Download What`s in the Sea for Me?

What’s in the Sea for Me?
Ecosystem Services Provided by
the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak
report 5872 • february 2009
1
In his work Oeconomica naturae (the Economy of Nature) Linnaeus pointed out that
if we cared more about natural science, we would notice more and greater wonders in
nature, and at the same time contribute greatly to ”the improvement of our economy”.
Orders
Phone: +46 (8)-505 933 40
Fax: +46 (8)-505 933 99
E-post: [email protected]
Adress: CM Gruppen AB, Box 110 93, SE-161 11 Bromma, Sweden
Internet: www.naturvardsverket.se/bokhandeln
The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
Phone: +46 (8)-698 10 00, Fax: 08-20 29 25
E-post: [email protected]
Adress: Naturvårdsverket, SE-106 48 Stockholm, Sweden
Internet: www.naturvardsverket.se
ISBN 978-91-620-5872-2.pdf
ISSN 0282-7298
© Naturvårdsverket 2009
Printed by: CM Gruppen AB
Graphic design: Johan Resele/Global Reporting
Photo: When no other source is given: Johan Resele/Global Reporting
2
Preface
The Swedish Government has instructed the Environmental Protection Agency to
compile information on the economic implications of human impacts on the Baltic Sea
and Skagerrak1. Katrin Zimmer has been projectleader.
The target groups for this report are politicians and decision makers in the countries
bordering the Baltic Sea. Its aim is to gather and describe existing literature on
– the economic value of marine ecosystem services;
– the economic effects on the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak if no further measures are
taken, as compared with the implementation of further measures;
– the cost of measures needed to ensure the most favourable economic outcome possible and the economic benefit of those measures.
In addition to this report, the Economic Marine Information project includes the seven
background reports listed in Appendix 1. Researchers and other colleagues in countries bordering the Baltic Sea, particularly Finland, have also contributed information
and research findings.
Stockholm, February 2009
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
1 The project defines the Baltic Sea and the Skagerrak as the waters of the Bothnian Bay, the Bothnian Sea, the Gulf of Finland, the Gulf of Riga,
the Baltic Proper, the Danish Straits, the Kattegat and the Swedish coast of the Skagerrak.
3
4
5
PHoto: henrik trygg
Contents
What’s in the Sea for Me?
Summary and Conclusions
1. Introduction
1.1. Government Assignment
1.2. Background Reports
1.3. Cooperation with all Baltic Sea States
1.4. Synthesis Report
2. Marine Ecosystem Services
2.1. Four Kinds of Ecosystem Services
2.2. Most Ecosystem Services are under Threat
2.3. What is Going to happen?
3. The Economics of Ecosystem Services
3.1. Eutrophication
3.2. Fisheries
3.4. Tourism and Recreation
3.5. Hazardous Substances
3.6. Invasive alien Species
3.7. Oil Discharges and Litter
4. The Need for further Research
Background Reports on the Sub-projects under the
Swedish EPA Project “Economic Marine Information”.
6
5
5
10
10
10
11
11
12
14
17
18
23
25
27
30
31
33
33
35
37
What’s in the Sea for Me?
Summary and Conclusions
Everyone living in countries bordering the Baltic Sea
and Skagerrak associates these seas with assets of great
value. These include fisheries, culture, recreation and
tourism. They also include biodiversity and the sea’s
ability to cleanse pollutants. There are gaps in our
knowledge, yet we know that the value of the many
services provided by the sea greatly exceeds the cost
of preserving them. The gaps in our knowledge notwithstanding, all the indications are that the collective
value of marine ecosystem services is so great that we
cannot afford to lose them. We must act now.
“What’s in the sea for me?” is a synthesis report as part
of a government-instigated Swedish Environmental
Protection Agency project, Economic Marine Information. The report describes current knowledge on
the economic consequences of human impact on the
Baltic Sea and Skagerrak. What will it cost if no further
action is taken, as compared with the implementation
of remedial measures?
This survey of knowledge adds to the background
material used as a basis for the economic assessments
being made by all countries bordering the Baltic Sea
in relation to their commitments under the Baltic Sea
Action Plan (BSAP). Assessments of this kind are also
an important part of the EC Marine Directives.
The project Economic Marine Information focuses on
ecosystem services provided by the sea, i.e. the products, services and processes that nature offers man.
Twenty-four ecosystem services are examined; almost
all of them are dependent on one another.
Cultural ecosystem services offer recreation, such as
the opportunity to take a swim, and aesthetic value,
such as enjoying beautiful views. They contribute to
PHoto: Jeppe wikström
education and scientific information. The ecosystem
services produced by the sea include the fish and the
shellfish we catch, as well as the potential for using
wave energy. Almost all services are heavily dependent
on supporting and regulating ecosystem services such
as biodiversity, habitat and biological regulation.
Although many ecosystem services are far from inexhaustible, they are naturally taken for granted. Ostensibly, it does not cost anything to use them, which
means they are often overused. At present most ecosystem services are under threat. Of the 24 ecosystem
services described here, only ten are operating properly in the Baltic Sea. Seven are severely threatened,
including four of the six supporting services. The four
are: the food web, biodiversity, habitats and Baltic Sea
resilience, i.e. capacity to recover.
7
The influx of nutrients may diminish in the future,
but discernible effects will probably not be seen until
several decades have passed. Overexploitation of the
most commercially sought-after fish species represents
a threat to the entire system. Yet this is the area offering the greatest potential for rapid improvements.
It would be economically profitable to end Baltic Sea
eutrophication in line with one of the BSAP objectives.
Model calculations and valuation studies suggest an
overall profit for all countries of just over €2 billion a
year, although there are large differences between the
various Baltic Sea States.
Future threats facing many ecosystem services are
effects of climate change, including marine eutrophication, and the fact that increasing numbers of invasive
alien species are jeopardising the balance of Baltic Sea
and Skagerrak ecosystems. The rapid growth of shipping also brings a greater risk of oil spills and major
incidents involving oil. Awareness that chemicals are
hazardous to the environment is growing all the time,
and new dispersal routes are constantly being identified. The pressure for development for various purposes creates increasingly intense competition for available space. This also creates doubts about the overall
effect of many threats and risks. This should be taken
into account.
The Swedish Board of Fisheries has identified nine
economically profitable measures to stop overfishing,
thereby increasing the capacity of the Baltic Sea to produce more fish. These include reducing fishing fleet
capacity and changing regulations governing fishing
methods. One estimate suggests that lower cod quotas
could rapidly result in larger catches.
The threats facing Baltic Sea and Skagerrak ecosystem services have been well documented, not least in
the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP). Current
knowledge often enables us to specify the impact that
various industrial facilities and sectors have on ecosystem services. Descriptions of what the sea gives us,
expressed in economic terms, are much rarer, as are estimates of what it will cost to postpone necessary action.
The major known negative impacts on Baltic Sea ecosystem services at present are eutrophication and overfishing. And it is in these areas that most economic
studies have been made – studies that show that action
is not only necessary to maintain ecosystem services,
but that such action is also economically profitable.
8
The Economic Marine Information project is based
on collaboration between scientists and experts in all
Baltic Sea States. In one of the seven background reports representatives from the countries have identified
priority areas for research to increase our knowledge
of the Baltic Sea’s economic value. Several of the other
background reports give further suggestions for data
and knowledge that are needed.
Scientific research is needed into the structure of ecosystem services and the way they interact, development
of models, analysis of uncertainties and risks, and of
the cost of various forms of action. There is a need to
develop instruments in areas where needs and effects
are relatively well known. Studies in the field of political science can analyse the prospects of implementing
international agreements in various countries. There
is a need in all areas for further improvement in cooperation between Baltic Sea States to obtain data and
models that the countries are able to accept as a basis
for new decisions.
PHoto: the swedish coast guard
The effects of eutrophication become immediately visible for short periods when algal blooms create “rhubarb soup” in some coastal areas. But the problems of
eutrophication are ever-present below the surface. Excessive quantities of the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus reach the sea, particularly from agricultural land
and sewers. Phytoplankton production explodes, secchi depth (transparency) deteriorates and decomposing plankton consume too much oxygen, which results
in dead sea bed areas.
Growing Interest in the Marine Environment in
the EU and Elsewhere
Overfishing, major oil spills and eutrophication have
caused the marine environment to climb up the political agenda over the last ten years, both in the EU and
in other international alliances. Over the past few
years marine environment, the risk of climate change
and globalisation have further added to the interest in
marine issues.
The five most important organisations for cooperation on our marine areas are HELCOM (the Helsinki
Commission, which includes the Baltic Sea), OSPAR
(the Oslo-Paris Commission, which covers the North
Atlantic), EU, IMO (the International Maritime Organisation, a UN body) and ICES (the International
Council for Exploration of the Sea, which covers the
North Atlantic, including the North Sea and Baltic).
Conventions have been drawn up by some of these
organisations.
The marine conventions were originally mainly aimed
at pollution. The focus gradually widened to include
nature conservation, and later also sustainable development.
EU member states have an integrated system of regulations governing agriculture and fisheries. The first EC
Marine Directive, which deals with the marine environment, entered into force in 2008, and is based on
the EU’s marine strategy, which preceded it by a number of years. A draft maritime policy, aimed at shipping and fisheries, is currently being formulated by the
EU. In 2009 the EU will also present a strategy for the
Baltic Sea region, whose objectives will be economic
growth, developing infrastructure, increased security
and a better environment.
In 2003 the environment ministers under HELCOM
and OSPAR adopted a declaration that the two commissions would work together and with the EU. The
9
EU strategy
for the Baltic
sea region
National
plans
submitted
Presented
Marine
Directive
Definition of
“good environmental status”
Baltic Sea
Action Plan
Revision
of BSAP
Marine
Directive
Action
programmes
produced
Baltic Sea
Action Plan
Actions
initiated
Marine
Directive
Good environmental status
achieved
Baltic Sea
Action Plan
Good environmental status
achieved
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
EU´s
Maritime
policy
Biodiversity
Convention
Status
report
Evaluation of
marine working
programme
Habitats
Directive
National
reporting on
conservation
status
Water Framework Directive
First action
programme
implemented
declaration covers the ecosystem approach, the EU
marine strategy, conservation of biodiversity, and also
the environmental impacts of fisheries and shipping.
The HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) was
adopted in November 2007. The aims are that the Baltic Sea should be unaffected by eutrophication, undisturbed by hazardous substances, that it should have
environmental friendly maritime activities, and a favourable conservation status of biodiversity. A further
feature of BSAP is that the Baltic Sea should serve as
a pilot area for implementation of EC Marine Directives.
Resolutions adopted by the EU are binding on member
states, unlike convention resolutions, which serve as
recommendations. Under the marine strategy, marine
areas in the EU should have achieved good environmental status by 2021. This is the year that also applies
for the objectives of BSAP, whose 150 measures should
be initiated by 2016. The EC Water Framework Directive provides that lakes, rivers, streams and coastal
waters should achieve good ecological status by 2015.
Other EC directives affecting the Baltic Sea and
Skagerrak are the Wastewater Directive, the Nitrates
Directive, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP),
10
diagram: annika röhl
Baltic Sea
Action Plan
Water Framework Directive
Good environmental status
achieved
“In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their
capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used
as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”
From the Rio Declaration, UN Conference on Environment
and Development (UNCED) (1992)
the Common Fisheries Policy CFP), the Habitats and
Birds Directive, as well as chemicals legislation in the
form of the REACH Regulation and the EU recommendation on integrated coastal management.
The Baltic Catchment Area
THE BALTIC SEA
The surface area of the Baltic Sea is 377,400 km2,
which is almost as large as Sweden. The surface area
of the catchment is approximately 1.7 million km2.
This means that the water flowing into the Baltic comes
from a catchment four times larger than the sea itself
– a catchment with a population of 90 million.
The brackish water of the Baltic is a mixture of sea
water from the North Sea and fresh water from rivers.
The salinity of the surface water varies from around
2 per cent in the Kattegat to 0.1– 0.2 per cent in the
northernmost Bothnian Bay and easternmost Bay of
Finland, as compared with 3.5 per cent in the open
sea. It takes 25 – 50 years for Baltic Sea water to be replaced via the Öresund and the Little and Great Belts.
The Baltic is a shallow sea. Its average depth is approximately 55 metres. It reaches a maximum depth
of 459 metres at Landsort Deep in the Stockholm
archipelago.
Only a few species can live in brackish water, and they
are more sensitive to change than saltwater and freshwater species. Sprat, cod and herring are the most
common fish. The Baltic is also home to salmon, pike,
bass, zander (pike-perch), flounder, dab, turbot and eel.
THE SKAGERRAK
More species can live here. The salinity of the Skagerrak is around 3.5 per cent, which is the same as the
open Atlantic. There are around 5,000 species in the
Skagerrak, which is ten times more than in the Baltic.
Some 130 species of fish are found along the Bohus
coast. The sea bed provides a habitat for several hundred
species of algae and several thousand animal species.
The eastern Skagerrak is impacted by brackish water
from the Kattegat and Baltic Sea.
Source: Stockholm Marine Research Centre
11
PHoto: danne eriksson
Introduction
1.1. Government Assignment
The Swedish EPA has produced this report at the instigation of the Swedish Government. The “Economic
Marine Information” project was inspired by the Stern
Review2 in 2006, which presented an analysis of the
economics of climate change.
The aim of this project is to use existing studies and
reports as a basis for a clear description of the economic implications of human impacts on the Baltic
Sea, Skagerrak and their coastal areas. What will happen if no further action is taken, as compared with a
scenario where action is taken? The project includes
F examining the economic value of, for example,
ecosystem services dependent on the water quality
in the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak – services that will
decline or be lost entirely if nothing more is done;
Festimating the cost of the measures needed to minimise the economic losses;
Festimating the economic benefits of the measures
proposed;
Fdescribing gaps in our knowledge.
1.2. Background Reports
The gathering of existing material resulted in seven
background reports in 2007 and 2008, written at the
instigation of the Swedish EPA. This synthesis report
summarises the background reports, which cover:
FEcosystem Services Provided by the Baltic Sea and
Skagerrak, Kajsa Garpe, Report 5873.
FThe Economic Value of Ecosystem Services Provided
2 The Economics of Climate Change – the Stern Review by Nicholas Stern, published in
October 2006.
1
by the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak – Existing Information and Gaps of Knowledge, Linus Hasselström,
and Tore Söderqvist, Enveco Environmental Economics Consultancy Ltd., Stockholm, Report 5874.
F Trends and Scenarios Exemplifying the Future of
the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak – Ecological Impacts
of Not Taking Action, Martina Kadin, Baltic Nest
Institute/Stockholm Resilience Center, Report 5875
F The Costs of Environmental Improvements in the
Baltic Sea and Skagerrak – A Review of the Literature, Katarina Elofsson, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Report 5876.
FCosts and Benefits from Nutrient Reductions to the
Baltic Sea. Ing-Marie Gren, Report 5877.
FTourism and Recreation Industries in the Baltic Sea
Area – How are they Affected by the State of the
Marine Environment? An interview study. Linus
Hasselström, Enveco Environmental Economics
Consultancy Ltd., Stockholm. Report 5878.
FEconomic Information Regarding Fisheries. Swedish
Board of Fisheries, Johanna Andréasson. Report
5879.
1.3. Cooperation with all Baltic
Sea States
The background reports have been written in English
because experts from all countries bordering the Baltic have been involved. The relevant public agencies in
the Baltic Sea States have had the opportunity to comment. The countries have also been invited to participate in a reference group comprising their HELCOM
13
(Helsinki Commission) representatives. All countries
have received regular information and have been invited to two working meetings.
The Baltic Sea States have also been directly involved
in the preparation of the reports on valuation studies
and interview studies in the tourism industry. The Swedish EPA has worked closely with Finland, since Finland is involved in a similar project, and we have been
able to include the conclusions from the Finnish prestudy in this synthesis report 3 .
Several of those involved in producing the background
reports also belong to the team of scientists and experts
who have applied to conduct a larger study: BalticSTERN4 .
1.4. Synthesis Report
A draft version of this report – the synthesis report –
has been distributed to 57 referral bodies, including
water agencies, the Marine Environment Coordination Group and the Marine Environment Council in
Sweden.
Sums of money in the synthesis report are given in 2007
prices, based on the average annual consumer prices
index in each country, and in euros at the exchange
rate in each country on 1 January 2008. Sources of
information not specified in the background reports
are given in footnotes.
3 “The Economics of the State of the Baltic Sea – pre-study assessing the feasibility
of a cost-benefit analysis of protecting the Baltic Sea ecosystem”, in collaboration
between MTT (Agrifood Research Finland), SYKE (Finnish Environment Institute),
Helsinki University and the Finnish Marine Research Institute.
4 Baltic Systems Tool for Ecological-economic evaluation – a Refined Nest-model
14
Chapter 2 describes the value of the ecosystem services we derive from the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak and
how those services interrelate, whether they are being
used sustainably or are under serious threat. Chapter 3
deals with the economics of ecosystem services based
on current knowledge. Conclusions and the need for
further information are presented in a concluding
chapter.
Marine Ecosystem Services
Ecosystem services are the products, services and
processes nature offers to man. The fish we catch are
an ecosystem service just as much as the degradation
of environmental toxins in seabed sediment, clean
water to swim in or wave energy. Although many ecosystem services are far from inexhaustible, they are
often taken for granted.
2
This chapter, which is mainly based on reports 5873
and 5875, describes the ecosystem services provided
by the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak, and whether they
being used sustainably or are seriously threatened.
Ecosystem services may also be underused, and could
provide man and society with more products and services than is currently the case.
Using MA and the Stern Review as a basis, the EU
Commission and Germany have produced “The Economics of Ecosystem Biodiversity” (2008) as part of a
project set to continue until autumn 2010. The report
examines the pricing of ecosystem services and the
difficulties involved. Like the Stern Review, the report
also considers the ethical question of handing on a
sustainable environment to future generations.
PHoto: tomas lundälv
The definition of ecosystem services is based on the
UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment5 (MA). Between
2001 and 2005 1,360 researchers and other experts
were involved in the process of assessing global ecosystems and the services they provide for us. According
to the assessment,“human activity has changed global
ecosystems more rapidly and profoundly over the past
50 years than at any other time in human history”. MA
considers that some 60 per cent of the ecosystem services that support live on earth are being destroyed or
used unsustainably. These include fresh water, fisheries, natural regulation of air and water quality, climate
and the ability to cure diseases. MA warns that the
harmful effects of this degradation may become much
worse over the next 50 years.
What is an ecosystem?
An ecosystem has no clearly defined boundaries. It is a
complicated system, an ecological unit of human beings,
plants, animals, fungi and micro-organisms in interplay
with their surroundings. A single lake, a river, stream or a
whole region can count as an ecosystem. All descriptions
of a clearly defined ecosystem presuppose that the ecosystem is in turn dependent on adjoining ecosystems.
Most ecosystems are founded on photosynthesis, i.e.
conversion of carbon dioxide into oxygen and sugars with
the help of solar energy.
5 See also http://www.millenniumassessment.org/
15
2.1. Four Kinds of Ecosystem Services
Marine ecosystem services can be divided into provisioning, cultural, supporting and regulating services, i.e.
the classification used in the UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. A total of 24 marine ecosystem services
are identified.
These services are interlinked. A provisioning ecosystem service such as fish and a cultural service such as tourism
are often valued in economic terms. Yet supporting ecosystem services such as production of phytoplankton, or
regulating services such as degradation of environmental toxins are rarely valued, even though they are essential
to fisheries, for example.
Provisioning Ecosystem Services:
Regulating Ecosystem Services:
F Food – fish, shellfish, algae, etc.
FImpact climate and air quality – absorption of car-
F Inedible goods – sand, rocks, oil, algae, drinking
bon dioxide and production of oxygen. Together,
the oceans of the world produce more oxygen than
do the rain forests.
FSediment retention – vegetation binding sediment
reduces the risk of erosion.
FLess eutrophication – surplus nitrogen and phosphorus can be cycled by organisms, particularly
mussels.
FBiological regulation – one organism regulates the
surplus of another, maintaining the balance between
species. One species may also create the right conditions for another, e.g., by grazing a rocky sea bed,
thereby enabling bladder wrack to attach itself to
the rocks.
FRegulation of pollutants – hazardous substances
can be degraded or stored in sediment. By being
stored in sediment, environmental toxins are temporarily removed from flows in the ecosystem.
water, industrial water
F Energy – wave energy
F Space and waterways – for shipping and wind
turbines
F Chemicals – in medicines, biotechnology, cosmetics
F Ornamental resources – seashells, driftwood, amber
FGenetic resources – DNA
Supporting Ecosystem Services:
FBiogeochemical cycles – nutrient cycle (nitrogen
and phosphorus), carbon and oxygen, including
the water cycle
FPrimary production – production of phytoplankton
and algae from sunlight and nutrients (photosynthesis), which is the basis for all life.
FFood web dynamics – who eats whom? Structure
of the food chain from formation of phytoplankton
to decomposition of dead animals and plants.
FBiodiversity – variation of plants, animals and
other organisms at all levels
FHabitats – the differing habitats of all species,
which are essential for a species to grow and survive, e.g., sea grass meadows in which fish fry can
hide.
FResilience – the ability to cope with change, ecosystems’ resistance and ability to recover.
16
Cultural Ecosystem Services:
FRecreation – tourism, swimming, boating, sport
fishing and bird watching.
FAesthetic value – enjoyment of scenery and silence
(apart from the lapping of the waves and bird calls),
clear water.
FScience and education – environmental studies for
all ages, research material, data for museums and
aquariums.
FCultural heritage – historic shipwrecks, prehistoric
finds, coastal communities, fishing villages and spas.
FInspiration – source of inspiration for art, literature,
music, films and advertising.
FThe legacy of the sea – preservation of nature for
ethical reasons, from our ancestors for future generations.
Illustration: Annika Röhl
O2
Supp
H2O
orting
Habitat
g
atin
L CYCLES
ul
Prov
N2
P
Recreation
eg
R
Prov
isioning
is io n i n g b io d i v e r sit
Genetic
resources
y
Sediment
retention
Reduced
eutrophication
Space and waterways
Food webs
ION
BIOGE
AQUARIUM
l
Science and education
ra
Legacy of the sea
Cultu
CO2
H2O
Inspiration
OCHEMICA
O2
CO2
A I R A N D C L I M AT E R E G U L AT
Resilience
Aestetic value
Food
Ornamental resources
Energy
Cultural
heritage
Chemical resources
Biologic
regulation
Non-edible goods
Regulation of
environmental toxins
PRI MARY P R O D UC TIO N
Source: Report 5873
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES are the products, services and processes than nature offers man and that are essential to our survival, welfare and
societal development. The various processes below the surface interact and are essential in order to derive economic benefits.
17
The Value the Sea Provides
When we think of the services the sea provides, perhaps we first think of food such as fish, and the opportunity to go swimming. But the sea gives us so much
more that many of us greatly appreciate on the basis of
economic, cultural and ethical values.
Cultural ecosystem services offer recreation and the
opportunity to enjoy beautiful scenery. They contribute to education and scientific information, and to
our cultural heritage. Books, films, paintings, folklore, music, architecture and advertising often employ
motifs from the coast and sea. The Danish “Skagen
Group” painters were inspired by the sea and light
along Denmark’s north coast.
If tourism reflects concern for nature, it can also contribute to local, regional and national sustainable
development. Tourism is predicated on clean beaches
to visit or clear water to swim or sail in. The sea has
also always offered routes for trade and cultural exchange.
The sea also stimulates children and adults alike to
learn more about the environment in general. All the
countries bordering the Baltic Sea are committed to
increasing awareness and understanding of the marine
ecosystem. This includes school trips, museums, nature
centres, aquariums, research and seminars. Activities
like these also create many jobs.
The Baltic Sea and Skagerrak are also at the centre
of numerous research projects. Scientists are studying
ancient coastlines, fossils and geochemical changes in
sediment core samples so as to better understand how
the environment has changed. They will then be better
able to predict future changes.
Marine provisioning ecosystem services include more
than fish and shellfish. There is a growing market for
health foods based on algae and seaweed. Algae from
the sea can be used as fertiliser and are often used
in the food and cosmetics industries as a thickener in
creams. Products derived from algae, kelp and red
algae are found in ice-cream, shampoo, paint, toothpaste, yoghurt and pet food.
photo: Per magnus persson/johnér bildbyrå
18
Provisioning ecosystem services such as fish, shellfish,
sand, industrial water and amber are well known. The
technology used to convert sea water into drinking
water is fairly new and demand is growing. There are
around 400 – 500 desalination plants in the Stockholm
archipelago. The cleaner the sea water, the more reli-
PHoto: Nationalmuseum
Song of the Waves
It’s we we the waves
who rock the winds when they
are weary!
We are green cradles, rocking.
We are wet waves and salty,
we’re like flames of fire,
flames of water are we.
Quenching and burning and
cleansing and bathing and
breeding, cleaning.
It’s we we the waves
who rock the winds when they
are weary!
Translation: Anne-Charlotte Hanes Harvey
able the quality of drinking water and the lower the
cost of maintaining the equipment6 .
Another example is glue from mussel excreta, which
can be used in dentistry, electronics and construction.
The Baltic Sea and Skagerrak also contain many species that are or can be used in the pharmaceutical and
biotechnology industries. The sea provides us with
genetic material that may be essential for restoring
degraded habitats or endangered populations.
All these Types of Value are Based on the Supporting and Regulating Services Provided by
the Sea.
Photosynthesis results in primary production. The two
ecosystem services that have greatest impact on the
extent of primary production are the biogeochemical
cycle (particularly nutrient, water and carbon cycles),
and the capacity of the sea to regulate climate. The
6 Kaj Öhman, land technician at Probitas/Stensnäs Kurs & Konferens, October 2008,
www.probitas.se
August Strindberg’s poem “Song of the Waves” and his painting “xxxxxxx”.
A quarter of all 20th century paintings on display at the National Museum
in Stockholm have motifs from coast and sea. It might be possible to work
out the economic value of the sea as a source of inspiration by ascertaining
people’s willingness to pay.
biogeochemical cycle and climate regulation impact
virtually all other ecosystem services, including each
other.
Marine primary production in the form of plankton
and marine vegetation form the basis for the diversity,
food web and habitats of supporting ecosystem services. Together, these produce the various products and
services that are of direct benefit to man. Diversity, the
food web and habitats also preserve resilience, i.e. the
capacity of the sea to recover from perturbation.
Perturbations are dealt with by regulating services in
a properly functioning ecosystem. In the marine ecosystem mitigation of eutrophication, biological regulation, sediment retention and regulation of pollutants
help to preserve diversity, the food web, habitat and
resilience. Regulating services remedy perturbations
of natural or, increasingly often, anthropogenic origin.
Energy and space for transport (waterways) and construction are among the few services that are not
19
directly dependent on supporting and regulating ecosystem services. However, they may in turn have an
adverse impact on other services such as diversity, the
food web and habitats.
2.2. Most Ecosystem Services are
under Threat
Perturbations are dealt with by regulating services in
a properly functioning marine ecosystem. At present
many regulating ecosystem services are under stress,
since they are trying to cope with other ecosystem
services that are chronically stressed. If the climate
changes in the way predicted by scientific climate models, the regulating services will be even more severely
affected.
Eutrophication and overfishing are the main causes of
ecosystem destruction in the Baltic Sea and the Skagerrak. At present there are restrictions on using fish
from the Baltic Sea as food because they contain dioxins and PCBs in concentrations above the permitted
limits. One major problem is that we do not yet fully
understand the reasons for these high concentrations.
Only 10 of the 24 ecosystem services described are
operating properly in the Baltic Sea. This conclusion
may be drawn even though there are wide gaps in our
knowledge of most of the services. Seven are severely
threatened, including four of the six supporting services. The four under severe threat are: the food web,
biodiversity, habitats and Baltic Sea resilience, i.e. the
capacity of the sea to recover. The other three threatened services are food, genetic resources and aesthetic
values.
Some services are relative unaffected by environmental
threats. Examples include the ability to produce phytoplankton and algae (primary production) and the
availability of space for shipping and shipping lanes.
Other services are impacted by several environmental
threats simultaneously, e.g., biodiversity, habitats, fish
and shellfish production and recreational assets. Most
ecosystem services are probably irreplaceable, and the
benefit from one service is usually a loss for another.
The most serious perturbations, caused by man to the
various ecosystem services are shown in Table 1. The
table also presents some of the industries that are
dependent on the respective services. Many of these
industries in turn affect the services they use.
Common sea mussels filter sea water for food and can help to counteract
eutrophication by being harvested and used as food, animal feed and fertiliser. Mussels can even be farmed as a way of treating waste water, although
they cannot then be used as food.
20
Annika Röhl
Table 1.
Tabell 1
Effects of Detrimental Human Activity on Marine Ecosystem Services2009-03-16
Provided by the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak.
Table 1. Effects of detrimental human activity on marine ecosystem services
documented increase
in ecosystem service
documented decrease
in ecosystem service
potential increase
in ecosystem service
documented though
varied impact
potential decrease
in ecosystem service
impact expected
though not described
Impact
CULTURAL SERVICES
PROVISIONING SERVICES
REGULATING SERVICES
SUPPORTING SERVICES
Ecosystem
service
Eutrophication
Hazard.
subst.
Fishery
Excessive
exploitation
& bycatch
Habitat
disturbance
fishing
Aquaculture
Construction
& developm.
Shipping
Invasive
alien species
Oil
spill
Pysical
damage
Climate
change
CO2
C°
Industry,
livelihood,
service*
S1
Biogeochemical
cycling
Support most other services
S2
Primary production
Support most other services
S3
Food web
dynamics
Support most other services
S4
Diversity
Support most other services
S5
Habitat
Support most other services
S6
Resilience
Support most other services
R1
Climate & atmosph.
regulation
All fossil-burning activities
R2
Sediment
retention
Construction, property,
tourism
R3
Eutrophication
mitigation
(mussels)
Tourism, fishery, property
R4
Biological
regulation
(mussels)
Food industry, tourism,
property
R5
Reg. of hazardious
substances
(mussels)
P1
Food
P2
Inedible goods
Food industry, tourism
Fishery, health, mariculture,
food, processing
(mussels)
Agriculture, livestock,
petroleum
P3
Genetic resources
Aquaculture
P4
Chemical
resources
Pharmaceutical, shipping,
chemical, health
P5
Ornamental
resources
Amber, tourism
P6
Energy
Wave energy
P7
Space &
waterways
Shipping,
offshore windparks
C1
Recreation
Tourism, sportsfishing,
yachting, diving, health
C2
Scenery
Property, construction,
tourism, health
C3
Science &
education
Museums, aquaria, science,
education
C4
Cultural heritage
Museums, festivals, health,
intrinsic
Art, ads, film,
lyrics, books
C5
Inspiration
C6
The legacy
of the sea
diagram: annika röhl
provided by the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak.
Intrinsic
*Though beneficiaries of the ecosystem services in question, some industries nonetheless contribute to their demise.
The table shows how the most serious perturbations of human origin threaten the marine ecosystem services provided by the Baltic Sea and
Skagerrak. The table also presents some of the industries that are dependent on each service. Many of those industries in turn impact the
services they use.
21
2.3. What is Going to Happen?
The ecosystem services in the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak are strongly impacted by man. The driving forces
of today will probably continue to have a major impact
in the future, but they will be joined by other forces, in
particular the effects of climate change.
Eutrophication
The influx of nutrients from industrial plants and sewage will probably diminish and inhibit eutrophication.
The prospects for the influx of more widely dispersed
diffuse sources, such as agriculture, are less certain.
It is possible that the influx of nutrients will decrease,
PHoto: kjell larsson
but visible effects will not be discernible for decades.
On the other hand, a warmer climate towards the end
of this century might exacerbate eutrophication owing
to greater quantities of warmer water and changes in
precipitation patterns.
Overfishing and Fish Farming
Over-exploitation of the most commercially soughtafter fish species represents a threat to the entire ecosystem. Yet this is also the area offering the greatest
potential for rapid improvements. Among other things,
the development of fish farms in our marine areas may
impact on eutrophication and the spread of diseases
among wild fish. It takes about three kilos of wild fish
caught to produce one kilo of farmed salmon, which
produces about 600 grams of fillets7. Choice of feed,
management and location, as well as development of
fish farming methods need to be the subject of more
research (see also Chapter 3).
Climate Change
Roughly half of the carbon dioxide man has emitted
is stored in the oceans. This marine sink means that
levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are rising
more slowly than they would otherwise have done.
International climate simulations focusing on the late
21st century suggest growing acidification of sea water,
rising sea levels, stronger winds, lower salinity – in
addition to increased eutrophication.
There has been a sharp decline in long-tailed duck numbers. Each year
some 10,000 of these birds are harmed by oil on the Hoburg Bank. One of
the Baltic shipping lanes passes via the Hoburg Bank east of Gotland, which
is a Natura 2000 protected site. The IMO has therefore recommended that
shipping avoid part of this area, so the number of ships passing the bank
has fallen.
22
The Swedish Climate and Vulnerability white paper
(SOU 2007:60) estimates that rising sea levels during
the period 2010 – 2100 may cause damage in Sweden as
7 Source: Angervall T., Sonesson U., Ziegler F., Cederberg C. (2008) Mat och klimat
– En sammanfattning om matens klimatpåverkan i ett livscykelperspektiv (“Food and
Climate – A summary of the climate impact of food from a life-cycle perspective”).
Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology (SIK).
a result of greater coastal erosion to the tune of €2 – 9
billion, and flood damage to buildings along coasts
totalling €1 – 2 billion.
Species composition will change as an effect of climate
change. For instance, more acidic sea water constitutes a direct threat to the coral reefs in the Skagerrak.
At present only one out of six known Swedish coral
reefs has living colonies of coral. Lower salinity would
probably also have a sharp impact on species diversity
in the Baltic Sea. The southern population of ringed
seals has already been affected, since they depend on
pack ice to be able to give birth to their pups.
Invasive Alien Species
Shipping and Oil Discharges
Increasing numbers of invasive alien species are changing the balance in the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak. Over
three billion tonnes of ballast water is pumped out of
ships across the world every year. Ballast water may
contain alien species of fish, shellfish, jellyfish, algae
and bacteria that can change the structure of the food
web. Sea transport will increase substantially over
the next decade, bringing with it the risk of increased
dispersal of harmful alien species. Compliance in the
Baltic Sea and North Sea with the provisions of the
Ballast Convention is therefore essential. The EU also
needs to formulate a common strategy on invasive
alien species.
The rapid increase in shipping will be accompanied by
a growing risk of oil discharges and major oil spills. It
is estimated that 50,000 crossings of the Baltic Sea are
made each year. Sea freight is expected to increase by
around five per cent a year in the Baltic, and oil transport is expected to double between 2005 and 2015. In
2006 the International Maritime Organisation (IMO)
classified the Baltic as a particularly sensitive sea area,
one consequence of this being more stringent controls
governing shipping routes.
One example of an invasive species is the American
comb jellyfish, which has caused damage in the Black
Sea, and was also discovered in 2005 in the Kattegat and southern Baltic. It has no natural enemies in
our waters. Another example is the fish-hook water
flea, which may occur in large numbers in the Bay of
Finland, forming an extensive jelly-like mass in the
water.
Accidents involving major oil spills have an immediate
impact on seabirds and the tourism industry. But minor
oil spills also cause damage. Here too, seabird species
are particularly at risk.
Hazardous Substances
It will remain difficult to prevent the dispersal of hazardous substances. Moreover, new substances are being
dispersed so rapidly that we do not have time to assess
their effects, e.g., pharmaceutical residues. Awareness
of the risks has grown. Consumer awareness provides
23
PHoto: © Centrum för Förnybar Elenergiomvandling (CFE)
Waves contain large amounts of energy. Using the right technologies, wave power may become a major renewable source of energy in the future.
a strong impetus in this process, as consumers demand
that importers and manufacturers offer alternatives.
(See also 3.5).
Competition for Space
There is enormous development pressure in coastal
areas, for housing, recreational facilities, and industrial
production. The priority given to the various interests
competing for space will impact the prospects of conserving biodiversity and protecting cultural heritage.
Energy production in marine areas is growing rapidly,
particularly from wind power. Denmark has six wind
farms out to sea. New wind farms are being built both
in the Baltic and in the North Sea. It is considered possible in the future to produce 24 TWh of wave energy
per year in the Baltic Sea, which is equivalent to the
electricity output from four Swedish nuclear power
generators. 8
8 Source: Fortum, November 2008.
24
Stressed Ecosystem Services may Cause
a Collapse
The combined effect of the many threats and risks must
be taken into account, because together they may result in a more rapid continual change, and in many
cases deterioration in the function of the ecosystems.
This may ultimately bring the system to a “tipping
point”, where it shifts to a new state without a major
single perturbation having occurred. At that point a
return to the previous state may no longer be possible.
A single major perturbation in a healthy and more
robust ecosystem may be less harmful, since the system then often retains its capacity to reorganise and
rejuvenate.
Valuing marine ecosystem services economically is a
fairly new area of research. Some 40 studies on the
economic value of the Baltic Sea have been identified
as part of a survey in which all Baltic Sea States participated. All participants have also made an assessment
of the areas they consider to be in greatest need of
research. The results are presented in background
Report 5874, which consists of an overall summary
and reports from nine countries.
The studies that have been made mainly concern eutrophication, fisheries (both commercial fisheries and
sport fisheries), oil discharges, litter, recreational values
and location of wind turbines. A few studies cover more
than one area. Most deal with a limited geographical
area. For example, there has been no study covering
fisheries in all the Baltic Sea States, or the impact of
coastal tourism in the respective countries. This makes
it difficult to express in figures the gains to be made
from a better Baltic Sea environment. The exception
is a comprehensive study from the mid-1990s, which
estimated how people in the various Baltic Sea States
valued reduced discharges of nutrients into the Baltic
(see section 3.1).
The survey shows that there are virtually no economic
studies of the value of most ecosystem services (see
Table 2). The main areas given priority for future research by economists are those in which considerable
research has already been carried out. There are two
quite different potential explanations for this result:
(1)These areas are the most important ones.
(2)There is a lack of scientific knowledge to use as a
basis for making an economic evaluation of the non priority areas.
3
There are many studies on the cost of remedying various environmental problems. However, if we concentrate on studies in which the cost of various measures
is compared with their impact on the environment, the
selection is more limited. The area that has been most
analysed is the cost of reducing nutrient emissions.
No systematic studies of the cost of reducing levels of
hazardous substances in the Baltic Sea or Skagerrak
are available. Although the remedial cost in relation to
some substances has been estimated, it is not known
what effect the measures will have on marine ecosystem services. Nor have any such studies been made into
measures to prevent the establishment of invasive alien
species.
3.1. Eutrophication
Eutrophication of the Baltic Sea and input of the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus are not only one of the
greatest threats to ecosystem services, including habiPHoto: brand x/Johnér bildbyrå
The Economics
of Ecosystem Services
One challenge we face is to manage livestock farming so that it helps to
maintain an open landscape, with all the biodiversity that offers, while
ensuring that this does not add to emissions of nitrogen and phosphorus.
25
Table 2.
Category
of ecosystem
service
Supporting
services
Ecosystem service
Degree to which the service
has been covered by economic
research as compared with the
other 23 ecosystem services
Biogeochemical cycles
Low
Primary production
Low
Food web
Low
Biodiversity
Regulating
services
Provisioning
services
Cultural
services
Medium
Habitat
High
Resilience
Low
Climate & atmospheric
regulation
Low
Sediment retention
Low
Biological regulation
Low
Regulation of pollutants
Low
Reduced eutrophication
Low
Food
High
Inedible goods
Low
Genetic resources
Low
Chemicals
Low
Ornamental resources
Low
Energy
Low
Space and waterways
Low
Recreation
High
Aesthetic values
High
Science & education
Low
Cultural heritage
Medium
Low
Inspiration
The legacy of the sea
Degree of priority
of the need for
future studies
Medium
Description of the economic valuations made of ecosystem services and the areas in which further studies are proposed according the various
country reports. (Source: Background Report 5874)
= The reports from the various Baltic Sea States make no specific
mention of this service as a priority for future studies
★ = Important area for future studies according to Report 5874
★ ★ = Very important area for future studies according to Report 5874
★ ★ ★ = Top priority for future studies according to Report 5874
26
Table 3.
Nitrogen reduction
Phosphorus reduction
Less rearing of livestock, pigs and fowl
Less rearing of livestock, pigs and fowl
Less fertiliser use
Less fertiliser use
Increased wastewater treatment at sewage works
Increased wastewater treatment at sewage work
Private sewage treatment systems
Private sewage treatment systems
Catch crops
Catch crops
More wetlands
More wetlands
Spreading manure at different times of year
Non-phosphate detergents
Energy forest
Buffer zones
Catalytic converters at power plants
Catalytic converters on ships
Catalytic converters in trucks
Grassland
Potential measures to reduce either nitrogen or phosphorus emissions, and some measures capable of reducing emissions of both nutrients,
according to literature on the Baltic Sea catchment. The measures have different effects on these nutrients and also vary depending on catchment.
tat, foods and tourism, it is also an area of knowledge
in which the greatest number of economic studies have
been carried out. Estimates have been made of eutrophication throughout the entire Baltic Sea, not only in
individual countries.
Achieving the BSAP objective of a general reduction in
nutrients in the Baltic Sea will require a reduction in
the annual input of phosphorus from the entire catchment of 15,000 tonnes, and a 130,000-tonne reduction
in nitrogen input.
Cost of Measures to Reduce Nitrogen and
Phosphorus Emissions
The lowest conceivable cost of achieving this has been
estimated using available data and models, which are
based on extensive simplifications, however. Potential
measures have been split into 14 categories of measure
to reduce the input of nitrogen och phosphorus. Several
of them also affect each other. A heavy focus on measures at source would reduce the quantity of nutrients
reaching the soil. This would therefore increase the cost
per kilo of nutrients of the measures to reduce leaching.
It may generally be said that measures to change land
use yield the highest net gains in reducing nitrogen input, e.g., by restoring wetlands, reducing fertiliser use
and improving wastewater treatment. But the net gain
varies depending on the present situation. Reducing
the use of artificial fertilisers is a cheap step for those
who have previously used more fertiliser than necessary. But if fertiliser use has previously been optimal,
this will be an expensive measure (since crop yields will
fall). The cheapest way of reducing phosphorus emissions is at source, e.g., by banning detergents containing phosphates and increasing the degree of phosphorus removal at sewage works.
BSAP includes an emission target for each HELCOM
land. Model calculations suggest a minimum annual
outlay of approximately €2,6 billion for a cost-effective combination of measures to achieve the targets for
all countries in the Baltic Sea region (see Table 4).
27
Table 4.
Benefits of avoiding the
effects of eutrophication,
estimated on basis of
people's willingness to pay
Minimum cost of achieving
the BSAP targets for emission
reductions in each country
Net gain
from achieving
the target
Denmark
290
920
+ 630
Estonia
10
60
+ 50
Finland
10
610
+ 600
Germany
130
530
+ 400
Latvia
30
60
+ 30
Lithuania
220
80
- 140
Poland
1,680
930
- 750
Russia
90
180
+ 90
Sweden
100
1,460
+ 1,360
TOTAL
2,560
4,830
+ 2,270
Country
Model calculations of the cost of achieving the BSAP target for reduced nutrient inputs from each country, and the benefits of limiting eutrophication. The results reveal major differences between the countries and a need to analyse joint funding instruments. In millions of euro per year.
Source: Report 5877.
There is great variation between countries. Studies into
the cost of reducing nutrient emissions conclude that
Poland, Latvia and Lithuania have little economic
incentive to participate in cost-effective joint action.
Sweden and Finland would gain most from international cooperation to reduce eutrophication.
The model calculations indicate a need for joint policy instruments to increase cost-effectiveness and create
more equal conditions in the various Baltic Sea States.
Among other things, there is discussion of joint funds
to finance measures and international trade in emission
rights for nutrients. The potential for a market of this
kind is discussed in the Nefco report: Framework of a
Nutrient Quota and Credits System for the Baltic Sea
and the Swedish EPA report Förslag till avgiftssystem
för kväve och fosfor (“Proposed System of Charges on
Nitrogen and Phosphorus”) (NV Report 5913).
Benefits of Reduced Eutrophication
A real reduction in the input of nutrients to the Baltic Sea would probably not have any marked positive
28
effects for several decades. However, local positive
effects could occur much more quickly. The benefits of
a healthier sea have been estimated using various valuation methods, e.g., people’s willingness to pay for a
better environment. Several valuation studies have been
made in the Baltic Sea States. For instance, one study
suggests that the value of better conditions for recreation in the Stockholm archipelago, in the form of improved water transparency (secchi depth), exceeds the
cost of achieving the improvement. Another study indicates that measures to improve Finnish coastal waters
in the Bay of Finland are economically profitable.
The only valuation study covering the entire Baltic
Sea region concerns eutrophication of the Baltic Sea.
A questionnaire survey on public willingness to pay
to avoid the effects of eutrophication was carried out
in Poland and Sweden in the mid-1990s. Respondents
were given descriptions of eutrophication, oxygen deficiency, changes in flora and fauna, algal blooms and
potential health risks. Inferences could then be drawn
about what people in Poland and Sweden respectively
were prepared to pay to reduce eutrophication to a
level with which the Baltic Sea can cope.
The Polish results were processed as a basis for estimating the willingness to pay in the “transition states”
in the 1990s, i.e. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Russia. The Swedish results were transposed to the established market economies of Denmark, Finland and
Germany.
The first results reflected the situation in the mid-1990s.
These have since been adjusted to reflect the position
in 2005, but are stated in 2007 prices, based on the
rapid rate of economic growth in many of the countries and information on how developments in general
have impacted people’s willingness to pay. There are
great differences between the countries. It is estimated
that an average Polish citizen is willing to pay about
€2; for a Swede the figure is approximately €13 per
month.
Willingness to pay totals approximately €4.8 billion a
year, which is almost twice as much as the total minimum cost of achieving the BSAP targets for reduced
nutrient inputs (see Table 4.)
3.2. Fisheries
Food is an ecosystem service that has been well covered
by economic research; see Table 3. In volume terms,
the main fisheries in the Baltic Sea are sprat and herring. The most important fish in economic terms is the
cod. A Swedish estimate of commercial cod catches
from the Baltic shows that lower cod quotas could rapidly yield results. Between 1983 and 2005 the annual
take was up to 60 per cent of cod stocks. If instead the
take had only been 30 per cent of Baltic cod stocks
each year between 1983 and 2005, average landings
could have been twice has high from 1985 onwards.
Only during the first two years would catches have
been lower. See diagram.
Some action has been taken to protect cod. For example, cod fishing has been banned since 2006 in a zone
off the coast of Gotska Sandön, north of Gotland. The
ban will be evaluated in 2010. By that time a further
six no-fishing zones will have been established in the
Baltic and Skagerrak. Three of them are intended to
protect cod stocks.
There is no doubt that it is economically profitable to
carry out a series of additional measures to allow fish
stocks to recover. As may be seen from the example
above, overfishing is a result of short-term management of fishery resources. EU fishing quotas have long
been too high. There are too many fishing vessels and
they are too large. The method of calculating fishing
quotas has meant that large quantities of fish are
treated as by-catches and die before they are thrown
back. In addition, control procedures and sanctions
are inadequate, which has resulted in extensive illegal
fishing. This in turn means that many fish stocks are
currently being fished below biologically safe limits,
with resulting high economic costs.
The Swedish Board of Fisheries has estimated that it
would be economically profitable to:
F Reduce the capacity of the fishing fleet.
F Introduce alternative forms of management, such as
trade in individual fishing quotas or regulation of
fishing effort (the “kW-day system”). However,
whether a given form of management helps to achieve
economically profitable fisheries depends on how the
systems are designed. Introduction of tradable indi29
400
diagram: annika röhl
Tonnes, 000s
500
Record years
1983–1984
30% take
300
Potential catches
60% take
200
ICES*
100
Actual catches
1966–2007
Less fish then – more fish today?
The blue area shows actual cod catches during 1966 –
2007, representing a take of 60 per cent.
Following the record years 1983 and 1984, catches
fall dramatically. Cod stocks have declined drastically
and are not recovering. This notwithstanding, the take
remains at 60 per cent, which has caused stocks to fall
below “danger level” over the past 15 years (red line).
The green area shows what the situation would have
been if the take had only been 30 per cent from 1983
onwards. Twice as much cod could now have been
caught. During a two-year period catches would have
been lower than was actually the case, but for the remainder of the period catches could have generated an
additional €100 – 200 million each year.
Source: Havsutsikt 2/2008 Bengt Sjöstrand, Swedish Board of Fisheries
83 84
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
* Källa: ICES (2007) Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Environment, and Ecosystems. Book VII).
vidual fishing quotas or kW-days does not itself
guarantee economically profitable fisheries.
F Introduce joint management where expedient, e.g.,
by a joint declaration by fisheries organisations, scientists and environmental organisations that they
accept the materials used as a basis for decisions.
F Divide Swedish waters into zones and specify fishing periods and fishing methods, etc. for each zone.
F Further reform fisheries legislation. This is currently
the subject of a study in Sweden. The proposals being
discussed include not only limiting fishing licences to
a given species, but also introducing fees for various
types of fishing.
F Develop and introduce more selective fishing methods and gear.
F Improve controls by effective procedures and electronic fisheries monitoring.
F Improve knowledge of fisheries and ecosystem-based
management.
30
F Actively influence the EU to secure greater accept-
ance of sustainable use of fishery resources.
Most of these measures will have to be implemented at
EU level to achieve the desired result. According to the
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, overfishing is one
of the most acute global environmental problems.
Nursery areas for several fish species are also in need
of protection, e.g. sea grass meadows on the sea bed.
Over 60 per cent of sea grass meadows along the west
coast of Sweden have been destroyed by eutrophication and physical impact in the form of road and harbour construction, for example. Alien species of algae,
which do not provide fish with the same protection, are
able to establish, which hinders the re-establishment
of sea grass. The estimated cost of artificially recreating sea grass meadows is €50,000 per hectare.
PHoto: björn edlund/pix gallery
Various studies of commercial fisheries and sport fisheries have shown that they have a high economic value. There is no doubt that it is economically profitable to
take action so that fish stocks can recover.
Swedish commercial fisheries and
sport fisheries
Income from Swedish commercial fisheries has declined, as has profitability. The value of landings fell
from €125 million to €90 million between 2002 and
2005, a decline of around 30 per cent. The value of
landings rose again to about €110 million in 2006.
Value added (what remains when the cost of fishing
vessels and equipment etc has been deducted) was
almost €50 million in 2006. The value of the fish also
depends on their quality, including their content of
environmental toxins. This is discussed in section 3.5.
Some 4,000 people work in the Swedish fisheries
industry, which accounts for less than 0.1 per cent of
GDP. The number of commercial fishermen has fallen
from around 20,000 in 1950 to about 1,800 in 2008.
Fisheries infrastructure has more or less vanished from
the Swedish east coast. This is a result of the declining
availability of cod and eel, and other obstacles such as
the bureaucracy facing small-scale fisheries and damage caused by seals and cormorants.
Commercial fishermen make a profit of around €0.1 per
kilo of fish caught. This may be compared with sport
fisheries, where the net value of each kilo of fish caught
is estimated to be €4, calculated on the basis of willingness to pay. Yet a study carried out in 2007 shows
that commercial fisheries have a high cultural value,
for which Swedes are prepared to pay almost €200
million a year. The same study also shows that the willingness to pay in Sweden to increase cod stocks by 70
per cent is just less than €250 million per year.
There are estimated to be one million sport fishermen
in Sweden, including all those who fish in lakes, rivers and streams. The total willingness to pay for sport
31
PHoto: skärgårdsguiderna
3.4. Tourism and Recreation
One of Sweden’s million-plus sports fishermen.
fisheries based on their willingness to pay for fishing
they did in 2006 was around €265 million a year.
Fish and Mussel Farms
The most commonly farmed species in the Baltic Sea
region are rainbow trout and salmon for consumption.
Salmon and trout are also bred for release into rivers and
seas. The main reason for this is to strengthen stocks
that have become depleted owing to loss of spawning
grounds.
Just under 2,000 tonnes of rainbow trout were farmed
in Sweden in 2007, which is almost one-third of all
rainbow trout farmed for consumption purposes in the
marine environment. Two-thirds of these farms are in
the northern Baltic.
Mussels are farmed for various purposes. Mussels from
the Skagerrak and Kattegat are sold for consumption.
Trials are in progress to ascertain whether mussels can
be used to filter out nutrients, e.g., at sewage works.
Denmark produces some 20,000 – 30,000 tonnes of
mussels each year in the Skagerrak, and Germany produces 10,000 tonnes.
32
Cultural ecosystem services include the world’s largest
industry – tourism. The tourism industry in the Baltic
Sea States is estimated to have an annual turnover of
about €90 billion, and to provide work for some two
million people. This includes all forms of tourism, not
merely those linked to the Baltic Sea itself. Other sectors that can be valued include the leisure boat industry, which had sales of approximately €265 million
in Sweden in 2004, including shipyards, marinas and
servicing.
Other assets, such as the sea as a source of inspiration
for musicians, artists, writers and scientists, are more
difficult to measure. The same applies to the importance of outdoor recreation to health and reduced
medical costs, or the value of 12,000 shipwrecks at the
bottom of the Baltic, which attract many of the region’s
235,000 divers.
In order to gain an idea of the valuation placed by the
tourism industry on clean beaches and good seawater,
a study was made in spring 2008 involving a total of 87
representatives of beach tourism, boating, sport fishing, cruise companies and real estate. The study included people from all Baltic Sea States. The questionnaire
survey was not based on a random selection of representatives, although the questions were based on the
same questionnaire and allow some comparisons and
overall conclusions.
The questions covered two main themes: Has business
been affected by changes in the marine environment
to date, and is it possible that it will be affected in
the future? One conclusion is that those interviewed
generally consider that tourism is so far relatively unaffected by current problems in the marine environ-
PHoto: jourmala city council
Thanks to sewage treatment and treatment of industrial effluents, the beach at Jurmala in Latvia was able in just a few years in the late 1990s to replace the
signs reading “Bathing Prohibited” with the “Blue Flag”, the international mark of quality for beaches and marinas. Nowadays most Baltic Sea States have
organisations for ecotourism, i.e. tourism that does not harm nature and cultural heritage. Even silence is starting to be protected. For example, there are two
stretches of the Skagerrak coast that are protected from noise disturbance.
ment, but that more widespread algal blooms may
cause serious problems, particularly for beach tourism
and sport fishing in Sweden, Denmark and Finland.
Together with Germany, tourism in these three countries is more dependent on the state of the environment
than tourism in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland
and Russia.
The reports from the various countries give three main
explanations of why environmental issues have not so
far been of central importance to the industry:
1) Those interviewed see algal blooms as a “natural”
phenomenon, rather than an environmental problem.
2) Demand is greater than supply. Resorts are fully
booked. Consumers, rather than producers, are affected by environmental problems.
3) The Baltic Sea environment is “good enough” to not
affect choice of holiday destinations to any great
degree.
There are local estimates of the cost of algal blooms.
Tourism on the island of Öland lost around €27 million due to algal blooms in 2005. The Hel peninsula in
Poland also saw tourist numbers drop one summer as
a result of algal blooms.
Estimates of the cost of increased occurrence of algal
blooms vary in the interviews. One person mentions
losses of millions of euro per year. Others estimate the
decline in sales to be 10 – 15 per cent, depend on the
amount of algae. Those interviewed in the real estate
sector say that the price of waterfront properties falls
if the water is murky or malodorous.
Aside from eutrophication and algal blooms, worries
about the future include the fear of oil spills. A major
oil spill could cause great harm to tourism in affected
areas.
33
3.5. Hazardous Substances
Hazardous substances also impact several ecosystem
services. Here too, most economic research relates to
the food service. The value of fish depends not only on
the species and how it is caught. Some oily fish caught
in the Baltic may not be sold in the EU because they
contain environmental toxins such as dioxins and
PCBs in concentrations exceeding permitted limits.
Sweden and Finland are exempt from this ban, since
these countries issue special guidelines for consumers.
One major problem is that we have no explanation as
to why concentrations are so high.
Heavy metals, brominated flame retardants and tributyltin compounds (TBTs, from hull paints) are other
examples of environmental toxins that accumulate in
fish and shellfish. TBTs are considered to be one of the
most dangerous substances released by man into the
environment. There are many substances whose potential effects on the environment are as yet unknown,
and even less is known about the effects of various
environmental toxins in combination. Supporting and
regulating ecosystem services are able to break down
some hazardous substances, but emissions are much
greater than the ecosystems can cope with.
There are no systematic studies on the cost of reducing levels of hazardous substances in the Baltic Sea
or Skagerrak. This is complicated by the fact that we
do not have a clear picture of the sources of all substances. However, cost studies have been carried out
on treatment of contaminated sediment, reduction of
quantities of heavy metals and a ban on tributyltin,
which may serve as a basis for future efforts in this
area.
34
WOMEN AND CHILDREN SHOULD AVOID OILY FISH
FROM THE BALTIC
The Swedish National Food Administration recommends
that children and adults eat fish 2 – 3 times a week, but
that children and women of child-bearing age should not
eat herring, wild-caught salmon and trout from the Baltic
more than 2–3 times a year, owing to their excessively high
levels of environmental toxins such as dioxins and PCBs.
There are also research reports suggesting that men who
each too much oily fish from the Baltic may suffer from
a lower sperm count. (Pharmacogenetics and Genomics
(2007) 6:391-401. Giwercman, Aleksander et al.)
Apart from the fact that these fish lose market value, the
anxiety about environmental toxins in food is itself an
indirect cost, which particularly affects parents and pregnant women. This is an example of a non-commercial
economic cost arising because emissions of hazardous
substances harm ecosystem services.
Air pollutants from various incineration and combustion
processes and other industrial operations, and also perhaps from small-scale combustion and contaminated
sites, are currently the predominant source of dioxins,
PCBs and hexachlorobenzene (HCB) that end up in the
Baltic. Concentrations of PCBs and HCB in herring have
been falling for many years, whereas concentrations of
dioxins fell until the mid-1980s, but have since remained
at a fairly constant level. In the early 2000s more than
ten per cent of the population ingested quantities of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs each day that were in excess of
the acceptable daily intake – even though concentration
in food have been falling since the 1970s.
Source: “Sources, Transport, Reservoirs and Fate of
Dioxins, PCBs and HCB in the Baltic Sea”, Swedish EPA
Report 5912
With a few exceptions, cost studies on heavy metal
reduction performed in other parts of the world disregard the dispersal of pollutants in the environment,
degradation, emissions and storage in biomass. This
means that the cost of measures at source cannot be
compared with the cost of measures in ecosystems.
However, some studies have been made of TBTs.
Foto: Gustav Almqvist
The round goby
It is likely that the round goby (Neogobius melanostomus)
arrived in the Baltic as a freeloader in ballast water. It is
spreading and there is a risk that it will outcompete native
species, thereby reducing biodiversity. There are economic
advantages in taking action to prevent invasive alien
species from establishing. Taking preventive measures in
relation to a species expected to enter the country in the
near future costs € 0.1 – 0.2 million per species and year.
Waiting until the species is already established entails a
much higher cost. Control and extermination programmes
can cost € 1.5 – 7 million per species and year.
Source: Swedish EPA Report 5910.
These indicate the costs and benefits of a ban and also
deal with the role of TBTs in relation to the risk of
invasive alien species becoming established.
3.6. Invasive Alien Species
Economic research has to some extent covered the biodiversity ecosystem service. One threat to this service
is the introduction of alien species, which may severely
disrupt the balance between species. In the marine environment it is particularly difficult to combat invasive
alien species. Working to prevent their introduction is
therefore of very great importance. The International
Maritime Organization – IMO) therefore adopted the
International Convention for the Control and Management of Ship Ballast Water and Sediment on 13 February 2004. The convention includes transitional provisions, but from 2016 all ships must have on-board
treatment systems for ballast water, and it will no longer be permitted to empty ballast water into the sea.
Very few impact analyses have been made in relation to
invasive alien species. No estimates have been made of
economic losses in the Baltic Sea. The difficulty of calculating effects generally hinders an analysis of costeffectiveness in relation to the goal of strengthening
and protecting marine biodiversity.
One example of an invasive alien species is the American comb jellyfish, which has been found in the southern Baltic and Kattegat. This species could out-compete
the native common jellyfish and represent a threat to
stocks of commercially important species such as herring, sprat and cod. It is probable that the comb jellyfish competes with cod, herring, sprat and other species
for zooplankton as a source of food. When anchovy
stocks collapsed in the Black Sea in the 1990s as a result
35
PHoto: the swedish coast guard
Operation Fu Shan Hai was one of the largest operations in the Swedish Coast Guard’s history. It cost the Coast Guard around €1 million and the municipalities
affected in southern Sweden just under €1.5 million. The total cost, i.e. the loss of the ship and its cargo, rescue work, the repair of Gdynia and the cost of oil
clean-up totalled over €100 million.
of the comb jellyfish, economic losses were estimated
at approximately €240 million.9
3.7. Oil Discharges and Litter
Much oil is broken down in the sea, thanks to ecosystem services. But cold water and a lack of throughflow
make the Baltic Sea especially sensitive to oil pollution.
Low temperatures increase the viscosity of oil and prevent it mixing with water. The microbial decomposition
of oil takes place more slowly than in warmer water,
and it can take years instead of months for it to break
down naturally. Large numbers of seabirds die after
a major oil spill; fisheries suffer and the value of recreation and tourism disappears. Even small oil spills
cause damage and entail high costs. Seabirds are particularly susceptible, and the Baltic Sea provides an
important winter habitat for many of these species.
9 Source: Nationell strategi och handlingsplan för främmande arter och genotyper
(“National strategy and action plan for alien species and genotypes”, Swedish EPA
Report 5910 (in Swedish).
36
Measures to reduce the risk of collisions and running
aground include improved navigation systems, use of
modern navigation instruments and more widespread
use of pilots. Aerial surveillance of sea areas has also
been found to significantly reduce the number of illegal
oil discharges.
When an oil spill has occurred, complete clean-up is
hardly ever achieved. Cost calculations do not usually
include the damage suffered by the environment, e.g.,
loss and injury of birds and mammals.
An estimate of clean-up costs after the oil spill from
the tanker Prestige, which sank off the coast of Spain
in 2002, arrived at a figure of €770 million. A total of
59,000 tonnes of oil leaked out over a period of a few
years. The cost calculation included clean-up, recovery, economic loss incurred by tourism, fisheries and
fish farming.
The most serious oil spillages in the Baltic have been
when the oil tanker Tsesis ran aground in the Stock-
holm archipelago in 1977, when around 1,000 tonnes
of oil leaked out, Baltic Carrier, which leaked 2,700
tonnes of oil in Grönsund (Denmark), and Fu Shan
Hai, which sank off the island of Bornholm in 2004,
leaking approximately 1,200 tonnes of oil in the process.
A scenario study of a major oil spill affecting parts of
the Stockholm archipelago estimated the cost at over
€90 million in 2007. The scenario was based on an
imaginary situation involving an oil spill of 30,000
tonnes east-northeast of the island of Gotska Sandön,
along the route taken by most of the tanker traffic to
and from the Bay of Finland. The oil would then drift
towards the Swedish coast. Most of the cost would
be for the two-year clean-up. Lower tourism revenues
would account for just over one-third of the costs,
while loss of revenue for fisheries, sport fisheries and
fish farming would only account for €1 million.10
Litter, too, impacts the recreation, food and habitat
ecosystem services. According to HELCOM, litter is
less of a problem in the Baltic than it is in many other
marine areas. Problems are greater along the west coast
of Sweden. The cost of cleaning beaches in Bohuslän
is estimated at €1 – 1.5 million a year. Poland has
reported that the cost of removing litter from beaches
in five municipalities and two ports totalled around
€570,000 in 2006.11
Protected marine areas
Map of marine areas that are protected from development.
Marine ecosystem services can only be protected if we
change the way we manage these services, e.g., adapt
fisheries, stop discharges of oil and hazardous substances
etc. Some fish nurseries and other important habitats can
be partly protected by creating nature reserves, national
parks and other forms of area protection.
(Map: HELCOM)
10Source: BalticMaster, April 2007.
11Source: HELCOM, http://www.helcom.fi/publications/other_publications/en_GB/
37
The Need for Further Research
The “Economic Marine Information” project was inspired by the Stern Review – an analysis of the economics of climate change. The Stern Review was published in 2006 and estimates the global cost of action
to mitigate climate change, as well of the cost of doing
nothing.
At present we lack the knowledge to be able to
make a similarly comprehensive analysis of the Baltic
Sea and Skagerrak.
4
F A new large-scale study is needed to value the will-
ingness to pay for the benefit of reducing nutrient
input to the Baltic Sea, since rapid development has
taken place in the Baltic Sea region over the past
decade. The degree of benefit also changes over time
and depending on information. In addition, valuation methods have been substantially developed,
which makes it possible to arrive at more accurate
economic appraisals of the value of various assets.
A coherent monetary valuation of ecosystem services in all Baltic Sea States should be carried out.
The background reports in this project and a Finnish
pre-study on the same theme as this project contain
proposed priority areas for research in the natural sciences, economics and political science. These proposals
are listed below.
F Determining an optimal target for reduced input of
F We need to know more about the way ecosystem
F A study of the way a programme to improve cod
services interact and how various measures impact
the services. If research focuses on the less well understood fundamental services, such as the food web,
habitats, biodiversity and resilience, we will also
obtain valuable information about other services.
stocks would affect the fisheries industry. The impact
on fisheries could also be compared with potential
cultural benefits such as preserving traditional fishing villages. There is also a need for more research
into the economic value of sport fisheries in the Baltic Sea.
nutrients will require a valuation of the marginal
benefits of reduced eutrophication effects.
F It is important to examine any goal conflicts, e.g.,
whether measures taken to support marine ecosystem services result in a decline in terrestrial ecosystem services, e.g., being able to control the input of
nutrients to the sea, while still conducting efficient
agriculture on land.
F Models and data are also needed for BSAP objec-
tives other than eutrophication, so as to analyse
the cost and benefit of achieving these objectives.
For instance, there has been virtually no economic
research on environmental toxins or invasive alien
species.
F Economic studies should be placed in relation to
measures relating to specific ecological variables that
can be defined and measured.
F The cost of not taking certain forms of action in
F The impact of climate change on the Baltic Sea is a
F There is a need for an analysis of uncertainty factors
key factor to analyse. How are salinity, temperature
and sea level affected, for example?
in models to study cost-effectiveness, to evaluate the
reliability of results.
38
some catchments should also be estimated.
PHoto: johan resele/global reporting
Despite the gaps in our knowledge, we know enough about the value of marine ecosystem services to act now, not least because we care about future generations.
F We need to know more about risks and threats posed
F A theoretical and empirical analysis of the terms of in-
by sea transport (oil spills, alien species, environmental toxins, etc). Knowledge is needed about the
economic consequences of the effect of oil spills on
ecosystems. We also need a valuation of measures to
reduce the risk of oil discharges.
ternational agreements is needed, including the way
that countries implement these agreements domestically. The net benefit to a country of a given measure may be of great importance, but other criteria,
such as fairness, may also be important if international agreements are to succeed.
F There is a need for economic analyses that take into
account future generations and examine the necessity of acting in time, e.g., by using a falling discount
rate over time.
F There should be a study into the scope for using vari-
ous policy instruments, including bilateral support
between countries, which could create more equal
conditions. Among other things, this applies to the
potential for an international nutrient quota and credits system. International and national policies need
to be coordinated to avoid measures that counteract one another.
39
Appendix 1.
List of Background reports on the sub-projects under the Swedish EPA project “Economic Marine Information”.
Ecosystem Services Provided by the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak.
Kajsa Garpe, fil dr.
ISBN 978-91-620-5873-9
Report 5873.
The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services Provided by the Baltic Sea and
Skagerrak – Existing Information and Gaps of Knowledge.
Linus Hasselström, fil. mag. och Tore Söderqvist, Associate Professor of Economics,
Enveco Environmental Economics Consultancy Ltd., Stockholm.
ISBN 978-91-620-5874-6
Report 5874.
Report 5875. Trends and Scenarios Exemplifying the Future of the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak – Ecological Impacts of not Taking Action.
Martina Kadin, fil. mag. Baltic Nest Institute/Stockholm Resilience Center.
ISBN 978-91-620-5875-3
Report 5876. The Costs of Environmental Improvements in the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak
– A Review of the Literature.
Katarina Elofsson, research assistant, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
ISBN 978-91-620-5876-0
Costs and Benefits from Nutrient Reductions to the Baltic Sea.
Professor Ing-Marie Gren.
ISBN 978-91-620-5877-7
Report 5877.
Report 5878. Tourism and Recreation Industries in the Baltic Sea area – How are they
Affected by the State of the Marine Environment? An Interview Survey.
Linus Hasselström, fil. mag., Enveco Environmental Economics Consultancy Ltd.,
Stockholm.
ISBN 978-91-620-5878-4
Economic Information Regarding Fisheries.
Johanna Andréasson fil. mag. och Tore Gustavsson, Head of Development Section,
Swedish Board of Fisheries.
ISBN 978-91-620-5879-1
Report 5879.
All these reports can be downloaded at www.naturvardsverket.se
40
What’s in the Sea for Me?
report 5872
NATURVÅRDSVERKET
Ecosystem Services Provided by the Baltic Sea
and Skagerrak
isbn 978-91-620-5872-2
Issn 0282-7298
The report describes current knowledge on the economic
consequences of human impact on the Baltic Sea and
Skagerrak. What will it cost if no further action is taken,
as compared with the implementation of remedial measures? This question was included in the terms of reference for the government-instigated project – “Economic
Marine Information”. The synthesis report – “What’s in
the sea for me?” is the summary report on the project.
Swedish EPA SE-106 48 Stockholm. Visiting address: Stockholm - Valhallavägen 195, Östersund - Forskarens väg 5 hus Ub, Kiruna - Kaserngatan 14.
Tel: +46 8-698 10 00, fax: +46 8-20 29 25, e-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.naturvardsverket.se Orders Ordertel: +46 8-505 933 40,
orderfax: +46 8-505 933 99, e-mail: [email protected] Address: CM Gruppen, Box 110 93, SE-161 11 Bromma. Internet: www.naturvardsverket.se/bokhandeln