Using a final ecosystem goods and services approach to support policy analysis

被引:5
|
作者
Sinha, Paramita [1 ]
Ringold, Paul [2 ]
Van Houtven, George [3 ]
Krupnick, Alan [4 ]
机构
[1] RTI Int, 701 13th St NW,Suite 750, Washington, DC 20005 USA
[2] US EPA, 200 SW 35th St, Corvallis, OR 97333 USA
[3] RTI Int, 3040 East Cornwallis Rd, Res Triangle Pk, NC 27709 USA
[4] Resources Future Inc, 1616 P St NW,Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036 USA
来源
ECOSPHERE | 2018年 / 9卷 / 09期
关键词
atmospheric deposition; ecological valuation; ecosystem goods and services; final ecosystem goods and services; policy analysis; regional analysis;
D O I
10.1002/ecs2.2382
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Evaluating environmental policies requires estimating the impacts of policy-induced changes on ecological and human systems. Drawing connections between biophysical and economic models is complex due to the multidisciplinary nature of the task and the lack of data. Further, time and resource constraints typically limit our ability to conduct original valuation studies to fit the specific policy context. Policy analysts thus rely on methods to transfer and adapt value estimates from existing studies. To conduct end-to-end policy analysis, assumptions are needed to make the linkages between ecological and valuation models as well as to conduct benefit transfers. This paper discusses an approach that can potentially help a policy analyst to minimize assumptions and identify appropriate caveats. This approach focuses on what human beings truly value from ecosystems, or, in other words, metrics of Final Ecosystem Goods and Services (FEGS). Our hypothesis is that the FEGS approach will help support policy analysis by drawing important linkages between ecological and economic models as well as by designing valuation studies that will be more conducive to benefit transfers. To examine this hypothesis, we use a selected set of existing valuation studies as case study examples, and we examine how the methods used in these studies compare with the FEGS approach. We find that the studies are not always consistent with the FEGS approach, in many cases due to data limitations. We illustrate ways in which using FEGS metrics can provide economists with a useful starting point for considering how the commodity can be defined and specified in the valuation study. Even if data limitations exist, a FEGS approach can help in determining whether the context in which the original study was conducted matches with the policy context. This can also help in determining the extent of uncertainty associated with the analysis and in providing transparent documentation that can be informative for policy makers.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A critical assessment of available ecosystem services data according to the Final Ecosystem Goods and Services framework
    Tashie, Arik
    Ringold, Paul
    [J]. ECOSPHERE, 2019, 10 (03):
  • [2] The final ecosystem goods and services Voltron: the power of tools together
    Sharpe, Leah M.
    Harwell, Matthew C.
    Phifer, Colin
    Gardner, George
    Newcomer-Johnson, Tammy
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2023, 11
  • [3] Linking ecosystem characteristics to final ecosystem services for public policy
    Wong, Christina P.
    Jiang, Bo
    Kinzig, Ann P.
    Lee, Kai N.
    Ouyang, Zhiyun
    [J]. ECOLOGY LETTERS, 2015, 18 (01) : 108 - 118
  • [4] Linking people to coastal habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coast
    Littles, Chanda J.
    Jackson, Chloe A.
    DeWitt, Theodore H.
    Harwell, Matthew C.
    [J]. OCEAN & COASTAL MANAGEMENT, 2018, 165 : 356 - 369
  • [5] Forest Biodiversity and the Delivery of Ecosystem Goods and Services: Translating Science into Policy
    Thompson, Ian D.
    Okabe, Kimiko
    Tylianakis, Jason M.
    Kumar, Pushpam
    Brockerhoff, Eckehard G.
    Schellhorn, Nancy A.
    Parrotta, John A.
    Nasi, Robert
    [J]. BIOSCIENCE, 2011, 61 (12) : 972 - 981
  • [6] Valuing ecosystem goods and services
    Lovett, Jon C.
    Noel, Stacey
    [J]. AFRICAN JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY, 2008, 46 (02) : 117 - 118
  • [7] Valuation of ecosystem goods and services Part 1: An integrated dynamic approach
    Winkler, Ralph
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2006, 59 (01) : 82 - 93
  • [8] Policy Contestation over the Ecosystem Services Approach in Sweden
    Hysing, Erik
    Lidskog, Rolf
    [J]. SOCIETY & NATURAL RESOURCES, 2018, 31 (04) : 393 - 408
  • [9] The ecosystem approach, ecosystem services and established forestry policy approaches in the United Kingdom
    Raum, Susanne
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2017, 64 : 282 - 291
  • [10] Amazon Basin water resources ecosystem services on the approach of Global Public Goods
    Cardozo, Monica
    Diniz, Marcelo Bentes
    Szlafsztein, Claudio Fabian
    [J]. AGUA Y TERRITORIO, 2023, (21): : 103 - 119