Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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
ā What places provide the most ecosystem services?
ā How would likely management scenarios affect different ecosystem services and biodiversity?
ā What landscape pattern would optimize ecosystem services now and under likely scenarios?
ā Who should pay whom under a proposed PES program, and how much?
InVEST
ā¢ Spatially explicit modeling tool ā Multiple servicesā Ecological production functions ā Economic valuation techniques
ā¢ Inputs:ā Land use / land cover map, future scenariosā Data tables, GIS layers
ā¢ Outputs:ā Biophysical production and economic valueā Maps, trends, balance sheets, tradeoff analyses
ā¢ Product of Natural Capital Project
Testing ground: Willamette Valley, OR
Three scenariosof Land use change
Willamette Basin Partnership
Services / Attributes Considered
ā¢ Carbon sequestration
ā¢ Water quality
ā¢ Storm peak mitigation
ā¢ Soil conservation
ā¢ Biodiversity
ā¢ 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
ā¢ Services differā spatial distributionā response to scenarios
ā¢ Strong spatial patterns in increase/decreaseā distributional effectsā management priorities
ā¢ Little evidence of trade-offs overallā Conservation scenario typically bestā Market value only exceptionā (but thatās a big one)
Exploring tradeoffs
Exploring Tradeoffs
Nelson, et al. in press. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
Monetizing additional services
ā¢ Requires beneficiaries, locations, valuation techniques
ā¢ Three outputsā¢ Potential supply:
ā¢ typical maps: sourcesā¢ Realized supply
ā¢ actually provides benefits to someoneā¢ Value
ā¢ economic valuation of realized supply
Example: Soil conservation
ā¢ Potential supply:ā¢ sediment retention
ā¢ Realized supplyā¢ sediment retention
upstream of damsā¢ Value
ā¢ avoided costs of dam dredging
ā¢ Same potential supply layers drive multiple values
Example: Water supply
ā¢ Potential supply:ā¢ water yield
ā¢ Realized supplyā¢ net water yield upstream
of hydro plantsā¢ Value
ā¢ value of additional power
Take homes
ā¢ Mapping multiple ecosystem services possible
ā¢ Scenarios allow assessment of tradeoffs
ā¢ Payments in theory can change these tradeoffs
ā¢ Valuation needs beneficiaries
17
Thanksā¦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 Bingā¦
www.naturalcapitalproject.org
Now: can ask policy questions!
ā¢ How well will payment programs work?ā changing landowner choices with PES
ā¢ Simulate different payment programsā predict landowner responseā if payments exceed opportunity costs, land enrolledā different budgets
ā¢ Track improvements in two benefitsā Species conservationā Market returns
Tradeoff Curves
Nelson et al. PNAS. 2007
Tradeoff Curves
Nelson et al. PNAS. 2007
ā¢ Different policies have different effectsā¢ None come close to efficiency frontier
Policy simulations
ā¢ 3 simple payment programs: ā All: all landowners eligible for paymentsā Carbon: restrict to land that could convert to forestā Riparian: restrict to land along riparian corridors
ā¢ If payment exceeds WTA, landowner enrolls
ā¢ Various budget levels ā $1 millionā $5 millionā $10 million
Willingness to accept payment
ā¢ How big a payment is needed for landowner to switch from current land use to conservation?
ā¢ āOpportunity costsā of conservation
REALLY Exploring Tradeoffs
ā¢ Plot full tradeoff curve for two benefits:ā Species conservation: terrestrial vertebrates ā Market returns: commodities and value of rural-
residential housing development
ā¢ Question:ā Which landscape patterns maximize joint production?
ā¢ Explore full scenario space
Polasky, et al. 2008. Biological Conservation