The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity Biodiversity and Water Patrick ten Brink TEEB for Policy Makers Co-ordinator Head of Brussels Office Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) CBD COP 10 Water Ecosystems and Climate Change Room 211A level 1B 16:30 – 17:45 22 October 2010 Nagoya, Japan 1
20
Embed
TEEB biodiversity and Water Patrick ten Brink of IEEP presentation at water day CBD COP10 Nagoya 22 Oct 2010
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
Biodiversity and Water
Patrick ten BrinkTEEB for Policy Makers Co-ordinator
Head of Brussels OfficeInstitute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP)
Valuation and policy making:from valuing natural assets to decisions
To underline the value of natural assets & help determine where ecosystem services can be provided at lower cost than man-made technological alternatives
e.g. water purification and provision, flood control
Conservation / restoration and other Investments decisionsPES instruments at different scales and by different stakeholders
Avoided cost of alternative water purification and provisione.g. USA-NY – Catskills-Delaware watershede.g. New Zealand – Te Papanui Park - watere.g. Mexico – PSAH nationally, and local application eg Saltillo City, Zapaliname mountains
Avoided loss of output e.g. Venezuela: PAs to avoid sedimentation & loss of hydro output
Lower cost of flood control e.g. Vietnam and restoring/investing in Mangroves - cheaper than dyke maintenancee.g. Belgium Schelde river: natural flood defence - cheaper than man-made infrastructure
Multiple Objectives : PSAH MexicoPES to forest owners to preserve forestManage and not convert forest• e.g. cloud forest US$ 40 per ha/year;• e.g. other tree-covered land US$ 30 per ha/year
Hydrological services: Aquifer Recharge; Improved surface water quality, Reduce frequency & damage from flooding
Munoz 2010); Muñoz-Piña et al. 2008; Muñoz-Piña et al. 2007.
Results: PSAH reduced the rate of deforestation from 1.6 % to 0.6 %. 18.3 thousand hectares of avoided deforestation Avoided GHG emissions this equates 3.2 million tCO2e.
Carbon Values 366 millionAir Protection Values 69 millionWatershed Values 409 millionPollination Values 360 millionBiodiversity Value 98 millionRecreation Value 95 millionAgricultural Land Value
329 million
Multiple Benefits: at the Urban level – City of Toronto• Estimating the value of the Greenbelt for the City of Toronto• The greenbelt around Toronto offers $ 2.7 billion worth of non-market
ecological services with an average value of $ 3, 571 / ha.→ Implication re: future management of the greater city area ?
Source: Wilson, S. J. (2008) Map: http://greenbeltalliance.ca/images/Greebelt_2_update.jpg
• WfW is a public works programme in South Africa which protects water resources by stopping the spread of invasive plants.
• Municipal government contracting workers to manage public land sustainably
Results - More than 300 projects in all nine South African provinces. • Employed around 20,000 people per year, • 52 per cent of them women4, and • also provided skills training, health and HIV/AIDS education to participants.• costs to rehabilitate catchments range from 200-700 EUR/ha (Turpie et al. 2008)
• benefits may reach a 40 year NPV of 47,000 EUR/ha (see TEEB Foundations, 2010)
WfW: The Manalana wetland (near Bushbuckridge, Mpumalanga)
• severely degraded by erosion that threatened to consume the entire system• WfW public works programme intervened in 2006 to reduce the erosion and
improve the wetland’s ability to continue providing its beneficial services
Results • The value of livelihood benefits from degraded wetland was just 34 % of what could be achieved after investment in ecosystem rehabilitation;• Rehabilitated wetland now contributes provisioning services at a net return of 297 EUR/household/year;• Livelihood benefits ~ 182,000 EUR by the rehabilitated wetland; x2 costs is • The Manalana wetland acts as a safety net for households.
Sources: Pollard et al. 2008’; Wunder et al 2008a; http://www.dwaf.gov.za/wfw/
Security and meeting objectives working with nature: Flood Control and the Schelde : Belgium
• Major infrastructural works were planned - deepening fairway to the harbour of Antwerp and complementary measures to protect the land from storm floods
• CBA carried out, including ecosystem services (recreational value) of new floodplains.
• Evaluation Result: an intelligent combination of dikes and floodplains can offer more benefits at lower cost than more drastic measures such as a storm surge barrier near Antwerp.
• 14 vs 41 year payback
• Policy Response / Action: The Dutch & Flemish gov’ts approved an integrated management plan consisting of the restoration of approximately 2500 ha of intertidal and 3000 ha of non-tidal areas
University of Antwerp and VITO (2004) in TEEB in National Policy (2011)
Vittel mineral water, France Perrot-Maître 2006; Wunder and Wertz-Kanounnikoff 2009
Since 1993, PES programme in its 5100 ha catchment in the Vosges Mountains.26 farmers paid to adopt best low-impact practices in dairy farming
Payment levelsAve. payments are EUR 200 ha/year over a five year transition period and up to 150,000 EUR per farm to cover costs of new equipment. Contracts are long-term (18-30 years), with payments adjusted to opportunity costs on a farm-by-farm basis.
Making it Happen• built on a 4-years research by the France’s INRA (National Institute for Agricultural Research )• took 10 years to become operational• Success because of economic rationale + tenacity of Vittel
Similar case for Beer ! Rochefort, Belgium . What cases do you know of ?
IEEP is an independent, not-for-profit institute dedicated to the analysis, understanding and promotion of policies for a sustainable environment www.ieep.euManual of EU Environmental Policy: http://www.earthscan.co.uk/JournalsHome/MEEP/tabid/102319/Default.aspx