The capacity of ecosystem service valuation estimates to inform decision-making on nature conservation could be hindered by data gaps, a study has found.

The research analysed over 9,400 monetary estimates attributed by 1,300 studies to ecosystem services, which are the benefits that people derive from ecosystems such as air filtration.

Through standardising the data included in the Ecosystem Services Valuation Database (ESVD), claimed as the world’s largest open-access data repository on ecosystem service values, the study seeks to enable comparison at a global level, and better inform nature conservation policies and investments.

“This study reveals comprehensively the depth and gaps in the field of ecosystem services valuation. It provides a standardised approach to handle a large volume of data that has had limited applications up until now,” Stefanos Solomonides, co-author of the study and one of the ESVD developers, told Carbon Pulse.

The report was led by an economist at Amsterdam-based Institute for Environmental Studies and published on Science Direct.

“With the ESVD, we want to streamline the analysis and provision of data by offering a central repository to the public that can be used to better inform decisions around natural capital,” Solomonides said.

To facilitate better uptake of such information in decision-making processes, more collaborative approaches between experts and end users to develop efficient integrations are needed, he said.

REGIONS UNDERREPRESENTED

Based on available data, the study estimated that coral reefs and mangroves globally generated the highest ecosystem service values, at $87,211 and $77,928 per hectare per year (ha/yr) on average respectively. Mangroves played a critical role in mitigating coastal flooding.

Urban and industrial areas, coastal systems, inland wetlands, rivers, and lakes also yielded high figures, exceeding $30,000 ha/yr each.

Economic valuations of ecosystem services inform decision-making at several levels, including prioritising policy targets, delivering investments in environmental conservation and nature-based solutions, and setting compensation for damage to nature.

“To guide decisions on use, investments, conservation, and restoration of natural capital, there is a need for more and better information on the value of ecosystem services,” researchers said.

Delving into the ESVD, researchers found that several biomes and ecosystems lack adequate data, including deserts, subterranean ecosystems, boreal and montane forests and woodlands, shrublands, polar alpine, and urban and industrial areas.

“The distribution of data across ecosystem services is also far from even, with some services very well represented – recreation, wild fish and wild animals, ecosystem and species appreciation, air filtration, and global climate regulation – and others with almost no value estimates – disease control, water baseflow maintenance, and rainfall pattern regulation”.

As well, some regions were underrepresented in the ESVD database, such as Russia, Central Asia, and North Africa.

“Europe accounted for the largest proportion of value estimates (32%), followed by Asia (24%), Africa (16%), North America (15%), South America (8%), and Oceania (5%),” researchers said.

“This geographic distribution is partially determined by the availability of valuation studies, but also by the regional interests of the organisations funding the development of the ESVD.”

The geographic distribution of study sites included in the ESVD. Source: Ecosystem Services

INCORPORATING THE VALUE OF ECOSYSTEMS

Initially developed in 2010 under The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) initiative hosted by the UN Environment Programme, the ESVD database was supported by several European environment ministries.

These public bodies include the UK Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Defra), the German Federal Environmental Agency, and the Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture, Nature, and Food Quality.

The database recently informed a project developed by Hague-headquartered ASN Bank that seeks to estimate the scale of its impacts on nature and society.

“Ecosystem services valuation provides a clear language for due diligence, offering a path to enhanced stakeholder engagement and new investment opportunities,” the bank said in December.

Governments are also taking steps to incorporate the value of ecosystem services into policy planning frameworks, as they begin to implement the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Yet, a recent study suggested that countries failed to take into account two key factors in their estimates – the growth in nature’s monetary value over time as human income increases, and the likely deterioration in biodiversity.

This research, published in Science earlier this month, calculated that government decision-making methods fell short of assessing the actual monetary value of ecosystem services by up to 180%.

By Sergio Colombo – sergio@carbon-pulse.com

*** Click here to sign up to our twice-weekly biodiversity newsletter ***