html5-img
1 / 24

Introduction to the discussion(s) on ecosystem services classification

International expert meeting on classification of ecosystem services 10 and 11 December 2008 at EEA premises in Copenhagen. Introduction to the discussion(s) on ecosystem services classification. Jean-Louis Weber, EEA. Worldwide interest for ecosystem services.

fuller-santana
Télécharger la présentation

Introduction to the discussion(s) on ecosystem services classification

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. International expert meeting on classification of ecosystem services 10 and 11 December 2008 at EEA premises in Copenhagen Introduction to the discussion(s) on ecosystem services classification Jean-Louis Weber, EEA

  2. Worldwide interest for ecosystem services Example: the Australian Ecosystem Services Project http://www.ecosystemservicesproject.org/index.htm

  3. SWOT • Strong point: economists speaking biology + biologists speaking economy have a chance to attract the attention of policy makers – see the impact of TEEB • Weak point: definitions still a bit loose, classifications not enough standardised • Opportunity: establish an consensus on a core common international classification to be used in the various programmes (MA, TEEB, GEI, SEEA, IW research, National assessments, Corporate/business accounting…) + establish a “system of classifiers” (classification system) for multiple purposes • Threat: multiplication of ad hoc classifications impairing comparability, aggregation…

  4. Threats: Examples of “variants” of the classical MA classification which may lead to inconsistencies…

  5. Wikipedia: 4+1 • Provisioning services • • foods (including seafood and game) and spices • • precursors to pharmaceutical and industrial products • • energy (hydropower, biomass fuels) • Regulating services • • carbon sequestration and climate regulation • • waste decomposition and detoxification • • nutrient dispersal and cycling • Supporting services • • purification of water and • • crop pollination and seed dispersal • • pest and disease control • Cultural services • • cultural, intellectual and spiritual inspiration • • recreational experiences (including ecotourism) • • scientific discovery • Preserving services • • genetic and species diversity for future use • • accounting for uncertainty • • protection of options

  6. Wallace, 2007

  7. More examples at

  8. At the same time, improvements are legitimate… • Clarifications needed • Connect to international standards where relevant (products, trade) • Fit specific purposes • Scales perspectives

  9. Costanza 2008: Ecosystem services: Multiple classification systems are needed

  10. Working nomenclature of ES for the EEA/TEEB Wetlands Accounts Case Study (1)

  11. Working nomenclature of ES for the EEA/TEEB Wetlands Accounts Case Study (2)

  12. Bob Scholes, 12 June 2008

  13. Migratory Birds Flyways, Wetlands & Bird Flu Prevention Doñana, Spain: Water, Wetland & Strawberries Amvrakikos, Greece: Wetland management, Water & Fish Accounting for ecosystem costs and benefits at 3 different scales…EEA Mediterranean Wetlands Ecosystem Accounts for TEEB (2008) Global scale National & regional government, European market Action level, local scale

  14. Ecosystem services and spatial characteristics

  15. Services and benefits See also Boyd, J., and S. Banzhaf. 2007. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics 63:616-626.

  16. Camargue Wetland AccountsCase StudyThe “Zanzibar table”

  17. The way forward • Build up on existing achievements from the pioneering lists (Daily, De Groot Costanza et al…) to MA conceptual model and classification • Do quickly, if needed some marginal adjustments or clarifications in order to come to a consensus on a working core common classification • Plan a revision of the classification at the end of the MA2015 process for taking stock of new experiences • Open a research agenda for defining/developing a classification system for guiding on purpose classifications – 1 year needed  CICES: Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services

  18. The early lists: Daily, De Groot, Costanza, 1997-2000-2002

  19. The MA classification

  20. Bob Scholes, 12 June 2008

  21. Maintenance and restoration costs Economic and social values (sometimes market values). ‘Final Products’ ‘Intermediate Products’ Clarification needed ?E.g.: from biodiversity to ecosystem services and benefits (Haines-Young 2006)

  22. A basis for a consensus

  23. The same graph applied to ecosystem accounting (EEA 2008) Physical units Money

  24. Towards a classification system Inclusive Wealth Research Socio-economic focus, property rights… National Accounts (SEEA) CICES Spatial breakdowns From services to benefits PES/ IPES markets Zooms on specific issues (biodiversity, catchments, sea, carbon…) Corporate, business accounting

More Related