Risks and rewards of quantifying nature's "ecosystem services"

Symposium takes on the ecological science underpinning dollar assessments of 
ecosystem services at the 97th annual meeting of the Ecological Society of 
America in Portland, Oregon

For immediate release: 21 July 2012


How much is a stream worth? Can we put a dollar value on a wetland? Some 
conservation proponents have moved to establish the economic value of 
"ecosystem services," the benefits that nature provides to people. The approach 
translates the beauty and utility of a wetland into pounds of phosphorus 
removed from agricultural runoff, Joules of heat pulled out of urban 
wastewater, and inches of floodwater absorbed upstream of riverside communities.

The idea of trading ecosystem services has surged in popularity since the 2005 
United Nations Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. But not all ecologists are 
enthusiastic about ecosystem services markets. In a half day symposium at the 
Ecological Society of America's annual meeting this August, experts will 
discuss the science underlying ecosystem services and the benefits and pitfalls 
for conservation.

"If you don't put a dollar on it, decision makers are not going to take it 
seriously," says symposium speaker Bobby Cochran, Executive Director of the 
Willamette Partnership. He says framing a natural system as an economic good 
puts it into a context where decision makers recognize its value. Reframing 
conservation in terms of benefits to people helps break down old stalemates 
between conservation advocates and other economic interests.

"Natural ecosystems provide us with numerous services, not all of which are 
easily quantified," says symposium organizer Emily Bernhardt of Duke 
University. "A challenge inherent in new ecosystem service markets is ensuring 
that commodifying one or more services doesn't lead to unintended consequences 
for non-target ecosystem attributes." Critics would prefer to invest 
comprehensively in the maintenance of ecosystems, with the understanding that 
people extract benefits from these resources that may not be easily captured by 
economic instruments.Bernhardt has recruited a slate of speakers with opposing 
views on the effectiveness of compartmentalizing nature into economic services 
with monetary values. To stir debate, she will push speakers to address 
tendentious questions, including:

* What variables have you measured as proxies for ecosystem services? How well 
do they match? Where are the uncertainties?
* How do you choose which ecosystem services to include in your analyses, and 
which to leave out?
* How does maximizing the profitability or effectiveness of one aspect of an 
ecosystem affect other essential ecosystem properties - particularly those that 
are more difficult to quantify?

Cochran has run into these hard choices on projects for the Willamette 
Partnership, where he has to balance the complexity of ecosystems against 
clarity of implementation. "Our biggest enemy in the conservation field is lack 
of trust and credibility," he says. "The more complicated a program is to 
implement, the harder it is to breed trust and credibility." 

Trust and credibility also grows from good experiences with programs that 
produce what they promise. Successful development of markets in ecosystem 
services, says Cochran, requires a sound understanding of the ecological 
systems in play, and the research that can provide that understanding. "There's 
just so much about ecosystems that we do not know. Ecosystems are changing 
dynamically, and the pace of change is increasing," he says. "If we don't have 
good science, none of this stuff works." 


SYMPOSIUM 23 - Commodifying Nature: The Scientific Basis for Ecosystem Services 
Valuation In Environmental Decision Making. Friday, August 10, 2012: 8:00 
AM-11:30 AM, Portland Blrm 252, Oregon Convention Center.

Organizer: Emily S. Bernhardt, Duke University
Moderator/ Co-organizer: Jana E. Compton, US Environmental Protection Agency

Speakers:
* Robert Costanza, Institute for Sustainable Solutions, Portland State 
University, Portland, OR 
* Sarah E. Gergel Centre for Applied Conservation Research, University of 
British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
* Jennifer L. Morse, Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, NY 
* Bobby Cochran, Willamette Partnership, Hillsboro, OR 
* Anne Neale, US Environmental Protection Agency
* Morgan Robertson, Geography, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 
* Guy Ziv, Stanford University, Natural Capital Project and Rebecca 
Chaplin-Kramer, Natural Capital Project, Stanford University, Stanford, CA


see the program at: 
http://eco.confex.com/eco/2012/webprogrampreliminary/Session7837.html

Reply via email to