identifying opportunities for the natural capital project to engage in new england
TRANSCRIPT
Identifying opportunities for the Natural Capital
Project to engage in New England
1. The project2. What is NatCap?3. Examples of our partnerships4. Ideas for how we could engage in New
England
1. The Project Apply NatCap’s InVEST ecosystem services assessment tool in New England or the Mid-Atlantic from March 2012-May 2013
Webinar goals - scope opportunities for engagement by:1. Identifying what ocean use/CMSP decisions you see on the
table and on the horizon2. Specify what ocean use/CMSP work you would like to
accomplish in the next year3. Based on 1 and 2, discuss how NatCap can be most useful
1. The project2. What is NatCap?3. Examples of our partnerships4. Ideas for how we could engage in New
England
The Natural Capital Project
• Help people understand what we get
from nature
• Use that understanding to inform
decisions
Scientific basis, policy & finance mechanisms lacking for integrating natural capital into natural resource decisions
• Hydrology• Economics• Policy• GIS analysis• Computer
science
• Ecology• Marine biology• Coastal
engineering• Fisheries• Oceanography
Free and open-source. Available at: www.naturalcapitalproject.org
The InVEST tool
Applicable anywhere
Flexible (data, scale)
Scenario-based analysis
Biophysical and economic currencies
Multiple ecosystem services
Renewable energy (wave and offshore wind)FisheriesCoastal protectionAquacultureRecreationAesthetic qualityCarbon storage and sequestrationHabitat risk assessmentWater quality
Harvested
Biomass
LandedBiomas
s
Visitation
Rates
AvoidedArea
Flooded/Eroded
Energy Capture
d
Recreation
Fishery
Aquaculture
Coastal Protection
Wave Energy
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Model Outputs(ecosystem services &
values)Marine InVEST ModelsInput Data (reflect scenarios)
Habitat type
Species distribution
Bathymetry & Topography
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
VALUATION
Aesthetic Quality
CarbonCarbon
Sequestered
Oceanography
2
6
1 8
9
3
7
4
5
SC
EN
AR
IOS
Value ofcarbon
sequestered
Value of captured
wave energy
Expenditures due to
recreationactivity
Net present
value of
finfish and
shellfish
Value of avoided damagesHabitat
Risk
WaterQuality
Population density
Property values
Aquaculture operation costs
BIO-PHYSICAL
Demographics
TERRESTRIAL SYSTEMS
e.g.
Harvested
Biomass
LandedBiomas
s
Visitation
Rates
AvoidedArea
Flooded/Eroded
Energy Capture
d
Recreation
Fishery
Aquaculture
Coastal Protection
Wave Energy
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Model Outputs(ecosystem services &
values)Marine InVEST ModelsInput Data (reflect scenarios)
Habitat type
Species distribution
Bathymetry & Topography
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
VALUATION
Aesthetic Quality
CarbonCarbon
Sequestered
Oceanography
2
6
1 8
9
3
7
4
5
SC
EN
AR
IOS
Value ofcarbon
sequestered
Value of captured
wave energy
Expenditures due to
recreationactivity
Net present
value of
finfish and
shellfish
Value of avoided damagesHabitat
Risk
WaterQuality
Population density
Property values
Aquaculture operation costs
BIO-PHYSICAL
Demographics
TERRESTRIAL SYSTEMS
e.g.
Harvested
Biomass
LandedBiomas
s
Visitation
Rates
AvoidedArea
Flooded/Eroded
Energy Capture
d
Recreation
Fishery
Aquaculture
Coastal Protection
Wave Energy
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Model Outputs(ecosystem services &
values)Marine InVEST Models
Input Data (reflect scenarios)
Habitat type
Species distribution
Bathymetry & Topography
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
VALUATION
Aesthetic Quality
CarbonCarbon
Sequestered
Oceanography
2
6
1 8
9
3
7
4
5
SC
EN
AR
IOS
Value ofcarbon
sequestered
Value of captured
wave energy
Expenditures due to
recreationactivity
Net present
value of
finfish and
shellfish
Value of avoided damagesHabitat
Risk
WaterQuality
Population density
Property values
Aquaculture operation costs
BIO-PHYSICAL
Demographics
TERRESTRIAL SYSTEMS
e.g.
Harvested
Biomass
LandedBiomas
s
Visitation
Rates
AvoidedArea
Flooded/Eroded
Energy Capture
d
Recreation
Fishery
Aquaculture
Coastal Protection
Wave Energy
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Model Outputs(ecosystem services &
values)Marine InVEST Models
Input Data (reflect scenarios)
Habitat type
Species distribution
Bathymetry & Topography
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
VALUATION
Aesthetic Quality
CarbonCarbon
Sequestered
Oceanography
2
6
1 8
9
3
7
4
5
SC
EN
AR
IOS
Value ofcarbon
sequestered
Value of captured
wave energy
Expenditures due to
recreationactivity
Net present
value of
finfish and
shellfish
Value of avoided damagesHabitat
Risk
WaterQuality
Population density
Property values
Aquaculture operation costs
BIO-PHYSICAL
Demographics
TERRESTRIAL SYSTEMS
e.g.
1. The project2. What is NatCap?3. Examples of our partnerships4. Ideas for how we could engage in New
England
GENERAL STRUCTURE FOR THE WCVI AND BELIZE EXAMPLES:1. Say what partners were doing (generating marine
spatial plans) 2. Say how InVEST was used (weigh pros and cons of
the alternative spatial plans)3. Show what we produced for them – maps!
REST OF THE SLIDES IN THE WCVI AND BELIZE SECTIONS
ARE MATERIAL THAT I’LL PULL TO MAKE A COUPLE OF SLIDES
(~5-10 FOR EACH SITE).
West Coast of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
West Coast Aquatic Management Board[Federal, Provincial, First Nation, and local governments]
Create a marine spatial plan that balances interests of multiple stakeholders
Recreation (whale watching, fishing, surfing, kayaking)
Tourism
Aquaculture (Atlantic salmon, shellfish)
Wave energy generation
Shoreline protection
Capture fisheries (salmon, halibut, groundfish)
Traditional seafood harvest
Healthy habitats
West Coast Aquatic’s planning process
Yrs 1-2: a) Extensive
stakeholder interviews: what are local visions and values? Where do people use the marine space?
b) Identify objectives
Yrs 2-3: a) Identify
vulnerabilities and suitabilities
b) Develop draft zones and identify potential conflicts
c) Use InVEST to learn about costs and benefits of alternative plans
Yrs 3-4: a) Present zoning
options to stakeholders
b) Re-iterate zoning if necessary
c) Present plan to governing authorities
Simple science has big impacts
Aquaculture suitability Vulnerability to erosion and flooding
Drawing lines on a map is difficult
Draft human use zones
Issues of concern:-Effects of forestry and other industrial activities on aesthetic views-Effects of shellfish harvest and aquaculture on sensitive habitats
Sample scenario
TimberViews
Models improve decision making: Identify win-wins
Vulnerability to erosion and flooding
Population centers
Models improve decision making: Identify unexpected consequences and trade-offs
Move shellfish tenures away from population centers
Restore eelgrass in high risk, high benefit locations
Space matters: reduce incompatibilities by shifting activities in space
CMSP is about many decisions of all shapes and sizes. We need to be flexible.
District of Tofino: Which areas are most vulnerable to flooding? Setback distances for new development.
Where to site wave energy facilities?0 - 1.5
1.5 - 3.0
3.0 - 4.5
4.5 - 6.0
6.0 - 7.5
NPV ($ mil)
Large scale
Small scale
Where to site wave energy facilities?0 - 1.5
1.5 - 3.0
3.0 - 4.5
4.5 - 6.0
6.0 - 7.5
NPV ($ mil)
It’s not all about dollars. Biophysical outputs can be enough.
($ mil)
Quality of views
Add maps from WEM and Fisheries manuscript
A. Baseline B. Conservation
C. Industry Expansion
FloatHome
s
EelgrassRecreationa
lKayaking
IncreasedKayaking
ShellfishAquacultur
e
GeoduckHarvest
CrabHarvest
Guerry et al IJBSESM, in press
A. Baseline B. Conservation
C. Industry Expansion
Low High
1.05 1.41 1.73 3.40 5.03 9.22
Ecosystem Risk
High Water Quality
Low Water Quality
0.000 0.101 0.280 0.527 0.874 1.600
g/m3 of fecal coliform bacteria
A. Baseline B. Conservation
C. Industry Expansion
Belize
Coastal zone management plan for Belize
Draft zoning schemes• current uses• future uses• CACs, other stakeholder engagement• Other reports (e.g., sustainable tourism)
HIGH RISK
VU
LNE
RA
BIL
ITY
EXPOSURE
Risk to habitats• coral• mangroves• seagrass
Fisheries
Coastal protection
Tourism opportunities
Stakeholder, local scientists and government officials
Risk to habitats• coral• mangroves• seagrass
HIGH RISK
VU
LNE
RA
BIL
ITY
EXPOSURE
Coastal zone management plan for Belize
Fisheries
Coastal protection
Tourism opportunities
Stakeholder, local scientists and government officials
Draft zoning schemes• current uses• future uses• CACs, other stakeholder engagement• Other reports (e.g., sustainable tourism)
Zones (CURRENT USES)
• Marine Transportation• Tourism/Recreation• Biodiversity• Critical Habitats• Shoals• Fishing• Coastal & Marine Managed Areas• Special Development Areas• Cultural & Historical Areas• Human Settlements• Coastal Development
The CAC Consultation Process
Usage of CAC Input
Development of Scenarios
Ideal Scenario
Unregulated Scenario
VS.
CURRENT MANAGED UNCHECKED
DEVELOPMENT
Protected Areas
High impactLow impact
Draft
Coastal zone management plan for Belize
Draft zoning schemes• current uses• future uses• CACs, other stakeholder engagement• Other reports (e.g., sustainable tourism)
Fisheries
Coastal protection
Tourism opportunities
Stakeholder, local scientists and government officials
Risk to habitats• coral• mangroves• seagrass
HIGH RISK
VU
LNE
RA
BIL
ITY
EXPOSURE
CURRENT MANAGED UNCHECKED
HABITATHIGH
RISK
VU
LNER
AB
ILIT
Y
EXPOSURE
Draft
Coastal zone management plan for Belize
Draft zoning schemes• current uses• future uses• CACs, other stakeholder engagement• Other reports (e.g., sustainable tourism)
Stakeholder, local scientists and government officials
Risk to habitats• coral• mangroves• seagrass
HIGH RISK
VU
LNE
RA
BIL
ITY
EXPOSURE
Fisheries
Coastal protection
Tourism opportunities
Inputs Outputs
Fishing zoneWhere do people catch lobster?
HabitatWhere? How much?
Fishing pressureHow much do people fish?
Catch of spiny lobster (no./m2/yr)
Market value of catch ($/m2/yr)
Value of habitats that support lobster
What areas are most important for catch of spiny lobster?
Where should mangroves and corals be protected in order to maintain lobster catch?
Marine InVEST Lobster fishery model
CURRENT MANAGED UNCHECKED
1816 lbs 1343 lbs1722 lbs
65 112 410 94
49 6064 408 385
Coral
Seagrass
Mangrove
(Areas in km2)
LOBSTER CATCH & HABITAT AREADraft
Coastal zone management plan for Belize
Draft zoning schemes• current uses• future uses• CACs, other stakeholder engagement• Other reports (e.g., sustainable tourism)
Stakeholder, local scientists and government officials
Risk to habitats• coral• mangroves• seagrass
HIGH RISK
VU
LNE
RA
BIL
ITY
EXPOSURE
Fisheries
Coastal protection
Tourism opportunities
Site characteristicsbathymetry, topographyBiotic featureskelp, seagrass, coral, mangrove
Outputs
Erosion and flood control (area of land protected)
Coastal protection
Social dataland tenure, population levels, home values
Avoided damage costs to property ($)
Storm characteristicswind, waves, sea level
Inputs
Will restoration or protection of critical habitats provide cost effective protection from flooding and erosion?
# of people protected
Relative exposure
Erosion for Current & Future Unchecked Development
Changes in wave height due to SLR, habitat change, and hurricane cat 4
Managed future Unchecked development
Coastal zone management plan for Belize
Draft zoning schemes• current uses• future uses• CACs, other stakeholder engagement• Other reports (e.g., sustainable tourism)
Stakeholder, local scientists and government officials
Risk to habitats• coral• mangroves• seagrass
HIGH RISK
VU
LNE
RA
BIL
ITY
EXPOSURE
Fisheries
Coastal protection
Tourism opportunities
Inputs
Demographicspopulation
Attractorscultural, natural
Outputs
% of visitors to different locations
Tourism/recreation
Superstructureroads, hotels
Expenditures by visitors
What areas are most visited by tourists and how would visitation be affected by conservation or development?
CURRENT MANAGED UNCHECKED
DRECREATION/ TOURISM% VisitationDraft
Effect of alternative zoning schemes on uses and services
Current zones of use
Managed development/
protection
Unchecked development
High impact dev 0.22 km 0.22 km 46.66 km
Low impact dev 0.08 km 14.21 km 0 km
Habitat area 587 km 565 km 493 km
Lobster catch 1816.19 lbs 1721.77 lbs 1342.58 lbs
Coastal protection
Tourism/recreation
Economic effect of alternative zoning schemes on uses and
servicesCurrent zones of
use
Managed development/
protection
Unchecked development
High impact dev $ $ $
Low impact dev $ $ $
Habitat area
Lobster catch $ $ $
Coastal protection
$/# people
$/# people $/ #people
Tourism/recreation
$ $ $
High impact dev
Low impact dev
Habitat area
Lobster catch
Coastal protection
Recreation/tourism
Effect of alternative zoning schemes on uses and servicesManage
dUnchecke
d
Yes
No
No
Yes
CURRENT MANAGED UNCHECKED
DEVELOPMENT
Protected Areas
High impactLow impact
Draft
DRAFT
Erosion for Current & Future (Unchecked)
DevelopmentErosion Averages• Current = 1.58m• Future (Unchecked) =
89.17m
CURRENT UNCHECKED
0 - 2626 - 66
66 - 79
79 - 94
94 - 180
(in meters)
Category 4 Storm
3m
180m
High impact dev
Low impact dev
Habitat area
Lobster catch
Coastal protection
Recreation/tourism
Effect of alternative zoning schemes on uses and servicesManage
dUnchecke
d
Yes
No
No
Yes
Coastal zone management plan for Belize
Draft zoning schemes• current uses• future uses• CACs, other stakeholder engagement• Other reports (e.g., sustainable tourism)
HIGH RISK
VU
LNE
RA
BIL
ITY
EXPOSURE
Risk to habitats• coral• mangroves• seagrass
Coastal protection
Fisheries
Tourism opportunities
Stakeholder, local scientists and government officials
Scenarios:Storylines that describe possible futures
Examples 1) Current2) Managed Development3) Unchecked Development (BAU)
The CAC Consultation Process
Usage of CAC Input
Development of Scenarios
Ideal Scenario
Unregulated Scenario
VS.
CURRENT MANAGED UNCHECKED
DEVELOPMENT
Protected Areas
HIGH impactLOW impact
DRAFT
CURRENT MANAGED
HABITATUNCHECKED
DRAFT
CURRENT MANAGED UNCHECKED
1816 lbs 1343 lbs1722 lbs
65 112 410 94
49 6064 408 385
Coral
Seagrass
Mangrove
(Areas in km2)
LOBSTER CATCH & HABITAT AREA
DRAFT
DRAFT
Erosion for Current & Future (Unchecked)
DevelopmentErosion Averages• Current = 1.58m• Future (Unchecked) =
89.17m
CURRENT UNCHECKED
0 - 2626 - 66
66 - 79
79 - 94
94 - 180
(in meters)
Category 4 Storm
3m
180m
Effect of Alternative Zoning Schemes on Uses and
Servicescurrent zones of use
managed development/
protection
unchecked development
high impact development
0.22 km 0.22 km 46.66 km
low impact development
0.08 km 14.21 km 0.00 km
habitat area 587 km 565 km 493 km
lobster catch 1816.19 lbs
1721.77 lbs 1342.58 lbs
coastal protection
tourism/recreation
16,037 visitor days
16,298 visitor days
22,976 visitor days
DRAFT
current zones of use
managed development/
protection
unchecked development
high impact development
$ $ $
low impact development
$ $ $
habitat area km2 km2 km2
lobster catch $ $ $
coastal protection
$/ # people
$/ # people $/ # people
tourism/recreation
$ $ $
Economic Effect of Alternative Zoning Schemes on Uses and Services
DRAFT
habitat area
lobster catch
coastal protection
recreation/tourism
low Impact development
high impact development
Effect of Alternative Zoning Schemes on Uses and
ServicesManaged Unchecked
DRAFT
Coastal zone management questions(examples)
• What areas are most important for catch of spiny lobster?
• Where should mangroves and corals be protected in order to maintain lobster catch?
What areas are important for catch of spiny lobster?
What areas are important for catch of spiny lobster?
Catch in year 2021 (lbs/km2)
What areas are important for catch of spiny lobster?
Valuation?
• Gross export revenue• Net revenue – we need better
information on fishing and processing costs
• NPV – need net revenue• Do we want to value lobster
exported, sold locally, together, separately?
What habitat areas are important for catch of spiny lobster?
Catch in year 2021 (lbs/km2)
Loss of habitats decreases catchCurrent habitat 50% reduction in
habitat per planning region
Identify Objectives
Develop Scenarios
Compile Data
Run InVEST(create maps in supply,
ecosystem service, and/or value metrics)
Synthesize Results (e.g. identify
trade-offs/win-wins)
Sta
keh
old
er
En
gag
em
en
t
How do our engagements generally work?
1. The project2. What is NatCap?3. Examples of our partnerships4. Ideas for how we could engage in
New England
We have flexibility and can do multiple scales – just need to scope how much each application entails; this is what
we’ve done in Monterey Bay
We realize there’s been a ton done here already (Mass Ocean Partnership; RI SAMP; offshore wind; application of MIMES) and would like to complement
that work, not be redundant.
At the large scale (RPB-scale):
• Maps. Existing services, vulnerabilities:– Renewable energy
(offshore wind)– Fisheries– Coastal protection– Aquaculture– Recreation– Aesthetic quality– Carbon storage and
sequestration– Habitat risk assessment– Water quality
• Climate scenario from NOAA?
At the smaller scale:
• Likely something involving wind and fisheries– Application related to Dept. of Interior’s
Smart from the Start Initiative (mandate to get wind energy going on the E. Coast)
– Potential site: New Bedford scallop grounds and wind energy siting
Discussion:1. What ocean use/CMSP decisions do
you see on the table and on the horizon?
2. What ocean use/CMSP work you would like to accomplish in the next year?
3. How NatCap can be most useful?