In this guest post Martin Sharman opens up a rich area of debate by arguing that as a policy concept, ecosystem services puts human wants first and foremost and undermines moral-aesthetic value arguments for conservation that are widely held in society. Martin was the policy offer responsible for biodiversity and ecosystems in the European Commission’s DG Research & Innovation up until his retirement last November. During his career he made an enormous contribution to biodiversity research and policy, including the initiation of the BioFresh project. The opinions expressed in this post are, of course, his own and are not intended to represent a position of either the Commission or BioFresh.

A "resource" is something that is useful to someone. A "natural resource" is something in the natural environment that a human can use to satisfy want or increase wellbeing.

To adopt this vocabulary is to adopt a forthright utilitarian view of the natural environment, and implicitly to accept that human benefit is the only good. Not only is human benefit the only good, but it is quantifiable – for if not, then we can never agree on what constitutes a resource, or who has the greater right to it. Thus someone who speaks of natural resources accepts, again implicitly, that happiness and wellbeing can be quantified. The vocabulary also requires that this quantified human benefit remains, if not constant, then comparable over cultures and generations.

More than this: the wellbeing of the "resource" is insignificant. It is only by setting concern for the wellbeing of the resource to zero that one can regard it as merely something to satisfy human want. Human benefit is the only good. This is the First Commandment; in the limpid words of the King James version of the bible, thou shalt have no other gods before me.

In this observation lies much of the moral argument against the concept of ecosystem services: just as oranges are not the only fruit, so humans are not the only species.

The concept of ecosystem services is one thing; the premise of its proponents is another. It is, in short, that conservation based on intrinsic value of biodiversity has failed to stop the loss of species, ecosystems, and the complex web of interactions between them. Since an ethical argument has failed, then we should try self-interest. By demonstrating that human wellbeing is increased by the services rendered by ecosystems, we can motivate people to protect the source of the service – biodiversity.

We know that conservation is not working because we continue to lose biodiversity. Oh yeah? This is the equivalent of me deciding that my accelerator is not working because my car is losing speed. Why is such a daft non-sequitur accepted by otherwise intelligent people? You immediately thought of many reasons my car might be losing speed – I have the brakes on, I’m going up a hill, I’ve run out of fuel, I’ve run into sand, I’ve hit an oncoming truck. The obvious reason that we are losing biodiversity is the memento mori that stares at us from our looking glass – biodiversity loss is the inevitable result of our debt-based economic system and our swelling population’s unsustainable demands on nature. We all know that. Why do we mutely accept the dangerously diversionary nonsense that "biodiversity is being lost because conservation is not working"?

Ecosystem services takes the utilitarian logic of natural resources one important step further. A "service" by definition benefits humans. If we are to protect services only if they benefit humans, then what happens to the useless ecosystems? Are they simply to be cemented over?

I recently heard a discussion in which one person said "most people are useless", meaning that they are surplus to requirement. The outrage that this provoked was spearheaded by someone saying that you can never prove that anyone is useless, because you can never know enough about their contribution to their social fabric. So does this mean that you can never show that an ecosystem is useless? If so that leaves the ecosystem services argument saying that because some ecosystems benefit humans, we have to protect every ecosystem.

Which may be the right answer, but why reach it by such objectionable means?

For those of us with a reverence of nature, the ecosystem services rhetoric and mindset are abhorrent, being fundamentally immoral and unethical. They take the most ecologically damaging invasive species in the history of life, and place it above all other species on Earth. They cast all other – voiceless – species in the role of consumables. This mindset might have worked for Homo habilis. It will not work for Homo sapiens.

Martin Sharman  for the BioFresh Blog: http://biofreshblog.com/2013/07/03/perspective-martin-sharman-on-ethics-and-the-ecosystem-services-paradigm/

The 2016 GEO BON Open Science Conference: "Biodiversity and ecosystem Services Monitoring for the 2020 Targets and beyond. Building on observations for user needs" will take place from 4 to 9 July 2016 in Leipzig, Germany. 

Biodiversity Science is facing enormous challenges as the pressures upon the earth’s biotic systems are rapidly intensifying and we are unlikely to reach the CBD 2020 Aichi Targets. But how far or close are we to reach the targets? The GEO BON Open Science Conference on "Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Monitoring for the 2020 Targets and beyond" will assess this question. The conference is open to the wide scientific public and is sponsored and co-organized by iDiv, UFZ, SASCAL (others to come).

For more information please visit: http://conf2016.geobon.org

A new paper "Combining internal and external motivations in multi-actor governance arrangements for biodiversity and ecosystem services" published in the journal Environmental Science & Policy looks at ways to motivate actions for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision. The paper is a result of the EU FP7 funded project BIOMOT.

Abstract: 

This paper analyses the possibility of building a mutually supportive dynamics between internally and externally motivated behaviour for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision. To this purpose a face to face survey amongst 169 key actors of 34 highly successful and prominent biodiversity arrangements in seven EU countries was conducted. The main finding of the paper is the feasibility of combining inherently intrinsically motivated behaviours (providing enjoyment, pleasure from experimentation and learning, aesthetic satisfaction) and internalized extrinsic motivations (related to the identification with the collective goals of conservation policy) through a common set of governance features. Successful initiatives that combine internal and external motivations share the following features: inclusive decision making processes, a broad monitoring by "peers" beyond the core staff of the initiatives, and a context that is supportive for the building of autonomous actor competences. These findings are in line with the psycho-sociological theory of motivation, which shows the importance of a psycho-social context leading to a subjective perception of autonomy and a sense of competence of the actors.

Original Source: 

Tom Dedeurwaerdere, Jeroen Admiraal, Almut Beringer, Flavia Bonaiuto, Lavinia Cicero, Paula Fernandez-Wulff, Janneke Hagens, Juha Hiedanpää, Paul Knights, Erica Molinario, Paolo Melindi-Ghidi, Florin Popa, Urban Šilc, Nathalie Soethe, Tiina Soininen, Jose Luis Vivero, Combining internal and external motivations in multi-actor governance arrangements for biodiversity and ecosystem services, Environmental Science & Policy, Volume 58, April 2016, Pages 1-10, ISSN 1462-9011, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.12.003

On the 1st of April, between 9:30 and 16:30, the BiodiversityKnowledge project organises a conference where outcomes will be presented and widely discussed with policy makers, science and other stakeholders at the European parliament in Brussels. As final result, BiodiversityKnowledge will present a stakeholder’s document outlining a recommended design on how such a Network of Knowledge could operate and produce added value.

EU BON will be also presented at the confernce as one of the knowledge providers of the Network of Knowledge.

To counteract biodiversity loss, efforts have considerably increased over the past years to strengthen the science-policy-society interface on biodiversity and ecosystem services. There is indeed an active landscape of projects, institutions, organisations and individuals in Europe involved in this interface, all aiming to improve the knowledge flow so that decisions at different policy levels (from European, to national and local levels) are based on the best available knowledge.

With the 7th Environmental Action Programme and the start of Horizon2020 and its focus on innovative solutions for society, the need for more concerted activities in this context become even more important.

In this context, BiodiversityKnowledge (FP7 KNEU), an EU-funded coordination action has been set up to help to map, mobilise and organise this landscape focusing on the knowledge holders’ community. For this the project has been developing and testing a prototype Network of Knowledge since 2011 with more than 300 active participations of representatives of the biodiversity and ecosystems services knowledge community. Stakeholders involved ranged from practitioners and researchers to policy-makers.

Please find the conference agenda attached below.

The conference covers scenarios and modelling applications in marine, freshwater and terrestrial systems, across all relevant disciplines of natural and social sciences. It is open to scientists and experts working in the field, policy makers and practioners. The conference focuses on: (i) Exploring recent advances in modelling human impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services, (ii) Addressing the use of scenarios and models for decision support, (iii) Mobilising observations of biodiversity and ecosystem services for model development and testing, (iv) Capacity building for developing scenarios and models and for their use in decision making, (v) Horizon scanning and addressing gaps in knowledge.

More information available on the conference website.

The European Ecosystem Services 2016 conference will take place from 19 to 23 September 2016 in Antwerp, Belgium. The theme 'Helping nature to help us' focuses on the important role that healthy ecosystems play in supporting human well-being and the protection of nature.

This conference will be the biggest European event in 2016 that links science, policy and practice on ecosystem services and natural capital. It will have a strong focus on practice and implementation.

The conference programme offers an attractive mix of:

• keynote presentations from policy, practice and science;
• a networking day where businesses, practitioners, policymakers and researchers meet and showcase their work;
• interactive sessions to demonstrate working examples of ecosystem services and natural capital;
• field excursions to see ecosystem services in action; and
• scientific sessions.

Key dates:

Registration opens on 2 May 2016.

Call for abstracts - 1 Apr - 15 May 2016.

To register and find out more about teh event, please visit the official website.

This paper summarises efforts in two West African countries – Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau – to mobilise international finance to sustain the marine biodiversity upon which fisheries depend, and to establish conservation trust funds. The countries study draws on the 2017 OECD report The Political Economy of Biodiversity Policy Reform.

‘Payment for ecosystem services’ (PES) has become a commonly used term in recent years, yet the concept is not well defined. A new study reviewing PES theory, concepts and practice from around the world provides a valuable overview, concluding that more can be done to share learning.

Tightly compacted cities can increase flooding risk for local residents, but sprawling, suburban development can lead to major losses in carbon stored by the land and agricultural production. These are the conclusions of a study which explored the effects of different urbanisation patterns on vital ecosystem services.

Research into ecosystem services has flourished considerably since the publication of UNEP's Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005, notably the ongoing Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) project, which is making a compelling case for promoting conservation by estimating the economic benefits of ecosystems to human welfare and the economic cost to society of ecosystem decline. This thematic issue provides a snapshot of the latest research in the most recent chapter of ecosystem services' story. It aims to help guide future conservation and sustainable development policies.

Biodiversity and ecosystems provide many critical life support functions and benefits for human wellbeing, security and economic growth, including food, clean water, recreational services and climate regulation. Despite its significant values, biodiversity worldwide is being lost, in some areas at a rapid rate. Given these losses, there is an urgent need for firstly, greater application of policies and incentives to promote the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and secondly, a more efficient use of available finance in existing biodiversity programmes. PES is a flexible, incentive-based mechanism that has potential to deliver in both of these areas. This Thematic Issue of Science for Environment Policy explores research which can help guide effective Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes. Under PES agreements, a user or beneficiary of an ecosystem service provides payments to individuals or communities whose management decisions and practices influence the provision of ecosystem services.

Agricultural intensification can significantly affect soil ecosystems and the services they provide, new research suggests. Examining soils across Europe, the study demonstrates that high intensity arable land uses have lower diversity and biomass of soil organisms than lower intensity arable or permanent grassland, affecting the carbon and nitrogen cycles in the environment.

How best to integrate the ecosystem services concept into regional planning? A recent study provides a practical example for an area in Germany that is faced with an increased risk of soil erosion under climate change. Researchers used a decision-support system incorporating ecosystem services to show that measures to reduce soil losses could also support a number of other services.

The decline of urban populations and abandonment of buildings and land could provide an opportunity to promote ecosystem services, a new study suggests. The researchers examined the relationships between the use of abandoned land and ecosystem services, providing insight into the pros and cons of different urban planning policies.

Simple characteristics of plant species - such as height or leaf size - can be used to predict the ecosystem services provided by the green roofs they grow on, a new study suggests. The researchers suggest that their method could be used to screen the thousands of potential plant species in order to optimize green roof design.

Payments for ecosystem services (PES) are one of a number of policy options available to support the provision of ecosystem services. Based on the characteristics of ecosystem services, a recent study has developed a framework for deciding when payments are a suitable tool for delivering ecosystem services.

Some 'intangible' ecosystem services, such as the aesthetic and cultural value, as well as the recreational use of land, are particularly difficult to price. New research has proposed three explorative methods to value these more intangible services using landscape evaluation, statistics on level of recreational use and the price of real estate in the area.

A new tool allows European businesses to see how, through informed decision-making, conserving the ecosystems they depend on is not only environmentally responsible, but can also increase profits, reduce risk and boost the value of their product or services.

A new study has developed a system to assess the potential of ecosystems to supply ecosystem services in the EU-25 plus Switzerland and Norway. It is one of the first to use historical and projected data on land use change at a continental scale to estimate the provision of ecosystem services and to assess possible trade-offs between them.

There is increasing policy demand for the ‘scaling-up’ of ecosystem service valuations to a national or regional level, but available methods for doing this are limited. A new study has proposed a new scaling-up methodology and tested it by assessing the impact of climate change on European wetlands.

Valuations of water quality as an ecosystem service often fail to include related services like recreation or human health, and do not consider the effects of water quality changes due to management. Researchers have now developed a template for valuation that considers multiple services and links management actions to changes in water quality and ultimate economic value.

Researchers have developed a new approach for identifying regions that are most suitable for expanding ecosystem services. This could be used to help inform spatial planning decisions. By modelling ecosystem services’ opportunity costs in relation to agricultural revenue, the study provides a map of suitable areas of ecosystem service expansion in Eastern Europe.

Ecosystem services, such as coastal protection or water supply, form an integral part of ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change. However, preserving and restoring ecosystems and their services relies on the economic system that supports these efforts. Ecosystem services will not be best protected by the classic market framework, new research suggests.

A framework to value marine and coastal zone ecosystem services, which acknowledges but transcends monetary value, has been proposed by researchers. Using this approach, coastal managers can integrate the different values placed on ecosystem goods and services by various stakeholders to assess how these values affect planning decisions.

A process to help identify and value cultural ecosystem services has been developed by researchers and is demonstrated in a recent Black Sea case study. This highlighted the value of anchovies to Turkish identity: respondents to a survey said that they would be willing to pay 135 Turkish lira (€49) per year in order to fund environmental management that protects this culturally important species.

Ecosystems services — the benefits that nature provides to people — are inadequately accounted for in Environmental Impact Assessments, a new study suggests. The researchers used a case study in France to illustrate the substantial economic losses that are incurred as a result of infrastructure development that goes ahead without sufficient consideration of the impacts on ecosystem services.

forest deadwood boosts key ecosystem services, new research suggests. By calculating the value of these services, the researchers were able to show that increasing the amount of deadwood in rivers and streams in a Basque Country reservoir basin was economically profitable and that returns on investment could be realised within 20 years.

To keep Europe’s ecosystems healthy, we need to protect biodiversity. How can the ecosystem service approach help? And how can we capture people’s more deeply held values beyond mere money? Watch the video produced by Science for Environment Policy about the different tools in the ecosystem services toolbox.

Ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change relies on the services provided by nature; new research has now demonstrated the wide potential of urban ecosystem services to aid local adaptation efforts. This study developed and trialled a streamlined method for assessing ecosystem services, such as temperature reduction and carbon sequestration, in four European cities, providing a valuable tool to help city planners enhance ecosystem services.

Urban green spaces provide important ecosystem services in cities, from recreation to the mitigation of noise and air pollution. This study quantified the ecosystem services (ES) provided by green spaces in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, using new methods to evaluate high-resolution land-cover data. The findings show that different types of green space provide different ES, highlighting the importance of careful design during city planning. The authors say their method to map ES supply will aid the design of healthy, climate-resilient cities.

New research aimed to identify the factors that lead to the success of Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes. The study analysed 40 different schemes in Latin America to identify factors related to success. The researchers identified four such factors, which could inform policy and aid decision makers in designing PES initiatives with increased chances of success.

Valuations of water quality as an ecosystem service often fail to include related services like recreation or human health, and do not consider the effects of water quality changes due to management. Researchers have now developed a template for valuation that considers multiple services and links management actions to changes in water quality and ultimate economic value.

A recent study suggests that a shift to more sustainable development, based on ecosystem services, is needed to support human health and wellbeing. Focusing on ecosystem services provided by river catchments, this study recommends that more needs to be done on a practical level to support decision-makers, in a way that recognises the relationships between different types of ecosystem services.

Measures to protect biodiversity can also improve carbon storage and water flow regulation, research indicates. In a Spanish protected area, researchers mapped biodiversity, carbon storage and water flow regulation, and found there was substantial overlap between the three.

Economic valuation of ecosystem services, from good quality water supplies to cooling cities in the face of climate change, can provide vital information for policy decisions. However, the definition and interpretation of ecosystem services need to be clarified to ensure accurate valuations, suggests new research.

From rising seas to fiercer and more frequent storms, climate change effects are putting increasing pressure on coastal populations and ecosystems throughout Europe. Human activities, such as farming and land-use changes, are already in conflict with ecosystems. However, linking ecosystem services with social preferences in coastal land-use management can lead to more sustainable resource planning, finds a new study. The researchers developed guidelines for a participatory climate change adaptation process, which integrates the social effects of adaptation measures with the ecosystem services that they affect.

Considering the sustainability of the services provided by an ecosystem could help to overcome management challenges and hit water quality targets defined by the EU, says a new study. By exploring 13 of the ecosystem services (ES) provided by the Venice Lagoon, Italy, the researchers identify factors affecting sustainable and unsustainable patterns of ES provision, and suggest that confined and more open water bodies could benefit from different management strategies.

A report commissioned by the French Government has calculated reference values for French ecosystems. These range from ???600 per hectare/per year for pastureland to ???2000 per hectare/per year for some types of forest. The methods used to calculate these values were carefully analysed.

It is important to have a single definition of 'ecosystem services', but a single classification scheme for services is not appropriate, according to researchers. There are many contexts in which ecosystem services can be used and the context should help to determine which classification scheme is the most appropriate for decision making.

A new study has reinforced the view that biodiversity improvements and greater provision of ecosystem services are complementary. An analysis of projects that restored ecosystems indicated that restoration produced a 44 per cent increase in biodiversity and a 25 per cent increase in the provision of ecosystem services.

Actions to reduce emissions caused by deforestation and degradation (REDD) also enhance ecosystem services, according to a new report. Using a case study from the Amazon it indicated that REDD support schemes can also help maintain water levels and quality and protect soil from erosion.

Practical barriers may be hampering the application of an ecosystem services approach to forests. A new analysis has outlined three strategies to overcome these barriers: fostering private markets, managing public land and raising awareness of ecosystem services.

A new model has been developed that could help metropolitan areas adapt to climate change by increasing ecosystem services provided by green spaces and farmland through calculating the percentage of evapotranspiring surface for different types of land use and the degree of fragmentation between ecosystems. To demonstrate how it works, researchers have applied this 'land use suitability strategy' model to an Italian municipality.

Global food security under a changing climate is possible if the vital role of healthy ecosystems is recognised, according to a recent study. The researchers suggest that an ecosystem-based approach must be integrated with other measures to tackle food security under climate change, to protect ecosystems and supply the essential services on which humanity depends.