Post on 16-Jan-2016
The Natural Capital Project
If we provide tools to help people understand what we get from nature, And we test and use that understanding to inform decisions,Will greater and more cost effective investments be made for ecosystems and people?
water
livelihoods
food
happiness
energy
health
protection
climate regulation
InVEST
Fisheries
Aquaculture: finfish
Coastal Vulnerability
Recreation
Wave Energy
Carbon Sequestration
Habitat Risk Assmt
Aesthetic Quality
Water Quality
Water purification
Sediment retention
Crop pollination
Hydropower
Irrigation water
NTFPs
Flood control
Commercial timber
Coastal Protection Aquaculture: shellfish
BiodiversityCarbon sequ’n
Agricultural prod’n
http://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/
Production Function
NAS 2005, Daily et al 2009
Where do habitats provide protection?Who or what is protected?What is cost effectiveness of alternative
protection approaches?
An example starting with one service…..
oyster reef
Nearshore Wave and Erosion Model
seagrass beds
marshesmangroves coral reefs
sand dunes
Erosion and flooding hazards
Off
sh
ore
Beach
Erosion Difference: 1.5m
friction factor depth distance period wavelength shoaling coefficient
wave height
Guannel et al. 2012
transmissioncoefficient
Kelp
Wetlands (MLPA)
Coastal Vulnerability
VI
1 - 3 (Low)
3-4
4-6 (Medium)
6-10
10-16 (High)
Kelp
Wetlands (MLPA)
Coastal Vulnerability
VI
1 - 3 (Low)
3-4
4-6 (Medium)
6-10
10-16 (High)
Kelp
Wetlands (MLPA)
Coastal Vulnerability
VI
1 - 3 (Low)
3-4
4-6 (Medium)
6-10
10-16 (High)
Natural Habitat (less)
Influence of natural habitat on coastal vulnerabilityIn Monterey Bay
Wetlands (NWI)
Kelp
Coastal Vulnerability (NWI)
VI
1 - 3 (Low)
3-4
4-6 (Medium)
6-10
10-16 (High)
Natural Habitat (more)
SanatationPumpStations
DrainageJunctions
Coastal Vulnerability
VI
1 - 3 (Low)
3-4
4-6 (Medium)
6-10
10-16 (High)
Coastal Vulnerability
VI
1 - 3 (Low)
3-4
4-6 (Medium)
6-10
10-16 (High)
VegetationAgricultureUrban
SanitationDrainage
Vulnerability of What? Of Whom?
TEXAS CITY
D I F F E R E N C E I NC O A S T A L V U L N E R A B I L I T Y
H i g h es t
L o w es t
N o ne
Elderly population
HarvestedBiomass
LandedBiomass
Visitation Rates
AvoidedArea
Flooded/Eroded
Energy Captured
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
SCEN
ARIO
S
Value ofcarbon
sequestered
Value of captured
wave energy
Expenditures due to
recreationactivity
Net present
value of
finfish and
shellfish
Value of avoided
damagesHabitatRisk
WaterQuality
Population density
Property values
Aquaculture operation costs
BIO-PHYSICAL
Demographics
TERRESTRIAL SYSTEMS
e.g.
Compatibility: Wave energy and commercial fisheries
Vancouver Island objectives: renewable, sustainable local energy sources, commercial fishing, recreation
Kim et al, in review
Testing many kinds of decision contexts
Decision Context Geography
Spatial Planning Tanzania, Indonesia, British Columbia, Hawaii, China, Belize
Ecosystem-based management (terrestrial-marine links)
Puget Sound, Galveston Bay, Chesapeake Bay
Climate adaptation (ecosystem-based adaptation)
Galveston Bay, Monterey Bay
Return on restoration investments, PES schemes
Colombia water funds, Gulf of Mexico, Indonesia, China
Impact assessment, permitting, licensing
Colombia mining concessions, agricultural practices in US
Supply chain/LCA, business risk US, South America, global
NatCap demonstration projects around the world……
• Using multiple ES in decisions is appealing, but early days
• High demand for tools• Not all about PES, $ values• Decision makers can easily consider trade-offs in
different (value) currencies• Working on:
– jobs/livelihoods– beyond basic correlations for human well being