Valuation of Biodiversity Benefits (OECD)

More documents

Recommendations

Info

- Cost of service access – time and money required to take advantage of the wetlandservice. All other things equal, the lower the cost of access to a wetland service, thegreater the value of the services to those who have access.- Revealed Preferences – participation rates, purchasing patterns, subscriptions, donations,and other decisions that reveal preferences for wetland services.- Stated Preferences – relative values assigned to wetland services by individuals,community leaders, elected officials, or citizen “valuation” juries.- Imputed Preferences – individual and community preferences assigned to wetlandservices and imputed to wetland functions and features as a result of choice modelling,conjoint analysis, and other forms of multi-attribute analysis.Box 7.6 Essential Questions About Relative Ecosystem ValuesFunctionsWhat environmental functions does this ecosystem have the capacity to provide?Does the ecosystem’s landscape context allow it to provide these functions?If so, are there factors that will cause it to function at less than full capacity?Are there factors that may cause it to function beyond its sustainable capacity?ServicesWhat services, products, and amenities will these ecosystem functions generate?Over what geographic area will people benefit from these services and products?ValuesHow scarce are these services, products, and amenities in this area?How many people benefit from them; what is their income, ethnicity, etc.?How much does it cost in money or time for people to enjoy these services?Are there near-perfect natural substitutes that exist or could be developed?Are there near-perfect man-made substitutes that exist or could be developed?How could the affected population adapt to having fewer of these services?How much would the affected population benefit from having more of these services?RiskHow might future development make the services provided here more/less important?How vulnerable are services generated by this site to temporary/permanent disruptions?How restorable are these services in this region compared to other regions?How might future development make the services provided here more/less vulnerable?Will demographic/land use change increase/decrease preferences for these services?Will demographic/land use changes increase/decrease availability of these services?The system we propose uses the following four sets of indicators that combine to generate asingle overall index of ecosystem value.1) Capacity utilisation sub-indexIndicators of landscape conditions that determine how much of the functional capacity of thesite is likely to be used.134
2) Service capacity sub-indexIndicators of landscape conditions that limit or enhance the level of services expected perunit of function.3) Service value sub-indexIndicators of local, regional, and national supply and demand conditions, individual andcommunity preferences, and the substitutability and replaceability of the service which reflect theexpected value per unit service.4) Service risk sub-indexIndicators of the likelihood of future disruptions in service flows that affect the value ofexpected ecosystem services. These are related to the exposure and vulnerability of the site or othercritical landscape features to such threats as floods, droughts, fire, disease, infestations, waterdiversion, pollution, and industrial development.Flow of Indicator DevelopmentThe flow of indicator development using site capacity indicators and the four sub-indiceslisted above is displayed in Figure 7.4. The initial assessment of the site’s functional capacity can beexpressed using any of the biophysical ecosystem assessment methods and ecosystem conditions withrespect to particular functions. 40 A recent paper Bartoldus (1999) describes approximately 30ecosystem assessment methods that generate “functional capacity indicators” or “habitat suitabilityindicators”. 41 The sub-indices listed above are then used to adjust site indices of functional capacity toreflect how landscape factors influence expected levels of service, value, and risk. If necessary the“adjusted service value” estimates associated with each function can be weighted using servicepreference weights and aggregated to form a single overall value index.The details of how individual sub-indices are developed are provided in the last section ofthis paper. The following section provides an illustration showing how the indicator system can beused to assess wetland trades.Illustrations of Indicator ApplicationsWetland trading: For illustration, assume that each of the four sub-indices listed above isdesigned to range around a mean or average value of one. At a site in a landscape context that is4041The review of ecosystem assessment methods provided in Bartoldus (1999) provides evidence thatmost of them focus on site conditions and ignore landscape linkages. They establish the capacity of anecosystem site to provided functions, not the opportunity the ecosystem site has to provide functions,and usually do not address landscape factors that link biophysical functions with services that matterto people.Most “functional capacity indicators” and habitat suitability indicators” range from zero to one withzero representing no functional capacity and one representing a high level of functional capacity.Several recent methods rely on high quality specimens of an ecosystem as a reference to establishbenchmark indicator values, which are then used to rank other sites. See the description of the“hydrogeomorphic”(HGM) wetland assessment method in Brinson, et al (1993).135
Page 1 and 2:
«ENVIRONMENTValuation ofBiodiversi
Page 3 and 4:
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERAT
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTSPART 1 ...........
Page 7 and 8:
PART 4 ............................
Page 10 and 11:
Why value biodiversity?There are th
Page 12 and 13:
Figure 1.1 Total economic value: us
Page 14 and 15:
from biodiversity at the local leve
Page 16 and 17:
in the database and also for undert
Page 18 and 19:
in the policy context. This is high
Page 20:
Table 1.3 Policy Options for the Cl
Page 23 and 24:
Box 1.2 Value of Turkey’s Forests
Page 25 and 26:
of the most important implications
Page 27 and 28:
Additionally, valuation does not ju
Page 29 and 30:
value is the habitat, many differen
Page 31 and 32:
are very modest. More recently, new
Page 33 and 34:
Table 2.2 Estimates of the Medicina
Page 35 and 36:
The importance of indirect use valu
Page 37 and 38:
pharmaceutical use, although the li
Page 39 and 40:
McAllister, D., (1991). Estimating
Page 41 and 42:
Simpson, D and Craft, A.. (1996).
Page 43 and 44:
practice, the overlap between these
Page 45 and 46:
aimed at giving more precise quanti
Page 47 and 48:
structural values. There are a numb
Page 49 and 50:
Reid (forthcoming) discusses the po
Page 51 and 52:
Ecotourism as a Way to Generate Loc
Page 53 and 54:
endangered Indian rhino and other t
Page 55 and 56:
ReferencesBann, C., and M. Clemens
Page 57 and 58:
PART 261
Page 59 and 60:
many European countries, CBA has a
Page 61 and 62:
(1) Cost and time constraintsThe co
Page 63 and 64:
activity day, there is greater vari
Page 65 and 66:
added independent variable C s= cha
Page 67 and 68:
error in valuing respiratory sympto
Page 69 and 70:
ReferencesArrow, K.J., R. Solow, E.
Page 71 and 72:
OECD (1995). The Economic Appraisal
Page 73 and 74:
CHAPTER 5:by José Manuel LIMA E SA
Page 75 and 76: linkages usually lead to diverse co
Page 77 and 78: A discrete choice approach to quest
Page 79 and 80: Table 5.2 Model-based point estimat
Page 81 and 82: is potentially very large for multi
Page 83 and 84: P3 is already in the mix is 2.51, s
Page 85 and 86: PART 391
Page 87 and 88: measures of value. An appendix to t
Page 89 and 90: features (such as parks, beaches or
Page 91 and 92: included in cost-benefit analysis o
Page 93 and 94: A Discussion of Past Efforts to Dev
Page 95 and 96: Satellite AccountsIn addition to th
Page 97 and 98: which many people argue are associa
Page 99 and 100: approach to competing uses of water
Page 101 and 102: Figure 6.2 Trade-Off AnalysisEnviro
Page 103 and 104: However, the farmers need not bear
Page 105 and 106: Appendix 1: Theory and Application
Page 107 and 108: iwhere C is the income adjustment n
Page 109 and 110: complete. If there are more than on
Page 111 and 112: Horowitz, Joel. L. and Jordan. J. L
Page 113 and 114: CHAPTER 7:by Dennis M. KING and Lis
Page 115 and 116: Box 7.1 Definition of terms related
Page 117 and 118: Box 7.2 Categories of Ecosystem Ser
Page 119 and 120: Box 7.4 Dollar-based ecosystem valu
Page 121 and 122: Non-monetary indicators of ecosyste
Page 123 and 124: Figure 7.1 Effects of Wetland Locat
Page 125: description, and that the usefulnes
Page 129 and 130: wetlands, for example, results in F
Page 131 and 132: (1) Functional CapacityIndexFigure
Page 133 and 134: constituents of runoff can be predi
Page 135 and 136: Service(on or off site)Recreational
Page 137 and 138: Table 7.3 Service Risk Sub-index De
Page 139 and 140: Measuring Service Preference Weight
Page 141 and 142: Table 7.4 Illustration of Paired Co
Page 143 and 144: PART 4151
Page 145 and 146: Ecological foundations for biodiver
Page 147 and 148: Phenotic diversity is a measure bas
Page 149 and 150: Operationalisation of the biotic-ri
Page 151 and 152: ten attributes that could score a m
Page 153 and 154: The choice of the scale relates to
Page 155 and 156: Nature measurement methodIn 1995, t
Page 157 and 158: Table 8.4 Value orientations and en
Page 159 and 160: Table 8.5 Identification of monetar
Page 161 and 162: Table 8.6 Valuation studiesSingle s
Page 163 and 164: in waterway systems for nine impact
Page 165 and 166: to other contexts, conditions, loca
Page 167 and 168: ReferencesAkcakaya, H.R. (1994).
Page 169 and 170: de Groot, R.S. (1994). “Environme
Page 171 and 172: Mace, G. M. & S. N. Stuart. (1994).
Page 173 and 174: Turner, R.K., Perrings, C. and Folk
Page 175 and 176: John A. DixonJohn A. Dixon is Lead
Page 177 and 178:
Robert O’NeillDr. O’Neill recei
Page 179 and 180:
Steven StewartSteven Stewart is Ass
Page 181:
OECD PUBLICATIONS, 2, rue André-Pa
show all

Valuation of Biodiversity Benefits (OECD)

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?