Defining, Valuing, and Providing Ecosystem Goods and Services

Ecosystem services are the specific results of ecosystem processes that either directly sustain or enhance human life (as does natural protection from the sun's harmful ultraviolet rays) or maintain the quality of ecosystem goods (as water purification maintains the quality of streamflow). "Ecosystem service" has come to represent several related topics ranging from the measurement to the marketing of ecosystem service flows. In this article we examine several of these topics by first clarifying the meaning of "ecosystem service" and then (1) placing ecosystem goods and services within an economic framework, emphasizing the role and limitations of substitutes; (2) summarizing the methods for valuation of ecosystem goods and services; and (3) reviewing the various approaches for their provision and financing.Many ecosystem services and some ecosystem goods are received without monetary payment. The "marketing" of ecosystem goods and services is basically an effort to turn such recipients - those who benefit without ownership- into buyers, thereby providing market signals that serve to help protect valuable goods and services. We review various formal arrangements for making this happen

Can ecosystem properties be fully translated into service values? an economic valuation of aquatic plant services

Ecological Applications 21. 5 (2011): 3083-3103 copyright by the Ecological Society of AmericaWe carried out an integrated analysis of ecosystem services in the Doñana social-ecological system (southwestern Spain), from the providers (different aquatic plant functional groups) to the beneficiaries (different stakeholders living in or visiting the area). We explored the ecosystem services supplied by aquatic plants by linking these services to different plant functional traits, identifying relevant ecosystem services and then working our way backward to ecosystem properties and the functional traits underpinning them. We started from 15 ecosystem services associated with aquatic systems (freshwater marshes, salt marshes, ponds on aeolian sheets, temporal coastal ponds, and estuaries) and related them to plant traits (directly or indirectly through intermediate ecosystem properties). We gathered information from the literature on the functional traits of 144 plants occurring in the aquatic ecosystems of Doñana. We analyzed the species×trait matrix with multivariate classification and ordination techniques and obtained seven functional groups with different potentials for delivering ecosystem services. A survey was then administered to 477 stakeholders to analyze, through the use of a contingent valuation exercise, how the ecosystem services provided by the different functional groups were valued. We identified connections between individual plant traits, ecosystem processes, and ecosystem services, but a mismatch appeared between the functional groups and the economic values placed on them by the beneficiaries. We found that contingent valuation applied to ecosystem services tended to ignore the ecosystem properties and biodiversity underpinning them. Our results cast doubts over the suitability of the economic valuation framework of ecosystem services to capture the full value of biodiversity and ecosystems to peopleThis research was partially supported by a grant from the Madrid Regional Government of Education, which was co-funded by the Social European Fund (F.S.E.), the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science (Project CGL2006- 14121/BOS), and the Spanish Ministry of the Environment and Rural and Marine Affairs through project 018/2009. S. Díaz acknowledges support from FONCyT and CONICET (Argentina) and IAI (CRN 2015, supported by US NSF GEO- 0452325

The impact of flooding on aquatic ecosystem services

Flooding is a major disturbance that impacts aquatic ecosystems and the ecosystem services that they provide. Predicted increases in global flood risk due to land use change and water cycle intensification will likely only increase the frequency and severity of these impacts. Extreme flooding events can cause loss of life and significant destruction to property and infrastructure, effects that are easily recognized and frequently reported in the media. However, flooding also has many other effects on people through freshwater aquatic ecosystem services, which often go unrecognized because they are less evident and can be difficult to evaluate. Here, we identify the effects that small magnitude frequently occurring floods (\u3c 10-year recurrence interval) and extreme floods (\u3e 100-year recurrence interval) have on ten aquatic ecosystem services through a systematic literature review. We focused on ecosystem services considered by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment including: (1) supporting services (primary production, soil formation), (2) regulating services (water regulation, water quality, disease regulation, climate regulation), (3) provisioning services (drinking water, food supply), and (4) cultural services (aesthetic value, recreation and tourism). The literature search resulted in 117 studies and each of the ten ecosystem services was represented by an average of 12 ± 4 studies. Extreme floods resulted in losses in almost every ecosystem service considered in this study. However, small floods had neutral or positive effects on half of the ecosystem services we considered. For example, small floods led to increases in primary production, water regulation, and recreation and tourism. Decision-making that preserves small floods while reducing the impacts of extreme floods can increase ecosystem service provision and minimize losses

Valuing New Hampshire Salt Marshes: An Approach to Measuring Ecosystem Services

David Burdick presented work a method for estimating the ecosystem services benefits of salt marsh restoration. The approach combines ecological valuation, which uses structural and functional indicators to measure the marshes response to restoration, and economic valuation, which uses ecosystem services valuations, to determine the net gain in ecosystem services of marsh restoration

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,

Amphibian Contributions to Ecosystem Services

Ecosystems provide essential services for human society, which include provisioning, regulating, cultural, and supporting services. Amphibians provide provisioning services by serving as a food source for some human societies, especially in Southeast Asia. They also serve as models in medical research and provide potential for new pharmaceuticals such as analgesics and anti-viral drugs derived from skin secretions. Amphibians contribute to regulating services by reducing mosquito recruitment from ephemeral wetlands, potentially controlling other pest species, and indirectly through predation of insect pollinators. Often neglected, ecosystems also provide cultural services to human societies that increase the quality of human life through recreation, religion, spirituality, and aesthetics. As an abundant and diverse class of vertebrates, amphibians also play prominent roles in the culture of human societies through pathways such as mythology, literature, and art. Most research on the role of amphibians in ecosystems has been on their contribution to supporting services. This is also the area where amphibians are likely to have the largest contribution to ecosystem services. Supporting services have structural (e.g., habitat) and functional (e.g., ecosystem functions and processes) components. Amphibians can affect ecosystem structure through soil burrowing and aquatic bioturbation and ecosystem functions such as decomposition and nutrient cycling through waste excretion and indirectly through predatory changes in the food web. They also can control primary production in aquatic ecosystems through direct consumption and nutrient cycling. Unfortunately, amphibians are experiencing major declines and humans may be losing associated ecosystem services. It is important to understand how declines affect ecosystem services for human societies, but these declines can also serve as natural experiments to understand the role of amphibians in ecosystems

Urban pollution and ecosystem services

Urban pollutants can degrade and inhibit ecological functions and processes. Those natural processes provide vital benefits and services to humans. The ‘services’ range from food and water provision, to aesthetics, cultural benefits, health and recreation opportunities, and also climate regulation (including water and air quality regulation and flood regulation). These services are referred to collectively as ecosystem services (ES). To understand the impacts of urban pollution, and the opportunities for mitigating its effects, it is important to explore the relationship between pollution and ES. This can lead to better decision-making for urban infrastructure and spaces and can provide increased opportunities for gaining multiple ES from urban environments

Designing Payments for Ecosystem Services

This Policy Series by James Salzman brings attention to a rapidly developing phenomenon—payments for ecosystem services (PES). Salzman, the Samuel F. Mordecai Professor of Law and the Nicholas Institute Professor of Environmental Policy at Duke University, explains when and where ecosystem services can be provided by voluntary markets rather than government actions. The key to understanding how PES work is rooted in the basis of any voluntary market transaction—gains from trade. One party agrees to take action because another party offers an incentive. Both parties benefit. A beekeeper, for example, brings her hives to an orchard to provide pollination services for a fee. But Salzman explores the less obvious services such as forests at the top of a municipal watershed that act as a filter providing clean water to people below. Salzman states that we receive many environmental benefits for “free,” which provides little or no incentive for people to pay for them or for entrepreneurs to provide them. Because price signals that alert individuals about scarce resources in traditional markets are absent, ecosystem services are taken for granted—until they stop providing benefits. Then the cost of remediation or building infrastructure, such as a water treatment plant, makes their value obvious. For decades the solution to environmental protection has been government action. Today, knowledge about environmental processes combined with increased environmental sensitivity provides opportunities for entrepreneurs to find innovative ways of developing markets for ecosystem services

Marine ecosystem services: Linking indicators to their classification

© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. There is a multitude of ecosystem service classifications available within the literature, each with its own advantages and drawbacks. Elements of them have been used to tailor a generic ecosystem service classification for the marine environment and then for a case study site within the North Sea: the Dogger Bank. Indicators for each of the ecosystem services, deemed relevant to the case study site, were identified. Each indicator was then assessed against a set of agreed criteria to ensure its relevance and applicability to environmental management. This paper identifies the need to distinguish between indicators of ecosystem services that are entirely ecological in nature (and largely reveal the potential of an ecosystem to provide ecosystem services), indicators for the ecological processes contributing to the delivery of these services, and indicators of benefits that reveal the realized human use or enjoyment of an ecosystem service. It highlights some of the difficulties faced in selecting meaningful indicators, such as problems of specificity, spatial disconnect and the considerable uncertainty about marine species, habitats and the processes, functions and services they contribute to

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