Workshop overview

6th Annual International ESP Conference 2013 Session 4C

Overview of using the tools of Mediated Modelling, Ecosystem Valuation studies and MIMES in forecasting trends on the value of

ecosystem services

Marjan van den Belt,Anne-Gaelle Ausseil and

Roelof Boumans

26-30 August 2013,Bali, Indonesia

Workshop overview• Introductions (10 minutes)• Case study ; Manawatu (10 minutes)• Benefit Transfer Method (10 minutes)• Mediated Modelling (MM) (10 minutes)• Multi-scale Integrated Modelling of Ecosystem

Services (MIMES) (20 minutes)• Coffee break (10 min)• Inter-activity (50 min)

Introductions

• Circulate participant list (name and email) only if happy to receive workshop results.

Workshop overview• Introductions • Case study – Manawatu, New Zealand • Benefit Transfer Method• Mediated Modelling (MM) • Multi-scale Integrated Modelling of Ecosystem

Services (MIMES) • Coffee break • Inter-activity

The Manawatū River Catchment

Catchment area 594,400 ha

4 (of 9) highly erodable sub-catchments

The Manawatū River Catchment

Highly modified catchment 133,000 people320,000 cows

Protecting assets, livelihoods

Manawatu land cover: Pre- and Post Settlement

Source: Landcare Research. Complements of Anthony Cole

Workshop overview• Introductions • Case study ; Manawatu• Benefit Transfer Method • Mediated Modelling (MM) • Multi-scale Integrated Modelling of Ecosystem


Rapid Ecosystem Service Assessments

ES value in US94$: 33 trillion

GDP in US94$: 18 trillion

ES value in NZ94$: 228 billion

GDP in NZ94$: 84 billion

ES in NZ2006$: 6 billion

GDP in NZ2006$: 7.4 billion

Sources: Costanza et al. 1997Patterson and Cole 1999van den Belt et al, 2009

GLOBAL

NEW ZEALAND

MANAWATU-WANGANUI

Benefit Transfer map

Ecosystems Total value per hectare

Indirect vs direct valueDirect Indirect

Other Benefit Transfer Methods

• Ecosystem Valuation Toolkit (EVT)• The Economics of Ecosystems and

Biodiversity (TEEB)• InVest

Workshop overview• Introductions • Case study; Manawatu• Benefit Transfer Method • Mediated Modelling (MM) • Multi-scale Integrated Modelling of Ecosystem

Services (MIMES) • Coffee break• Inter-activity

Mediated Modelling‘Model building with, rather than for, people’

Auckland Mediated Modelling, Sustainable Pathways 2, 2012

IFS-MM ResultLand Use / Land CoverForest, Wetland, Riparian, River/Lake, Urban, Dairy, Sheep&Beef, Horticulture

Ecosystem ServicesFunctioning index (slider)

ValuesCost of actionsBenefit Transferred ESStakeholder dialogue

ActionsErosion control (SLUI)Nutrient managementRiparian PlantingWaste Water TreatmentRestoration

Impacts of Erosion, Nutrient runoff and habitat loss

IFS management scenarios

Sediment loading in tonnes per year

1990 2000 2013 2020 2030 2040

5 Million

3 Million

1 Million

Workshop overview• Introductions • Case study ; Manawatu • Benefit Transfer Method • Mediated Modelling (MM) • Multi-scale Integrated Modelling of

Ecosystem Services (MIMES) • Coffee break • Inter-activity

Forest, Wetland, Riparian, River/Lake,

Ecosystem Services Provided

Stakeholder dialogue

Actions


Urban, Dairy, Sheep&Beef, Horticulture

-+

PressuresDemographics, Global markets, Climate change

- +

-+

Ecosystem Services Demanded

ES Values

Cost of actions

+-

-

-+

Causality within the sustainability loopSUPPLY

DEMAND



Actions



-+

Pressures

- +

-+


ES Values+

-

-

+

Economic Services

-+

EconomicSectors+

+

Causality for sustainable economies

Cost of actions

-



Actions



-+

Pressures

- +

-+


Values+

-

-+

Economic Services

-+

EconomicSectors

++

Causality for non-sustainability Economies

Subsidies+

Cost of actions

-

Manawatu MIMES - Qualitative overview

CatchmentsCatchments

Hydrological model

Land cover

Demographics coefficients

Land use

Demographics:Built capital

Water routing

Land environments

Land cover

Land use:N loadingWater

Land use

Demographics: population effect

Rain

Ecosystem goods and

services model Conversion

EcosystemServices

Water quality standards

Catchments

Manawatu MIMES – Data base links

CatchmentsCatchments

WATYIELD

The New Zealand Land Cover Database

Demographics By ANZSIC 2006 – industry classification

Land use change as emergent behavior

Input for local investment scenarios

FENZ

13 underlying climate, landform and soil variables

8 Land covers

7 land uses

7x7 Land use change

Demographics: 1 Population effect2 Business as Usual3 Restoration

[email protected]

z

Dynamics in goods and

service trade-offs

Emergent dynamics in EcosystemServices (see output slide 17)

Resource Management Act 1991

Freshwater Ecosystems of New Zealand (FENZ GIS)

Land Environments of New Zealand (LENZ)Database

8 user groups

Input for land use change scenarios

The Manuwatu MIMES User Interface for Scenario Modeling

The Introduction Page

Manawatu Land Use (ha) by Land Covers 1990

Land Use Dairy Cropping

Forestry

Sheep &

Beef

ResidentialIndustryServices

Conservatio

n

Water Use

Land Cover

Urban 11468

Pasture 50685 170106

Cropping 6591

Wetland 210Forest 8585 22665

Shrub 63697

Water 3092

Riparian 222

Ecosystems perform Ecosystem Functions (estimated)

S() S()S()S()

EcosystemFunctions

De-nitrification

Water storage

Habitat conditions for wildlife

Habitat conditions for Soil organisms

Growing of Biomass

Buildings and and Roads

Land CoverorEcosystems

Riparian low medium

high medium

medium

Cropping low high lowForest mediu

mhigh high high

Pasture low low high lowShrub low medium mediu

mlow

Urban highWater low high high low

Wetland high high high low

Ecosystem services needed for economic productivity(indexed)

Eco

syst

em s

ervi

ces

Economic Sectors

Demographic Groups

Farmers

Recreationists

Foresters

Iwi Urbanites Conservationist

Industrialists

Services

EcosystemsServices

Waste assimilation high highFlood protection low low high high high

Habitat provisioning

medium high high high

RecreationalCultural

high high high

Pollination high highFish and Water Quality

high high medium

high

Soil Formation high high

Water Supply high medium high medium

Food provisioning high high high medium

Economic sectors produce Environmental Externalities (estimated)

Impacts Nitrogen Loading

Urbanization

Restoration

Erosion

Demographic Groups

Farmers high highRecreationists medium low

Foresters low low high

Iwi

Urbanites high highConservationists high

Industrialists high

Services high high

Externalities have impact on Ecosystems (estimated)

Ecosystems

Ext

erna

litie

s

Clean water provision

Food & fibre

Food production

Nutrient loss (OVERSEER)

Forestry

Climate

Input

Soil

EnvironmentTimber production

Livestock farm types

Habitat Provision

Water flow regulationWater yield (WATYIELD)

Habitat provision

Erosion controlSediment loss (NZEEM)

Natural ecosystems

GIS framework




-+SUPPLY

Land use/cover Indicators ES

Habitat provision (ecosystem service)

Food supply (agricultural sector)

Meat supply Milk solids supply

SLUI scenario

Sediment loss

Nutrient loss

Water yield

The SLUI Scenario Run

COFFEE BREAK

Workshop overview• Introductions • Case study ; Manawatu • Benefit Transfer Method • Mediated Modelling (MM) • Multi-scale Integrated Modelling of Ecosystem


Toolkit assessment

Benefit Transfer

Strengths Weaknesses Strengths Weaknesses Strengths Weaknesses

Mediated Modeling Multi-scale Integrated Modelling

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the individual ESV tools, considering context, process and content?

What are the opportunities and threats for a toolkit?

Opportunities and Threats?

Feedback survey appreciated!

We’ll be in touch

THANK YOU!

Marjan, Anne-Gaelle and Roel

Workshop overview

Documents

Transcript of Workshop overview