THE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES PROJECT

Dr Wendy ProctorPolicy and Economic Research

Unit

CSIRO Land and Water

DEFINITION

“…the conditions and processes through which natural ecosystems, and the species that make them up, sustain and fulfill human life”

Daily (1997)

OBJECTIVES

• Document ecosystem services in a range of Australian ecosystems

• Assess consumption and value, benefits and beneficiaries, threats and opportunities

• Dialogue and involvement with decision makers at all levels

FRAMEWORK

Representative stakeholder group

Inventory

Ecological modelling

Scenariosand

options

Economic and social assessments

Better informed decisions

New opportunities

Major commitment to two-way communication throughout

Representative stakeholder group

Inventory

Ecological modelling

Scenariosand

options

Economic and social assessments

Better informed decisions

New opportunities

Major commitment to two-way communication throughout

KEY ISSUES

• Integrating management across ecosystem services by: re-establishment of the Lower-Goulburn River floodplain; alternative revegetation strategies; and nutrient management including the merits of alternative approaches.

• Managing land-use intensification.

• Managing transitions in land-use.

• Managing vegetation for the full suite of ecosystem services.

• Managing cultural, heritage and option values.

• Maintaining soil health.

• Accounting for the value of non-agricultural land and water-uses.

• Water and salinity management.

• Anticipating and adaptively managing emerging issues.

SCENARIOS APPROACH

S ub-ob jective 1E valuate d ifferen t

flood pla inoption s

S ub-ob jective 2E valuate d ifferen t

re-veg etatio noption s

S ub-ob jective 3E valuate d ifferen t

cu ltura l an dtourism option s

S ub-ob jective 4E valuate d ifferen t

dairy m anagem en toption s

S ub-ob jective 5E valuate change s

in land use a tcatchm ent sca le

O bjectiv eT o asses s the natu re and va lue of an d im prov ethe ecosystem serv ices prov id ed by a num be r

of d ifferent lan d use c hange options in the G oulbu rn-B rok en C atchm en t

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

S ub-ob jective 1E valuate d ifferen t

flood pla inoption s

S ub-ob jective 2E valuate d ifferen t

re-veg etatio noption s

S ub-ob jective 3E valuate d ifferen t

cu ltura l an dtourism option s

S ub-ob jective 4E valuate d ifferen t

dairy m anagem en toption s

S ub-ob jective 5E valuate change s

in land use a tcatchm ent sca le

O bjectiv eT o asses s the natu re and va lue of an d im prov ethe ecosystem serv ices prov id ed by a num be r

of d ifferent lan d use c hange options in the G oulbu rn-B rok en C atchm en t

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

2 -3 s c e n a r io s re f le c t in g o p t io n s

fa c in g d e c is io n m a k e rs

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES FROM DAIRY

• Output– Dynamic model of milk producing area on a dairy farm with

emphasis on ecosystem services

• Results– Greatest variation between dairy management practises is in

feed supplementation and water use efficiency

– Water re-use systems on high input farms increase milk production and reduce nutrient runoff

– Higher herd productivity through the provision of shade and shelter

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ON THE FLOODPLAIN

• Output– Spatially explicit dynamic model for generation and evaluation

of future management options

• Results– Floodplain is highly interconnected system – model shows

complexity, key drivers and trade-offs

– Improved management of river flows has implications for a suite of other services

– Extremely long time scales are involved in the vegetation change (Hab. Ha. Score) and therefore management process

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES FROM VEGETATION PATTERNS

• Outputs– A GIS model that shows changes in various ES’s as vegetation

cover changes

• Results– Benefits of shelter belts peaks at 40% native veg cover

– Erosion rates much lower under native veg

– Water yield to channel is affected by spatial configuration of veg

– Water yield to deep drainage is sensitive to the area of deep rooted perennials

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES AND ECONOMY AT CATCHMENT SCALE

• Outputs– Input output model that tracks dollars, water and nutrients

among 33 sectors of the GB economy

• Results– Dairy processing industry has largest influence on economy

– ‘Other horticulture’ has largest influence on water use for each dollar invested in industry

– Simultaneous evaluation of investments in regulation of river flows, stream health etc. and importance of industries

TOURISM IN THE UPPER CATCHMENT

• Significant source of income for the upper Goulburn Broken Catchment

MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

• On Site Management

• Riparian Zone Management

• Demand Management

• Education

SCENARIO WORKSHOP

• Main recreation and tourism activities in catchment

• What ecosystem services do these depend on?

– Issues and relationships

• Main drivers

• Options

ASSESSMENT

• Deliberative Multi-criteria EvaluationMulti-criteria

Decision Analysis

•Simplify

•Identify trade-offs

•Structure/transparency

•Options

•Criteria

•Sensitivity analysis

•Heuristic approach

Citizen’s Jury

•10 to 20 participants

•Specific charge

•Facilitated

•Time to deliberate

•Witnesses engaged

•Consensus often reached

Combined Approach

•Facilitation, interaction, consensus

•Structure, integration

OPTIONS

• Business As Usual

• Maximise Ecosystem Services Concerns

• Minimise Ecosystem Services Concerns /Maximise Social Concerns

• Minimise Ecosystem Services Concerns/Maximise Economic Concerns

• The Sustainable Tourism/Environment/Society Mix

Objectives

• To protect and enhance the environment and natural attributes of the catchment that attract recreational users.

• To balance recreational development and use of our catchment (particularly in riparian zones) with the environmental and economic values of the community.

OBJECTIVES

• To protect and enhance the environment and natural attributes of the waterways that attract recreational users.

• To encourage appropriate and sustainable recreational development and use of the waterways in keeping with demand.

CRITERIA

Ecosystem ServicesWater Quality Water Quantity Biodiversity/Native BiotaSediment Filtration/Erosion controlNutrient Management/waste assimilationShadingStream Health (instream and riparian zones) Aesthetics/scenic views

Social/CulturalPublic AccessJobs

EconomicCostsBenefits

FINAL STEPS

• Sensitivity Analysis

– uncertainty of impact data and weights

– test sensitivity of outcomes for most crucial and contentious criteria and impacts.

• Reiterations

The Charge

• To agree on a set of weights for criteria deemed important in deciding between options for recreation and tourism in the upper GB Catchment

Priorities

    Ecosystem Service Scenarios

Criteria Indicator Curr. Max ES Max S Max Ec Mix

Ecosystem Services            

Water Quality Mg/L P 0.02 0.005 0.05 0.1 0.01

Water Quantity Discharge 000 ML 150 250 100 125 150

Biodiversity/Native Biota 10=High1=Low

6 10 3 5 10

Sediment Filtration 10=High1=Low

3 8 6 8 8

Erosion control 10=High1=Low

7 10 7 4 7

Nutrient Management/waste assimilation 10=High1=Low

3 8 7 3 8

Shading 10=High1=Low

5 10 6 2 8

Stream Health including instream and riparian zones

ISC - Very poor: 0-19 Poor: 20-25 - Moderate: 26-34Good: 35-41- Very Good:42-50

35-41 42-50 35-41 26-34 35-41

Aesthetics/scenic views 10=High1=Low

5 8 6 2 7

Social/Cultural            

Public Access 10=High1=Low

5 1 7 10 5

Jobs No. ‘000 15 18 20 25 18

Cultural & Her 0=not maint.1=maintained

0 1 1 0 1

Education 0=not present1=present

0 0 1 0 1

Economic            

Costs $mill 2.5-3.5 0 25-3.5 0 18.3

Benefits $mill 5.5-6.5 0 6.4-49 4.3-40.1 9-57.3

Final ranking of options

FINDINGS

• Importance of Ecosystem Services in recreation and tourism management

• Need for greater research on public access issues

• Need for research on effects of education on tourists with respect to environmental damage

• Need to investigate methods for the recovery of management costs

• Research the role of market and other incentives in limiting environmental damage of tourists

CATCHMENT COMMUNICATIONCATCHMENT COMMUNICATION

• ESs a central theme in catchment strategies in ESs a central theme in catchment strategies in five statesfive states

• Agencies use the term in communications with Agencies use the term in communications with landholderslandholders

RESEARCH NETWORK

• Network connects researchers in Aus, NZ, Us, Germany, Switzerland and South Africa

• Katoomba Group

• ES initiatives in other CSIRO Divisions

GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS

• Almost 1500 copies of inventory report distributed

• Web hits 1000/month

• Newsletter, 2 journal papers, 10 conference papers, 2 books…

Next

• Markets for Ecosystem Services

• To combat:

– Irrigation induced salinity

– Dryland salinity

THANK YOU!

wendy.proctor@csiro.auwendy.proctor@csiro.au