dr. caroline howe centre for biodiversity and environment … · 2015-12-01 · poverty and human...
TRANSCRIPT
Ecosystem services for poverty alleviation: guiding principles and emerging generalisations for future
research
Dr. Caroline HoweCentre for Biodiversity and Environment Research, UCL
ESPA Annual Science Conference 2015The Honourable Society of Grey’s Inn, London, UK
“To be able to ask a question clearly is two-thirds of the way to getting it
answered.”
John Ruskin
Ecosystem services: building on the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
An assessment ofecosystem services in
the UK
Ecosystem processes, services and goods/benefits
Goods/benefitsPrimary & intermediate ecosystem processes
Ecosystem services
e.g. Nutrient cycling, primary production water cycle, etc.
e.g. Trees, etc. e.g. Timber, etc.
Other capitalinputs
Management and natural
capital inputs
ES contribution to well-being
Primary production
Decomposition
Soil formation
Nutrient cycling
Water cycling
Weathering
Climate regulation
Pollination
Evolutionary processes
Ecological interactions
Crops, livestock, fish
Water availability
Trees
Peat
Wild species diversity
Drinking water
Food
Fibre
Energy
Equable climate
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
Final ecosystem services Goods
Value of goods... ..of which ES value
Primary & intermediate ecosystem processes
Solar & other physical inputs Other capital
inputs
Natural enemies
Detoxification
Local climate
Waste breakdown
Purified water
Stabilising vegetation
Meaningful places
Wild species diversity
Flood control
Natural medicine
Pollution control
Disease control
Good health
Recreation
☺
☺
☺
☺
Regulating
Supporting
Provisioning
Cultural
Natural capitalinputs
Value of goods...
Ecosystem services, Benefits and Demand
“The biophysical processes of ecosystems that provide benefitsfor human well‐being” (UKNEA, 2011)
“Concept for the expression of values assigned by people tovarious functions of ecosystems” (Bennett et al, 2015)
Abiotic inputsEcosystem processes
and functionsBenefits Well‐being
DEMAND= SERVICES
BIODIVERSITYBIODIVERSITY
“The benefits that people obtainfrom ecosystems” (MA, 2005)
ESPA Framework
People
&
Partners
hips
(Are
at the
heart
of E
SPA) Change
Enablers
(Users of ESPA research)
External drivers
of change
(Social, political & environmental)
Polit
ical
Eco
nom
y
(Inclu
ding
gov
erna
nce,
soc
ial
stru
ctur
es, m
arke
ts &
inst
itutio
ns)
Ecosystem structure & processes
Values
Goods
Ecosystem functions & capabilities
Services
Enabling Conditions
Ecosystems
Human well-being &
Poverty reduction
GlobalESPA Knowledge
(Global public goods)
Conflicts between different epistemic communities
Philosophical&
Conceptual
Methodological&
Empirical
Values
Definitions
Assumptions
Data collection
Defining the question -
frameworks
Definitions
Ecosystem Services Well‐Being (wealth)Value
PRICE
PRICE Vs. VALUE(Accountants) (Economists)
e.g. riverside walks: price = 0, value > 0
“What right have you to take the word wealth, which originally meant ''well-being,'' and degrade and narrow it by confining it to certain sorts of material objects measured by money.”
Poverty and human well-being
“ A lack of, or inability to, achieve a socially acceptable standard of living”
OR
“Possession of insufficient resources to meet basic needs”
Example metrics of human well-being
Food security and nutrition, Health, Income and assets, Fuel and energy, Socialcapital, Housing, Vulnerability and resilience, Water, Education and skills,Access to public goods, Employment, Property rights, Time
Assumptions
1. Protecting/delivering ecosystem services sustainably will alleviate poverty – ‘win-win’
2. There are simple and positive linkages between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being.
Methodological and Empirical Conflicts
Disparate data collection
Multiple, complicated frameworks
Fisher et al (2013)
1. DEMAND - Ecosystem services are better defined by the people that derive benefits from them not the ecosystems that deliver them.
1. TRADE-OFFS - Ecosystem services are co-produced by people and thus there will always be competition for resources.
2. BIODIVERSITY - The relationship between biodiversity, ecosystem services, their benefits and human well-being is complicated and not well understood.
1. THRESHOLDS - both biological and social systems have tipping points and finite resources.
1. VALUATION - both in monetary and non-monetary terms us vital to ensure equitable distribution of benefits
(Howe et al, Submitted to Ambio)
• Knowledge is fragmented between disciplines. • Most research is largely conceptual. • Often studies only cover one aspect of the interactions
between ecosystems and people (Bennett et al, 2015).
Emerging generalisations
IPBES Conceptual Framework
Diaz et al., 2015
Yahdijian et al, 2015; Geijzendorffer et al, 2015
Ecosystem services and human well-being: a need for interdisciplinary approach
Processes/flows Ecosystem services Benefits Human well-being
Biodiversity
gEnvironmental change and
management
Processes/flows Ecosystem services Benefits Human well-being
Biodiversity
DEMANDgEnvironmental change and
management
Trade-offs are recorded three times more frequently than synergies. No empirical evidence fora link between the provision of ecosystem services and alleviation of poverty.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Yes No
% o
f cas
es re
sulti
ng in
a tr
ade-
off (
n=13
0)
Crops used as an ecosystem service
Private interest
No private interest
Winners and losers from ecosystem services
Winners and losers from ecosystem services
Provision of ecosystem
servicesAlleviation of poverty
POVERTY REDUCTIONsteadily improving household situation
POVERTY PREVENTION Maintenance of livelihood and/or prevention from falling further into poverty (Angelson & Wunder,
2003; Daw et al, 2011)
Trade-offs are more common when at least one beneficiary has a private interest and when provisioning services are involved.
Howe et al (2014), Suich et al (2015)
DIVERSITY
ABUNDANCE PRODUCTION
LAND COVER
Crops
Wood
Water
Species
ClimateHowe and Mace, in preparation
Crops
Wood
Species
Water
Climate
LAND COVER
Food
Timber
Aesthetic
Wildlife
Water
Climate
Crops
Wood
Species
Water
Climate
PRODUCTION
Food
Timber
Aesthetic
Wildlife
Water
Climate
Crops
Wood
Species
Water
DIVERSITY
Food
Timber
Aesthetic
Wildlife
Water
Crops
Wood
Species
Climate
Food
Timber
Climate
Aesthetic
Wildlife
ABUNDANCE
Howe and Mace, in preparation
Planetary Boundaries
Lade et al, 2013; Rockström et al, 2009; Raworth, 2012
Current Issues in Valuation
• Aggregated fashion:– No distinction between groups,
geographic areas, level of dependence
• Fails laugh test
• Excludes elements of wellbeing– Wellbeing has a value not a price
Freedom of choice & action
Provisioning
(e.g. crops, livestock, fish, trees, standing vegetation, water
supply)
Regulating (e.g. Climate regulation, disease & pest regulation, detoxification & purification, pollination, hazard
regulation, noise regulation)
Cultural
(e.g. Wild species diversity, environmental settings)
Resources & Resilience
(food, water, medicine, shelter)
Physiological
(stress, injuries, non-infectious diseases)
Psychological
(mental health diseases)
Disease exposure & regulation
(zoonotic, air and water-borne
diseases) D
irect effects
(e.g. floods, heat-w
ave
s,
wa
ter
sh
or
tag
es
, exposure)
Ecosystem-m
ediated effects
(e.g. disease
risk, under-
nutrition, medicine, m
ental health) and/or indirect effects (e.g. livelihood loss, conflict, adaptation & m
itigation)
Well-being value
Ecosystem services Health benefits
Supporting
(e.g. Primary production, water cycling, soil formation, nutrient
cycling)
People
Material needs
Social relations
Security
Health
Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs)
Other capital inputs, socio-economic, institutional and developmental factors
McGrath, Howe & Carrasco, In Submission
A New Framework?
People (1) Include people and their needs (2) Explicitly consider trade-offs
and distribution of benefits from ecosystem services
(2) Explicitly c o n s i d e r t r a d e - o f f s a n d distribution of benefits from e c o s y s t e m services
(3 ) S imp le relationships b e t w e e n e c o s y s t e m services and b iodiversi ty c a n n o t b e assumed
(5) Improved decision-making about ecosystem benefits and their distribution and measuring benefits as a mechanism of support for governance.
(4) There are thresholds and limits that cannot be ignored
Direct
Drive
rs
Indirect
Drivers
3) Simple relationships be tween ecosys tem services and biodiversity cannot be assumed (4) There are thresholds and limits that cannot be ignored
3) Simple relationships be tween ecosys tem services and biodiversity cannot be assumed (4) There are thresholds and limits that cannot be ignored
“What we think or what we know or what we believe is in the end of little
consequence. The only thing of consequence is what we do”
John Ruskin
Thank [email protected]
@CarolineHowe