Kerry Turner

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES AND ECONOMIC THEORY: INTEGRATION FOR POLICY‐RELEVANT RESEARCH

It has become essential in policy and decision-making circles to think about the economic benefits (in addition to moral and scientific motivations) humans derive from well-functioning ecosystems. The concept of ecosystem services has been developed to address this link between ecosystems and human welfare. Since policy decisions are often evaluated through cost-benefit assessments, an economic analysis can help make ecosystem service research operational. In this paper we provide some simple economic analyses to discuss key concepts involved in formalizing ecosystem service research. These include the distinction between services and benefits, understanding the importance of marginal ecosystem changes, formalizing the idea of a safe minimum standard for ecosystem service provision, and discussing how to capture the public benefits of ecosystem services. We discuss how the integration of economic concepts and ecosystem services can provide policy and decision makers with a fuller spectrum of information for making conservation-conversion trade-offs. We include the results from a survey of the literature and a questionnaire of researchers regarding how ecosystem service research can be integrated into the policy process. We feel this discussion of economic concepts will be a practical aid for ecosystem service research to become more immediately policy relevant.

Biodiversity Conservation and the Millennium Development Goals

Any near-term gains in reducing extreme poverty will be maintained only if environmental sustainability is also achieved. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are designed to inspire efforts to improve peoples lives by, among other priorities, halving extreme poverty by 2015 (1). Analogously, concern about global decline in biodiversity and degradation of ecosystem services (2) gave rise in 1992 to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The CBD target “to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss” was incorporated into the MDGs in 2002. Our lack of progress toward the 2010 target (3, 4) could undermine achievement of the MDGs and poverty reduction in the long term. With increasing global challenges, such as population growth, climate change, and overconsumption of ecosystem services, we need further integration of the poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation agendas.

Primary and Secondary Values of Wetland Ecosystems

Wetlands are continuously degraded in many parts of the world. One reason is the lack of the appropriate valuation of the multifunctionality of wetland. In an attempt to improve the understanding of the importance of this feature of wetlands an alternative classification of values is suggested; primary and secondary values. Primary value refers to the development and maintenance of ecosystems — their self-organizing capacity. Secondary values are defined as the outputs, life-support functions and services, generated by wetlands. Methods for measuring these values are discussed. Three case studies are presented which use different valuation methods and which to different degrees capture the primary and secondary values. It is concluded that only part of the total wetland value can be captured in monetary terms.

The Market Triumph of Ecotourism: An Economic Investigation of the Private and Social Benefits of Competing Land Uses in the Peruvian Amazon

Annual revenue flow to developing countries for ecotourism (or nature-based tourism) could be as large as US

Closing the ecotourism-conservation loop in the Peruvian Amazon

210×1012, providing an enormous financial incentive against habitat loss and exploitation. However, is ecotourism the most privately and/or socially valuable use of rainforest land? The question is rarely answered because the relevant data, estimates of profits and fixed costs, are rarely available. We present a social cost-benefit analysis of land use in an ecotourism cluster in the Tambopata region of Amazonian Peru. The net present value of ecotourism-controlled land is given by the producer surplus (profits plus fixed costs of ecotourism lodges): US

Steps toward a shared governance response for achieving Good Environmental Status in the Mediterranean Sea

1,158 ha−1, which is higher than all currently practiced alternatives, including unsustainable logging, ranching, and agriculture. To our knowledge, this is the first sector-wide study of profitability and producer surplus in a developing-country ecotourism sector and the first to compare against equivalent measures for a spectrum of alternative uses. We also find that ecotourism-controlled land sequesters between 5.3 to 8.7 million tons of above-ground carbon, which is equivalent to between 3000–5000 years of carbon emissions from the domestic component of air and surface travel between the gateway city of Cusco and the lodges, at 2005 emission rates. Ecotourism in Tambopata has successfully monetized the hedonic value of wild nature in Amazonian Peru, and justifies the maintenance of intact rainforest over all alternative uses on narrow economic grounds alone.

Environmental Economics and Environmental Policy Instruments: Introduction and Overview

Annual revenue flow to developing countries for ecotourism could be as large as US

Ecology. Biodiversity conservation and the Millennium Development Goals.

29 billion, providing an enormous financial incentive against habitat loss and exploitation. However, surprisingly little quantitative evidence exists on the profitability of the rainforest ecotourism sector, which determines the incentive and capacity of the sector to engage in conservation. A Peruvian rainforest ecotourism cluster generated US

Biodiversity conservation and achievement of the Millennium Development Goals

11.6 million in 2005. The after-tax profit margin was at least 14% and has increased with tourist volume. High profitability, coupled with new legislation, has allowed operators to put 54 358 ha of rainforest near the new Interoceanica Sur highway under private management and to engage in conservation actions. A previously published microeconomic contract model of protected-areas management identifies two key features of rainforest tourism that link ecotourism to conservation: (1) tourists demand an immersive experience, which incentivizes the acquisition of large amounts of forest cover, and (2) institutional reforms have increased the expected effectiveness of conservation actions. In Peru, these conditions appear to be met, so that profits from ecotourism can combine with new land tenure rights to create a governance structure within which the industry can act as an independently financed partner to the conservation community.

Reply to Lindbert and McCool: 'A critique of environmental carrying capacity as a means of managing the effects of tourism development'

The Mediterranean region is of fundamental importance to Europe given its strategic position. The responsibility for its overall ecosystem integrity is shared by European Union Member States (EU-MS) and other Mediterranean countries. A juxtaposition of overlapping governance instruments occurred recently in the region, with the implementation of both the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) for EU-MS and the Ecosystem Approach Strategy (ECAP) for all Mediterranean countries, including EU-MS. Both MSFD and ECAP are structured around vision-driven processes to achieve Good Environmental Status and a Healthy Environment, respectively. These processes have clear ecosystem-based, integrated policy objectives to guarantee the preservation and integrity of Mediterranean marine ecosystem goods and services. However, adoption of these instruments, especially those related to the new EUMS directives on marine policy, could result in a governance gap in addition to the well-known economic gap between the EU and the non-EU political blocs. We identify two complementary requirements for effective implementation of both MSFD and ECAP that could work together to reduce this gap, to ensure a better alignment between MSFD and ECAP and better planning for stakeholder engagement. These are key issues for the future success of these instruments in a Mediterranean region where discrepancies between societal and ecological objectives may pose a challenge to these processes.