Ecosystem services accounts: Valuing the actual flow of nature-based recreation from ecosystems to people

Natural capital accounting aims to measure changes in the stock of natural assets (i.e., soil, air, water and all living things) and to integrate the value of ecosystem services into accounting systems that will contribute to better ecosystems management. This study develops ecosystem services accounts at the European Union level, using nature-based recreation as a case study and following the current international accounting framework: System of Environmental-Economic Accounting – Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA). We adapt and integrate different biophysical and socio-economic models, illustrating the workflow necessary for ecosystem services accounts: from a biophysical assessment of nature-based recreation to an economic valuation and compilation of the accounting tables. The biophysical assessment of nature-based recreation is based on spatially explicit models for assessing different components of ecosystem services: potential, demand and actual flow. Deriving maps of ecosystem service potential and demand is a key step in quantifying the actual flow of the service used, which is determined by the spatial relationship (i.e., proximity in the case of nature-based recreation) between service potential and demand. The nature-based recreation accounts for 2012 show an actual flow of 40 million potential visits to ‘high-quality areas for daily recreation’, with a total value of EUR 50 billion. This constitutes an important contribution of ecosystems to people's lives that has increased by 26% since 2000. Practical examples of ecosystem services accounts, as shown in this study, are required to derive recommendations and further develop the conceptual and methodological framework proposed by the SEEA EEA. This paper highlights the importance of using spatially explicit models for ecosystem services accounts. Mapping the different components of ecosystem services allows proper identification of the drivers of changes in the actual service flow derived from ecosystems, socio-economic systems and/or their spatial relationship. This will contribute to achieving one of the main goals of ecosystem accounts, namely measuring changes in natural capital, but it will also support decision-making that targets the enhancement of ecosystems, their services and the benefits they provide

Ecosystem services accounting: Part I - Outdoor recreation and crop pollination

The Knowledge Innovation Project on an Integrated system of Natural Capital and ecosystem services Accounting (KIP INCA) aims to develop the first ecosystem accounts at EU level, following the UN System of Environmental-Economic Accounting- Experimental Ecosystem Accounts (SEEA-EEA). The application of the SEEA-EEA framework is useful to illustrate ecosystem accounts with clear examples and contribute to further develop to methodology and give guidance for Natural Capital Accounting. The aim of this study is to assess and account for two ecosystem services: outdoor recreation and crop pollination. Each service was assessed biophysically within the ESTIMAP toolbox, allowing us to quantify different service components: the service potential that the ecosystems can deliver; the demand for each service; and the actual flow of the service used based on the spatial relationship between the service potential and demand. The results of the biophysical assessment were then translated into monetary units using valuation methods consistent with the System of National Accounts. Valuation methods require the integration of the key variables of the biophysical model to quantify the actual flow. In this way, changes in the value of the service are strictly linked to changes in biophysical assessment, which includes potential, demand and their spatial relationship determining the actual flow. Accounting of outdoor recreation shows that at EU level, forest ecosystems have the highest value for outdoor recreation, although this varies among countries. Households are the users of the service, with Germany being the country with the largest share of population whose demand for daily recreation is covered. As demonstrated, countries with a larger share of population living within 4 km of recreational areas present higher level of life satisfaction. EU accounting shows an overall increase in the use of the service between 2000 and 2012 (26%), mainly due to the enhancement of the recreation potential, and, to a lesser extent, to an increase in the demand (population). These results are useful to support policy decisions related to land planning, aiming at guaranteeing the equitable accessibility to outdoor recreation opportunities (citizen rights): 38% of the population at the EU have limited accessibility to recreational areas (unmet demand). We estimated for 2012 an actual flow of 40 million potential visits to recreational areas per year (daily use), with a total value of 31 billion euro. At this stage, the full accounting cannot be given for crop pollination due to the lack of connection between the available valuation methods and the biophysical model assessing the service flow. In this sense, further research is needed to develop suitable methods to link the valuation technique with the biophysical model. In spite of these limitations, the crop pollination assessment provides useful results for the EU Pollinators Initiative. The work presented in this report highlights the importance of the spatial relationship between ecosystem service potential and demand. The changes in the use of the service quite often cannot be explained solely by changes in the potential and the demand, but also by their spatial relationship. When dealing with ecosystem services the spatial component is a key driver that needs to be integrated within the accounting framework for a consistent assessment. The spatial relationship between potential and demand is different for each service. Crop pollination requires the spatial overlap between potential and demand, whereas proximity is the key spatial feature for outdoor recreation. As shown by the two examples presented here, ecosystem service accounts significantly differ depending on the service being assessed, both conceptually and methodologically. Hence, further examples of ecosystem service accounting are needed to produce accounting tables for a representative number of service. Ultimately, the availability of this information represents a key input for the analysis of synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services.JRC.D.3-Land Resource

Mapping and valuing habitat services: two applications at local scale

n/

Towards an ecosystem-based approach in marine ecosystem accounting. Seagrass ecosystems in the Mediterranean Sea: from diversity to restoration

The aim of this report is to highlight the relevance of implementing an ecosystem-based approach in the marine ecosystem accounting. The evidences are based on non-exhaustive literature review and data and analyses present in non-public external study reports commissioned by Joint Research Centre (section 1, 2, 3), and are used to present a conceptual framework (section 4) for marine accounts. The report will focus on seagrass ecosystems, with a case study in the Mediterranean Sea, explaining their importance as essential (vulnerable) ecosystems with several key roles, from biodiversity hotspots to climate change mitigation, and highlighting their characteristics, condition, threats, and potential values of ecosystem services fundamental for the society and economy. Finally, the report will summarize the main methodologies applied for seagrass restoration (section 3) and include a brief narrative on the marine ecosystem accounting (section 4) as pivotal implementation of conservation, protection and restoration actions in the framework of European legislations, such as Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 and the Proposal on Nature Restoration Law, Marine Strategy Framework Directive, Common Fisheries Policy Regulation, Ecosystem-based Approach for Maritime Spatial Planning Directive, Nature-based Solutions, Sustainable Blue Economy, Taxonomy Regulation for Sustainable Activities, and the Regulation (EU) No 691/2011 on European environmental economic accounts.JRC.D.2 - Ocean and Wate

Ecosystem services classification : A systems ecology perspective of the cascade framework

Creative Commons License (CC BY 4.0)Ecosystem services research faces several challenges stemming from the plurality of interpretations of classifications and terminologies. In this paper we identify two main challenges with current ecosystem services classification systems: i) the inconsistency across concepts, terminology and definitions, and; ii) the mix up of processes and end-state benefits, or flows and assets. Although different ecosystem service definitions and interpretations can be valuable for enriching the research landscape, it is necessary to address the existing ambiguity to improve comparability among ecosystem-service-based approaches. Using the cascade framework as a reference, and Systems Ecology as a theoretical underpinning, we aim to address the ambiguity across typologies. The cascade framework links ecological processes with elements of human well-being following a pattern similar to a production chain. Systems Ecology is a long-established discipline which provides insight into complex relationships between people and the environment. We present a refreshed conceptualization of ecosystem services which can support ecosystem service assessment techniques and measurement. We combine the notions of biomass, information and interaction from system ecology, with the ecosystem services conceptualization to improve definitions and clarify terminology. We argue that ecosystem services should be defined as the interactions (i.e. processes) of the ecosystem that produce a change in human well-being, while ecosystem components or goods, i.e. countable as biomass units, are only proxies in the assessment of such changes. Furthermore, Systems Ecology can support a re-interpretation of the ecosystem services conceptualization and related applied research, where more emphasis is needed on the underpinning complexity of the ecological system.Peer reviewe

How ecosystem services are changing: an accounting application at the EU level

Ecosystem services accounts are a useful tool that provides relevant information on the role of ecosystems in delivering services, and the society benefiting from them. This paper presents the accounting workflow for ecosystem services at the European Union level adopted by the Knowledge Innovation Project on an Integrated system for Natural Capital and ecosystem services Accounting (KIP INCA) - a European Commission initiative. The workflow includes: 1) biophysical assessment of ecosystem services; 2) monetary valuation; and 3) compilation of accounting tables. Supply and use tables are presented for six ecosystem services assessed so far. The supply table shows woodland and forest, followed by wetlands, as the ecosystem types with the highest monetary value per unit area. Analyses of changes between 2000 and 2012 show an overall increase of the monetary value of ecosystem services, mainly due to an increase in demand for them. We also discuss advantages and disadvantages of adopting a fast-track approach, based on official statistics, in comparison to an accounting strategy based on spatial models. We propose a novel workflow for ecosystem services accounts, focused on assessment of the actual flow of ecosystem services, making a significant contribution to further development of the technical recommendations for ecosystem service

Nature-Based Tourism Accounting

The purpose of ecosystem service accounting is to quantify the main contributions of ecosystems to society and the economy and to report them in accounting tables that are compatible with the structures and practices used in traditional economic accounting. In this report, we assess and value nature-based tourism (NBT), one of the mandatory services EU Member States are requested to quantify according to the amended Regulation (EU) No 691/2011 on European environmental economic accounts. NBT is a cultural ecosystem service in which people visit and enjoy destinations characterised by the presence of natural resources. The proposed methodology was implemented using an updated version of a biophysical map that considers the impact of major fires. The approach was applied across different scales to estimate the impact of statistical data aggregation on the final results. At the EU level, statistical data on tourism were gathered at the NUTS (nomenclature of territorial units for statistics) 2 level (for 2000–2018) and at the NUTS 3 level (for 2021). In addition, a case study of Italy was conducted to apply the methodology at the municipal level. Overall, from 2000 to 2018, Europe registered an increase in total overnight stays of 47.5 %, and an increase in NBT of 46.7 %; this growth was mainly caused by an increase in activities in the tourism sector over time. However, when assessing NBT in relation to the total number of overnight stays, we register a loss of 0.5 %. The level of aggregation of overnights stays affects service use differently across the Member States. The impact appears extremely relevant when assessing the spatial pattern of NBT in Italy at the municipal level. The use of aggregated statistical data affects the results differently, depending on the dominant ecosystem types. Notably, among the regions where NBT was underestimated at the NUTS 2 level are those recognised as having significant tourism activity linked to nature, such as Valle d’Aosta (very important for mountain tourism) and Trentino-Alto Adige. This study reduced the complexity of valuing cultural services and demonstrated the importance not only of creating specific national biophysical maps but also of using more specific statistical data.JRC.D.3 - Land Resources and Supply Chain Assessment

Ecosystem and ecosystem services accounts: time for applications

This report outlines the ecosystem accounting applications that have been presented in the Ecosystem Services World Conference in Hannover, Germany in 2019. Eight cases are summarized here; applications of ecosystem accounts in Europe, Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Uganda, Bulgaria, Andalusia-Spain and Oslo-Norway. Most of these applications are in line with the System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounts (SEEA) framework and the outcomes are regarded as pilot attempts concluding in interesting messages that should be accounted for in next development steps. All cases discuss the compilation process of certain type of ecosystem asset or ecosystem services accounts either at regional, national or local level depicting the methodological process as well as the main outcomes. They also report the policy priorities that these accounts attempted to address and the policy implications that may follow given the accounts’ results. Some of the strong highlights emerged from these cases are summarized as follows: countries should initiate the development of accounts using currently available data and then evolve this attempt based on pilot accounts. It is imperative that collaboration between institutes is ensured as ecosystem accounting is a complex process that demands strong joint forces between different experts as well as stakeholders. Demand for ecosystem accounts should be systematically developed if ecosystem accounting is to be institutionalized. Accounts need to demonstrate clear messages and be linked to certain policy needs even in this primary stage to foster policy support.JRC.D.3 - Land Resource