Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1 1
Pieter Booth, Exponent
Ecosystem Services Quantification for
Resource Management: Is it
Appropriate for NRDA?
December 13, 2012
ACES and Ecosystem Markets Fort Lauderdale, FL
2
Natural Resource Damage Assessment: Some
Concepts and Precepts
Compensation for losses to the public
Compensation goal is restoration of “lost services”
Trustees typically pursue claims under threat of litigation
Process entails many technical steps, some of which are analogous to ES quantification
Concepts of baseline and causation are central to liability determination
3
Ecosystem Services: Some Concepts and
Precepts
By definition, human benefit is at the core
– “Benefits people obtain from ecosystems” (MEA 2005)
– “Benefits Supplied to Human Societies by Natural Ecosystems” (ESA 1997)
– “…conditions and processes [that] sustain and fulfill human life” (Daily 1997)
Encompasses both use and nonuse services
Biophysical production functions (BPFs) define linkages between ecosystem state and provision of services
4
Ecosystem Services: Some Basic Concepts and
Precepts (continued)
Ecosystem Services ≠ Ecological Services
– Ecological services are often considered an “intermediate service” in an ecosystem services context
– Ecological services must be of direct benefit to humans to be valued in an ecosystem services context
Valuation is typically monetary
Use in NRDA is not tested
5
Conceptual Framework for “Ecosystem
Services-Think”
6
Why Might this be Important?
Trustees are exploring ecosystem services quantification approaches for NRDA (NAS DWH Interim Report)
EPA, USGS, and others are developing ecosystem services databases that include valuation
Ecosystem services tools and approaches only seem to expand the scope of an NRDA and may clash with NRDA approaches, especially HEA and REA
6
7
Key Disconnects in Technical Underpinnings
Ecosystem Services Quantification
Identify universe of services based on “what people care about”
Quantify the relationships between ecological processes and the provision of services (BPFs)
Determine impacts of the release on ecological processes and the provision of services
Preference for monetization over restoration scaling
NRDA as Practiced (HEA/REA)
Identify key habitats or populations injured based on Trustee imperatives
Quantify service losses (DSAYs or DKYs) for key habitats or populations
Determine restoration needed to compensate for service losses
Damages for lost services = cost of restoration
8
An Ecosystem Services Approach Starts out Big
9
Definition of Services in Ecosystem Services
versus NRD
10
Definition of Services in Ecosystem Services
versus NRD
11
Definition of Services in Ecosystem Services
versus NRD
12
An ES Approach to NRDA Suggests the Need to
“Model the World”
“Implementing an ecosystem approach to damage assessment requires an understanding
of the complex linkages amongst various ecosystem components, including the impact of
humans on the structure and function of the ecosystem, the resulting changes in
ecosystem services, and how these changes affect human well-being.” (NAS 2012)
NAS (2005) describes three phases for an ecosystem services-based NRDA:
1. Determine the impact of human actions on the structure and function of the ecosystem
2. Establish how changes in the ecosystem lead to changes in ecosystem services
3. Establish how changes in the provision of ecosystem services affect human well-being
13
An ES Approach to NRDA Leads to
Monetization of Lost Services
Services are strictly defined as benefits to human, thus defining “value” to humans leads toward monetization
Examples of works-in-progress (Alee 2010):
– Elwha Floodplain Restoration, Ecosystem Services Valuation Survey (Stated Preference), and Cultural Services (Tribal Values–non monetary)
– Ecosystem Services and Markets—Chesapeake Bay; ESV-based modeling tool (Marine InVest) uses benefits transfer from database of monetary valuations
14
Conclusions
ES assessments are bound to influence the NRDA process
Key technical issues are unresolved
– Uncertainty in BPFs
– How to manage baseline and causation
Consideration of only “final” services in an ecosystem services approach precludes HEA and to a lesser extent, REA in most cases
Ecosystem services framework might be appropriate for restoration planning but not determination of liability
16
References
Alee, R. 2010. NOAA activities to improve decision-making: Valuing ecosystem services. Presentation, ACES 2010. NOAA Coastal Services Center.
Daily G. C. (ed.). 1997. Nature's services: Societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Ecological Society of America. 1997. Issues in Ecology (2): Ecosystem Services: Benefits Supplied to Human Societies by Natural Ecosystems. Ecological Society of America. http://www.esa.org/sbi/issue2.htm.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC.
