Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T02:42:19.438Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Assessing biophysical and economic dimensions of societal value: an example for water ecosystem services in Madagascar

from Part III - Assessing water ecosystem services

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2015

Ferdinando Villa
Affiliation:
Basque Foundation for Science
Rosimeiry Portela
Affiliation:
Conservation International
Laura Onofri
Affiliation:
University Cà Foscari of Venice
Paulo A. L. D. Nunes
Affiliation:
University of Padova
Glenn-Marie Lange
Affiliation:
World Bank
Julia Martin-Ortega
Affiliation:
The James Hutton Institute, Scotland
Robert C. Ferrier
Affiliation:
The James Hutton Institute, Scotland
Iain J. Gordon
Affiliation:
The James Hutton Institute, Scotland
Shahbaz Khan
Affiliation:
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), France
Get access

Summary

13.1 INTRODUCTION

Policy decisions are often based on an assessment of value. However, the definition of value is highly context-dependent and policy decisions are ultimately a multiple-objectives problem, containing internal trade-offs that make alternative actions difficult to assess and rank. This chapter provides a demonstration of how to operationalize an ecosystem services-based approach, as defined in Chapter 2 of this book, to assess the social and economic value of water from a pluralistic viewpoint that can better support decision-making. Our approach to the biophysical analysis emphasizes explicitly identified beneficiaries (core element 1) along with an assessment and mapping of physical flows to them (core element 2). The biophysical interpretation is complemented by an analysis of economic productivity of water and by a policy analysis where the biophysical and economic analysis are integrated and discussed (core element 3), and implications of alternative management scenarios (protected versus non-protected areas) are addressed (core element 4). Notably, we quantify four key dimensions of ecosystem services, moving beyond the purely economic viewpoint that has dominated the policy translation of ecosystem services assessments so far. These are:

  1. • Input productivity: the relationship between inputs and final output, estimated in this study as water productivity in four selected economic sectors.

  2. • Economic value: the value of marginal productivity, in terms of the increases in economic productivity with the increase of an additional unit of input (in this case, per additional unit of water).

  3. • Sustainability of supply: defined as the ratio between the amounts of ecosystem-provided benefit (here: water services) and the estimated maximum demand that can be met for it in the same conditions.

  4. • Quality of supply: estimated by assessing the influence of the natural environment in preserving the quality of the ecosystem service.

Our study was performed in the context of a World Bank-led global initiative that aims to integrate natural capital values into national account systems.

Type
Chapter
Information
Water Ecosystem Services
A Global Perspective
, pp. 110 - 118
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bagstad, K., Villa, F., Johnson, G. W., & Voigt, B. (2011). ARIES: ARtificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services: a guide to models and data. ARIES report series 122.
Bagstad, K. J., Johnson, G. W., Voigt, B. & Villa, F. (2013). Spatial dynamics of ecosystem service flows: a comprehensive approach to quantifying actual services. Ecosystem Services 4, 117–125.Google Scholar
Bagstad, K. J., Villa, F., Batker, D., et al. (2014). From theoretical to actual ecosystem services: mapping beneficiaries and spatial flows in ecosystem service assessments. Ecology and Society 19(2), art. 64.Google Scholar
Boyd, J. & Banzhaf, S. (2007). What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics 63(2–3), 616–626.Google Scholar
Brouwer, C., Goffeau, A., & Heilbloem, M. (1985). Irrigation Water Management Training Manual. FAO, Rome.
Costanza, R., dArge, R., deGroot, R., et al. (1997). The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387(6630), 253–260.Google Scholar
Daily, G. C., Polasky, S., Goldstein, J., et al. (2009). Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7(1), 21–28.Google Scholar
Eigenbrod, F., Armsworth, P. R., Anderson, B. J., et al. (2010). The impact of proxy-based methods on mapping the distribution of ecosystem services. Journal of Applied Ecology 47(2), 377–385.Google Scholar
Fisher, B., Turner, K., Zylstra, M., et al. (2008). Ecosystem services and economic theory: integration for policy-relevant research. Ecological Applications 18(8), 2050–2067.Google Scholar
Fisher, B., Turner, R. K., Burgess, N. D., et al. (2011). Measuring, modeling and mapping ecosystem services in the Eastern Arc Mountains of Tanzania. Progress in Physical Geography 35(5), 595–611.Google Scholar
Hannah, L., Dave, R., Lowry, P. P., et al. (2008). Climate change adaptation for conservation in Madagascar. Biology Letters 4(5), 590–594.Google Scholar
Johnson, G. W., Bagstad, K. J., Snapp, R. & Villa, F. (2010). Service Path Attribute Networks (SPANs): spatially quantifying the flow of ecosystem services from landscapes to people. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6016, 238–253.Google Scholar
Johnson, G. W., Bagstad, K., Snapp, R. & Villa, F. (2012). Service Path Attribution Networks (SPANs): a network flow approach to ecosystem service assessment. International Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Information Systems 3(2), 54–71.Google Scholar
Kareiva, P. M., Tallis, H., Ricketts, T., Daily, G. C. & Polasky, S. (2011). Natural Capital : Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services. Oxford University Press, New York.
Kull, C. A. (2000). Deforestation, erosion, and fire: degradation myths in the environmental history of Madagascar. Environment and History 6 423–450.Google Scholar
Martinez-Harms, M. J. & Balvanera, P. (2012). Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management 8(1–2), 17–25.Google Scholar
Portela, R., Nunes, P. A. L. D., Onofri, L., Villa, F., Shepard, A., & Lange, G. M. (2012). Assessing and valuing ecosytem services in the Ankeniheny–Zahamena Corridor, Madagascar: A Demonstration Case Study for the Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES) Global Partnership. World Bank, New York.
Rakotoarison, H. F. (2003). Evaluation Economique des Bassins Versants Dans Les Regions de Fierenana et D'Andekaleka. Mémoire de fin d'Etudes. Antananrivo. Université d'Antananarivo, Madagascar.
Tallis, H. & Polasky, S. (2009). Mapping and valuing ecosystem services as an approach for conservation and natural-resource management. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1162, 265–283.Google Scholar
Troy, A. & Wilson, M. A. (2006). Mapping ecosystem services: practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer. Ecological Economics 60(2), 435–449.Google Scholar
UNDP (2011). Situation des autres usages de l'eau dans le Grand Sud Malgache. Rapport Provisoire.
Varian, H. R. (1992). Microeconomic Analysis. W. W. Norton, New York.
Vigerstol, K. L. & Aukema, J. E. (2011). A comparison of tools for modeling freshwater ecosystem services. Journal of Environmental Management 92(10), 2403–2409.Google Scholar
Villa, F. (2007). A semantic framework and software design to enable the transparent integration, reorganization and discovery of natural systems knowledge. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 29(1), 79–96.Google Scholar
Villa, F. (2009). Semantically-driven meta-modelling: automating model construction in an environmental decision support system for the assessment of ecosystem services flow. Information Technology in Environmental Engineering. In Athanasiadis, I. N., Mitkas, P. A., Rizzoli, A. E., & Gomez, J. Marx. Springer, New York.
Villa, F., Bagstad, K., Voigt, B., et al. (2014a). A methodology for robust and adaptable ecosystem services assessment. PLoS One 9(3).Google Scholar
Villa, F., Voigt, B. & Erickson, J. (2014b). New perspectives in ecosystem services science as instruments to understand environmental securities. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B: Biological Sciences 369(1639).Google Scholar
Waage, S., Kester, C. & Armstrong, K. (2013). Global Public Trends in Ecosystem Services, 2009–2012. BSR, San Francisco, CA.
Wallace, K. J. (2007). Classification of ecosystem services: problems and solutions. Biological Conservation 139(3–4), 235–246.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×