosystem service frameworks

Function*

(e.g. slow

water

passage,

biomass)

Service

(e.g. flood-

protection,

waste

treatment)

Benefit(s)

(e.g. food,

fuel, tourism

etc) (econ) Value

(e.g. WTP for

protection or

products)

EEA Common International Classification of

Ecosystem Services (CICES)

Ecosystem service frameworks

Biophysical

structure or

process

(e.g. nutrient

cycling or Net

Primary

Productivity)

Limit pressures via

policy action

Sum of

pressures

Haines-Young, R. and Potschin, M. (2013a): Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services

(CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December 2012. EEA Framework Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003.

Overall National Ecosystem Assessment Conceptual Framework

*Note that the term good(s) includes all use and non-use, material and non-material benefits from ecosystems that have value for people.

Ecosystems

Air, land, water and all living things

Drivers of Change (Direct and Indirect) • Demographic, economic, socio-political,

technological and behavioural • Management practices • Environmental changes

Human wellbeing: •Economic value •Health value •Shared (social) value

Good(s)* Ecosystem

services

Dogger Bank ecosystem services under differing VECTORS scenarios

• The EC MSFD calls for an ecosystem approach to marine management • The Dogger Bank contributes to wellbeing by providing ecosystem services (ES) • ES assessment to inform ecosystem-based management

SL. Garrard, C. Hattam, A. Böhnke-Henrichs, D. Burdon, J. Atkins, M. Austen

Assessment based on indicators

Literature review

Modelling approach

Expert judgement

Fish/ shellfish populations:

Abundance

Biomass

A2 B1

Quality of the fishery:

Species compositin

Age profile

Length profile

Fishing mortality

% affected by disease

Food provision (example)

Trends in ES

Lessons learnt: • Data limitation restrict ES assessment; more indicator specific data needed • Results help prioritize research and monitoring • Interdisciplinary teams are essential for ES assessment

Implications of Vectors scenarios for Dogger Bank

B1 • Precautionary

approach to MSY • 50% cover of

windfarms = no take zone

• Reduced oil and gas exploration

• 0.3oC SST increase

A2 • Abandonment of CFP:

more destructive fishing practices

• 15% cover of windfarms

• Increased oil and gas exploration

• 0.8oC SST increase

Value = importance?

• Economic values

– assume that individuals are rational and have well-defined and

stable preferences over alternative outcomes, which are revealed

through actual or stated choices.

– based on utilitarianism and assume substitutability

– defined in terms of the trade-offs that individuals are willing to make,

given the constraints they face.

• Community-based values

– based on the assumption that individuals make choices based on

what they think is good for society as a whole rather than what is

good for them as individuals.

• Attitude or judgment-based values

• Values based on constructed preferences

• Bio-ecological values

• Energy-based values US Environmental Protection Agency, 2009

Valuation: Approaches and Methodologies

• Revealed preference

– Market values, travel cost, hedonic pricing

Direct market valuation: Production function

• Production function approaches

– Estimates contribution of an ecosystem service to a final commodity

– Improvement in resource base or environmental quality, i.e. enhanced

ecosystem services, lowers costs and prices or increases quantity of

goods

– Requires knowledge of relationships between ecosystems services

and valued end points

• Applicable to regulating and supporting services

Photo: Keith Hiscock Ecosystem service

Value

?

Valuation: Approaches and Methodologies

• Revealed preference

– Market values, travel cost, hedonic pricing

• Stated preference

– Contingent valuation, contingent behaviour, choice experiments

Valuation of Ecosystem Benefits from the Dogger Bank

• The Dogger Bank is facing various pressures from fisheries, wind farm development and aggregate extraction.

• To comply with the EC Habitats Directive and Marine Strategy Framework Directive, the Dogger Bank SAC requires management to achieve the protection objectives.

T. Börger, C. Hattam, D. Burdon, J. Atkins, M. Austen

Dogger Bank management targets

Change in species diversity

Protection area for porpoises, seals and

seabirds

Reduction of risk of invasive species

Method and Results

• UK-wide choice experiment survey (N=1,022 households)

• Unit: Willingness to pay (WTP) to secure ecosystem service change

• Outcomes can inform management planning and decision making

Dogger Bank

Method:

• Survey all beneficiaries of a set of ecosystem services

• Respondents make choices and reveal their preferences

Results:

• Value of particular services (Willingness to pay)

• Tradeoff between particular services

• Profile of groups that profit more or less from ecosystem service change

• The Dogger Bank is facing various pressures from fisheries, wind farm development and aggregate extraction.

• To comply with the EC Habitats Directive and Marine Strategy Framework Directive, the Dogger Bank SAC requires management to achieve the protection objectives.

Valuation of Ecosystem Benefits from the Dogger Bank T. Börger, C. Hattam, D. Burdon, J. Atkins, M. Austen

Dogger Bank management targets

Change in species diversity

Protection area for porpoises, seals and

seabirds

Reduction of risk of invasive species

Method and Results

• UK-wide choice experiment survey (N=1,022 households)

• Unit: Willingness to pay (WTP) to secure ecosystem service change

• Outcomes can inform management planning and decision making

Economic valuation of impacts

4,22 7,97

23,96 30,34

25,31

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Species +10%

Species +25%

Protected area +25%

Protected area +50%

Restricted spread of invasive species

WTP (£) per UK household

• Economic valuation can quantify the welfare impacts of policy-induced ecosystem change to inform management planning and decision-making.

Valuation: Approaches and Methodologies

• Revealed preference

– Market values, travel cost, hedonic pricing

• Stated preference

– Contingent valuation, contingent behaviour, choice experiments

• Benefit transfer

– Adapt values derived from existing studies to some other context

• Measures of attitudes, preferences, and intentions

– Surveys, narratives, focus groups, behavioural observation

• Civic valuation

– Referenda, citizen jury

Deliberative Valuation and the Dogger Bank A. Delaney, D. Degnbol, M. Hadjimichael, C. Hattam, T. Börger, J. Atkins, D. Burdon, M. Austen

Alternative to monetary valuation of

ecosystem services

In-depth exploration of opinions

Conflicts and dilemmas in management of DB

Prioritisation of uses/ ecosystem services of

DB

Results

Sustainability and balance is important

Conservation a priority, with caveats – balance intrinsic value of DB with

economic demands

Influence of witnesses apparent

Availability of evidence affected discussions

Fishing prioritised over windfarm construction – historical legitimacy and

information imbalance

Methods

• Workshop designed as citizens’ jury

• 20 members of the public

• 4 expert witnesses

• 2 rounds of deliberation

• Did not aim for consensus

• Supports development of management plan for the Dogger Bank cSAC • Complements ecosystem service valuation in support of ecosystem approach to marine

management, as required by MSFD

Valuation: some challenges • Values are dynamic

– Responsive to environmental change and human pressures;

Tempered by uncertainty; Spatio-temporally variable; Social and

historical context

• Values are simplistic – Inter-relationships of different ecosystem services; Feedbacks in

systems; Non-linearities in systems

– Are all ecosystem services substitutable?

• Whose values count and who does the valuing?

• What is being valued? – Stocks of resources (natural capital) or flows from these?

city

city

Some spatial considerations…

Policy/management use examples

MSFD – socio-economic analysis

• MS challenged by limited amount of socio-economic data

available within the timeframe required to undertake MSFD

assessment – very little new research provided for this

phase.

• Only five MS opted to apply an Ecosystem Services

Framework to look at costs of degradation

• Considerable uncertainty about the level of existing

knowledge on the extent to which changes in ecosystem

state translate into changes of ecosystem services provision

WFD – Disproportionate costs to reach good ecological status

Some research needs…

• Ecosystem services – natural science perspective

– Biodiversity structure-function-services-benefits relationships

– Spatial and temporal dimensions

– Increase use of natural science in valuation

Biodiversity and natural resources

Ecosystem

processes and

functions

Ecosystem

services

Ecosystem

benefits and

values

Natural science Social

science

Research needs…

• Ecosystem services – natural science perspective

– Biodiversity structure-function-services-benefits relationships

– Spatial and temporal dimensions

– Increase use of natural science in valuation

• Apply lessons learned from fisheries economics

– to broader marine ecosystem service valuation

– Spatio-temporal scales

– Modelling

• Marine cultural ecosystem services and benefits

– Understand, quantify and value

• Evaluate use of valuation in policy making

– Develop mechanisms to improve use of valuation in decision

making

Research needs…

Photo: G. Newman

Valuation research needs – Addressing limitations and uncertainties

• Monetary valuation of marine ecosystem services

– Uncertainty in marine vs terrestrial application of public stated

preference

– Transferability of valuation methodologies from terrestrial to marine

– Lack of data

– Sensitivity

– Context dependence

• Non-monetary valuation of marine ecosystem services

– Development of discursive valuation

– Understanding and distinction of societal values (general public) vs

those of informed stakeholder

– Health benefit (and cost) values

Research needs…

Spatial and temporal dimensions of valuation

• Valuation of ecosystem benefits (EB)

– temporal stability error/variability of value systems – relationship of

current economic context and EB values

– geographic/cultural heterogeneity of EB value systems

– use in benefit transfer

– spatial delimitation of value (mobile natural assets!)

– valuation across international borders

– use of discounting during temporal variability

• Research to address issues concerning ecosystem

thresholds and tipping points within EB valuation

Research needs…

Modelling

• Modelling natural science using and developing ecosystem models

(system models) to quantify and project ES changes

• Develop system modelling approaches to include ES and EB values to

retain complexity of interactions (e.g. Atlantis type modelling platforms)

• Linking natural science models with economic and social science

models:

– Develop a broader ES bioeconomic modelling approach: perhaps tackle

provisioning/regulating/cultural services with different modelling approaches

• Adapt models to requirements/perceptions of decision makers –

develop user friendly modelling

• Develop decision support approaches MCA, INVEST, Atlantis

Research needs…

Marine Ecosystem accounting

• Marine ecosystems as natural capital within a natural

capital portfolio; marine ecosystem services as capital

within a portfolio management approach

• Payment for ecosystem services (PES vs valuation)

• Life cycle analysis, evidence to support decisions e.g.

– of commercial companies marketing fish

– for marine renewable energy development

Research needs…

Some conclusions • Valuation is needed to support policy, industry,

management/regulation, environmental protection

• Ecosystem service typologies exist for the marine environment – these

probably need to be adapted to the context in which they are applied

• We should continue to ‘marinise’ terrestrial ecosystem service

frameworks, valuation methods and natural capital (green/blue)

accounting

• There are still many research and data needs

• Interdisciplinary research linking natural and social science is

essential, we need to build capacity

Zen & the Art of Ecosystem Services

Some conclusions

• Valuation is needed to support policy, industry,

management/regulation, environmental protection

• Ecosystem service typologies exist for the marine

environment – these probably need to be adapted to the

context in which they are applied

• We should continue to ‘marinise’ terrestrial ecosystem

service frameworks and valuation methods

• There are still many research and data needs

• Interdisciplinary research linking natural and social science

is essential, we need to build capacity

Rome wasn’t built in a day

www.bjjee.com

Thank you