Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at landscape scales

Erik Nelson, Guillermo Mendoza, James Regetz, Stephen Polasky, Heather Tallis, D Richard Cameron, Kai MA Chan, Gretchen C Daily, Joshua Goldstein, Peter Kareiva, Eric Lonsdorf, Robin Naidoo, Taylor H Ricketts, and M Rebecca Shaw

December 2008

2

Decision-maker questions

– What places provide the most ecosystem services?

– How would likely management scenarios affect different ecosystem services and biodiversity?

– What landscape pattern would optimize ecosystem services now and under likely scenarios?

– Who should pay whom under a proposed PES program, and how much?

InVEST

• Spatially explicit modeling tool – Multiple services– Ecological production functions – Economic valuation techniques

• Inputs:– Land use / land cover map, future scenarios– Data tables, GIS layers

• Outputs:– Biophysical production and economic value– Maps, trends, balance sheets, tradeoff analyses

• Product of Natural Capital Project

Testing ground: Willamette Valley, OR

Three scenariosof Land use change

Willamette Basin Partnership

Services / Attributes Considered

• Carbon sequestration

• Water quality

• Storm peak mitigation

• Soil conservation

• Biodiversity

• Market returns to landowners *

Comparing scenarios

More

Less

Mapping changes

Nelson, et al. in press. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution

ArcGIS toolbox

http://invest.ecoinformatics.org

Key Points

• Services differ– spatial distribution– response to scenarios

• Strong spatial patterns in increase/decrease– distributional effects– management priorities

• Little evidence of trade-offs overall– Conservation scenario typically best– Market value only exception– (but that’s a big one)

Exploring tradeoffs

Exploring Tradeoffs

Nelson, et al. in press. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution

Monetizing additional services

• Requires beneficiaries, locations, valuation techniques

• Three outputs• Potential supply:

• typical maps: sources• Realized supply

• actually provides benefits to someone• Value

• economic valuation of realized supply

Example: Soil conservation

• Potential supply:• sediment retention

• Realized supply• sediment retention

upstream of dams• Value

• avoided costs of dam dredging

• Same potential supply layers drive multiple values

Example: Water supply

• Potential supply:• water yield

• Realized supply• net water yield upstream

of hydro plants• Value

• value of additional power

Take homes

• Mapping multiple ecosystem services possible

• Scenarios allow assessment of tradeoffs

• Payments in theory can change these tradeoffs

• Valuation needs beneficiaries

17

Thanks…NatCapKai ChanChris ColvinGretchen DailyHelen FoxPeter KareivaChuck KatzErik LonsdorfBruce McKenneyGuillermo MendozaBelinda MorrisRobin NaidooErik NelsonNasser OlweroSteve PolaskyJim RegetzSusan RuffoRebecca ShawHeather TallisChristine TamBuzz ThompsonMichael Wright

Willamette ValleyWillamette Partnership

SupportNSF-NCEASLeverhulme TrustPackard FoundationMacArthur FoundationMoore FoundationRoger and Vicki SantPeter and Helen Bing…

www.naturalcapitalproject.org

Now: can ask policy questions!

• How well will payment programs work?– changing landowner choices with PES

• Simulate different payment programs– predict landowner response– if payments exceed opportunity costs, land enrolled– different budgets

• Track improvements in two benefits– Species conservation– Market returns

Tradeoff Curves

Nelson et al. PNAS. 2007

Tradeoff Curves

Nelson et al. PNAS. 2007

• Different policies have different effects• None come close to efficiency frontier

Policy simulations

• 3 simple payment programs: – All: all landowners eligible for payments– Carbon: restrict to land that could convert to forest– Riparian: restrict to land along riparian corridors

• If payment exceeds WTA, landowner enrolls

• Various budget levels – $1 million– $5 million– $10 million

Willingness to accept payment

• How big a payment is needed for landowner to switch from current land use to conservation?

• “Opportunity costs” of conservation

REALLY Exploring Tradeoffs

• Plot full tradeoff curve for two benefits:– Species conservation: terrestrial vertebrates – Market returns: commodities and value of rural-

residential housing development

• Question:– Which landscape patterns maximize joint production?

• Explore full scenario space

Polasky, et al. 2008. Biological Conservation