Values of Ecosystem Services
and benefits of their restoration
9th European Conference on Ecological
Restoration (SER 2014)
3-8 August 2014, Oulu, Finland
(Ru)Dolf de Groot, Env. Systems Analysis Group
Wageningen University, The Netherlands
Excursion 3: Mire and Peatland restoration: Harakkasuo & Pilpasuo
Thank you, Anne !
SER still needed ..........
1987: SER established
Our Mission: “To promote ecological restoration as a means of
sustaining the diversity of life on Earth and re-establishing an
ecologically healthy relationship between nature and culture”
Land conversion
(population growth)
CBD 2010: 47.500 spp/year (1/11 min)*
* Up from 27.000 in 2002
Bad economics: “growth
without limits”
-> destruction ‘pays’
‘natural’ hazards?
Floods
Storm
damage
Landslides
> 1 trillion US$/year
(NOAA, 2012)
Damage costs of ‘natural’ disasters
<- 1 trillion US$/y
GDP 2012: 72 trillion US$
[INCLUDING the 1 trillion ...]
Cost of ecosystem loss
Flooding
cost
LivelyHood
loss
Water
pollution
cost
7.3 Trillion *
US$/y. (2012)
Cost of ecosystem loss 2-5% of GDP per year (Science, 2002)
(2-3 trillion $/y damage-costs, replacement & restoration costs, etc …)
Air
pollution
cost
Crop
loss
* 13% of global GDP
9 Oct
2010
(TEEB for Business Report, May
2013)
Erosion
cost
Cost of / INVESTMENT in Restoration ?
Needed: 100 billion $/year
(Lester Brown, 2007)
[less than 10% of the direct
damage cost]
Net-Benefits of Ecosystem Restoration
Blignaut et al. screened 20.000 publ.; 95 selected for further analysis *
Benefit – Cost Ratio of Ecosystem Restoration
BC ratio of ecosystem restoration
75
80.00
70.00
Grasslands: 75 x
BC ratio
60.00
50.00
40.00
31
30.00
22
10.00
18
16
20.00
3
1
6
3
C
oa
st
al
an
gr
ov
In
la
es
nd
w
et
la
nd
La
s
ke
s/
ri v
Tr
er
op
s
ic
al
fo
re
st
O
s
th
er
W
oo
fo
re
dl
st
an
s
d/
sh
ru
bl
an
d
G
ra
ss
la
nd
s
Coral reefs: 3 x
M
C
or
al
re
ef
s
-
Assumptions: high cost scenario, average benefit scenario, time horizon
= 40 years (including 10% annual operation costs; discount rate = 1 %)
* De Groot et al., 2013, Cons Biol.
Biol.
control
Ecosystem Services
Habitat
& nursery
Recreation
C-seq
Pollination
Air quality
Timber
Inspiration
Water
Medicins
& models
Food
www.maweb.org (2005) and www.teebweb.org (2010
How to measure ‘value’ (importance)
Ecological value /importance (role in ecosystem)
Intrinsic
/existence
value
Cultural value
(tradit. whaling,
inspiration
etc.)
?
Economic value
Effect on welfare and ‘the’ economy
usually/conveniently expressed in
monetary units.
Whale: meat, tourism (DUV), biol.
control (IUV), donations (NUV)
Additional value (information)
in decision making process
[but very important/trade-offs]
How measure economic (monetary) value ?
2. Shadow Price
1. Market Price
Coastal Protection
(eco)tourism
Food
3. Questionnaire based
Replacement cost
10 million $/km
Spiritual value /habitat service
WTP for
protecting
Humpback
Whales:
57 $/pp/year
(1993)
Avoided damage Cost:
36 million $ (Maledives-2004).
Other: Mitigation Cost, Travel cost,
Hedonic pricing,
Coastal Protection
4. Benefit (Value) Transfer
Total value* of ecosystem services (22) by biome (12)
Marine
Biome
Ecosystem Service
1) Food provision
24
(6)
0 - 44
Coral Reefs
470
(22)
0 - 3.818
2) Water provision
3) Raw material provision
400
(5)
0 - 1.990
20.434
(1)
4) Provision of genetic
resources
5) Provision of medicinal
resources
6) Provision of ornamental
resources
7) Air quality regulation
8) Climate regulation
Coastal
3.248
(12)
1 - 13.043
1.413
(1)
8
(4)
Mangroves
693
(8)
0 - 2.744
1.990
(1)
511
0 - 36
(5)
3 - 326
264
(3)
151 - 347
231
56
(2)
2 - 54
9) Moderation of extreme events
648
(3)
2 - 646
25.200
(9)
3 - 34.408
37.339
(2)
700 - 73.979
(1)
5.926
(4)
2 - 10.407
515
(2)
37 - 993
10) Regulation of water flows
11) Waste treatment
(esp. water purification)
12) Erosion prevention
13) Maintenance of soil fertility
42
(2)
3 - 81
189.470
(1)
84
(2)
3 - 165
3
(1)
19.368
(3)
2.002 - 29.520
11.576
(2)
2.334 - 9.242
448
(2)
141 - 756
220
(1)
14) Pollination
15) Biological control
4
(2)
4
0 - 7
16) Habitat for migratory species,
incl. nursery
17) Maintenance of genetic
diversity
18) Aesthetic information
19) Opportunities for recreation
and tourism
20) Inspiration for culture and art
6
(2)
1 - 11
0
(1)
76
(2)
0
(6)
0 - 511
13.541
0
7.425
0
79.099
0
0
0
55
(1)
Other Wetlands
442
(16)
0 - 981
2.739
(4)
15 - 5.210
698
(12)
1 - 2.436
12
(1)
92
(1)
10
(1)
Fresh water Tropical Forest Other Forests
69
(3)
13 - 68
1.864
(2)
1.110 - 2.619
1
(1)
75
0
143
6
431
1
483
7
181
11
(19)
- 552
(3)
- 411
(26)
- 1.418
(4)
- 1.756
(4)
- 562
126
(8)
0 - 552
148
(3)
0 - 442
24
(6)
1 - 45
2
(1)
11
Woodlands
2.824
(5)
0 - 8.369
541
(9)
3 - 645
> 225 studies
(3)
0 - 11
12
0
(1)
230
10
468
(7)
59
(1) 1.965
3 - 1.285
10
3.544
(10)
14
238 - 10.264
6
535
(2)
2.675
5 - 530
1
3.586
(10) 1.221
(2)
177
42 - 9.368
105 - 2.337
0
89
(1)
694
7
634
(3)
1
(1)
508
31 - 344
1
17
(1)
10
5
16
(1)
9
(2)
- 449
(10)
- 3.218
(2)
- 8
(6)
- 5.235
(6)
- 506
(9)
- 1.084
(3)
- 501
(2)
- 14
(1)
257
2 52
0 1
0 15
0 2
0 -
(9)
1.447
(2)
104
(2)
1
(4)
68
(2)
3
439
(1)
16
(1)
(1)
497
(2)
90 - 903
219
(2)
3 434
262
(4)
0 - 786
55
(1)
7
108
(2)
33 - 183
83
(1)
(7)
- 57.133
(4)
- 27.484
(29)
13.780
(5)
- 1.063.946
70 - 40.268
(2)
- 0
106
(3)
3 - 266
174
(2)
27 - 321
1.128
(3)
493 - 713
13
648
(9)
0 - 2.247
950
(11)
1 - 3.715
595
(1)
320
(1)
649
(5)
322 - 1.166
(1)
373
(12)
3 - 5.151
381
(20)
1 - 1.171
225
(7)
0 - 2.504
499
(1)
1
(1)
3.733
(1)
758
(5)
1 - 2.934
0
(1)
21) Spiritual experience
22) Information for cognitive
development
TOTAL
2.154
250
(20)
(4)
0 - 6.461
129.245
(92)
41
(1)
73.852
(28)
21.077
(31)
14.245
(84)
3.803
(12)
8.338
(128) 1.618
*) Average Potential Sustainable Use Value ….
(51) 4.343
(22)
> 1.250
data-points
Used for
analysis: 522
Ongoing
process …
Log-scale of value range (TEV) in US$/ha/yr (2007 PPP corrected)
Grasslands (25)
= Average value
Woodlands (18)
Temparate Forest (40)
() = number of used
estimates (522
out of > 1250
Tropical Forest (140)
Lakes (12)
Inland wetlands (86)
Coastal wetlands (112)
Only 25-30%
market values
Coastal systems (32)
Coral reefs (101)
Marine systems (6)
1
10
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
1,000,000 10,000,000
10
1 million
Range of Ecosystem Service Value (in USD/ha/yr (2007/PPP-corrected)
De Groot, et al., 2012
Oceans
Mangroves
49 US$/ha/yr [climate regulation & fishery]
46.239 US$/ha/yr [waste treatment & nursery]
Coral Reefs
92.775 US$/ha/yr [tourism & storm protection
Total (Economic) Value
“Serious under-estimate
of infinite value of
nature”
Who’se
gonna
buy the
Planet?
Total: 33 trillion ?
“Total Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital”
Changes in the global value of ecosystem services
Figure S1. Map of global annual ecosystem services based on 2011 land areas and 2011 unit values
(1997 – 2011)*
Costanza, d´Arge, de Groot,
Farber, Grasso, Hannon, Limburg,
Naeem, O`Neil, Raskin, Sutton
and Van den Belt, Nature (1997)
Flow value/ha went up
for most ecosystems
Cost of ecosystem
loss 4-20/trillion/y.
*)
From: Costanza, R., R. de Groot, P. Sutton, S. van der Ploeg, S. Anderson, I.
Kubiszewski, S. Farber, and R. K. Turner. 2014. Changes in the global value of
ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 26:152-158
Value of restoring natural ecosystems
US$/ha/y
Storm protection
Coastal protection
& erosion prev.
8.000 (coastal wetland, US)
7.700 coastal systems, Spain
4.300 (mangroves – global)
129.000 (coral reefs – global)
Flood protection
11.000 (floodplain, Czech Rep)
1.750 (marsh, Shri Lanka
Landslide prevention
2.000 (Mountain forest
Switzerland)
NATURA 2000 COST estimates
Building on the results of the Member States questionnaire,
the annual costs of implementing the Natura 2000 network
were estimated as €5.8 billion per year for the EU-27.
(Gantioler, 2010)
Average: 63€/ha/y (range: 10 – 800€/ha/y)
incl. acquisition & infrastructure dev. (30%) + management
Marine sites:
< 3 €/ha/y.
Natura 2000 BENEFITS
“A number of examples have demonstrated that the
benefits can be 3–7 times larger than the costs”
According to a study in Ireland, the aggregate benefits provided by the
Burren park’s limestone pavements and the orchid rich grasslands were
estimated to amount to €4,420 / ha / year . The total benefit from the Park is
estimated to be €65 million per year or about 3 times as much as the cost
of Government support (Gantioler, 2010)
The protection of all 300 Natura 2000 sites throughout Scotland was estimated
to have an overall benefit cost ratio of around 7 over a 25-year period
(Jacobs, 2004). Total benefits were estimated at £210 million per year,
however, 99% is non-use value (Gantioler, 2010)
In 2008 a study was carried out in France to determine costs and benefits of
the Natura 2000 site ‘Plaine de la Crau’. The calculated overall net benefits
amounted to €142ha/year, which was around seven times higher than the
costs associated with the site. (Hernandez & Sainteny, 2008).
De Loonse en Drunense Duinen (3500 ha)
(The Netherlands)
100 x
Cost per ha:
142 euro/yr
Benefits per ha: 15.338 euro/yr
Important Ecosystem Services
 Recreation
 Air filtration
 Real estate value increase
(proximity to Natura 2000)
 CO2 sequestration
 Water-filtration
Applying the TEEB approach to
estimate the economic benefits
of re-naturalising the Haringvliet
delta
2010
Anne Böhnke-Henrichs
& Dolf de Groot
Cost and benefits of restoring Haringvliet
1953
Wageningen
1971 (14 years)
WWF: Open Haringvliet (i.e. restore the natural estuary & river)
Mono/few
services
Dam
€
?
No dam
Many
services
LEGENDA
Landgebruik
Zoet
Zout
Klimaatdijken
Akkerland
Water met getij
Water met getij
Hoog stedelijk
Weiland
Kreken
Kreken
Dorps smal
Spaarbekkens
Water stilstaand
Zand & slik
Dorps breed
Bos
Zand- & slik
Lage kwelder(schor)
Landelijk smal
Riet & biezen
Hoge kwelder(schor)
Landelijk breed
Wilgenvloedbos
Duingebied & strand
Gewone dijk
Grasland
Ecosystem Services in Haringvliet
LANDSCHAPSTYPEN
DIENSTEN
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
€
Value-change for some important landscape elements after
opening the Haringvliet
Landscape
Element
Riet en wilgenvloedbossen
Change
in surface (in
1000 ha)
+ 13,4
Economically most valuable
services
Value
change
(in Mill.
€ /year)*
Oogsten van riet en wilgentakken, wegvang
fijnstof, water zuivering, recreatie /toerisme
+ 266
+ 221
Estuarine
wateren
+ 7,2
Water (scheepvaart, drinken, irrigatie),
mogelijkheden voor recreatie en toerisme
habitat/biodiversiteit (kraamkamerfunctie)
Kwelder
(salt marsh)
+ 2,9
Water zuivering, mogelijkheden voor recreatie
en toerisme, kennisnetwerk delta
+ 43
Dijken conventionele en
Klimaatdijken
+ 1,8
Delta als kennisbron, voedselproductie
(akkerbouw, veeteelt) , attractieve standplaats
voor woningen
+ 36
Zand en slikplaten (mudflats)
+ 0,7
Waterzuivering, recreatie en toerisme,
biodiversiteit (incl. refugiumfunctie)
+ 15
Akker, weiland,
populierenbos
- 27,9
Voedsel (akkerbouw producten, vlees, melk),
wol, hout, koolstof vastlegging
- 100
Balance: + 500
*) This involves for appr. 30% market prices (eg fishery, recreation, transport) and 70%
shadow prices (eg. avoided damage costs for water purif., health care, climate change)
VIMINE project (2014 – 2017) EU-LIFE
Restoring salt marshes in the bay of Venice
Mangrove Capital’ Project (2011 – 2014)
Wetland International (Int. NGO)
The Nature Conservancy (UK)
Deltares (NL) [hydro-engineering]
Wageningen Univ – ESA [“CBA”]
Restore 100.000 ha of Mangrove
Coastline in Indonesia (Java)
Baviaanskloof S. Africa (ongoing since 2007)
No goats
Fenc
e
Goats
Baviaanskloof, S. Africa
Conservation (& restoration) still seen as a cost …
“Current” expenditures on all Protected Areas (incl. bilateral
agreements, GEF, etc): < 10 billion US$/y (1
Needed
: 45-50 billion $ (2 < 0.1%
Global GDP: ca 50 Trillion US$ (2009) (1
Valentines day in USA
2012: 17 billion US$
Globally on cigarettes:
2009: 50 billion US$
Benefits: >> 1,5 - 4,5 trillion (3
(return 1: 30-100)
1) EASAC, 2009, 2) Balmford et al., 2002. Science, 3) TEEB, 2010
Why continues
…?
Conventional (outdated) economics
„Society must urgently replace
some problems:
its defective economic compass“
(Pavan Sukhdev, TEEB study
leader, 29.05.2008 CBD COP9)
-
“Free” services (75%) [pollination]
Neglect of externalities [pollution]
Perverse subsidies [fishery, forestry]
Wrong assumptions (paradigms)
about people & markets
EU Biodiversity Strategy 2020 (May 2011)*
Subtitle: “our life insurance, our natural capital”
Action 5: Improve knowledge of ecosystems and their services in the EU
Target 2: “by 2020, ecosystems and their services are maintained and enhanced by
establishing green infrastructure and restoring at least 15% of degraded ecosystems
All member states ... will:
(1) map and assess the state of ecosystems and their services in their
national territory by 2014
(2) Assess the economic value of such services by 2020, and
(3) promote the integration of these values into accounting and
reporting Systems at EU and national level
Ecosystem Services Partnership
ESP
*) CBD COP-10 Nagoya, 2010
www.es-partnership.org
How turn value into real money?
- Reward/Pay providers of “free services”
-“Punish” environmental damage (liability)
1. Government run finance mechan.
(public incentives: subsidies/taxes)
- Agri-environmental schemes [“farming for nature”]
- Conservation payments (e.g. watershed-prot. [NYC] / REDD+ (forest)
- Other (eg. tax-incentives for green investments)
2. Government supported market creation
- Offsets, eg Carbon credits [145 billion$ 2009/800 US$/ha/y – Ecosystem Market Pla
- Other “eco-assets” (eg. salinity credits, wetland banking, high-rise buildings(!))
3. Private market arrangements [PES – payment for use of ES]
- User fees (eg. resources (water), eco-tourism, bioprospecting)
- Biorights (compensate local people for not damaging ES, i.e cons.easem/Perrier)
-Ecolabelling: Cert.Agr.Products (40 billion $ 2008/2,5% of total market)
FSC: 5 billion, Fair Trade, etc)
Make biodiversity a business case (TEEB D3-report)
Business opportunities:
-(eco) tourism
-Resources (food, water, etc)
-Pharmaceutical products
-Biotechnology/bio-mimicry
(nature as “model”)
model for improving
scotch tape and post-its
IWOKRAMA
800.000 US$ profit in 2008
“Biodiversity as Business Opportunity’’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyL272Q1N0s
&feature=youtu.be&goback=.gde_1081717_me
mber_5811965182330576900
Investing in nature (restoration) pays !
„Every dollar
invested ....
saves anywhere
between 7,5
and 200 US$
in damage &
repair costs“
TheEconomist
(23 April 2005)
www.ES-Partnership.org
Next (7th) Int. Conference: 8-12 Sept. , Costa Rica
> 40 Working Groups and National Networks
Ecosystem Services Partnership
ESP
www.es-partnership.org

Lucknow

leasing brochure(2) - Greenwood Calendar