patrick ten brink of ieep teeb natura 2000 and nature & green economy ep 3 dec 2012 final
Upload: patrick-ten-brink-of-the-institute-for-european-environmental-policy
Post on 15-May-2015
361 views
DESCRIPTION
Patrick ten Brink of IEEP TEEB Natura 2000 and Nature & Green Economy EP 3 Dec 2012 finalTRANSCRIPT
Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: EU nature conservation
& Nature and the Green Economy
Patrick ten Brink Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP)
Public Hearing
Protected areas and green employment Monday 3.12.12, 14.00-17.00
European Parliament, room PHS 6B054, Brussels
Presentation overview
Part A: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature
a) TEEB for Policy Makers and the EU
b) Benefits of Natura 2000
Part B: Nature and the green economy
c) Nature and GE
“I believe that the great part of miseries of mankind are brought upon them by false estimates they have made of
the value of things.” Benjamin Franklin, 1706-1790
Source: Nellemann et al 2008: 22
~ 20% of the world’s coral reefs loss - effectively destroyed by fishing, pollution, disease and coral bleaching
~ 24% of remaining reefs under imminent risk of collapse through human pressures.[3]
[2] http://www.ramsar.org/about/about_wetland_loss.htm [3] Wilkinson C., 2004: Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2004 report
Species extinction ~ 100 to 1,000 times more rapid than “natural” extinction rate (MA 2005)
Since 1900, global loss ~ 50%of its wetlands. [2].
Coral Reefs
Biodiversity loss
Forests
Global Forest Area has shrunk by approximately 40% since 1700.
Forests have completely disappeared in 25 countries [1].
[1] United Nations FAO, 2001.Global Forest Resources Assessment 2000; United Nations Forest and Agriculture Organisation, 2006 Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005 [4] Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005: Global Assessment Report 1: Current State & Trends Assessment. Island Press, Washington DC. Detail: Chapter 19 Coastal Systems. Coordinating
lead authors: Tundi Agardy and Jacqueline Alder. Original reference: 35%: Valiela et al. 2001; 80% reference: Spalding et al. 1997
.
In the past two decades, 35% of mangroves have disappeared.
Some countries have lost up to 80% through conversion for aquaculture, overexploitation and storms.[4]
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/World_map_mangrove_distribution.png
Mangroves
Source: FAO 2005a: 7
$50 bn/yr lost econ. value, over exploitation (World Bank 2008)
Collapse of fisheries: loss of livelihoods
Fisheries
Source: Sea Around Us project
2010
40 %
40 %
20 %
Worlds Fisheries : overexploited
Lake Karla, Greece: 1300 fishermen lost their jobs due to the degradation of the former Lake Karla in Greece and impacts on commercial fisheries. (Zalidis and
Gerakis, 1999)
Provisioning services Food, fibre and fuel Water provision Genetic resources
Ecosystem services
Regulating Services Climate /climate change regulation Water and waste purification Air purification Erosion control Biological control
Cultural Services Aesthetics, landscape, recreation & tourism Cultural values and inspirational services
Supporting Services: Soil formation & fertility, photosynthesis, nutrient cycle et al
TEEB’s Genesis and Developments
Interim
Report
India, Brazil, Belgium,
Japan & South Africa
Sept. 2010
TEEB
Synthesis
Climate
Issues Update
Ecol./Env. Economics literature
TEEB End User
Reports Brussels
2009, London 2010
CBD COP 9
Bonn 2008 Input to
UNFCCC 2009
BD COP 10
Nagoya, Oct 2010
TEEB
Books
Nature & Green Economy
TEEB Water & Wetlands
TEEB Oceans
TEEB studies
The Netherlands,
Germany, Nordics,
Norway, India, Brazil,
South-East Asia
The Global Biodiversity Crisis
Transforming our approach to natural capital
Available Solutions • PES (e.g. water), PES: REDD+
• Markets, GPP
• Subsidy reform
• Legislation, liability, taxes & charges
• Protected Areas
• Investment in natural capital (restoration et al)
Measuring what we manage
http://www.teebweb.org/
TEEB for Policy Makers
Diversity/variety – e.g. pharmaceuticals, food security, biomimicry;
E.g. genetic resources: > than
Quantity – e.g. timber, carbon storage, fish stock, flood control, water retention
E.g. for fish production: > than
Quality – e.g landscape & tourism, ecosystems & water filtration, resilience
(to climate change, IAS)
Biodiversity (genes, species, ecosystems) & its value is about
Bu
ildin
g o
n B
alm
ford
an
d R
od
rig
ue
z e
t a
l (2
00
9)
Sco
pin
g th
e S
cie
nce
Values of Working with Nature – evidence base
• Germany : peatland restoration: avoidance cost of CO2 ~ 8 to 12 €/t CO2 (0-4 alt. land use)
• USA-NY: Catskills-Delaware watershed for NY: PES/working with nature saves money (~5US$bn)
• France & Belgium: Priv. Sector: Vittel (Mineral water) PES & Rochefort (Beer) PES for water quality
• Venezuela: PA helps avoid potential replacement costs of hydro dams (~US$90-$134m over 30yr)
• South Africa: WfW public PES to address IAS, avoids costs and provides jobs (~20,000; 52%♀)
Sources: various. Mainly in TEEB for National and International Policy Makers, TEEB for local and regional policy and TEEB cases
Range of policy synergies of Biodiversity: with Water security, climate change, jobs,
health, public and private finance
Jobs
EU: 14.6 million jobs (7% employment) highly dependent on ecosystem services (Nunes et al, 2011)
USA: Nature-based recreation. Wildlife-related recreational activities ~ US$ 122 billion – just under 1% of GDP in 2006 (US Fish and Wildlife Service 2007).
New Zealand’s South Island (West Coast Region)- additional 1,814 jobs (15% of total jobs in
2004) and extra spending US$ 221m/yr (10% of total spending), mainly from tourism related to conservation lands (Butcher Partners 2004).
Black Sea and job losses: invasion by a non native comb jellyfish in late 1980s led to collapse of the fishing industry with a loss of 150,000 jobs. (Lubschenco, 1997)
CBD COP 10 Nagoya: Strategic Plan 2011-20
5 strategic goals & 20 headline targets ….extracts…
Target 1: “… people aware of the values of biodiversity …..”
Target 2: “…. biodiversity values have been integrated ….into strategies… planning … national accounting…. reporting systems.”
…
…
Target 11: “By 2020, at least 17% cover of terrestrial and inland water and 10% coastal and marine areas …. are conserved through effectively and equitably managed... systems of protected areas”
Protected Areas - “crown jewels” of biodiversity
Intrinsic value
Also: food security
Water security (supply & quality)
Climate mitigation & adaptation,
Knowledge, Culture Recreation and tourism And other ecosystem services
Dudley and Stolton, 2010
Current status: ~12.9% terrestrial; 6.3% territorial seas, <1% open seas (IUCN and UNEP-WCMC 2010)
Investment in natural infrastructure
Ecological (green) infrastructure is key for adaptation to climate change
• Afforestation: carbon store+ reduced risk of soil erosion & landslides
• Wetlands and forests and reduced risk of flooding impacts
• Restore Forests, lakes and wetlands to address water scarcity
• PAs & connectivity to facilitate resilience of ecosystems and species
Can help adapt to climate change at lower cost than man-made technological solutions
Adaptation to climate change will receive hundreds of US$ billions in coming years/decades.
Critically important that this be cost-effective.
Support for identifying where natural capital solutions are appropriate & mobilise resources
Past loss/ degradation
Baseline: Future loss of biodiversity, natural capital (schematic) – with no additional policy action
Today 2050
Halting biodiversity loss
Regulation & standards.
Protected areas;
Restoration & offsets;
Investment in natural capital;
Trading and new markets;
Better regulation, assessment, accounting, integration, monitoring,
enforcement;
Sustainable production and consumption, markets, certification/logos, innovation & GPP;
No net loss from current levels
2020
Slowing biodiversity loss
Source: Patrick ten Brink, own representation
Eroding Natural Capital Base & Tools for an Alternative Development Path, Towards a Green Economy
Alternative natural capital development path: Meeting biodiversity objectives, investing in natural capital
Charges, taxes, fines, fees, liability, subsidy reform;
PES, REDD, ABS;
Instru
me
nts &
me
asure
s – illustra
tive
Need multi-level governance & engagement (government, business, communities, citizens) & integration.
Part A: Summary
Mainstream the economics of nature – Making Nature’s Values Visible: across sectors,
across policies, seek synergies across disciplines.
Protected areas: biodiversity riches that can also offer
value for money, recreation and cultural identity, tourism.
Ecological infrastructure and benefits: climate
change (mitigation/adaptation), air pollution & health et al
Changing the incentives: payments, taxes, charges,
subsidy reform, markets …always better to look at
the whole board
And engage the full set of
players
…is this enough to work out
what to do?
Part A: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature Benefits of Natura 2000
Natura 2000
Birds Directive 2009/147/EC in 1979
Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC in 1992.
26,000 sites ~ 18 % of EU Terrestrial SCIs/SACs: ~ 59 million ha, Terrestrial SPAs: ~ 49 million ha (Natura
2000 Barometer, 2010).
Marine protected area (MPA) network – ~14.5 million ha2
Natura 2000 Conservation Status Remaining Challenge
Funding a challenge Costs ~ 5.8 bnEUR/yr Source: Gantioler et al 2010
But also benefits
First year after
designation as
protected area
Before
designation as
protected area
COSTS
Ecological services that
would have remained
without protected area
Risk of degradation
without PA measures
Management and
investment
Opportunity Costs Cost of management,
TIME
BENEFITS
Source: Patrick ten Brink, own representation in TEEB 2011
Illustrative schematic for analysing the value of PAs
A decade in…
Benefit Numbers
Natura 2000 network total benefits
~ €200 - 300 bn/year Building on 3 estimates (different assumptions): €223 – 314 bn /yr (a) €251 – 360 bn /yr (b) €189 – 308 bn /yr (c)
Carbon sequestration / storage
Current Stock: €600 bn - €1130 bn Annual Sequestration Benefits:
€79-88 bn increase to 2020 if ecosystem quality is improved;
€82-92 bn to 2020 if a 10% increase: forest area.
Tourism expenditures ~€ 50-85 billion /year for 1.7 billion visitor days (~466,000
visitors/day average)
~€ 9-20 billion/year directly for Natura 2000
Recreation (non market benefits)
~€ 5-9 billion/year for Natura 2000 (4 € / visit )
Natura 2000 : An first Economic Assessment
Sou
rce:
ten
Bri
nk
et a
l 20
10
Finland: The Total annual revenue linked with the visitor spending in national parks was
€70.1 million and supported local employment by creating 893 person-years. In general, it
was estimated that €1 public investment to protected areas provided €20 return.
(Metsahallitus, 2009).
Spain: The implementation of Natura 2000 network > positive impacts on GDP (0.1 - 0.26
per cent at national level). Network estimated to generate an additional 12,792 jobs.
Andalucía, Aragon and the Canarias islands - benefit most from Natura 2000: 0.26 - 0.44
per cent increase in their GDP and between 1346 - 5957 additional jobs created. (Fernandez et al
2008 in Gantioler et al 2010)
Natura 2000 Benefits: jobs
Germany: national park Wattenmeer in Germany is responsible of around 23 per
cent of total tourists in the region, with associated gross economic income of over €100
million in 2003 (Neidlein and Walser, 2005)
Natura 2000 Benefits: interpreting the results
• A first estimate
• Methodological issues
• Impossible to attribute EU wide numbers to all services – eg water, pollination, natural hazards, HNV farming….
• Whole picture of benefits is needed
• For robust value focus at site level assessments
• EU wide assessment to communicate the benefits beyond intrinsic values
• Useful to attract funding, encourage restoration, wise use & management
Part B: Nature and the green economy
Challenges
• Feeding the 9 billion; Water; Poverty alleviation, Urbanisation, Jobs, Climate change, Financial crisis etc
• The rising level of consumption and production will put increasing stress on the planet’s resources and ecosystems – limits, scarcity, price volatility, critical (ecological and social) thresholds...
Nature and the Transition to a Green Economy
• Need for a transition towards a “green” economy that promotes social equity, poverty eradication and human well-being.
• Increasing appreciation of biodiversity and ecosystem services and the value of nature.
• Healthy and resilient ecosystems are necessary for long-term socio-economic development
• Efforts to build a green economy should be based on an appreciation of the values of nature.
Economic Sectors (examples)
- Agriculture, hunting, forestry & fishing
- Oil and Gas; Mining & quarrying
- Wood and wood products
- Food products, beverages & tobacco
- Pulp, paper & paper products
- Research & development
- Hotels & restaurants
- Chemicals - Pharmaceuticals
- Recycling - Manufacturing
- Electricity - Water supply
- Education - Finance & insurance
Outputs from one sector can be
intermediate inputs to another Human & Social Capital
Inputs: labour, skills, knowledge, institutions,
culture
Ou
tpu
ts: P
rod
ucts &
Service
s Exports
Public Sector
House-holds
Private Sector
Man-made capital (inc. financial capital)
€
€
Waste / pollution
Society Environment / Nature
The Economy
Social impact
€
The Greening Economy
Source: ten Brink, Russi and Mazza, 2012 building on ten Brink et al. 2011
€
Impacts on environment
Imported natural capital Timber,
Food , Primary materials &
embedded Biodiversity,
Water, Carbon
in products
Domestic Natural Capital
Minerals, Energy
Water, Land
Timber, Fish, Ag
Other Biodiversity (genes, species,
ecosystems) Ecosystem service flows
Natural capital
€
€
€
€
€
Go
od
go
vern
ance
Go
od
Go
vern
ance
Current Situation
Declining Sustainability in a Brown Economy
Resource over-exploitation & pollution pressures
Climate Change
Biodiversity and natural capital loss
Critical ecological and resource thresholds passed
or at risk
Resource scarcity and limited access to a clean
environment
Health impacts and man-made natural disasters
An economy that is not resource efficient, low carbon
and socially inclusive
Ambitions for the Future
A Green Economy
Improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly
reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities
Staying within a ‘safe operating space’: using resources within the planet’s regenerative capacities &
avoiding critical ecological thresholds
No net loss of biodiversity and climate change within ‘acceptable’
limits
Sustainability for future generations and business:
available natural capital and a clean environment
Health and livelihoods for citizens and communities
An economy decoupled from environmental impacts and
resource use
Building Blocks in the
Transition to a Green Economy
Business-as-Usual
Approaches
Avoiding Unsustainable Trade-offs
+ Environmental compliance &
infrastructure
Active environmental
management Active Risk Management
+
Proactive Investment in Natural Capital
Pursuing environmental
sustainability Eco-efficiency
+ Decoupling via Radical
Innovation & Demand change
+
+
Source: Patrick ten Brink & Leonardo Mazza, own representation
The Transition to a Green Economy
G. G
oo
d
G
ove
rnan
ce
Building Blocks in the
Transition to a Green Economy
Business-as-Usual
Approaches
A. Avoiding Unsustainable Trade-offs
+ B. Environmental compliance &
infrastructure
Active environmental
management C. Active Risk Management
+
D. Proactive Investment in Natural Capital
Pursuing environmental
sustainability E. Eco-efficiency
+ F. Decoupling via Radical
Innovation & Demand change
+
+
Examples of actions
A: Assessment to understand winners/losers, impacts & responses
B: Investment in water and waste infrastructures
C: Flood risk mapping, taxonomy & pathways for IAS
D: Restoration of ecological infrastructure & Conservation, protected area management
E: EHS reform, positive incentives, polluter pays
F: R&D for new products/applications + Information / engagement for demand changes
G: Indicators and Environmental accounts
Conclusions
1. Nature provides a wide range of benefits and values to society and the economy.
2. A green economy aims to incorporate these values into decision-making across all levels of governance.
3. There are major opportunities to be realised and also trade-offs. Transition management is critical for success.
4. Protected areas are a key element of the transition to a green economy.
Additional information sources
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) in National and International Policy Making (ed. Patrick ten Brink) www.teebweb.org or via www.ieep.eu Estimating the Overall Economic Value of the Benefits provided by the Natura 2000 Network (ten Brink et al 2011) http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/06/estimating-the-overall-economic-value-of-the-benefits-provided-by-the-natura-2000-network
Costs and Socio-Economic Benefits associated with the Natura 2000 Network (Gantioler et al 2010) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/financing/docs/natura2000_costs_benefits.pdf Green Infrastructure options (Mazza et al, 2010)) http://www.ieep.eu/assets/898/Green_Infrastructure_Implementation_and_Efficiency.pdf
Nature in the Transition to a Green Economy (ten Brink et al 2012) http://www.ieep.eu/newsletter/summer-2012/nature-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy/
The Social Dimension of Biodiversity Policy: Final Report (Nunes et al 2011) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/biodiversity/pdf/Social%20Dimension%20of%20Biodiversity.pdf
Recognising the value of protected areas (Kettunen et al 2011) www.cbd.int/database/attachment/?id=1408
The Social and Economic Benefits of Protected Areas: an Assessment Guide (Kettunen and ten Brink eds 2013 forthcoming) http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415632843/
Thank you for your attention !
Patrick ten Brink
IEEP is an independent not for profit institute dedicated to advancing an environmentally sustainable Europe through policy analysis, development and dissemination.
For further information see: http://www.ieep.eu Follow us on twitter: IEEP_EU
For more information about IEEP’s work on Nature and the Green Economy visit
www.ieep.eu and for TEEB also www.teebweb.org
Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP)
• IEEP is an independent research organisation concerned with policies affecting the environment in Europe and beyond • Research and consultancy on the development, implementation and evaluation of
environmental and environment-related policies in Europe • Policy advise and intelligence • Capacity-building
• Interdisciplinary staff including natural and social scientists, lawyers and
economists
• Key research areas: • Governance • Agriculture and land management • Biodiversity • Climate change and energy • Resources use, waste and chemicals • Water, marine and fisheries; and • Environmental Economics (green economy, value of nature, EHS/MBI et al,)