1
|
Pascual U, Balvanera P, Anderson CB, Chaplin-Kramer R, Christie M, González-Jiménez D, Martin A, Raymond CM, Termansen M, Vatn A, Athayde S, Baptiste B, Barton DN, Jacobs S, Kelemen E, Kumar R, Lazos E, Mwampamba TH, Nakangu B, O'Farrell P, Subramanian SM, van Noordwijk M, Ahn S, Amaruzaman S, Amin AM, Arias-Arévalo P, Arroyo-Robles G, Cantú-Fernández M, Castro AJ, Contreras V, De Vos A, Dendoncker N, Engel S, Eser U, Faith DP, Filyushkina A, Ghazi H, Gómez-Baggethun E, Gould RK, Guibrunet L, Gundimeda H, Hahn T, Harmáčková ZV, Hernández-Blanco M, Horcea-Milcu AI, Huambachano M, Wicher NLH, Aydın Cİ, Islar M, Koessler AK, Kenter JO, Kosmus M, Lee H, Leimona B, Lele S, Lenzi D, Lliso B, Mannetti LM, Merçon J, Monroy-Sais AS, Mukherjee N, Muraca B, Muradian R, Murali R, Nelson SH, Nemogá-Soto GR, Ngouhouo-Poufoun J, Niamir A, Nuesiri E, Nyumba TO, Özkaynak B, Palomo I, Pandit R, Pawłowska-Mainville A, Porter-Bolland L, Quaas M, Rode J, Rozzi R, Sachdeva S, Samakov A, Schaafsma M, Sitas N, Ungar P, Yiu E, Yoshida Y, Zent E. Diverse values of nature for sustainability. Nature 2023; 620:813-823. [PMID: 37558877 PMCID: PMC10447232 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06406-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2022] [Accepted: 07/05/2023] [Indexed: 08/11/2023]
Abstract
Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis3 still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature's diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever4. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature's values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)5 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals6, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature7. Arguably, a 'values crisis' underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change8, pandemic emergence9 and socio-environmental injustices10. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature's diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Unai Pascual
- Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), Scientific Campus of the University of the Basque Country, Leioa, Spain.
- Ikerbasque Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao, Spain.
- Centre for Development and Environment, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
| | - Patricia Balvanera
- Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Morelia, México
| | - Christopher B Anderson
- Instituto de Ciencias Polares, Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Tierra del Fuego (ICPA-UNTDF), Ushuaia, Argentina
- Centro Austral de Investigaciones Científicas, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CADIC-CONICET), Ushuaia, Argentina
| | - Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer
- Global Science, WWF, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Institute on the Environment, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, USA
| | - Michael Christie
- Aberystwyth Business School, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, UK
| | - David González-Jiménez
- Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Morelia, México
- Global Resilience Partnership, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Adrian Martin
- School of International Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| | - Christopher M Raymond
- Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
- Ecosystems and Environment Research Program, Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
- Department of Economics and Management, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Mette Termansen
- Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Arild Vatn
- Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway
| | - Simone Athayde
- Department of Global and Sociocultural Studies and Kimberly Green Latin American and Caribbean Center, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | | | - David N Barton
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Oslo, Norway
| | - Sander Jacobs
- Research Institute for Nature and Forest INBO, Brussels, Belgium
- Belgian Biodiversity Platform, Brussels, Belgium
| | | | - Ritesh Kumar
- Wetlands International South Asia, New Delhi, India
| | - Elena Lazos
- Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Mexico City, México
| | - Tuyeni H Mwampamba
- Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Morelia, México
- Department of Ecosystems and Conservation, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Tourism, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania
| | - Barbara Nakangu
- World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Culemborg, The Netherlands
| | - Patrick O'Farrell
- Department of Biodiversity and Conservation Biology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
- Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources, UNU-FLORES, United Nations University, Dresden, Germany
| | - Suneetha M Subramanian
- Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability, United Nations University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Meine van Noordwijk
- International Centre for Forestry Research and World Agroforestry (CIFOR-ICRAF), Bogor, Indonesia
- Plant Production Systems, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands
- Agroforestry Research Group, Brawijaya University, Malang, Indonesia
| | - SoEun Ahn
- Korea Environment Institute, Sejong, Republic of Korea
| | - Sacha Amaruzaman
- International Centre for Forestry Research and World Agroforestry (CIFOR-ICRAF), Bogor, Indonesia
| | - Ariane M Amin
- Université Felix Houphouët-Boigny, Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire
- Centre Suisse de Recherche Scientifique, Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire
| | - Paola Arias-Arévalo
- Departamento de Economía, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales y Económicas, Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia
| | - Gabriela Arroyo-Robles
- Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Morelia, México
| | - Mariana Cantú-Fernández
- Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Morelia, México
| | - Antonio J Castro
- Departamento de Biología y Geología, Centro Andaluz de Evaluación y Seguimiento del Cambio Global (CAESCG), Universidad de Almería, Almería, Spain
| | - Victoria Contreras
- Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Morelia, México
| | - Alta De Vos
- Department of Environmental Science, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa
- Centre for Sustainability Transitions, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
| | - Nicolas Dendoncker
- Department of Geography, Institute of Life Earth and Environment, University of Namur, Namur, Belgium
| | - Stefanie Engel
- School of Business Administration and Economics & Institute for Environmental Systems Research, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
| | - Uta Eser
- Office for Environmental Ethics, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Daniel P Faith
- Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Anna Filyushkina
- Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
- Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Erik Gómez-Baggethun
- Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Oslo, Norway
| | - Rachelle K Gould
- Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA
| | - Louise Guibrunet
- Institute of Geography, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Mexico City, México
| | - Haripriya Gundimeda
- Department of Economics, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India
| | - Thomas Hahn
- Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Zuzana V Harmáčková
- Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
- Global Change Research Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic
| | | | - Andra-Ioana Horcea-Milcu
- Kassel Institute for Sustainability, University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany
- Faculty of Humanities and Cultural Studies, University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany
| | - Mariaelena Huambachano
- Center for Global Indigenous Cultures and Environmental Justice Center, Syracuse University, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Cem İskender Aydın
- Institute of Environmental Sciences, Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Mine Islar
- Center for Sustainability Studies, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Ann-Kathrin Koessler
- Department of Geography, Institute of Life Earth and Environment, University of Namur, Namur, Belgium
- Institute of Environmental Planning, Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Jasper O Kenter
- Aberystwyth Business School, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, UK
- Ecologos Research Ltd, Aberystwyth, UK
- Department of Environment and Geography, University of York, York, UK
| | - Marina Kosmus
- Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GIZ, Bonn, Germany
| | - Heera Lee
- Department of Forestry and Landscape Architecture, Konkuk University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
- Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research, Atmospheric Environmental Research (IMK-IFU), Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany
| | - Beria Leimona
- International Centre for Forestry Research and World Agroforestry (CIFOR-ICRAF), Bogor, Indonesia
| | - Sharachchandra Lele
- Centre for Environment & Development, ATREE, Bengaluru, India
- Indian Institute of Science Education & Research, Pune, India
- Shiv Nadar University, Delhi, India
| | - Dominic Lenzi
- Department of Philosophy, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Bosco Lliso
- Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), Scientific Campus of the University of the Basque Country, Leioa, Spain
- World Benchmarking Alliance, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Juliana Merçon
- Instituto de Investigaciones en Educación, Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa, México
| | - Ana Sofía Monroy-Sais
- Centro de Investigaciones en Geografía Ambiental, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Morelia, México
| | - Nibedita Mukherjee
- Division of Anthropology, Geography and Development, Department of Social and Political Sciences, Brunel University, London, UK
| | - Barbara Muraca
- Department of Philosophy and Environmental Studies Program, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA
| | - Roldan Muradian
- Faculdade de Economia, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, Brazil
| | - Ranjini Murali
- The Snow Leopard Trust, Seattle, WA, USA
- Geography Department, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Sara H Nelson
- Centre for Climate Justice, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Gabriel R Nemogá-Soto
- University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
- Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Jonas Ngouhouo-Poufoun
- International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Nkolbisson Yaoundé, Cameroon
- Congo Basin Institute (CBI), Nkolbisson Yaoundé, Cameroon
| | - Aidin Niamir
- Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Institute, Frankfurt, Germany
| | | | - Tobias O Nyumba
- Department of Environment and Geography, University of York, York, UK
- African Conservation Centre, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Begüm Özkaynak
- Department of Economics, Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Ignacio Palomo
- University of Grenoble Alpes, IRD, CNRS, INRAE, Grenoble, France
| | - Ram Pandit
- Centre for Environmental Economics and Policy, School of Agriculture and Environment, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
- Global Center for Food, Land and Water Resources, Research Faculty of Agriculture, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Agnieszka Pawłowska-Mainville
- Global and International Studies, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada
- Nicholaus Copernicus University, Toruń, Poland
| | | | - Martin Quaas
- German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv), Leipzig, Germany
| | - Julian Rode
- Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Leipzig, Germany
| | - Ricardo Rozzi
- Cape Horn International Center (CHIC), Universidad de Magallanes, Santiago, Chile
- Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy and Religion, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA
| | - Sonya Sachdeva
- Northern Research Station, US Forest Service, Evanston, IL, USA
| | - Aibek Samakov
- Aigine Cultural Research Center, Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic
| | - Marije Schaafsma
- Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
- School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Nadia Sitas
- Centre for Sustainability Transitions, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
| | - Paula Ungar
- The Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Evonne Yiu
- Ernst & Young ShinNihon LLC, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yuki Yoshida
- National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan
| | - Eglee Zent
- Laboratorio Ecología Humana, Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Científicas, Altos de Pipe, Venezuela
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Barton DN. Value ‘generalisation’ in ecosystem accounting - using Bayesian networks to infer the asset value of regulating services for urban trees in Oslo. OE 2023. [DOI: 10.3897/oneeco.8.e85021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/24/2023]
Abstract
In this paper, we demonstrate value generalisation from a sample of ecosystem assets – municipally managed trees - to all tree assets within an urban ecosystem accounting area. A Bayesian network model is used to machine-learn non-parametric correlation patterns between biophysical site condition variables and output variables of an ecosystem service model – here iTree Eco for modelling the regulating services of urban forests. The paper also demonstrates the use of spatial Bayesian network modelling to quantify the reliability of value generalisation for accounting purposes. Value generalisation entails inferring ecosystem service values for all locations in an ecosystem accounting area, where the accounting practitioner has less information about the asset and its context, than in an available sample of managed sites within the accounting area. The modelling is carried out as a “proof-of-principle” of potential value generalisation and uncertainty analysis methods for ecosystem accounting. It does not cover all regulating ecosystem services of urban forests, nor cultural services. While noting that wide confidence intervals for generalised values pose challenges for using monetary accounts for the accounting purpose of change detection, we find that tree-specific asset valuation is possible in an urban accounting setting. Our findings serve the purpose of raising awareness about asset values of urban green infrastructure, to bring them more on a par with grey infrastructure in urban planning. We also argue that the reliability of the asset value of individual trees is also good enough to be used for non-accounting purposes, such as municipal tree damage assessments.
Collapse
|
3
|
Grammatikopoulou I, Badura T, Johnston RJ, Barton DN, Ferrini S, Schaafsma M, La Notte A. Value transfer in ecosystem accounting applications. J Environ Manage 2023; 326:116784. [PMID: 36450189 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116784] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2022] [Revised: 10/31/2022] [Accepted: 11/11/2022] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
Ecosystem accounting is a statistical framework that aims to track the state of ecosystems and ecosystem services, with periodic updates. This framework follows the statistical standard of the System of Environmental Economic Accounting Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA). SEEA EA is composed of physical ecosystem extent, condition and ecosystem service supply-use accounts and monetary ecosystem service and asset accounts. This paper focuses on the potential use of the "Value Transfer" (VT) valuation method to produce the monetary ecosystem service accounts, taking advantage of experience with rigorous benefit transfer methods that have been developed and tested over many years in environmental economics. Although benefit transfer methods have been developed primarily for welfare analysis, the underlying techniques and advantages are directly applicable to monetary exchange values required for ecosystem accounting. The compilation of regular accounts is about to become a key area of work for the National Statistical Offices worldwide as well as for the EU Member States in particular, due to the anticipated amendment to regulation on European environmental economic accounts introducing ecosystem accounts. On this basis, accounting practitioners have voiced their concerns in a global consultation during SEEA EA revision, about three issues in particular: the lack of resources, the need for guidelines and the challenge of periodically updating the accounts. We argue that VT can facilitate empirical applications that assess ecosystem services in monetary terms, especially at national scales and in situations with limited expertise and resources available. VT is a low-cost valuation approach in line with SEEA EA requirements able to provide periodic, rigorous and consistent estimates for use in accounts. While some methodological challenges remain, it is likely that VT can help to implement SEEA EA at scale and in time to respond to the pressing need to incorporate nature into mainstream decision-making processes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I Grammatikopoulou
- European Commission, Joint Research Center (JRC), Directorate for Sustainable Resources, Land Resources Unit, Via E. Fermi 2749, I-21027 Ispra, VA, Italy.
| | - T Badura
- Global Change Research Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic; Department of Environmental Economics, Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - R J Johnston
- George Perkins Marsh Institute and Department of Economics, Clark University, United States
| | - D N Barton
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Norway
| | - S Ferrini
- Center for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE), School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom; Department of Political and International Sciences, University of Siena, Siena, Italy
| | - M Schaafsma
- Department of Environmental Economics, Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | - A La Notte
- European Commission, Joint Research Center (JRC), Directorate for Sustainable Resources, Land Resources Unit, Via E. Fermi 2749, I-21027 Ispra, VA, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Barton DN. Recognising institutional context in simulating and generalising exchange values for monetary ecosystem accounts. OE 2022. [DOI: 10.3897/oneeco.7.e85283] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
The paper argues that monetary valuation of ecosystem services for ecosystem accounting needs to be sensitive to institutional context, when simulating markets to generate exchange values where none was available previously and when conducting value generalisation that extrapolates exchange values from specific sites to the whole acounting area. The same ecosystem type can contain different governance regimes or, conversely, a single governance regime may be present in many ecosystem types. Governance regimes are, in part, determined by ecosystem type and condition, but also by ecosystem access characteristics which vary over urban-rural gradients. An ecosystem service will not have a single price if costs of supply and transaction vary in space. This is generally true for all accounting compatible valuation methods if they are extrapolated across different market contexts, but require particular attention if markets are simulated for specific locations and then assumed to be generally valid for the accounting area. The paper exemplifies this for different institutional settings for exchange values of recreation services exploring the general recommendation in SEEA EA for making valuation methods sensitive to institutional context. Stated preference methods simulate markets for ecosystem services. The paper then reviews non-market stated preference valuation studies that have been sensitive to institutional design. Findings on institutional design are, therefore, specifically relevant for simulation of market exchange values for the purpose of compiling monetary ecosystem accounts. The paper finds that disregard for the institutional context in valuation for ecosystem accounting can lead to: (i) errors of generalisation/aggregation and (ii) downward ‘bias’ in simulated accounting prices (relative to the status quo of the institutional context).
Collapse
|
5
|
Venter ZS, Krog NH, Barton DN. Linking green infrastructure to urban heat and human health risk mitigation in Oslo, Norway. Sci Total Environ 2020; 709:136193. [PMID: 31887497 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136193] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2019] [Revised: 12/05/2019] [Accepted: 12/16/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
The predicted extreme temperatures of global warming are magnified in cities due to the urban heat island effect. Even if the target for average temperature increase in the Paris Climate Agreement is met, temperatures during the hottest month in a northern city like Oslo are predicted to rise by over 5 °C by 2050. We hypothesised that heat-related diagnoses for heat-sensitive citizens (75+) in Oslo are correlated to monthly air temperatures, and that green infrastructure such as tree canopy cover reduces extreme land surface temperatures and thus reduces health risk from heat exposure. Monthly air temperatures were significantly correlated to the number of skin-related diagnoses at the city level, but were unrelated to diagnoses under circulatory, nervous system, or general categories. Satellite-derived spatially-explicit measures revealed that on one of the hottest days during the summer of 2018, landscape units composed of paved, midrise or lowrise buildings gave off the most heat (39 °C), whereas units composed of complete tree canopy cover, or mixed (i.e. tree and grass) vegetation maintained temperatures of between 29 and 32 °C. Land surface temperatures were negatively correlated to tree canopy cover (R2 = 0.45) and vegetation greenness (R2 = 0.41). In a scenario in which each city tree was replaced by the most common non-tree cover in its neighbourhood, the area of Oslo exceeding a 30 °C health risk threshold during the summer would increase from 23 to 29%. Combining modelling results with population at risk at census tract level, we estimated that each tree in the city currently mitigates additional heat exposure of one heat-sensitive person by one day. Our results indicate that maintaining and restoring tree cover provides an ecosystem service of urban heat reduction. Our findings have particular relevance for health benefit estimation in urban ecosystem accounting and municipal policy decisions regarding ecosystem-based climate adaptation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zander S Venter
- Terrestrial Ecology Section, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research - NINA, 0349 Oslo, Norway.
| | - Norun Hjertager Krog
- Division of Infection Control and Environmental Health, Section of Air Pollution and Noise, Norwegian Institute of Public Health - NIPH, PO Box 222, Skøyen N-0213, Oslo, Norway
| | - David N Barton
- Terrestrial Ecology Section, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research - NINA, 0349 Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Langemeyer J, Wedgwood D, McPhearson T, Baró F, Madsen AL, Barton DN. Creating urban green infrastructure where it is needed - A spatial ecosystem service-based decision analysis of green roofs in Barcelona. Sci Total Environ 2020; 707:135487. [PMID: 31759703 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135487] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2019] [Revised: 11/08/2019] [Accepted: 11/10/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
As cities face increasing pressure from densification trends, green roofs represent a valuable source of ecosystem services for residents of compact metropolises where available green space is scarce. However, to date little research has been conducted regarding the holistic benefits of green roofs at a citywide scale, with local policymakers lacking practical guidance to inform expansion of green roofs coverage. The study addresses this issue by developing a spatial multi-criteria screening tool applied in Barcelona, Spain to determine: 1) where green roofs should be prioritized in Barcelona based on expert elicited demand for a wide range of ecosystem services and 2) what type of design of potential green roofs would optimize the ecosystem service provision. As inputs to the model, fifteen spatial indicators were selected as proxies for ecosystem service deficits and demands (thermal regulation, runoff control, habitat and pollination, food production, recreation, and social cohesion) along with five decision alternatives for green roof design (extensive, semi-intensive, intensive, naturalized, and allotment). These indicators and alternatives were analyzed probabilistically and spatially, then weighted according to feedback from local experts. Results of the assessment indicate that there is high demand across Barcelona for the ecosystem services that green roofs potentially might provide, particularly in dense residential neighborhoods and the industrial south. Experts identified habitat, pollination and thermal regulation as the most needed ES with runoff control and food production as the least demanded. Naturalized roofs generated the highest potential ecosystem service provision levels for 87.5% of rooftop area, apart from smaller areas of central Barcelona where intensive rooftops were identified as the preferable green roof design. Overall, the spatial model developed in this study offers a flexible screening based on spatial multi-criteria decision analysis that can be easily adjusted to guide municipal policy in other cities considering the effectiveness of green infrastructure as source of ecosystem services.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johannes Langemeyer
- Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Edifici Z (ICTA-ICP), Carrer de les Columnes s/n, Campus de la UAB, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain; Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM), Carrer Doctor Aiguader 88, 08003 Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Diego Wedgwood
- Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Edifici Z (ICTA-ICP), Carrer de les Columnes s/n, Campus de la UAB, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain
| | | | - Francesc Baró
- Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Edifici Z (ICTA-ICP), Carrer de les Columnes s/n, Campus de la UAB, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain; Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM), Carrer Doctor Aiguader 88, 08003 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Anders L Madsen
- HUGIN EXPERT A/S, DK-9000 Aalborg, Denmark; Aalborg University, DK-9220 Aalborg, Denmark
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Andersson E, Langemeyer J, Borgström S, McPhearson T, Haase D, Kronenberg J, Barton DN, Davis M, Naumann S, Röschel L, Baró F. Enabling Green and Blue Infrastructure to Improve Contributions to Human Well-Being and Equity in Urban Systems. Bioscience 2019; 69:566-574. [PMID: 31308573 PMCID: PMC6622445 DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biz058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 101] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
The circumstances under which different ecosystem service benefits can be realized differ. The benefits tend to be coproduced and to be enabled by multiple interacting social, ecological, and technological factors, which is particularly evident in cities. As many cities are undergoing rapid change, these factors need to be better understood and accounted for, especially for those most in need of benefits. We propose a framework of three systemic filters that affect the flow of ecosystem service benefits: the interactions among green, blue, and built infrastructures; the regulatory power and governance of institutions; and people's individual and shared perceptions and values. We argue that more fully connecting green and blue infrastructure to its urban systems context and highlighting dynamic interactions among the three filters are key to understanding how and why ecosystem services have variable distribution, continuing inequities in who benefits, and the long-term resilience of the flows of benefits.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erik Andersson
- Stockholm Resilience Centre, at Stockholm University, in Stockholm, Sweden.,North-West University, in Potchefstroom, South Africa
| | - Johannes Langemeyer
- Institute of Environmental Science and Technology at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, in Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain.,Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute, in Barcelona, Spain
| | - Sara Borgström
- Department of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering, at the Royal Institute of Technology-KTH, in Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Timon McPhearson
- Stockholm Resilience Centre, at Stockholm University, in Stockholm, Sweden.,Urban Systems Lab, The New School, in New York, New York.,Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, in Millbrook, New York
| | - Dagmar Haase
- Institute of Geography at Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, in Berlin, Germany.,Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Department of Computational Landscape Ecology, in Leipzig, Germany
| | - Jakub Kronenberg
- Faculty of Economics and Sociology at the University of Lodz, in Lodz, Poland
| | - David N Barton
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, in Trondheim, Norway
| | | | | | | | - Francesc Baró
- Institute of Environmental Science and Technology at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, in Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Burkhard B, Maes J, Potschin-Young M, Santos-Martín F, Geneletti D, Stoev P, Kopperoinen L, Adamescu C, Adem Esmail B, Arany I, Arnell A, Balzan M, Barton DN, van Beukering P, Bicking S, Borges P, Borisova B, Braat L, M Brander L, Bratanova-Doncheva S, Broekx S, Brown C, Cazacu C, Crossman N, Czúcz B, Daněk J, Groot RD, Depellegrin D, Dimopoulos P, Elvinger N, Erhard M, Fagerholm N, Frélichová J, Grêt-Regamey A, Grudova M, Haines-Young R, Inghe O, Kallay T, Kirin T, Klug H, Kokkoris I, Konovska I, Kruse M, Kuzmova I, Lange M, Liekens I, Lotan A, Lowicki D, Luque S, Marta-Pedroso C, Mizgajski A, Mononen L, Mulder S, Müller F, Nedkov S, Nikolova M, Östergård H, Penev L, Pereira P, Pitkänen K, Plieninger T, Rabe SE, Reichel S, Roche P, Rusch G, Ruskule A, Sapundzhieva A, Sepp K, Sieber I, Šmid Hribar M, Stašová S, Steinhoff-Knopp B, Stępniewska M, Teller A, Vackar D, van Weelden M, Veidemane K, Vejre H, Vihervaara P, Viinikka A, Villoslada M, Weibel B, Zulian G. Mapping and assessing ecosystem services in the EU - Lessons learned from the ESMERALDA approach of integration. OE 2018. [DOI: 10.3897/oneeco.3.e29153] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
The European Union (EU) Horizon 2020 Coordination and Support Action ESMERALDA aimed at developing guidance and a flexible methodology for Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) to support the EU member states in the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy’s Target 2 Action 5. ESMERALDA’s key tasks included network creation, stakeholder engagement, enhancing ecosystem services mapping and assessment methods across various spatial scales and value domains, work in case studies and support of EU member states in MAES implementation. Thus ESMERALDA aimed at integrating various project outcomes around four major strands: i) Networking, ii) Policy, iii) Research and iv) Application. The objective was to provide guidance for integrated ecosystem service mapping and assessment that can be used for sustainable decision-making in policy, business, society, practice and science at EU, national and regional levels. This article presents the overall ESMERALDA approach of integrating the above-mentioned project components and outcomes and provides an overview of how the enhanced methods were applied and how they can be used to support MAES implementation in the EU member states. Experiences with implementing such a large pan-European Coordination and Support Action in the context of EU policy are discussed and recommendations for future actions are given.
Collapse
|
9
|
Zulian G, Stange E, Woods H, Carvalho L, Dick J, Andrews C, Baró F, Vizcaino P, Barton DN, Nowel M, Rusch GM, Autunes P, Fernandes J, Ferraz D, Ferreira dos Santos R, Aszalós R, Arany I, Czúcz B, Priess JA, Hoyer C, Bürger-Patricio G, Lapola D, Mederly P, Halabuk A, Bezak P, Kopperoinen L, Viinikka A. Practical application of spatial ecosystem service models to aid decision support. Ecosyst Serv 2018; 29:465-480. [PMID: 29492376 PMCID: PMC5821683 DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2017] [Revised: 10/30/2017] [Accepted: 11/06/2017] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Ecosystem service (ES) spatial modelling is a key component of the integrated assessments designed to support policies and management practices aiming at environmental sustainability. ESTIMAP ("Ecosystem Service Mapping Tool") is a collection of spatially explicit models, originally developed to support policies at a European scale. We based our analysis on 10 case studies, and 3 ES models. Each case study applied at least one model at a local scale. We analyzed the applications with respect to: the adaptation process; the "precision differential" which we define as the variation generated in the model between the degree of spatial variation within the spatial distribution of ES and what the model captures; the stakeholders' opinions on the usefulness of models. We propose a protocol for adapting ESTIMAP to the local conditions. We present the precision differential as a means of assessing how the type of model and level of model adaptation generate variation among model outputs. We then present the opinion of stakeholders; that in general considered the approach useful for stimulating discussion and supporting communication. Major constraints identified were the lack of spatial data with sufficient level of detail, and the level of expertise needed to set up and compute the models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Grazia Zulian
- Joint Research Centre, via Fermi 1, 21020 Ispra Varese, Italy
| | - Erik Stange
- Norwegian Institute for Nature research (NINA), Lillehammer, Norway
| | - Helen Woods
- CEH, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Edinburgh, Midlothian EH26 0QB, UK
| | | | - Jan Dick
- CEH, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Edinburgh, Midlothian EH26 0QB, UK
| | | | - Francesc Baró
- Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), (ICTA-ICP), Carrer de les Columnes s/n, Campus de la UAB, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès (Barcelona), Spain
- Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM), Edifici PRBB, Carrer Doctor Aiguader 88, 08003 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Pilar Vizcaino
- Joint Research Centre, via Fermi 1, 21020 Ispra Varese, Italy
| | - David N. Barton
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Gaustadalléen 21, 0349 Oslo, Norway
| | - Megan Nowel
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Gaustadalléen 21, 0349 Oslo, Norway
| | - Graciela M. Rusch
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), P.O. Box 5685 Sluppen, 7485 Trondheim, Norway
| | - Paula Autunes
- CENSE - Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal
| | - João Fernandes
- CENSE - Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal
| | - Diogo Ferraz
- CENSE - Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal
| | - Rui Ferreira dos Santos
- CENSE - Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal
| | - Réka Aszalós
- Institute of Ecology and Botany, Centre for Ecological Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Alkotmány u. 2-4, H-2163 Vácrátót, Hungary
| | - Ildikó Arany
- Institute of Ecology and Botany, Centre for Ecological Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Alkotmány u. 2-4, H-2163 Vácrátót, Hungary
| | - Bálint Czúcz
- Institute of Ecology and Botany, Centre for Ecological Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Alkotmány u. 2-4, H-2163 Vácrátót, Hungary
- European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, 57 rue Cuvier, FR-75231 Paris Paris Cedex 05, France
| | - Joerg A. Priess
- Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research UFZ, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
| | - Christian Hoyer
- Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research UFZ, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
| | | | - David Lapola
- LabTerra - UNESP Univ Estadual Paulista, Rio Claro, SP, Brazil
| | - Peter Mederly
- Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, Slovakia
| | - Andrej Halabuk
- Institute of Landscape Ecology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Branch Nitra, Slovakia
| | - Peter Bezak
- Institute of Landscape Ecology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Branch Nitra, Slovakia
| | - Leena Kopperoinen
- Finnish Environment Institute SYKE, Environmental Policy Centre, P.O. Box 140, FI-00251 Helsinki, Finland
| | - Arto Viinikka
- Finnish Environment Institute SYKE, Environmental Policy Centre, P.O. Box 140, FI-00251 Helsinki, Finland
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Bernasconi P, Blumentrath S, Barton DN, Rusch GM, Romeiro AR. Constraining Forest Certificate's Market to Improve Cost-Effectiveness of Biodiversity Conservation in São Paulo State, Brazil. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0164850. [PMID: 27780220 PMCID: PMC5079756 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164850] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2015] [Accepted: 10/03/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
The recently launched Brazilian “forest certificates” market is expected to reduce environmental compliance costs for landowners through an offset mechanism, after a long history of conservation laws based in command-and-control and strict rules. In this paper we assessed potential costs and evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the instrument when introducing to this market constraints that aim to address conservation objectives more specifically. Using the conservation planning software Marxan with Zones we simulated different scopes for the “forest certificates” market, and compared their cost-effectiveness with that of existing command-and-control (C&C), i.e. compliance to the Legal Reserve on own property, in the state of São Paulo. The simulations showed a clear potential of the constrained “forest certificates” market to improve conservation effectiveness and increase cost-effectiveness on allocation of Legal Reserves. Although the inclusion of an additional constraint of targeting the BIOTA Conservation Priority Areas doubled the cost (+95%) compared with a “free trade” scenario constrained only by biome, this option was still 50% less costly than the baseline scenario of compliance with Legal Reserve at the property.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paula Bernasconi
- Institute of Economics—University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil
- Instituto Centro de Vida (ICV), Cuiabá, Brazil
- * E-mail:
| | | | - David N. Barton
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Ademar R. Romeiro
- Institute of Economics—University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil
- Fellow of the Brazilian National Council of Scientific Research—CNPq, Brasília, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Robalino J, Sandoval C, Barton DN, Chacon A, Pfaff A. Evaluating interactions of forest conservation policies on avoided deforestation. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0124910. [PMID: 25909323 PMCID: PMC4409369 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124910] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2014] [Accepted: 03/09/2015] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
We estimate the effects on deforestation that have resulted from policy interactions between parks and payments and between park buffers and payments in Costa Rica between 2000 and 2005. We show that the characteristics of the areas where protected and unprotected lands are located differ significantly. Additionally, we find that land characteristics of each of the policies and of the places where they interact also differ significantly. To adequately estimate the effects of the policies and their interactions, we use matching methods. Matching is implemented not only to define adequate control groups, as in previous research, but also to define those groups of locations under the influence of policies that are comparable to each other. We find that it is more effective to locate parks and payments away from each other, rather than in the same location or near each other. The high levels of enforcement inside both parks and lands with payments, and the presence of conservation spillovers that reduce deforestation near parks, significantly reduce the potential impact of combining these two policies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juan Robalino
- Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza, Turrialba, Costa Rica
- Universidad de Costa Rica, San Pedro, Costa Rica
| | - Catalina Sandoval
- Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza, Turrialba, Costa Rica
| | | | - Adriana Chacon
- Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza, Turrialba, Costa Rica
| | - Alexander Pfaff
- Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Sverdrup-Thygeson A, Søgaard G, Rusch GM, Barton DN. Spatial overlap between environmental policy instruments and areas of high conservation value in forest. PLoS One 2014; 9:e115001. [PMID: 25502238 PMCID: PMC4263736 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2014] [Accepted: 11/15/2014] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
In order to safeguard biodiversity in forest we need to know how forest policy instruments work. Here we use a nationwide network of 9400 plots in productive forest to analyze to what extent large-scale policy instruments, individually and together, target forest of high conservation value in Norway. We studied both instruments working through direct regulation; Strict Protection and Landscape Protection, and instruments working through management planning and voluntary schemes of forest certification; Wilderness Area and Mountain Forest. As forest of high conservation value (HCV-forest) we considered the extent of 12 Biodiversity Habitats and the extent of Old-Age Forest. We found that 22% of productive forest area contained Biodiversity Habitats. More than 70% of this area was not covered by any large-scale instruments. Mountain Forest covered 23%, while Strict Protection and Wilderness both covered 5% of the Biodiversity Habitat area. A total of 9% of productive forest area contained Old-Age Forest, and the relative coverage of the four instruments was similar as for Biodiversity Habitats. For all instruments, except Landscape Protection, the targeted areas contained significantly higher proportions of HCV-forest than areas not targeted by these instruments. Areas targeted by Strict Protection had higher proportions of HCV-forest than areas targeted by other instruments, except for areas targeted by Wilderness Area which showed similar proportions of Biodiversity Habitats. There was a substantial amount of spatial overlap between the policy tools, but no incremental conservation effect of overlapping instruments in terms of contributing to higher percentages of targeted HCV-forest. Our results reveal that although the current policy mix has an above average representation of forest of high conservation value, the targeting efficiency in terms of area overlap is limited. There is a need to improve forest conservation and a potential to cover this need by better targeting high conservation value areas.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Sverdrup-Thygeson
- Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Department of Ecology and Natural Resource Management, Aas, Norway
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Oslo, Norway
- * E-mail:
| | | | | | - David N. Barton
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Schröter M, Rusch GM, Barton DN, Blumentrath S, Nordén B. Ecosystem services and opportunity costs shift spatial priorities for conserving forest biodiversity. PLoS One 2014; 9:e112557. [PMID: 25393951 PMCID: PMC4230974 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112557] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2014] [Accepted: 10/07/2014] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Inclusion of spatially explicit information on ecosystem services in conservation planning is a fairly new practice. This study analyses how the incorporation of ecosystem services as conservation features can affect conservation of forest biodiversity and how different opportunity cost constraints can change spatial priorities for conservation. We created spatially explicit cost-effective conservation scenarios for 59 forest biodiversity features and five ecosystem services in the county of Telemark (Norway) with the help of the heuristic optimisation planning software, Marxan with Zones. We combined a mix of conservation instruments where forestry is either completely (non-use zone) or partially restricted (partial use zone). Opportunity costs were measured in terms of foregone timber harvest, an important provisioning service in Telemark. Including a number of ecosystem services shifted priority conservation sites compared to a case where only biodiversity was considered, and increased the area of both the partial (+36.2%) and the non-use zone (+3.2%). Furthermore, opportunity costs increased (+6.6%), which suggests that ecosystem services may not be a side-benefit of biodiversity conservation in this area. Opportunity cost levels were systematically changed to analyse their effect on spatial conservation priorities. Conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services trades off against timber harvest. Currently designated nature reserves and landscape protection areas achieve a very low proportion (9.1%) of the conservation targets we set in our scenario, which illustrates the high importance given to timber production at present. A trade-off curve indicated that large marginal increases in conservation target achievement are possible when the budget for conservation is increased. Forty percent of the maximum hypothetical opportunity costs would yield an average conservation target achievement of 79%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias Schröter
- Environmental Systems Analysis Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Trondheim/Oslo, Norway
- * E-mail:
| | - Graciela M. Rusch
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Trondheim/Oslo, Norway
| | - David N. Barton
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Trondheim/Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Björn Nordén
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Trondheim/Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Bakken TH, Aase AG, Hagen D, Sundt H, Barton DN, Lujala P. Demonstrating a new framework for the comparison of environmental impacts from small- and large-scale hydropower and wind power projects. J Environ Manage 2014; 140:93-101. [PMID: 24726970 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.01.050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2013] [Revised: 01/19/2014] [Accepted: 01/22/2014] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Abstract
Climate change and the needed reductions in the use of fossil fuels call for the development of renewable energy sources. However, renewable energy production, such as hydropower (both small- and large-scale) and wind power have adverse impacts on the local environment by causing reductions in biodiversity and loss of habitats and species. This paper compares the environmental impacts of many small-scale hydropower plants with a few large-scale hydropower projects and one wind power farm, based on the same set of environmental parameters; land occupation, reduction in wilderness areas (INON), visibility and impacts on red-listed species. Our basis for comparison was similar energy volumes produced, without considering the quality of the energy services provided. The results show that small-scale hydropower performs less favourably in all parameters except land occupation. The land occupation of large hydropower and wind power is in the range of 45-50 m(2)/MWh, which is more than two times larger than the small-scale hydropower, where the large land occupation for large hydropower is explained by the extent of the reservoirs. On all the three other parameters small-scale hydropower performs more than two times worse than both large hydropower and wind power. Wind power compares similarly to large-scale hydropower regarding land occupation, much better on the reduction in INON areas, and in the same range regarding red-listed species. Our results demonstrate that the selected four parameters provide a basis for further development of a fair and consistent comparison of impacts between the analysed renewable technologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tor Haakon Bakken
- SINTEF Energy Research, Sem Sælands vei 11, NO-7465, Trondheim, Norway; Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Department of Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering, Norway.
| | - Anne Guri Aase
- Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Department of Geography, Norway
| | - Dagmar Hagen
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Norway
| | - Håkon Sundt
- SINTEF Energy Research, Sem Sælands vei 11, NO-7465, Trondheim, Norway
| | | | - Päivi Lujala
- Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Department of Geography, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Barton DN, Kuikka S, Varis O, Uusitalo L, Henriksen HJ, Borsuk M, de la Hera A, Farmani R, Johnson S, Linnell JDC. Bayesian networks in environmental and resource management. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2012; 8:418-29. [PMID: 22707420 DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1327] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/20/2023]
Abstract
This overview article for the special series, "Bayesian Networks in Environmental and Resource Management," reviews 7 case study articles with the aim to compare Bayesian network (BN) applications to different environmental and resource management problems from around the world. The article discusses advances in the last decade in the use of BNs as applied to environmental and resource management. We highlight progress in computational methods, best-practices for model design and model communication. We review several research challenges to the use of BNs in environmental and resource management that we think may find a solution in the near future with further research attention.
Collapse
|
16
|
Sparrevik M, Barton DN, Bates ME, Linkov I. Use of stochastic multi-criteria decision analysis to support sustainable management of contaminated sediments. Environ Sci Technol 2012; 46:1326-34. [PMID: 22191941 DOI: 10.1021/es202225x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/25/2023]
Abstract
Sustainable management of contaminated sediments requires careful prioritization of available resources and focuses on efforts to optimize decisions that consider environmental, economic, and societal aspects simultaneously. This may be achieved by combining different analytical approaches such as risk analysis (RA), life cycle analysis (LCA), multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA), and economic valuation methods. We propose the use of stochastic MCDA based on outranking algorithms to implement integrative sustainability strategies for sediment management. In this paper we use the method to select the best sediment management alternatives for the dibenzo-p-dioxin and -furan (PCDD/F) contaminated Grenland fjord in Norway. In the analysis, the benefits of health risk reductions and socio-economic benefits from removing seafood health advisories are evaluated against the detriments of remedial costs and life cycle environmental impacts. A value-plural based weighing of criteria is compared to criteria weights mimicking traditional cost-effectiveness (CEA) and cost-benefit (CBA) analyses. Capping highly contaminated areas in the inner or outer fjord is identified as the most preferable remediation alternative under all criteria schemes and the results are confirmed by a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The proposed methodology can serve as a flexible framework for future decision support and can be a step toward more sustainable decision making for contaminated sediment management. It may be applicable to the broader field of ecosystem restoration for trade-off analysis between ecosystem services and restoration costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Magnus Sparrevik
- Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, PO Box 3930 Ullevål Stadion, NO-0806 Oslo, Norway.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Sparrevik M, Barton DN, Oen AMP, Sehkar NU, Linkov I. Use of multicriteria involvement processes to enhance transparency and stakeholder participation at Bergen Harbor, Norway. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2011; 7:414-425. [PMID: 21309079 DOI: 10.1002/ieam.182] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2010] [Revised: 12/11/2010] [Accepted: 01/12/2011] [Indexed: 05/30/2023]
Abstract
Use of participatory stakeholder engagement processes could be important to reduce the risk of potential conflicts in managing contaminated sites. Most stakeholder engagement techniques are qualitative in nature and require experienced facilitators. This study proposes a multicriteria involvement process to enhance transparency and stakeholder participation and applies it to a contaminated sediment management case study for Bergen Harbor, Norway. The suggested multicriteria involvement process builds on the quantitative principles of multicriteria decision analysis and also incorporates group interaction and learning through qualitative participatory methods. Three different advisory groups consisting of local residents, local stakeholders, and nonresident sediment experts were invited to participate in a stakeholder engagement process to provide consensual comparative advice on sediment remediation alternatives. In order for stakeholders or residents to be able to embrace a complex decision such as selection of remediation alternatives, the involvement process with lateral learning, combined with multicriteria decision analysis providing structure, robustness and transparent documentation was preferable. In addition, a multicriteria involvement process resulted in consistent ranking of remediation alternatives across residents, stakeholder, and experts, relative to individual intuitive ranking without the multicriteria involvement process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Magnus Sparrevik
- Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, PO Box 3930 Ullevål Stadion, NO-0806 Oslo, Norway.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Barton DN, Faith DP, Rusch GM, Acevedo H, Paniagua L, Castro M. Environmental service payments: evaluating biodiversity conservation trade-offs and cost-efficiency in the Osa Conservation Area, Costa Rica. J Environ Manage 2009; 90:901-911. [PMID: 18423841 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.02.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2006] [Revised: 12/17/2007] [Accepted: 02/23/2008] [Indexed: 05/26/2023]
Abstract
The cost-efficiency of payments for environmental services (PES) to private landowners in the Osa Conservation Area, Costa Rica, is evaluated in terms of the trade-off between biodiversity representation and opportunity costs of conservation to agricultural and forestry land-use. Using available GIS data and an 'off-the-shelf' software application called TARGET, we find that the PES allocation criteria applied by authorities in 2002-2003 were more than twice as cost-efficient as criteria applied during 1999-2001. Results show that a policy relevant assessment of the cost-effectiveness of PES relative to other conservation policies can be carried out at regional level using available studies and GIS data. However, there are a number of data and conceptual limitations to using heuristic optimisation algorithms in the analysis of the cost-efficiency of PES. Site specific data on probabilities of land-use change, and a detailed specification of opportunity costs of farm land, labour and capital are required to use algorithms such as TARGET for ranking individual sites based on cost-efficiency. Despite its conceptual soundness for regional conservation analysis, biodiversity complementarity presents a practical challenge as a criterion for PES eligibility at farm level because it varies depending on the set of areas under PES contracts at any one time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D N Barton
- Norwegian Institute for Water Research, NIVA, Oslo, Norway.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Saloranta TM, Armitage JM, Haario H, Naes K, Cousins IT, Barton DN. Modeling the effects and uncertainties of contaminated sediment remediation scenarios in a Norwegian fjord by Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation. Environ Sci Technol 2008; 42:200-6. [PMID: 18350897 DOI: 10.1021/es070622l] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/24/2023]
Abstract
Multimedia environmental fate models are useful tools to investigate the long-term impacts of remediation measures designed to alleviate potential ecological and human health concerns in contaminated areas. Estimating and communicating the uncertainties associated with the model simulations is a critical task for demonstrating the transparency and reliability of the results. The Extended Fourier Amplitude Sensitivity Test(Extended FAST) method for sensitivity analysis and Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method for uncertainty analysis and model calibration have several advantages over methods typically applied for multimedia environmental fate models. Most importantly, the simulation results and their uncertainties can be anchored to the available observations and their uncertainties. We apply these techniques for simulating the historical fate of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs) in the Grenland fjords, Norway, and for predicting the effects of different contaminated sediment remediation (capping) scenarios on the future levels of PCDD/Fs in cod and crab therein. The remediation scenario simulations show that a significant remediation effect can first be seen when significant portions of the contaminated sediment areas are cleaned up, and that increase in capping area leads to both earlier achievement of good fjord status and narrower uncertainty in the predicted timing for this.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tuomo M Saloranta
- Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA) Gaustadall&en 21, N-0349 Oslo, Norway.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|