Social preferences for ecosystem services in a biodiversity hotspot in South America

Identifying which ecosystem services are relevant to different stakeholders and understanding stakeholders’ perceptions of such services is useful for making informed decisions, especially in regions of the world where the achievement of biodiversity conservation goals is threatened by economically productive activities. In this article, we assess social preferences for ecosystem services in a biodiversity hotspot in central Chile. We use a consultative case study to ask local stakeholders (n = 70) from the Campana Peñuelas Biosphere Reserve to identify the most important ecosystem services the area provides for them and inquire about the perceived vulnerability of the services to changes in the future. We also explore the association between the perceived importance of ecosystem services and the sociodemographic and cultural characteristics of the respondents, which allows us to identify contrasting stakeholder perceptions of different ecosystem services. The most important services for local actors were the drinking water, fresh air and climate change control, genetic pool of plant communities in central Chile, and educational value. From the perspective of local actors, the services that could be threatened by negative changes in the future in terms of their provision included the possibilities of developing conservation activities focused on iconic threatened animal and plant species, water regulation, food from agriculture, and drinking water. Contrasting perceptions about the importance of ecosystem services emerged among stakeholders. While small farmers and members of local organizations attributed higher importance values to provisioning services, scientists and rangers and administrators of protected areas as well as teachers, NGO members and local government employees attributed more importance to the regulating and cultural services associated with threatened species. Our results can serve as a source of information for the planning and decision-making processes related to the search for socially and ecologically sustainable solutions for land use managemen

A combination of methods needed to assess the actual use of provisioning ecosystem services

Failure to recognize that potential provisioning ecosystem services are not necessarily collected and used by people may have important consequences for management of land and resources. Accounting for people's actual use of ecosystem services in decision making processes requires a robust methodological approach that goes beyond mapping the presence of ecosystem services. But no such universally accepted method exists, and there are several shortcomings of existing methods such as the application of land use/cover as a proxy for provisioning ecosystem service availability and surveys based on respondents' recall to assess people's collection of e.g. wild food. By combining four complementary methods and applying these to the shifting cultivation systems of Laos, we show how people’s actual use of ecosystem services from agricultural fields differs from ecosystem service availability. Our study is the first in Southeast Asia to combine plot monitoring, collection diaries, repeat interviews, and participant observation. By applying these multiple methods borrowed from anthropology and botany among other research domains, the study illustrates that no single method is sufficient on its own. It is of key importance for scientists to adopt methods that can account for both availability of various services and actual use of those services

Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand

Due to the public goods characteristics of many ecosystem services and their vital importance to human welfare, various mechanisms have been put in place to motivate private landowners in the provision of ecosystem services. A common approach is to try to develop a comprehensive ecosystem services market where landowners can receive payments from beneficiaries of ecosystem services. Much research has been directed at developing methods for valuing the range of ecosystem services so that they can be incorporated into ecosystem services markets. However, valuation methods are difficult, expensive and time consuming. Other approaches to the provision of ecosystem services such as payments for ecosystem services usually focus on a single service like water or biodiversity. However, in the provision of a particular ecosystem service, there are spill-over effects of providing other ecosystem services, and thus studying those spill-over effects may provide a simple and cost-effective way of ensuring the provision of a wide range of ecosystem services. In New Zealand, there are a variety of forestry programs which provide incentives to landowners to plant trees on their lands to meet particular objectives, but which also produce other ES. This research aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the provision of a wide range of ES by these approaches, the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme, the East Coast Forestry Scheme, and the QEII National Trust.ecosystem services market, spill-over effect, cost-effectiveness, New Zealand, Environmental Economics and Policy,

Putting Theory into Practice: Market Failure and Market Based Instruments (MBIs)

The use of market-based instruments (MBIs) to provide and protect ecosystem services has gained significant attention in Australia. Despite their popularity, MBIs are not appropriate for the provision of all ecosystem services. Rather, MBIs must be carefully designed given the ecosystem service outcomes desired, while meeting the needs of participants. In this paper we detail the importance of a robust theoretical structure to underpin the selection and design of an MBI. In particular, we demonstrate the role of identifying and analysing the nature of the market failures present, and their implications for instrument design. Our conclusions are illustrated using several regional MBI case studies.Market Based Instruments (MBIs), ecosystem services, conservation

Governing for ecosystem health and human wellbeing

Governance arrangements and processes influence access to and benefits from ecosystem services, and therefore the potential for ecosystem services to alleviate poverty. Governance also then influences the health of ecosystems. This chapter learns from decades of governance-related research to identify how to make ecosystem governance more effectively ‘pro-poor’. It is informed by a systematic mapping of literature related to governance of ecosystem services and renewable natural resources for improved wellbeing and poverty alleviation, expert interviews and a workshop with government and non-government actors across a range of sectors from both North and South. The chapter is organised around the concept of trade-offs, considering first ecosystem-focused approaches, then rights-based approaches and lastly, participatory approaches to governance. The chapter further addresses the relevance of scale and multiple administrative levels (multi-level governance) and the importance of informal, or socially embedded, institutions. The chapter concludes that there is no single governance approach that can definitively deliver on improved ecosystem health and human wellbeing, that trade-offs are inevitable and governance is therefore an inherently political process

Assessing, quantifying and valuing the ecosystem services of coastal lagoons

The natural conservation of coastal lagoons is important not only for their ecological importance, but also because of the valuable ecosystem services they provide for human welfare and wellbeing. Coastal lagoons are shallow semi-enclosed systems that support important habitats such as wetlands, mangroves, salt-marshes and seagrass meadows, as well as a rich biodiversity. Coastal lagoons are also complex social-ecological systems with ecosystem services that provide livelihoods, wellbeing and welfare to humans. This study assessed, quantified and valued the ecosystem services of 32 coastal lagoons. The main findings of the study are: (i) the definitions of ecosystem services are still not generally accepted; (ii) the quantification of ecosystem services is made in many different ways, using different units; (iii) the evaluation in monetary terms of some ecosystem service is problematic, often relying on non-monetary evaluation methods; (iv) when ecosystem services are valued in monetary terms, this may represent very different human benefits; and, (v) different aspects of climate change, including increasing temperature, sea-level rise and changes in rainfall patterns threaten the valuable ecosystem services of coastal lagoons.DEVOTES project, from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration [308392]; networks and communities of Eurolag; Future Earth Coasts; SCOR; Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT) Investigador Programme [IF/00331/2013]; Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia [UID/MAR/04292/2013]; CESAM by FCT/MEC national funds (PIDDAC) [UID/AMB/50017/2013 - POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007638]; FEDER; European Commission, under the 7th Framework Programme through the collaborative research project LAGOONS [283157]; FCT [SFRH/BPD/107823/2015, SFRH/BPD/91494/2012

Attaining Aichi Target 11: How Well Are Marine Ecosystem Services Covered by Protected Areas?

The spatial coverage of marine and coastal protected areas worldwide has shown a rapid increase in recent years. Over 32% of the world's coral reefs and over 36% of the world's mangrove forests now fall within protected areas. However, simple measures of extent are insufficient for assessing progress toward achieving global targets. Notably, the CBD Aichi Target 11 calls for 'at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water areas, and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services' to be protected. There is, therefore, an urgent need to assess how well protected areas cover these areas of importance for ecosystem services

Does landscape-scale conservation management enhance the provision of ecosystem services?

Biodiversity conservation approaches are increasingly being implemented at the landscape-scale to support the maintenance of metapopulations and metacommunities. However, the impact of such interventions on the provision of ecosystem services is less well defined. Here we examine the potential impacts of landscape-scale conservation initiatives on ecosystem services, through analysis of five case study areas in England and Wales. The provision of multiple ecosystem services was projected according to current management plans and compared with a baseline scenario. Multicriteria analysis indicated that in most cases landscape-scale approaches lead to an overall increase in service provision. Consistent increases were projected in carbon storage, recreation and aesthetic value, as well as biodiversity value. However, most study areas provided evidence of trade-offs, particularly between provisioning services and other types of service. Results differed markedly between study areas, highlighting the importance of local context. These results suggest that landscape-scale conservation approaches are likely to be effective in increasing ecosystem service provision, but also indicate that associated costs can be significant, particularly in lowland areas

What matters to whom and why? Understanding the importance of coastal ecosystem services in developing coastal communities

Coastal ecosystems support the livelihoods and wellbeing of millions of people worldwide. However, the marine and terrestrial ecosystem services that coastal ecosystems provide are particularly vulnerable to global environmental change, as are the coastal communities who directly depend on them. To navigate these changes and ensure the wellbeing of coastal communities, policy-makers must know which coastal ecosystem services matter to whom, and why. Yet, in developing coastal settings, capturing people's perceptions of the importance of ecosystem services is challenging for several reasons. Firstly, coastal ecosystem services encompass both terrestrial and marine services across multiple categories (i.e. provisioning, supporting, and cultural) that are difficult to value together. Secondly, widely used monetary valuation techniques are often inappropriate because of culturally specific attributions of value, and the intangible nature of key cultural ecosystem services. Thirdly, people within communities may hold different ecosystem services values. In this paper, we examine how people ascribe and explain the importance of a range of marine and terrestrial ecosystem services in three coastal communities in Papua New Guinea. We use a mixed-methods approach that combines a non-monetary ranking and rating assessment of multiple ecosystem services, with a socio-economic survey (N = 139) and qualitative explanations of why ecosystem services matter. We find that people uniformly ascribe the most importance to marine and terrestrial provisioning services that directly support their livelihoods and material wellbeing. However, within communities, gender, wealth, and years of formal schooling do shape some differences in how people rate ecosystem services. In addition, although cultural ecosystem services were often rated lower, people emphasized that they ranked provisioning services highly, in part, because of their contribution to cultural values like bequest. People also expressed concern about extractive ecosystem services, like fuelwood, that were perceived to be destructive, and were rated low. We contend that comprehensive ecosystem services assessments that include narratives can capture the broad importance of a range of ecosystem services, alongside relational values and normative judgements. This exploratory approach is a useful step towards understanding the complexities of ecosystem services in developing coastal settings