Accounting for water use by wildlife–conceptual and practical issues and a case study from Botswana

Use of water by wildlife is not explicitly considered in any part of the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA). However, wildlife uses water and in some cases this may be in conflict with other water uses (e.g. irrigation). To examine the magnitude of this problem and the conceptual and practical challenges of including wildlife water use in the SEEA, estimates of water use for 31 mammals in Botswana were developed using readily available data on their abundance and coefficients of water use. Three recording options were considered for the physical supply and use tables: (1) water use by wildlife shown in a new column entitled “Wildlife”; (2) shown as a use by industry under “Operation of nature reserves” and; (3) the preferred option, shown as a split between the first two options, reflecting the location of wildlife inside or outside national parks. The key conceptual issue for recording is the delineation of the production boundary, determined in this case by the extent to which wildlife is deemed managed and hence akin to a cultivated resource in the SEEA. Despite some data limitations, wildlife water use in Botswana was significant, with 21 species accounting for 19,345 ML in 2012–13, equivalent to 10% of the previously estimated water consumption in that year. Water account producers now have clear options for including wildlife, providing water planners and wildlife managers with improved information to help balance competing demands for water that may occur at particular times and places

Linking biodiversity into national economic accounting

Biodiversity underpins the supply of ecosystem services essential for well-being and economic development, yet biodiversity loss continues at a substantial rate. Linking biodiversity indicators with national economic accounts provides a means of mainstreaming biodiversity into economic planning and monitoring processes. Here we examine the various strategies for biodiversity indicators to be linked into national economic accounts, specifically the System of Environmental-Economic Accounts Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA) framework. We present what has been achieved in practice, using various case studies from across the world. These case studies demonstrate the potential of economic accounting as an integrating, mainstreaming framework that explicitly considers biodiversity. With the right indicators for the different components of biodiversity and scales of biological organisation, this can directly support more holistic economic planning approaches. This will be a significant step forward from relying on the traditional indicators of national economic accounts to guide national planning. It is also essential if society’s objectives for biodiversity and sustainable development are to be met

Accounting for ecosystem services – Lessons from Australia for its application and use in Oceania to achieve sustainable development

This paper aims to illustrate the conceptual and practical issues that need to be considered if ecosystem service accounting is to be used to achieve sustainable development in Oceania. Recent international activity has focused on setting international standards for accounting for ecosystem services via the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA). This includes defining the assets from which ecosystem services are generated. We examine how ecosystem services are incorporated into accounting and the benefits of doing this. This is done using Australia examples from the Great Barrier Reef region and elsewhere. Key lessons relate to: (1) the practical issues facing the producers of ecosystem accounts, including data availability and quality; (2) the need to account for both ecosystem services and ecosystem assets to assess sustainability, and; (3) explaining how ecosystem accounting can assist with sustainable development via policy as well as the management of specific ecosystem assets.Fujitsu Laboratories, Japan; Australian Government National Environmental Science Program Threatened Species Recovery Hu

Integrating physical and economic data into experimental water accounts for the United States: Lessons and opportunities

Water management increasingly involves tradeoffs, making its accounting highly relevant in our interconnected world. Physical and economic data about water in many nations are becoming more widely integrated through application of the System of Environmental-Economic Accounts for Water (SEEA-Water), which enables the tracking of linkages between water and the economy. We present the first national and subnational SEEA-Water accounts for the United States. We compile accounts for water: (1) physical supply and use, (2) productivity, (3) quality, and (4) emissions for roughly the years 2000 to 2015. Total U.S. water use declined by 22% from 2000 to 2015, falling in 44 states though groundwater use increased in 21 states. Water-use reductions, combined with economic growth, led to increases in water productivity for the overall national economy (65%), mining (99%), and agriculture (68%). Surface-water quality trends were most evident at regional levels, and differed by waterquality constituent and region. This work provides (1) a baseline of recent historical water resource trends and their value in the U.S., and (2) a roadmap for the completion of future accounts for water, a critical ecosystem service. Our work also aids in the interpretation of ecosystem accounts in the context of long-term water resources trends.This work was conducted as a part of the “Accounting for U.S. Ecosystem Services at National and Subnational Scales” working group supported by the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) under funding received from the National Science Foundation (grant DBI-1052875) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) John Wesley Powell Center for Analysis and Synthesis (grant GX16EW00ECSV00). We thank members of the working group for constructive discussions of the scope and content of U.S. water accounts and reviews of this manuscript. We thank the following individuals for assistance with data access and interpretation: Cheryl Dieter, Carey Johnston, John Lovelace, Molly Maupin, Gary Rowe, and Lori Sprague. Support for Bagstad and Ancona’s time was provided by the USGS Land Change Science Program

Increasing frailty is associated with higher prevalence and reduced recognition of delirium in older hospitalised inpatients: results of a multi-centre study

Purpose: Delirium is a neuropsychiatric disorder delineated by an acute change in cognition, attention, and consciousness. It is common, particularly in older adults, but poorly recognised. Frailty is the accumulation of deficits conferring an increased risk of adverse outcomes. We set out to determine how severity of frailty, as measured using the CFS, affected delirium rates, and recognition in hospitalised older people in the United Kingdom. Methods: Adults over 65 years were included in an observational multi-centre audit across UK hospitals, two prospective rounds, and one retrospective note review. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), delirium status, and 30-day outcomes were recorded. Results: The overall prevalence of delirium was 16.3% (483). Patients with delirium were more frail than patients without delirium (median CFS 6 vs 4). The risk of delirium was greater with increasing frailty [OR 2.9 (1.8–4.6) in CFS 4 vs 1–3; OR 12.4 (6.2–24.5) in CFS 8 vs 1–3]. Higher CFS was associated with reduced recognition of delirium (OR of 0.7 (0.3–1.9) in CFS 4 compared to 0.2 (0.1–0.7) in CFS 8). These risks were both independent of age and dementia. Conclusion: We have demonstrated an incremental increase in risk of delirium with increasing frailty. This has important clinical implications, suggesting that frailty may provide a more nuanced measure of vulnerability to delirium and poor outcomes. However, the most frail patients are least likely to have their delirium diagnosed and there is a significant lack of research into the underlying pathophysiology of both of these common geriatric syndromes

Environmental Accounting: Concepts, Practive and Assessment of Sustainable Development

Quantitative assessment of sustainable development requires accounting for the depletion and degradation of natural resources and other environmental impacts of economic development. The United Nations System of Integrated Economic and Environmental Accounting (SEEA) provides a system that links economic activities to changes in the environment and natural resources. SEEA has guided the development of environmental accounts by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This paper describes how SEEA can be used to assess different aspects and different concepts of sustainable development. This is demonstrated with Australian examples

Natural Capital Accounting for Better Policy Decisions: Measuring and Valuing Natural Capital to Improve Landscape Management and Governance : Proceedings and Highlights of the 4th Forum on Natural Capital Accounting for Better Policy Decisions, 18-19 November 2019, Kampala, Uganda

The fourth Forum on Natural Capital Accounting for Better Policy Decisions met against the backdrop of alarming evidence that natural resources are under considerable pressure. Earlier in 2019, the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and the IPCC Report on Climate Change and Land had identified dramatic changes in land use as having the most negative impacts on nature. These reports had given rise to policy and media debates on a ‘nature emergency’ and calls for more integrated ways to manage landscapes under growing pressure. The theme for this year’s Forum was therefore very timely – measuring and valuing natural capital for improved landscape management

Applying Natural Capital Accounting to Water Policy

This chapter provides an introduction to key water policy areas and the concepts of full cost recovery and integrated water resource management to which natural capital accounting (NCA) has or could contribute. The discussion uses examples from Australia, the Netherlands, and Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES) countries to illustrate some key points, which are likely to be relevant beyond the countries examined. It is important to understand, that the limited freshwater resources on the planet require management through water policies that regulate the supply as well as the demand of multiple users. Freshwater resources are unevenly distributed in time and space. Reservoirs are used to manage water over time, but options for increasing water supply in dry areas are limited. Because water is a bulky good, the demand in one region cannot simply be addressed by supply from another region. Water policy targets are set at different levels: globally (for example, through the Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs]), regionally (for example, European Water Framework Directive), as well as through national strategies and legislation. Water accounting is a helpful tool to analyze current water uses and related environmental and financial implications. Accounting helps in demand forecasting to assess the impact on the economy of reduced water availability and determine cost-effective options for increasing supply or reducing demand. Furthermore, it is a useful tool to model the impact of regulative measures on water use patterns and the impact of changing the price of water on the economy