Natural Capital Accounting and Ecosystem Services Within the Water–Energy–Food Nexus: Local and Regional Contexts

2017 ◽  
pp. 63-78
Author(s):  
Natasha Tang Kai
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Natural Capital ◽  
Natural Capital Accounting

scholarly journals Nature as capital: Advancing and incorporating ecosystem services in United States federal policies and programs

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (24) ◽  
pp. 7383-7389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Schaefer ◽  
Erica Goldman ◽  
Ann M. Bartuska ◽  
Ariana Sutton-Grier ◽  
Jane Lubchenco
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Natural Capital ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Use Of Resources ◽  
Natural Capital Accounting ◽  
Policies And Programs ◽  
Policies And Practices

The concept of nature as capital is gaining visibility in policies and practices in both the public and private sectors. This change is due to an improved ability to assess and value ecosystem services, as well as to a growing recognition of the potential of an ecosystem services approach to make tradeoffs in decision making more transparent, inform efficient use of resources, enhance resilience and sustainability, and avoid unintended negative consequences of policy actions. Globally, governments, financial institutions, and corporations have begun to incorporate natural capital accounting in their policies and practices. In the United States, universities, nongovernmental organizations, and federal agencies are actively collaborating to develop and apply ecosystem services concepts to further national environmental and economic objectives. Numerous federal agencies have begun incorporating these concepts into land use planning, water resources management, and preparations for, and responses to, climate change. Going forward, well-defined policy direction will be necessary to institutionalize ecosystem services approaches in federal agencies, as well as to guide intersector and interdisciplinary collaborative research and development efforts. In addition, a new generation of decision support tools are needed to further the practical application of ecosystem services principles in policymaking and commercial activities. Improved performance metrics are needed, as are mechanisms to monitor the status of ecosystem services and assess the environmental and economic impacts of policies and programs. A greater national and international financial commitment to advancing ecosystem services and natural capital accounting would likely have broad, long-term economic and environmental benefits.

Biophysical and economic assessment of four ecosystem services for natural capital accounting in Italy

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 101207
Author(s):  
A. Capriolo ◽  
R.G. Boschetto ◽  
R.A. Mascolo ◽  
S. Balbi ◽  
F. Villa
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Natural Capital ◽  
Economic Assessment ◽  
Natural Capital Accounting

scholarly journals Valuing Marine Ecosystems - Taking into account the value of ecosystem benefits in the Blue Economy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie Austen ◽  
Peder Andersen ◽  
Claire Armstrong ◽  
Ralf Döring ◽  
Stephen Hynes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Ecosystem Service ◽  
Natural Capital ◽  
Marine Ecosystem ◽  
Ecosystem Valuation ◽  
Natural Capital Accounting ◽  
Support Policy ◽  
Marine Ecosystem Services

The main aim of this publication is to highlight the current thinking in ecosystem service valuation for the marine environment. Valuation of the benefits stemming from marine ecosystem services, including often unnoticed benefits to society, can help to assess the long-term sustainability of blue growth, support policy development and marine management decisions, and raise awareness of the importance of the marine environment to society and in the economy. Recommendations are made on how to incorporate outputs from valuation studies into the traditional analyses used in resource and environmental economics and into the European marine policy landscape and related management and decision making choices. The publication is primarily aimed at stakeholders interested in valuation of marine ecosystem services and natural capital accounting, spanning diverse roles from commissioning, managing, funding and coordinating, to developing, implementing, or advising on, marine ecosystem service and natural capital programmes. Such programmes will have strategic and policy drivers but their main purpose may vary from predominantly research driven science to provision of valuation data and reporting to legally-binding regulations or directives. The main focus is on European capabilities but set in a global context with the various actors spanning a variety of geographical scales from national to regional and European. Key stakeholder organizations include environmental or other agencies; marine research institutions, their researchers and operators; international and regional initiatives and programmes; national, regional and European policy makers and their advisors. It will also be of interest to the wider marine and maritime research and policy community. The publication recommends:1.Marine ecosystem valuation should be used to support policy making, regulation and management and decision making;2.The quality and availability of monetary and non-monetary valuation data should be improved and increased through research, development and implementation actions;3.The spatial and temporal dimensions of ecosystem valuation need to be mapped and their implications for policy and management decisions assessed;4.In order to strengthen the use and derivation of ecosystem service values to support policy, regulation and management, underpinning research and development actions should be undertaken:a.To improve understanding of the role of marine biodiversity and ecosystem processes in providing services and benefits;b.To improve modelling approaches to support ecosystem valuation and decision making;5.Systems to enable and use marine natural capital accounting and enhance the experimental ecosystem accounts should be further developed and implemented including:a. A natural capital portfolio approach utilising existing marine data sets and assessment results and addressing scale and aggregation as well as ecosystem degradation;b.Valuation methods for both ecosystem services and assets that can be standardised and are compatible with National Accounting;c.Payment for marine ecosystem services and other financing mechanisms to restore marine natural capital and improve its sustainable use.

scholarly journals Distributional Issues in Natural Capital Accounting: An Application to Land Ownership and Ecosystem Services in Scotland

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giles Atkinson ◽  
Paola Ovando
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Natural Capital ◽  
Relative Concentration ◽  
Land Ownership ◽  
Private Land ◽  
Urban Settlements ◽  
Natural Capital Accounting ◽  
Land Holdings ◽  
Pollution Removal

AbstractAccounting for ecosystems is increasingly central to natural capital accounting. What is missing from this, however, is an answer to questions about how natural capital is distributed. That is, who consumes ecosystem services and who owns or manages the underlying asset(s) that give rise to ecosystem services. In this paper, we examine the significance of the ownership of land on which ecosystem assets (or ecosystem types) is located in the context of natural capital accounting. We illustrate this in an empirical application to two ecosystem services and a range of ecosystem types and land ownership in Scotland, a context in which land reform debates are longstanding. Our results indicate the relative importance of private land in ecosystem service supply, rather than land held by the public sector. We find relative concentration of ownership for land providing comparatively high amounts of carbon sequestration. For air pollution removal, however, the role of smaller to medium sized, mostly privately owned, land holdings closer to urban settlements becomes more prominent. The contributions in this paper, we argue, represent important first steps in anticipating distributional impacts of natural capital (and related) policy in natural capital accounts as well as connecting these frameworks to broader concerns about wealth disparities across and within countries.

scholarly journals Trends and Evolution in the Concept of Marine Ecosystem Services: An Overview

Water ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 2060
Author(s):  
Elvira Buonocore ◽  
Umberto Grande ◽  
Pier Paolo Franzese ◽  
Giovanni F. Russo
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Alternative Assessment ◽  
Natural Capital ◽  
Marine Ecosystem ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Marine Ecosystems ◽  
Global Ocean ◽  
Coastal Protection ◽  
Policy Dialogue ◽  
Marine Ecosystem Services

The biotic and abiotic assets of the marine environment form the “marine natural capital” embedded in the global ocean. Marine natural capital provides the flow of “marine ecosystem services” that are directly used or enjoyed by people providing benefits to human well-being. They include provisioning services (e.g., food), regulation and maintenance services (e.g., carbon sequestration and storage, and coastal protection), and cultural services (e.g., tourism and recreational benefits). In recent decades, human activities have increased the pressures on marine ecosystems, often leading to ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss and, in turn, affecting their ability to provide benefits to humans. Therefore, effective management strategies are crucial to the conservation of healthy and diverse marine ecosystems and to ensuring their long-term generation of goods and services. Biophysical, economic, and sociocultural assessments of marine ecosystem services are much needed to convey the importance of natural resources to managers and policy makers supporting the development and implementation of policies oriented for the sustainable management of marine resources. In addition, the accounting of marine ecosystem service values can be usefully complemented by their mapping to enable the identification of priority areas and management strategies and to facilitate science–policy dialogue. Given this premise, this study aims to review trends and evolution in the concept of marine ecosystem services. In particular, the global scientific literature on marine ecosystem services is explored by focusing on the following main aspects: the definition and classification of marine ecosystem services; their loss due to anthropogenic pressures, alternative assessment, and mapping approaches; and the inclusion of marine ecosystem services into policy and decision-making processes.

scholarly journals From natural capital accounting to natural capital banking

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Vardon ◽  
Heather Keith ◽  
Peter Burnett ◽  
David B. Lindenmayer
Keyword(s):  
Natural Capital ◽  
Natural Capital Accounting

Environmental impacts of smart local energy systems

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Robinson ◽  
Alona Armstrong
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Natural Capital ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Energy Systems ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Simulation Modelling ◽  
Local Energy ◽  
Energy Technologies ◽  
Degraded Ecosystems

<p>Energy systems around the world are rapidly transitioning towards decentralised and digitalised systems as countries aim to decarbonise their economies. However, broader environmental effects of the upscaling of these smart local energy systems (SLES) beyond reducing carbon emissions remain unclear. Land-use change associated with increased deployment of renewables, new infrastructures required for energy distribution and storage, and resource extraction for emerging energy technologies may have significant environmental impacts, including consequences for ecosystems within and beyond energy system project localities. This has major implications for biodiversity, natural capital stocks and provision of ecosystem services, the importance of which are increasingly recognised in development policy at local to international scales. This study assessed current understanding of the broader environmental impacts and potential co-benefits of SLES through a global Rapid Evidence Assessment of peer-reviewed academic literature, with a critical evaluation and synthesis of existing knowledge of effects of SLES on biodiversity, natural capital and ecosystem services. There was a striking overall lack of evidence of the environmental impacts of SLES. The vast majority of studies identified considered only energy technology CO<sub>2</sub> emissions through simulation modelling; almost no studies made explicit reference to effects on ecosystems. This highlights an urgent need to improve whole system understanding of environmental impacts of SLES, crucial to avoid unintended ecosystem degradation as a result of climate change mitigation. This will also help to identify potential techno-ecological synergies and opportunities for improvement of degraded ecosystems alongside reaching decarbonisation goals.</p>

Vulnerability and Importance of Arctic Wetlands as large-scale nature-based solutions for Sustainability in a Changing Climate

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisie Kåresdotter ◽  
Zahra Kalantari
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Natural Capital ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
Indigenous Populations ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Arctic Wetlands

<p>Wetlands as large-scale nature-based solutions (NBS) provide multiple ecosystem services of local, regional, and global importance. Knowledge concerning location and vulnerability of wetlands, specifically in the Arctic, is vital to understand and assess the current status and future potential changes in the Arctic. Using available high-resolution wetland databases together with datasets on soil wetness and soil types, we created the first high-resolution map with full coverage of Arctic wetlands. Arctic wetlands' vulnerability is assessed for the years 2050, 2075, and 2100 by utilizing datasets of permafrost extent and projected mean annual average temperature from HadGEM2-ES climate model outputs for three change scenarios (RCP2.6, 4.5, and 8.5). With approximately 25% of Arctic landmass covered with wetlands and 99% being in permafrost areas, Arctic wetlands are highly vulnerable to changes in all scenarios, apart from RCP2.6 where wetlands remain largely stable. Climate change threatens Arctic wetlands and can impact wetland functions and services. These changes can adversely affect the multiple services this sort of NBS can provide in terms of great social, economic, and environmental benefits to human beings. Consequently, negative changes in Arctic wetland ecosystems can escalate land-use conflicts resulting from natural capital exploitation when new areas become more accessible for use. Limiting changes to Arctic wetlands can help maintain their ecosystem services and limit societal challenges arising from thawing permafrost wetlands, especially for indigenous populations dependent on their ecosystem services. This study highlights areas subject to changes and provides useful information to better plan for a sustainable and social-ecological resilient Arctic.</p><p>Keywords: Arctic wetlands, permafrost thaw, regime shift vulnerability, climate projection</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document