Download Ecosystem Services for Climate change Adaptation in Agricultural

Appendix 6
An Ecosystem Approach (EsA) for
Agricultural Land Management
A User Guide
Prepared as part of Defra project AC0308
Ecosystem Services for Climate change Adaptation in Agricultural Land
Management
August 31st 2008
Authors:
Jason Pole, Rosemary Collier, Robert Lillywhite, and Peter Mills
(Warwick HRI, the University of Warwick)
If you use this document please cite as:
Pole, J., Collier, R., Lillywhite, R. and Mills, P. (2008), Ecosystem Services for
Climate Change Adaptation in Agricultural Land Management. Defra project
AC0308.
Contents
Appendix J
Introduction
Tracking the evidence base: the use of comment boxes (CBs)
64
1. Demand Parameters
1.1
Column A: Natural and managed goods and services: Themes
1.2
Column B: Natural and managed goods and services: Products
1.3
Column C: Desired Outcomes
1.4
The Demand/Supply Parameters sheet
1.5
Column D: Product Value
66
66
68
69
70
72
2. Supply Parameters
2.1
Column E onwards: management options
2.2
Marginal change in supply
2.3
Marginal change in value
2.4
The percentage uncertainty supply score and uncertainty range
75
75
75
76
77
3. Outcomes
77
The Dynamic Evidence-Based Knowledge Feedback System
79
References
80
Annex 1. MA Typology of ecosystem services
81
Annex 2. Illustration of evidence/information required for use
within comment boxes
83
3
Appendix J
Introduction
The Convention on Biological Diversity8 has defined the ecosystem approach (EsA) as:
“…a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that
promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way.”
The use of the EsA is consistent with the Government’s vision for the natural environment
as described within the Public Service Agreement 289:
“…the Government’s vision is to secure a diverse, healthy and resilient natural
environment, which provides the basis for everyone’s well-being, health and prosperity
now and in the future; and where the value of the services provided by the natural
environment are reflected in decision-making.”
This PSA along with climate change are the top two strategic priorities for Defra 10. At the
End of 2007, Defra published two documents as an initial step to embed an EsA in policymaking and delivery1,3.
Central to any EsA is the concept that the natural and managed environment produces a
range of goods and services. Global recognition of the importance of such goods and
services to human well-being was achieved through the Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment (MA)2.
Natural goods and services are provided by natural processes that have historically been
undervalued or not valued at all. Examples of such services (Annex 1) from the MA would
include:




The provision of fresh water;
The provision of wild food, feed and fibre;
The regulation of air quality;
The regulation of the climate.
Managed goods and services are provided through the management of natural goods and
services and frequently have a clear economic value. Examples of such services from the
MA would include:

The provision of cultivated food, feed and fibre.
When natural goods and services are used to assist the production of managed goods and
services they are often used unsustainably (at a faster rate than they can be replaced
naturally). An example would be the use of soil nutrients to produce cultivated crops.
Some reasons as to why natural goods and services are often undervalued and used
unsustainably include:



That they are natural and do not incur costs traditionally accounted for (e.g. labour
costs and capital costs).
That they are ‘used’ relatively slowly and as a consequence it often takes many
years for them to drop below a threshold where their unsustainable consumption is
noticed.
That they arise through complicated and often poorly understood processes.
4
Appendix J
This EsA, hereafter referred to as ‘the EsA Matrix’, aims to provide a framework in which to
evaluate the environmental, economic and social effects of land management decisions
and has the potential to be used at a range of spatial and temporal scales. The EsA
Matrix has a particular use in assessing the wider implications of decision making and
enables decisions to be made based on best available knowledge. Decisions are made
through assessing marginal changes in the value of goods and services. This value, as
endorsed by the MA, is measured through impacts on human well-being. Although an
idealistic measure of value, human well-being is fundamental to the success of any EsA as
it accepts that many natural goods and services are frequently difficult to value
economically, and additionally provides justification for decisions that would not be
acceptable if only viewed from an economic perspective.
The EsA operates via an Excel-based matrix (EsA Template.xls) which is divided into
three main sections (Demand Parameters; Supply Parameters; and Outcomes) which will
be described in the remainder of this guide.
Tracking the evidence base: the use of comment boxes
A key component of the EsA is its ability to track the evidence used within decision
making. This enables external stakeholders to clearly see how particular management
choices have been made.
Tracking is enabled through utilising comment boxes within Excel. Comment boxes can
be inserted within any cell by:
1. Selecting the desired cell in which the comment is to be made.
2. Right clicking the mouse and selecting insert comment from the menu.
Figure 1. A Comment Box within Excel.
Once a cell has had a comment box embedded within it a red mark is displayed in the top
right hand corner. Moving the cursor over such a cell displays its embedded comment.
Clicking within the cell and right clicking the mouse enables the Comment Box to be edited
or deleted by selecting the appropriate option from the menu.
Figure 2. The edit menu for comment boxes within Excel.
5
Appendix J
The use of Comment Boxes will be discussed in the relevant sections of this User’s Guide
(and are summarised in Annex 2) but all have the primary aim of tracking evidence-based
changes within the Matrix.
Ideally any reasoning should be backed up with a full reference. The full reference should
be entered on the Comment Box Reference Index sheet on the next available entry line.
The associated reference number should be cited after the relevant evidence in the
comment box in the following format: (ref n).
For practical reasons, where significant amendments to the evidence base are being
made, this process may be facilitated by structuring the evidence in a word processing
document. All the data can then be transferred to the EsA Matrix on a single occasion.
1 Demand Parameters
The Demand Parameters section clarifies two key questions:
a) What are the goods and services demanded from our natural and managed
environment? (columns A-B).
b) What is the ‘value’ of those goods and services? (columns C-D).
1.1 Column A: Natural and managed goods and services : Themes
Column A can be viewed as a list of themes7. There are two primary reasons for using
themes to describe goods and services:
1. Themes, and associated products (column B), develop the ecosystem service
classifications (the ‘typology’) promoted by the MA (see Annex 1) into a practical
framework through highlighting ecosystem services with a direct value to humanwell being. This, as a consequence, minimises the risk of overlap, and the risk of
double counting (see Box 1).
2. Themes can be interpreted and understood by the general public which assists with
efforts to increase awareness about how they impact upon well-being.
Themes should be designed to represent natural and managed goods and services with a
direct value to human well-being. For example, Clean Water for Human Consumption is a
suitable theme category. A theme entitled Fresh Water (as used within the MA Typology)
would not be adequate. This is because fresh water has value to all species (not just
humans) amongst many other additional uses, such as irrigation water for the production
of food crops. In these two cases it would be individual species, and specific food crops
that carry the direct value to human well-being. Although a difficult concept to master, it is
critical to aid understanding of how goods and services contribute to human well-being and
how to minimise the risk of double counting values. Box 1 attempts to visualise this
concept to assist understanding.
6
Appendix J
Box 1. Minimising double counting through a direct value approach.
A major challenge in the application of an ecosystem approach is minimising the
issue of double counting. Double counting occurs when values are captured more
than once in a valuation process. This difficulty can be illustrated through valuing the
contribution of fresh water to human well-being. Fresh water is valuable to human
well-being directly, but also indirectly. The direct value of water to humans can be
captured in the demand for clean water for human consumption. However, fresh
water also has an indirect value to human well-being. This indirect value would
include the value of water to food crop irrigation, and the value of water in supporting
‘other’ life. It is the food crops and other life (biodiversity) which has the direct value
to human-well being.
The other elements of demand (products) and supply illustrated in the diagram will be explained in
subsequent sections.
Some potential theme categories are provided in Table 1, which includes a category for
biodiversity. The capacity of this EsA to allow for the addition of a category for biodiversity
is a particular strength. The MA does not list biodiversity within its typology as its value is
captured through the ecosystem services biodiversity provides. However, a range of
biodiversity indicators, such as skylarks and the Adonis Blue, have been developed 11 to
assess ecosystem health. Such indicators (which measure products, see column B) are
able to have a direct value to human well-being attributed to them and therefore can be
considered within a biodiversity theme.
Theme Comment Boxes (TCBs) should include a general:
a) Introduction, current state and impact on human well-being.
b) Description of potential future pressures.
It is recommended that the themes, and supporting information, are set at and fixed at a
national level to reflect global and sub global needs. This is because an evaluation that
takes place on a relatively small spatial scale may fail to sufficiently capture the goods and
services required by the wider society; for example, the importance of regulating
greenhouse gases. This holistic viewpoint is fundamental to the success of any EsA.
7
Appendix J
1.2 Column B: Natural and Managed Goods and Services: Products
The theme quality and value is influenced by a series of natural and managed goods and
services, each with its own direct value to human well-being. In this EsA we refer to these
as products. It is the collective value of products that provide the total value of the themes.
For example, a theme entitled Regulation of Greenhouse Gases can only be valued by
identifying and summing the contribution of individual greenhouse gases (e.g. carbon
dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane) - the ‘products’.
As a product can have multiple uses it can also have multiple values. Where a product
has multiple values it can be entered more than once into the Matrix to reflect each of its
uses. Woodland, for example, can be classified as a product. However, woodland has
value to human well-being through providing fuel, a recreational space, and contributing to
biodiversity. In this case it would be appropriate to list the woodland product under the
potential themes of non-food crops, recreation, and biodiversity to reflect its multiple
values to human well-being.
Examples of some potential themes and their associated products are provided in Table 1.
There are many, potentially thousands, of products that impact on human-well being which
could be identified. As each product added greatly increases the amount of data required
for construction of the EsA Matrix it is recommended that an emphasis should be placed
on products that are deemed to contribute significantly to human well-being. Many such
products have long been established; especially where the impacts on human well-being
are relatively clear (e.g. carbon dioxide and pesticides).
Product Comment Boxes (PCBs) should include a general:
a) Introduction, current state and impact on human well-being. This section should
include an indication on potential sources and sinks of the product.
b) Description of potential future pressures.
c) Areas of uncertainty.
The main aim of the PCBs is to enable the supply calculations to be made by people with
little or no expertise in natural and managed goods and services.
As with the themes, it is recommended that the products, and the associated supporting
information, are set at, and fixed at, a national level to reflect global and sub global needs.
8
Appendix J
Potential Theme
Associated Products
Cultivated Food Crops
(for Human Consumption)
Wheat, milk, eggs...
Cultivated Non-food Crops
(for Human Consumption)
Oilseed rape for biodiesel, wheat for
biofuel…
Clean Air
(for Human Consumption)
Ammonia, tropospheric ozone, dust,
pollen…
Stable Global Climate
(Regulation of Greenhouse Gases)
Carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide,
methane…
Stable Local Climate
(Regulation of Natural Hazards)
Off-farm floods, storms, fires,
landslides…
Regulation of Pest and Diseases
(of Humans)
Coliforms, E.coli…
Clean Water
(for Human Consumption)
Nitrate, phosphate, Cryptosporidium,
pesticides and other chemicals.
Recreation
Countryside access, aesthetic
quality…
Biodiversity
Skylark, Adonis Blue…
Table 1. Some examples of potential themes and associated products.
1.3 Column C: Desired Outcomes
The identified products may contribute either positively (e.g. wheat) or negatively (e.g.
tropospheric ozone) to human well-being and this determines whether it is desirable to
produce more or less of them. The symbols + (more) and - (less) are used in column C to
illustrate these alternative desired outcomes. This desire may not be uniform across all
spatial scales. For example, it may be desirable to let agricultural land flood in some
regions under evaluation. In this circumstance the desire is for a reduction in agricultural
products in return for an increase in off-farm flood prevention.
Additionally, some products may not be applicable at a defined regional level. For
example, a particular species listed under the biodiversity theme (e.g. the Adonis Blue)
may not have, or be able to have, habitat space within the region being evaluated. Rather
than removing the product from the regional list, the symbol (NA) should be used.
Outcome Comment Boxes (OBCs)
OCBs should illustrate why a particular product outcome has been chosen. This is
particularly important in circumstances where the chosen outcomes are not intuitive (e.g.
fewer food products could be tolerated where certain biodiversity products increase).
It is recommended that desired outcomes, and the associated supporting information, are
set regionally using national guidance.
9
Appendix J
1.4 The Demand/Supply Parameters sheet
Various factors influence the level of demand for, and supply of, a particular product,
including: the spatial scale, the temporal scale, the climate change emission scenario, and
the socio-economic scenario. The Demand/Supply Parameters sheet requires the user to
set and consider these factors when assessing current and future product demand and
supply.
i) Spatial scale
The level of demand for and supply of products is heterogeneous across society. For
instance, some products are of global significance (e.g. carbon dioxide) and have
relatively low value at a small spatial scale, whereas others are of regional significance
(e.g. off-farm flood prevention) and have relatively low value at a large spatial scale.
Although this EsA can be used at relatively large spatial scales the national scale is
likely to be too large. Consequently it is recommended that it is used at the level of
Government Office Regions12, or smaller. However, it is also recommended that
products of global significance (e.g. carbon dioxide) have their value set nationally, and
the value of locally significant products set relative to these.
ii) Temporal scale
Longer timeframes are recommended for assessing product supply and demand as
they enable future societal needs to be considered. Additionally, longer timeframes
increase the likelihood of detecting small but sustained increases/decreases in product
supply. The relatively long timeframes used for assessing climate change 4 (2020,
2050, 2080) are suitable for use within this EsA and enable available climatic data to
be utilised in establishing demand/supply values.
Short timeframes can also be used (e.g. ‘one-year’, and ‘today’) but this could result in
decisions being made that do not adequately reflect the needs of society in the longer
term.
It is recommended that this parameter is set at the national scale.
iii and iv) Climate change emission scenario: current and desired
Climate change will fundamentally impact upon the demand for products. It will also
alter the capacity of the environment to supply them. However in terms of assessing
the supply and demand of products it is important to consider both the most likely
climate change path, and the desired climate change path.
The current climate change scenario that we are most likely to follow will influence the
demand and supply of products required for climate change adaptation (e.g. the
demand for clean water for human consumption might be expected to increase during
hotter drier summers, whereas its supply would be anticipated to decrease).
The desired climate change scenario that we wish to follow will influence the demand
for goods and services involved in climate change mitigation (e.g. demand for less
carbon dioxide to meet greenhouse gas emissions targets).
It is recommended that these parameters are set at the national/global level.
10
Appendix J
v) Socio economic scenarios: current and desired
Four UKCIP socio-economic scenarios (UKCIP SES) have been developed for the UK 5
spanning two time frames, the 2020s and the 2050s. The scenarios are: National
Enterprise; World Markets; Local Stewardship; and Global Sustainability (see Figure 3).
Figure 3. Four socio-economic scenarios for the UK (taken from source 5).
The four scenarios represent four future possibilities defined by a ‘Values’ and a
‘Governance’ axis.
The values axis
Consumerism: Values are dominated by private consumption and personal freedom.
The rights of the individual and the present are privileged over those of the collective
and the future. Resources are distributed through free and competitive markets.
Community: Values are dominated by the common good. The rights of the collective
and the future are highly valued. Resources are distributed through increasingly
managed markets.
The governance axis
Interdependence: Economic and political power is distributed away from the national
state level towards globalised economic and political systems.
Autonomy: Economic and political power is retained at the ‘national’ and ‘local’ level
away from globalised economic and political systems.
As with the climate change scenarios it is necessary to specify the current and desired
socio-economic scenario. For example, conventionally values are orientated towards
‘consumerism’ (as shown in Figure 3). Such values could reduce the value of local
food products, especially where equivalents could be imported at a lower cost. Society
would not be particularly concerned that the negative products associated with food
11
Appendix J
production were exported. In contrast this might actually be viewed as a positive
outcome. If, on the other hand, the desired socio-economic scenario was oriented
towards ‘community’ the value of local food production might increase, with consumers
willing to pay more for local products with potentially lower environmental impacts even though the negative impact would now be in their ‘backyard’.
It is recommended that the socio-economic scenario parameters should be set at the
regional level whilst following national guidance.
1.5 Column D: Product Value
Whereas column B identifies the products that are demanded by society column D, in
conjunction with the Demand/Supply Parameters sheet, aims to establish a relative value
for each product. This value aims to capture the impact of the product on well-being,
which takes into account existing supply and demand, and future demand. However, it
does not take into account future supply changes as this is taken into account within the
Supply Parameters section. An illustration of what should be taken into account within
product value is illustrated below using the example of the product of pesticide and its
negative value in the theme Clean Water for Human Consumption.
An illustration of high (negative) product value
Current pesticide concentrations are unacceptably high resulting in EU limits constantly
being breached or costly water treatment being frequently required. The spatial scale
under consideration has a high population and as a consequence the demand for water is
correspondingly high. The population is forecast to grow rapidly during the timescale
under consideration.
An illustration of low (negative) product value
Current pesticide concentrations are consistently low and never/rarely breach EU limits.
There is little or no cost associated with water treatment to remove nitrate. The population
is low in the spatial scale under consideration and so is the demand for water for human
consumption. The population is not forecast to change greatly within the timescale under
consideration.
It is important to note that the above valuations do not incorporate the potential change in
supply of clean water for human consumption (e.g. altered water availability or pesticide
levels) as this is accounted for within the Supply Parameters section.
Although the MA endorses valuation through impact on human well-being, it is recognised
that economic valuations play a role in any EsA. Defra’s publication on valuing ecosystem
services3 reviews a range of Total Economic Value (TEV) techniques that can be used to
asses the value of products. However, TEV techniques may not always be available for
some products (e.g. ascertaining the aesthetic value of a landscape) and economic values
may need to be adjusted to reflect the value to well-being within a region (e.g. food
products within the region may be able to be substituted by importing food products from
outside the region – although any substitution should consider the impacts of increased
production outside of the region – this would enable the local well-being value of food
production within the region to be reduced).
12
Appendix J
The products valued utilising TEV techniques can form a relative value framework (see
Figure 4) upon which other products, that are difficult to value, can have their relative
values judged.
A 2008 report entitled Environmental Accounts for Agriculture6 is one of the most
comprehensive attempts (to date) to value the positive and negative non-marketed
impacts of agriculture on the environment. The environmental impact categories included
within the report were:











Freshwater quality status (groundwater and surface water);
Transitional water quality (estuaries);
Marine water quality;
Pollution incidents due to agriculture;
Contamination of drinking water;
Agricultural abstraction and spray irrigation;
Flooding attributed to agriculture;
Emissions to Air;
Soil Erosion;
Landscape, Habitats and Species;
Waste.
The authors of the environmental accounts attempted, where possible, to minimise the
issue of double-counting and consequently some of the data is able to be transferred for
use within the EsA Matrix. However, careful consideration should be given to the product
name so that it reflects what is, and, importantly, what is not being captured within the
product value. For example, in the environmental accounts6 the ‘soil erosion’ category
only captures the costs of dredging waterways along with the damage to property and
roads (clean up costs). In this in this circumstance we would recommend the product to
be named:
‘Soil/sediment deposits on roads, property and in rivers’
This would make it clearer that the value does not capture soil erosion costs that relate to
flood damage, water treatment, air quality, biodiversity, carbon dioxide regulation, or the
loss of agricultural productivity.
13
Appendix J
Figure 4. The relative value framework. (a) Solid horizontal lines represent the well-being values of six products (V1 V6) established using conventional economic valuation techniques. (b) Broken horizontal lines represent three relative
values (RV7 – RV9) of products that are challenging to value conventionally. For example, the RV7 is judged to have
a positive value to well-being between V2 and V3, with its value being closer to V3 than V2.
It is recommended that value is expressed using an arbitrary scale rather than an
economic scale. This is due to the recognition that economic value does not always
correlate with human well-being. It is recommended that the initial value range is -10 to
+10 (note: negative values are associated with products with a desired outcome for fewer
products and vice versa). In successive versions the EsA Matrix the value range is likely
to increase. For instance, a product deemed as value 10 may become more valuable, or a
new product may be identified with greater value.
Although this is a somewhat rudimentary approach to valuation it achieves its primary aim
in establishing the relative importance of products to human well-being.
Product Value Comment Boxes (PVCBs)
PVCBs should provide evidence as to why a particular value has been chosen (e.g based
on regional data for that product).
14
Appendix J
2. Supply Parameters
The Supply Parameters section aims to quantify the effect of a range of potential
management options, and the impact of relevant parameters defined on the
Demand/Supply Parameters Sheet (e.g. the impact of climate change), on the marginal
change in future product supply. This section also captures uncertainty in supply change
(whether it is due to gaps in the knowledge of the ecosystem function associated with
product level, or due to other factors, such as issues with the spatial/temporal scale being
considered).
This section also automatically calculates the marginal change in value for every product
under each management option. This is achieved by multiplying the marginal change in
supply for a product by the product’s value. It also takes uncertainty within the data into
account.
2.1 Column E onwards: management options
Land management options under consideration could range from relatively minor changes
(e.g. establishing in-field grass buffer strips) right through to fundamental changes (e.g.
afforestation of arable land). The first option considered should always be the ‘do nothing’
option. This option establishes a baseline for the marginal change in supply that is
anticipated to occur as a consequence of chosen parameters defined on the
Demand/Supply Parameters sheet (e.g. the impact of climate change). This baseline
marginal change should be factored in to all supply calculations for each management
option.
Management Option Comment Boxes (MOCBs)
MOCBs should provide a description of the management option under consideration.
Each management option is allocated 5 columns: marginal change in supply; marginal
change in value; % uncertainty; and % uncertainty range (2 columns).
2.2 Marginal change in supply
This column attempts to quantify the potential change in marginal supply of the product for
each management option. In the EsA Matrix marginal change is measured using a
relatively simple, and thus manageable, scoring system, -10 to +10, where: -10
represents a major decrease; and +10 represents a major increase (see Figure 5). For
marginal change it is not necessary to consider the total supply. In some respects it is
useful to ‘zero’ the existing level of product supply, for what needs to be established is how
much more, or how much less of product would be produced under each management
option, rather than the total.
Consequently, care must be taken when using percentage change data for obtaining a
marginal change in supply score. This is because a 100% increase in one product may be
significant in some situations (e.g. where current product total is high) but not in others
(e.g. where current product total is low).
15
Appendix J
Figure 5. Scoring marginal change in supply.
It is likely that the supply score will reflect the most likely outcome. However, in some
situations it could be preferable to alter the supply score away from the most likely
outcome; for example, in cases where an unlikely outcome is highly undesirable. For
example, if zero cultivation was the management option under consideration, in a relatively
few cases nitrous oxide release from soils may increase significantly (especially where
water logging occurs as a consequence). Although the most likely outcome would be little
increase in nitrous oxide (e.g. score 1), the risk of nitrous oxide increase might be so
undesirable that a higher supply score (e.g. score 5) might be justifiable.
Supply Comment Boxes (SCBs)
SCBs should provide evidence as to why the marginal change in supply score has been
chosen.
2.3 Marginal change in value
The marginal change in value cells contain a formula that multiplies the product value (PV)
by its associated marginal change in supply value (S) for each management option.
Products with a high value and a large increase in supply will have the highest marginal
change in value, and vice versa.
16
Appendix J
2.4 The percentage uncertainty supply score and uncertainty range
Inevitably there will always be uncertainty associated with any supply score. Many factors
influence the level of uncertainty, including:



Gaps in the understanding of how products are regulated;
A wide range of possible outcomes due to the heterogeneity of the spatial scale
under consideration;
A wide range of possible outcomes due to uncertainties within the temporal scales
under consideration (e.g. socio-economic or climate change scenarios).
The percentage uncertainty score attempts to capture this associated uncertainty, where:
50-100 %
= Highly Uncertain (e.g. major knowledge gaps or issues with scale).
25-49 %
= Uncertain (e.g. some knowledge gaps or issues with scale).
0-25 %
= Relatively Certain (e.g. few/no knowledge gaps or issues with scale).
The EsA Matrix uncertainty cells automatically change colour when a value is entered, to
red, orange or green, to highlight whether supply data is highly uncertain, uncertain or
relatively certain, respectively. The use of a colour coded scoring system enables key
uncertainty issues to be elucidated and addressed. This could be through stimulating
research to plug knowledge gaps, or focusing on a less heterogeneous region, for
example.
The uncertainty range cells use the percentage uncertainty value to calculate a range for
the marginal change in value. For example, a marginal change in value of 100 with a
supply uncertainty value of 50% would have an uncertainty range of 50 – 150.
Uncertainty Comment Boxes (UCBs)
UCBs should summarise the specific factors that contribute to the uncertainty.
3. Outcomes
In the Outcomes section the total marginal change in value for each management option is
presented (in addition to the total uncertainty range). This is calculated by summing the
individual marginal change in value for each product.
The total marginal change in value for each theme is also displayed. This permits the user
to see which themes benefit and which themes are compromised as a consequence of the
various management options. This should be for illustrative purposes only, as the grand
total should be the only total to influence the decision made. A decision should not be
made based on a perceived unacceptable impact on a particular theme. This is due to the
impact being offset by minor, but collectively large, changes in other themes (see Figure 6)
or incorrect values being attributed to certain products. If it is the latter reason, values
should be recalculated.
17
Appendix J
Figure 6. Detecting minor changes.
Option 1: The marginal value of product 1 (P1) increases by 90. The marginal value of products 2, 3, and 4
(P2–P4) decreases by 30, 30, and 40 respectively. Option 1 therefore has a total marginal change in value
of -10.
Option 2: The marginal value of product 1 (P1) decreases by -10. The marginal value of products 2, 3 and 4
(P2–P4) all increase by small amounts, 20, 10, and 10 respectively. Option 2 therefore has a total marginal
change in value of 30.
Option 2 appears to be the better option as, although there is no large change in the level of any product, it
produces a favourable total change in marginal value. In this situation we can tolerate a negative impact on
P1 as this negative impact is offset by the collectively large positive impacts on P2-P4.
18
Appendix J
The Dynamic Evidence-Based Knowledge Feedback System
The success of the EsA Matrix relies on a Dynamic Evidence-Based Knowledge Feedback
System (The System). The System encourages continuous evidence-based input from as
many stakeholders as reasonably to provide a solution to ‘the problem’ (see Figure 7).
It is recommended that the use of this EsA Matrix is initially developed by a selected range
of experts. This would then be followed by a continuing period of public consultation to
enable wider opinion to be sought. Any change would need to be evidence-based and
logged within the EsA Matrix’s comment box and reference system. Despite the EsA
Matrix being continuously updated and improved it can be consulted at any time in order to
make a decision as the decision would be based on the best available knowledge at that
time.
The dynamic nature of the EsA Matrix makes it extremely flexible and receptive to new
information (e.g. revised climate change scenarios or mitigation strategies). It is also, like
conventional markets, responsive to over and under supply through allowing amendments
to product values, which would immediately filter through to the outcome calculations.
Figure 7. Solving ‘the problem’. The entangled line in the centre of figure represents a complex problem:
for example, how to use an ecosystem approach (EsA) to manage our environment to maximise human wellbeing. The EsA should be an interdisciplinary approach utilising the knowledge and expertise of a range of
stakeholders. Even when many different stakeholder groups are consulted aspects of the problem will
inevitably be overlooked. However, the established solution to the problem will be based on ‘best available’
knowledge and resources.
19
Appendix J
References
1. Defra. (2007), Securing a Healthy Natural Environment: an Action Plan for
Embedding an Ecosystems Approach.
2. MA. (2005), Ecosystems and Human Well Being. Island Press. Millennium.
3. Defra. (2007), An Introductory Guide to Valuing Ecosystem services.
4. Hulme,M., Jenkins,G.J., Lu,X., Turnpenny,J.R., Mitchell,T.D., Jones,R.G., Lowe,J.,
Murphy,J.M., Hassell,D., Boorman,P., McDonald,R. and Hill,S. (2002), Climate
Change Scenarios for the United Kingdom: The UKCIP02 Scientific Report. Tyndall
Centre for Climate Change Research, School of Environmental Sciences, University
of East Anglia, Norwich, UK. 120pp
5. UK Climate Impacts Programme. (2001), Socio-economic Scenarios for Climate
Change Impact Assessment: a Guide to Their Use in the UK Climate Impacts
Programme. UKCIP, Oxford.
6. Jacobs. (2008), Environmental Accounts for Agriculture. Final Report (SFS0601).
Prepared for Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Welsh Assembly
Government; Scottish Government; Department of Agriculture & Rural Development
(N. Ireland).
7. Haines-Young, R. and Potschin, M. (2008), England’s Terrestrial Ecosystem
Services and the Rationale for an Ecosystem Approach. Overview Report, 30 pp.
(Defra Project Code NR0107).
8. Convention on Biological Diversity. Definition of the Ecosystem Approach.
http://www.cbd.int/ecosystem/ (accessed 15/07/08).
9. HM Government. (2007), PSA Delivery Agreement 28: Secure a Healthy Natural
Environment for Today and the Future.
10. Defra. Strategic Priorities: http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/index.htm (accessed
15/07/08).
11. Defra. Biodiversity Indicators: http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlifecountryside/biodiversity/biostrat/indicators/index.htm (accessed 16/07/08).
12. National Statistics. Government Office Regions:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/geography/downloads/GB_GOR98_A4.pdf (accessed
16/07/08).
20
Appendix J
Annex 1
MA Typology of Ecosystem Services (Taken from: Defra (2007), Securing a Healthy
Natural Environment: An Action Plan for Embedding an Ecosystems Approach).
Provisioning services
These are the products obtained from ecosystems, including:
 Food. This encompasses the vast range of food products derived from plants, animals
and microbes.
 Fibre. This is derived from materials such as wood, jute, cotton, hemp, silk and wool.
 Fuel. Wood, dung and other biological materials serve as sources of energy.
 Genetic resources. This covers the genes and genetic information used for animal
and plant breeding and biotechnology.
 Biochemicals, natural medicines, and pharmaceuticals. Many medicines, biocides,
food additives such as alginates and biological materials are derived from ecosystems.
 Ornamental resources. Animal and plant products, such as skins, shells and flowers
are used as ornaments, and whole plants are used for landscaping and as ornaments.
 Fresh water. People obtain freshwater from ecosystems and therefore the supply of
freshwater can be considered a provisioning service. Fresh water in rivers is also a
source of energy. Because water is required for other life to exist, however, it could
also be considered a supporting service.
Regulating services
These are the benefits obtained from the regulation of ecosystem processes, including:
 Air quality regulation. Ecosystems both contribute chemicals to and extract chemicals
from the atmosphere, influencing many aspects of air quality.
 Climate regulation. Ecosystems influence climate both locally and globally. For
example, at the local level, changes in land cover can affect both temperature and
precipitation. At the global level, ecosystems play an important role in climate by either
sequestering or emitting greenhouse gases.
 Water regulation. The timing and magnitude of run-off, flooding and aquifer recharge
can be strongly influenced by changes in land cover, including, in particular, alterations
that change the water-storage potential of the system such as the conversion of
wetlands or the replacement of forests with croplands or croplands with urban areas.
 Erosion regulation. Vegetative cover plays an important role in soil retention and the
prevention of landslides.
 Water purification and waste treatment. Ecosystems can be a source of impurities
(e.g. in fresh water). However, they can help in the filtering out and decomposition of
organic wastes introduced into inland waters and coastal and marine ecosystems and
can also assimilate and detoxify compounds through soil and sub-soil processes.
 Disease regulation. Changes in ecosystems can directly change the abundance of
human pathogens, such as cholera, and can alter the abundance of disease vectors,
such as mosquitoes.
 Pest regulation. Ecosystem changes affect the prevalence of crop and livestock pests
and diseases.
 Pollination. Ecosystem changes affect the distribution, abundance and effectiveness
of pollinators.
 Natural hazard regulation. The presence of coastal ecosystems such as mangroves
and coral reefs can reduce the damage caused by hurricanes or large waves.
21
Appendix J
Cultural services
These are the non-material benefits people obtain from ecosystems through spiritual
enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation and aesthetic experiences,
including:










Cultural diversity. The diversity of ecosystems is one factor influencing the
diversity of cultures.
Spiritual and religious values. Many religions attach spiritual and religious values
to ecosystems or their components.
Knowledge systems (traditional and formal). Ecosystems influence the types of
knowledge systems developed by different cultures.
Educational values. Ecosystems and their components and processes provide the
basis for both formal and informal education in many societies.
Inspiration. Ecosystems provide a rich source of inspiration for art, folklore,
national symbols, architecture and advertising.
Aesthetic values. Many people find beauty or aesthetic value in various aspects of
ecosystems, as reflected in the support for parks and scenic drives and in the
selection of housing locations.
Social relations. Ecosystems influence the types of social relations that are
established in particular cultures. Fishing societies, for example, differ in many
respects in their social relations from nomadic herding or agricultural societies.
Sense of place. Many people value the ‘sense of place’ that is associated with
recognised features of their environment, including aspects of the ecosystem.
Cultural heritage values. Many societies place high value on the maintenance of
either historically important landscapes (‘cultural landscapes’) or culturally
significant species.
Recreation and ecotourism. People often choose where to spend their leisure
time based, in part, on the characteristics of the natural or cultivated landscapes in
a particular area.
Supporting services
Supporting services are those that are necessary for the production of all other ecosystem
services. They differ from provisioning, regulating and cultural services in that their impacts
on people are often indirect or occur over a very long time, whereas changes in the other
categories have relatively direct and short-term impacts on people. (Some services, like
erosion regulation, can be categorised as both a supporting and a regulating service,
depending on the timescale and immediacy of their impact on people.)





Soil formation. Because many provisioning services depend on soil fertility, the
rate of soil formation influences human wellbeing in many ways.
Photosynthesis. This process produces oxygen, which is necessary for most living
organisms.
Primary production. The assimilation or accumulation of energy and nutrients by
organisms.
Nutrient cycling. Approximately 20 nutrients essential for life, including nitrogen
and phosphorus, cycle through ecosystems and are maintained at different
concentrations in different parts of ecosystems.
Water cycling. Water cycles through ecosystems and is essential for living
organisms.
22
Appendix J
Annex 2 Illustration of evidence/information required for use within comment boxes
General Information
Theme Comment Boxes (TCBs) should include a general:
c) Introduction, current state and impact on human well-being.
d) Description of potential future pressures.
Product Comment Boxes (PCBs) should include a general:
a) Introduction, current state and impact on human well-being.
This section should include an indication of potential product sources and sinks.
b) Description of potential future pressures.
c) Areas of uncertainty.
Specific Information
Information should relate to the set parameters as defined within the
Demand/Supply parameters sheet.
Outcome Comment Boxes (OBCs)
OCBs should illustrate why a particular product outcome has been chosen. This is
particularly important in circumstances where the chosen outcomes are not intuitive (e.g.
fewer food products could be tolerated where certain biodiversity products increase).
Product Value Comment Boxes (PVCBs)
PVCBs should provide evidence as to why a particular value has been chosen (e.g based
on regional data for that product).
Management Option Comment Boxes (MOCBs)
MOCBs should provide a description of the management option under consideration.
Supply Comment Boxes (SCBs)
SCBs should provide evidence as to why the marginal change in supply score has been
chosen.
Uncertainty Comment Boxes (UCBs)
UCBs should summarise the specific factors that contribute to the uncertainty.
23