Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

24
Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at landscape scales Erik Nelson, Guillermo Mendoza, James Regetz, Stephen Polasky, Heather Tallis, D Richard Cameron, Kai MA Chan, Gretchen C Daily, Joshua Goldstein, Peter Kareiva, Eric Lonsdorf, Robin Naidoo, Taylor H Ricketts, and M Rebecca Shaw December 2008

Transcript of Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Page 1: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at landscape scales

Erik Nelson, Guillermo Mendoza, James Regetz, Stephen Polasky, Heather Tallis, D Richard Cameron, Kai MA Chan, Gretchen C Daily, Joshua Goldstein, Peter Kareiva, Eric Lonsdorf, Robin Naidoo, Taylor H Ricketts, and M Rebecca Shaw

December 2008

Page 2: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

2

Decision-maker questions

– What places provide the most ecosystem services?

– How would likely management scenarios affect different ecosystem services and biodiversity?

– What landscape pattern would optimize ecosystem services now and under likely scenarios?

– Who should pay whom under a proposed PES program, and how much?

Page 3: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

InVEST

• Spatially explicit modeling tool – Multiple services– Ecological production functions – Economic valuation techniques

• Inputs:– Land use / land cover map, future scenarios– Data tables, GIS layers

• Outputs:– Biophysical production and economic value– Maps, trends, balance sheets, tradeoff analyses

• Product of Natural Capital Project

Page 4: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Testing ground: Willamette Valley, OR

Page 5: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Three scenariosof Land use change

Willamette Basin Partnership

Page 6: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Services / Attributes Considered

• Carbon sequestration

• Water quality

• Storm peak mitigation

• Soil conservation

• Biodiversity

• Market returns to landowners *

Page 7: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Comparing scenarios

Page 8: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

More

Less

Mapping changes

Nelson, et al. in press. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution

Page 9: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

ArcGIS toolbox

http://invest.ecoinformatics.org

Page 10: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Key Points

• Services differ– spatial distribution– response to scenarios

• Strong spatial patterns in increase/decrease– distributional effects– management priorities

• Little evidence of trade-offs overall– Conservation scenario typically best– Market value only exception– (but that’s a big one)

Page 11: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Exploring tradeoffs

Page 12: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Exploring Tradeoffs

Nelson, et al. in press. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution

Page 13: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Monetizing additional services

• Requires beneficiaries, locations, valuation techniques

• Three outputs• Potential supply:

• typical maps: sources• Realized supply

• actually provides benefits to someone• Value

• economic valuation of realized supply

Page 14: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Example: Soil conservation

• Potential supply:• sediment retention

• Realized supply• sediment retention

upstream of dams• Value

• avoided costs of dam dredging

• Same potential supply layers drive multiple values

Page 15: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Example: Water supply

• Potential supply:• water yield

• Realized supply• net water yield upstream

of hydro plants• Value

• value of additional power

Page 16: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Take homes

• Mapping multiple ecosystem services possible

• Scenarios allow assessment of tradeoffs

• Payments in theory can change these tradeoffs

• Valuation needs beneficiaries

Page 17: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

17

Thanks…NatCapKai ChanChris ColvinGretchen DailyHelen FoxPeter KareivaChuck KatzErik LonsdorfBruce McKenneyGuillermo MendozaBelinda MorrisRobin NaidooErik NelsonNasser OlweroSteve PolaskyJim RegetzSusan RuffoRebecca ShawHeather TallisChristine TamBuzz ThompsonMichael Wright

Willamette ValleyWillamette Partnership

SupportNSF-NCEASLeverhulme TrustPackard FoundationMacArthur FoundationMoore FoundationRoger and Vicki SantPeter and Helen Bing…

www.naturalcapitalproject.org

Page 18: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Now: can ask policy questions!

• How well will payment programs work?– changing landowner choices with PES

• Simulate different payment programs– predict landowner response– if payments exceed opportunity costs, land enrolled– different budgets

• Track improvements in two benefits– Species conservation– Market returns

Page 19: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Tradeoff Curves

Nelson et al. PNAS. 2007

Page 20: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Tradeoff Curves

Nelson et al. PNAS. 2007

• Different policies have different effects• None come close to efficiency frontier

Page 21: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Policy simulations

• 3 simple payment programs: – All: all landowners eligible for payments– Carbon: restrict to land that could convert to forest– Riparian: restrict to land along riparian corridors

• If payment exceeds WTA, landowner enrolls

• Various budget levels – $1 million– $5 million– $10 million

Page 22: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Willingness to accept payment

• How big a payment is needed for landowner to switch from current land use to conservation?

• “Opportunity costs” of conservation

Page 23: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

REALLY Exploring Tradeoffs

• Plot full tradeoff curve for two benefits:– Species conservation: terrestrial vertebrates – Market returns: commodities and value of rural-

residential housing development

• Question:– Which landscape patterns maximize joint production?

• Explore full scenario space

Page 24: Modeling multiple ecosystem services and tradeoffs at

Polasky, et al. 2008. Biological Conservation