The TEEB Report:
inspiring
conservation
salman.hussain@sac.ac.uk
44 131 535 4307
1
1. TEEB: Overview
2. Inspiring change: Marine ecosystem
services valuation for the UK Marine and
Coastal Access Bill
3. TEEB: Interim Findings and next steps
2
TEEB - context
“Potsdam Initiative – Biological
Diversity 2010”
1) The economic significance of
the global loss of biological
diversity
the global economic benefit of
biological diversity,
the costs of the loss of
biodiversity and
the failure to take protective
measures versus the costs of
effective conservation.
3
TEEB: Goals and aspirations
• To mainstream the economics of
ecosystems and biodiversity
• To review extensively the current state of
the science and economics of ecosystems
and biodiversity, and recommend valuation
and evaluation frameworks and
methodologies
• To address the needs of the end-users
4
TEEB- Final Reports
Science & Economics
Foundations, Policy
D0
Costs & Costs of Inaction
Policy Evaluation
for Policy-Makers
D1
Decision Support
for Administrators
D2
Business Risks
& Opportunities
D3
Consumer
Ownership
D4
5
The UK Marine Bill – Marine Nature
Conservation Proposalsvaluing the benefits
Published in Ecological Economics (Hussain et al., 2010)
Dominic Moran
Salman Hussain
Abdulai Fofana
Chris Frid
Odette Paramour
Leonie Robinson
Alex Winrow-Giffin
6
Marine Protected Areas
• UN World Summit on Sustainable
Development: requires the establishment of
representative networks of marine protected
areas (MPAs) by 2012
• What is the economic rationale?
• Can such a policy intervention be
substantiated?
– Does the extant literature allow us to do so?
– Where are the gaps in the evidence base?
7
Background to the study
• Different drivers impact on marine ecosystems
• Study in Science (Halpern et al.,2008) applies a multi-scale
spatial model to analysis anthropogenic drivers of ecological
change in 20 marine ecosystems.
– 41% are strongly affected by multiple drivers.
• These drivers stimulate a shift in the production of
ecosystem goods and services (e.g. gas and climate
regulation)
• These services can be valued
• According to study in Nature (Costanza et al., 1997) service
provision by marine ecosystems constitutes around twothirds of the global total
8
Anthropogenic impacts
9
Objectives of the study
1. To estimate monetary economic benefits
derived from the marine protected areas
(MCZs) proposals being put forward as
part of the Marine and Coastal Access Bill;
2. Where agreed, to provide qualitative
benefits where monetised values cannot
be given; and
3. To provide the necessary detail for Impact
Assessment reporting
10
The three network scenarios
selected by Defra from Kaiser et al. (2006)
Scenario % of
OSPAR
Species
and
Habitats
included
% of UK
Marine
Landscapes
included
Network Additional Criteria
size
(1000
km2)
A
20%
10%
125.7
G
60%
10%
156
J
60%
10%
147.2
None
Commercial fishery
species spawning and
nursery areas preferred
to protect areas essential
to life history stages
Locked out sites licensed
for aggregate extraction,
dredging and dredge
disposal activities.
11
UK MCZs/UK Continental
Shelf limits
12
Management regimes defined
by UK government (Defra)
Conservation Objective
Highly Restricted
(HR-MCZ)
Management • General presumption
against fishing of all kinds,
Regime
Restrictions
Maintenance of Conservation
Status (MCS-MCZ)
• New development activities
permitted where in the public
all constructive, destructive interest (on social or economic
and disturbing activities
grounds)
• Recovery measures
• Existing activities to continue if
appropriate to the local
do not cause site condition to
situation (enhanced
deteriorate
restoration/aftercare measures • Restriction of bottom fishing gears
on expiry of operating
either spatially or temporally and
licences)
technical conservation measures
• Recovery measures appropriate to
the local situation (enhanced
restoration/aftercare measures on
13
expiry of operating licences)
Comparisons against the
baseline status quo
Ecosystem service
A
B
C
D
MCZ
inception
20
years
Time
14
MA categories pertaining to
terrestrial marine ecosystems
MEA Category
Provisioning
Supporting
Ecosystem Good/ Service
Definition
Food provision
Plants and animals taken from the marine environment for human
consumption
Raw materials
The extraction of marine organisms for all purposes, except human
consumption
Nutrient cycling
The storage, cycling and maintenance of availability of nutrients
mediated by living marine organism
Resilience and resistance
The extent to which ecosystems can absorb recurrent natural and human
perturbations and continue to regenerate without slowly degrading or
unexpectedly flipping to alternate states
Gas and climate regulation
The balance and maintenance of the chemical composition of the
atmosphere and oceans by marine living organisms
Biologically mediated habitat
Habitat which is provided by living marine organisms
Disturbance prevention and
alleviation
The dampening of environmental disturbances by biogenic structures
Bioremediation of waste
Removal of pollutants through storage, dilution, transformation and burial
Cultural heritage and identity
The cultural value associated with the marine environment e.g. for
religion, folk lore, painting, cultural and spiritual traditions
Cognitive values
Cognitive development, including education and research, resulting from
marine organisms
Leisure and recreation
The refreshment and stimulation of the human body and mind through
the perusal and engagement with, living marine organisms in their
natural environment
Regulating
Cultural
15
Synopsis of valuation
literature
Good/Service
Defra CRO 380
Monetary Value
Valuation method
Subjective Reliability
Food provision
£884.9 million
Market data
MEDIUM: value added factor
simplification
Raw materials
£116.5 million
Market data
MEDIUM: some data unavailable
Leisure and recreation
£1.4-£3.4 billion
Market data
LOW: based on market data but wide
variability
Resilience and resistance
N/A
N/A
N/A
Nutrient cycling
£ 1.3 billion
Market, WTP
MEDIUM: used 'open seas'
estimates
Gas and climate regulation
£8.2 billion
Avoidance cost
approach
HIGH: social cost of carbon used
Bioremediation of waste
N/A
N/A
N/A
Biologically mediated habitat
N/A
N/A
N/A
Disturbance prevention and
alleviation
0.44 billion
Avoidance cost
approach
MEDIUM: based on extrapolated
Cultural heritage and identity
N/A
N/A
N/A
Cognitive values
£453.3 million
Market data
HIGH: based on reliable survey data16
Methodological steps
1. For one hectare of the habitat/landscape what is the extra
provision of this ecosystem service brought about by
Highly Restricted or Less Restricted as compared with the
counterfactual?
2. How many hectares are there in each network scenario A,
G and J?
3. What proportion is going to be protected under Highly
Restricted and how much under Less Restricted?
•
Summing across all habitats/landscapes and across all
ecosystem services gives the total value of each network
17
UK Seabed Landscapes
18
Aphotic reef - UK
19
Aphotic reef – network
scenario A
20
Landscapes – Scenario A
21
Apportioning total value of an ecosystem
service across habitats/landscapes
• Code A: biological partitioning
– (area/impact per unit area)
nutrient recycling
gas and climate regulation
raw materials
bioremediation of waste
food provision
• Code B: area only
biologically mediated habitat
resistance and resilience
• Code C: biological partitioning/location specific
disturbance prevention and alleviation
• Code D: No biological basis for partitioning
leisure and recreation
non-use/bequest value
cognitive values
cultural heritage and identity
option use value
22
Coding for extent of impacts from MCZ
designation (compared with status quo)
Interpretation of the impact coding for the valuation estimate
Coding
VH (very high)
Percentage
range
Mid-point
High value Low value
90-100%
95%
100%
90%
H (high)
50-89%
70%
89%
50%
M (medium)
10-49%
30%
49%
10%
1-9%
5%
9%
1%
<1%
0.5%
1%
0%
L (low)
VL (very low)
23
Coding for timing of impact – the
benefits stream over the 20 year IA period
Trajectories for impact path for 10/20 coding
1.000
0.900
0.800
0.700
0.600
0.500
0.400
0.300
0.200
0.100
0.000
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
24
Aggregation of on-site benefit from
enhanced provision of ecosystem services
Present values (£) for protecting the entire network under
Highly Restricted Less Restricted (3.5% discounted rate)
Network/
management
Nutrient
Recycling
Gas/climate
regulation
Total Value
A/HP-MCZ
1,300,000,000
95.49
1,241,366,354
89.75
1,166,762,575
168.38
2,188,948,181
157.47
2,047,131,025
220.22
2,862,802,868
212.19
2,758,431,506
8,238,601,638 884,900,000
95.49
0.07
7,867,017,601
613,414
89.75
2.37
7,394,224,662 20,966,407
168.38
0.12
13,872,209,283
1,053,612
157.47
3.98
12,973,459,245 35,212,089
220.22
0.14
18,142,686,461
1,280,813
212.19
3.85
17,481,244,863 34,074,307
%
Total
A/MCS-MCZ %
Total
G/HP-MCZ %
Total
G/MCS-MCZ %
Total
J/HP-MCZ %
Total
J/MCS-MCZ %
Total
Food
provision
Raw Materials Disturbance
prevention/
alleviation
116,500,000 440,000,000
0.08
0.07
92,394
304,829
0.64
0.07
751,400
304,829
0.13
0.12
149,169
511,987
1.03
0.12
1,198,696
511,987
0.14
0.14
167,192
617,613
1.32
0.14
1,533,579
617,613
Leisure and
recreation
Cognitive
value
3,400,000,000
39.76
1,351,868,807
33.74
1,147,060,637
59.74
2,031,245,922
47.70
1,621,700,525
51.08
1,736,676,286
42.95
1,460,315,811
453,300,000
127.14
576,306,372
106.15
481,176,256
195.06
884,192,259
159.43
722,703,371
173.20
785,128,064
146.99
666,290,327
SUM
11,037,569,771
10,211,246,765
18,978,310,412
17,401,916,938
23,529,359,297
22,402,508,006
25
Overall results
• With a 3.5% discount rate, the present value
benefits range from £10.3 billion to £22.7
billion depending on network scenario/split
between Highly and Less Restricted
• Sensitivity analysis: present value range falls
to £6.4 billion to £15.1 billion
• Present value of costs £0.4 billion to £1.2
billion
• Mean annual undiscounted benefit range:
£0.9 billion to £1.9 billion
26
Limitations
• No ‘network effect’ accounted for
• Exclusions/local conditionality for restrictions
• Apportioning of benefits crude
• Benefits Transfer – limited number of studies
27
Take home messages:
MCZ study
• The estimated benefit range is £10.3 billion to £22.7
billion (at least seven times estimated costs)
• This is an under-estimate and does not include
several benefit categories
• Importance of defining clear scenarios and
counterfactual
• Ad hoc methodology – in the absence of production
functions we have to make assumptions (score)
about how designation produces goods and services
• Developments in FP7 project Options for Delivering
Ecosystem-Based Marine Management [ODEMM]
28
TEEB and ‘operationalising’ the
Ecosystem Approach
• Can such examples inspire change?
• Can we transfer benefit estimates?
• Can we understand the needs of different
TEEB stakeholders at different levels?
29
TEEB D0 Chapter 7
Benefits Transfer database
30
The TEEB BT database
Biome
Ecosystem Service
1) Food provision
Marine
24
(6)
0 - 44
Coral Reefs
470
(22)
0 - 3.818
2) Water provision
3) Raw material provision
400
(5)
0 - 1.990
20.434
(1)
4) Provision of genetic
resources
5) Provision of medicinal
resources
6) Provision of ornamental
resources
7) Air quality regulation
8) Climate regulation
3.248
(12)
693
(8)
1 - 13.043
0 - 2.744
1.413
(1)
1.990
(1)
8
(4)
0 - 36
511
(5)
3 - 326
231
56
(2)
2 - 54
648
(3)
2 - 646
25.200
(9)
3 - 34.408
10) Regulation of water flows
11) Waste treatment
(esp. water purification)
12) Erosion prevention
42
(2)
3 - 81
189.470
(1)
84
(2)
3 - 165
3
(1)
14) Pollination
15) Biological control
Mangroves
264
(3)
151 - 347
9) Moderation of extreme events
13) Maintenance of soil fertility
Coastal
4
(2)
4
0 - 7
16) Habitat for migratory species,
incl. nursery
17) Maintenance of genetic
6
(2)
diversity
1 - 11
18) Aesthetic information
0
(1)
19) Opportunities for recreation 76
(6)
and tourism
0 - 511
20) Inspiration for culture and art
(2)
0
13.541
0
7.425
0
79.099
0
0
0
Other Wetlands Fresh water Tropical Forest Other Forests Woodlands
442
(16)
69
(3)
0 - 981
13 - 68
2.739
(4) 1.864
(2)
15 - 5.210 1.110 - 2.619
698
(12)
1
(1)
1 - 2.436
12
(1)
92
(1)
10
(1)
(1)
75
0
143
6
431
1
483
7
181
11
(19)
- 552
(3)
- 411
(26)
- 1.418
(4)
- 1.756
(4)
- 562
126
(8)
0 - 552
148
(3)
0 - 442
24
(6)
1 - 45
2
(1)
11
2.824
(5)
0 - 8.369
541
(9)
3 - 645
(3)
0 - 11
12
0
(1)
230
10
5.926
(4)
468
(7)
59
(1) 1.965
2 - 10.407
3 - 1.285
10
37.339
(2)
515
(2)
3.544
(10)
14
700 - 73.979
37 - 993
238 - 10.264
6
535
(2)
2.675
5 - 530
1
11.576
(2)
3.586
(10) 1.221
(2) 177
2.334 - 9.242
42 - 9.368
105 - 2.337
0
448
(2)
89
(1)
694
141 - 756
7
19.368
(3)
220
(1)
634
(3)
1
(1) 508
2.002 - 29.520
31 - 344
1
17
(1)
10
5
55
(1)
16
(1)
9
-
(2)
449
(10) 257
3.218
2
(2)
52
8
0
(6)
1
5.235
0
(6)
15
506
0
(9)
2
1.084
0
(3)
501
(2) 439
14
(1)
16
(9)
- 1.447
(2)
- 104
(2)
- 1
(4)
- 68
(2)
- 3
(1)
497
(2)
90 - 903
219
(2)
3 434
262
(4)
0 - 786
55
(1)
(1)
(1)
7
108
(2)
33 - 183
83
(1)
106
(3)
3 - 266
174
(2)
27 - 321
(7)
- 57.133
(4)
- 27.484
(29)
13.780
(5) 1.128
(3)
- 1.063.946
70 - 40.268
493 - 713
(2)
- 0
13
648
(9)
0 - 2.247
950
(11)
1 - 3.715
595
(1)
320
(1)
649
(5)
322 - 1.166
(1)
373
(12)
3 - 5.151
381
(20)
1 - 1.171
230 studies
225
(7)
0 - 2.504
499
(1)
1
(1)
3.733
(1)
1.100
data-points
Used so far:
522
Ongoing
process …
758
(5)
1 - 2.934
0
(1)
21) Spiritual experience
22) Information for cognitive
development
TOTAL
2.154
250
(20)
(4)
0 - 6.461
129.245
(92)
41
(1)
73.852
(28)
21.077
(31)
14.245
(84) 3.803
7.4 Total value of ecosystem services (22) by biome (12)
(12) 8.338
(128) 1.618
(51) 4.343
(22)
31
1)
Fo
od
2)
Wa
ter
3)
Ra
4)
Ge w
ne
ti
5)
Me c
6)
di
Or
na cal
me
7)
nt
Ai
r Q al
ua
lit y
8)
Cl
im
a
9)
Ex te
10
t
re
)W
me
ate
rf
low
11
s
)W
a
st e
12
)E
13
ro
)S
oil sion
fe r
14
ti
)P
oll lity
ina
15
ti
)B
ioC on
o
16
) M ntro
l
igr
17
ato
)B
ioD
ry
iv e
18
) A rsity
es
th
eti
19
c
)T
ou
r
ism
20
)C
ult
21
ur
)S
e
p
irit
22
ua
)E
l
du
ca
tio
n
TEEB database:
ecosystem services
Distribution of 522 data points over services
120
102
100
85
80
20
72
40
40
17
18
8
7
6
7
8
4
8
7
4
Most data:
Food
Tourism
Raw materials
60
45
27
33
15
4
0
5
0
Least data
Pollination
Aesthetics
Cultural insp.
Spiritual
32
TEEB database: biomes
Distribution of 522 data points over biomes
246
250
228
Most data:
Trop. Forest
Wetlands
Coral reefs
200
152
150
103
86
100
61
51
50
16
42
37
95
30
35
27
48
17
24
26
3
4
C
M
ar
or ine
al
R
ee
fs
C
o
M asta
an
l
gr
ov
W es
et
l
Fr and
es
s
h
T
w
ro
a
pi
ca ter
lF
or
es
Fo t
r
W est
s
oo
dl
G and
ra
s
ss
la
nd
s
D
es
er
C
t
ul
tiv
M
at
ul
ed
tip
U
le
Ec rba
n
os
ys
te
m
s
0
20
41
96
135
Grey = used for Total Value Matrix
Least data
Marine
Urban
Desert
33
TEEB database:
data sources
Origin of values per continent (& country)
148
160
140
120
100
99
86
80
60
49
60
37
40
37
20
4
0
Africa
Americas
Asia (148)
:
Lat.Am. & Carib. :
Africa
:
Oceania
:
Europe
:
Americas
:
Asia
Europe
Latin
America
and the
Caribbean
Oceania
Various
World
China (42); India (25); Philippines (24)
Brazil (25); Mexico (23); Ecuador (9)
South africa (19); Tanzania (16); Uganda (13)
Australia (29); Samoa (25); New Zealand (4)
Spain (12); Netherlands (9); Austria (7)
USA (22); Canada (13); Costa Rica (2)
34
TEEB Quantitative Assessment
CHANGES TO PRODUCTION PRACTICES
1. Closing the agricultural yield gap versus failure to increase future yields
2. Liberalisation of trade in agricultural products
3. Aquaculture partly replacing marine capture fisheries
4. Reducing post-harvest loss
CONSERVATION POLICIES
5. Sustainable forest management
6 Expansion of protected areas to 20% and 50% per biome per region
POLICIES TARGETED AT CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION
7. Reducing emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD)
8. Climate change mitigation by bio-energy and forest plantations
CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR
9. Dietary change (reducing / not increasing consumption of animal proteins,
healthy diet)
35
Macro scaling:
preliminary findings
50-year impact of inaction or ‘business as usual’
Welfare losses equivalent to 7 % of GDP, horizon 2050
Source: Braat & ten Brink (Eds., 2008): Cost of Policy Inaction
36
TEEB: Benefit-Cost ratios
(screened: 20.000 -> 95 relevant -> 18 used for TEEB)
BC ratio of ecosystem restoration
75
80.00
70.00
BC ratio
60.00
50.00
40.00
31
30.00
22
10.00
18
16
20.00
3
1
6
3
an
gr
ov
In
la
es
nd
w
et
la
nd
La
s
ke
s/
ri v
Tr
er
op
s
ic
al
fo
re
st
O
s
th
er
W
oo
fo
re
dl
st
an
s
d/
sh
ru
bl
an
d
G
ra
ss
la
nd
s
al
C
oa
st
M
C
or
al
re
ef
s
-
Assumptions: high cost scenario, average benefit scenario, time horizon
= 40 years (including 10% annual operation costs; discount rate = 1 %)
37
TEEB - summary
• TEEB is meant to inspire and ‘operationalise’
change
• It is to be ‘field tested’ [TEEB D2] with
stakeholders
• The report structure [TEEB D0-D4] is set up
so as to facilitate engagement with and use
of the end products
38
39