london group meeting brussels, 29 september – 3 october 2008 land & ecosystem accounts within...

LONDON GROUP MEETINGBRUSSELS, 29 SEPTEMBER – 3 OCTOBER 2008

Land & Ecosystem Accounts within SEEA revision


“Global warming may dominate headlines today.

Ecosystem degradation will do so tomorrow”

Corporate Ecosystems Services review, WRI et al. March 2008

Jean-Louis WeberEuropean Environment Agency

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


An EEA proposal to UNCEEA (June 2008)

take the responsibility of organising the drafting of a volume on land and ecosystem accounts to be issued at the same time as volume 1

UNCEEA answer:

review of the proposal by Brasil, Canada, Eurostat

land possibly integrated to Volume 1, ecosystem to Volume 2

Volume 2 shortly after Volume 1

opinion of London Group

interest by UNEP to particpating into the process (LG sub-group on land and ecosystem accounts)


Land and ecosystems in the SEEA

The SEEA classification of assets (Chapter 7 – Table 7.2) refers to 3 categories:

1.natural resources

2.land and water surfaces

3.ecosystems

Note:

Ecosystems are made of component [natural resources] and land. Natural resources and land are [are prone to be] private goods [withexclusive right of use]. They are more than the sum of components and land: their capacity of reproducing life [and continue delivering a bundle of services over time] is their fundamental characteristic; it is a public good [and therefore the objectives such as “halt biodiversity loss”].


3 – Ecosystem as a Public Good: non-transferable rights on ecosystem sustainable potential

1 – Produced & Non produced Assets/SNA:

Resource & land

Assets, services and values: 3 components

2 - Non produced Assets/ Other Services

Reg

ulat

ing

Recreating

Provisioning


SEEA2003: enlargement of SNA1993 for a better description of the economy-environment relation

Natural resources EcosystemsEconomic

assets (SNA)Non-economic

assets

Openingstocks

Openingstocks

OpeningState

SNAtransactions

and otherflows

Changes instocks

Changesin stocks

Economicactivities,

naturalprocesses,

etc.

Changesin state

Closingstocks

Closingstocks

Closingstate

Described in SNA

RM HASSAN - UN The System of Environmental and Economic Accounting (UN 2003) - RANESA Workshop June 12-16, 2005 Maputo

Volume 1

Statistical Standard

Volume 2

Non Standard Accounts

Volume 1

Statistical Standard

NAMEA, expenditure,

physical quantities, sub-soil, energy, land (?),value of economic assets

Volume 2

Non Standard Accounts

ecosystems, quality,

valuation…

Revision SEEA2012

Macro-ecological closure(non-linear feedback, spatial

issues)

Impacts on ecosystems & related services/benefits


CORE LAND COVER ACCOUNT

ECOSYSTEM ACCOUNTS

Land integration of ecosystem accounts

Soil

Flora & Fauna

Water system

Atmosphere/ Climate

Land use economic & social

functions

Intensity of use & full maintenance

costs

Ecosystem services

Ecosystemassets

Stocks

Material & energy flows

Resilience

Production & Consumption

Economic Assets

Population

Infrastructures & Technologies

Inclusive use of market & non

market ecosystem services


Land cover accounts


The approach used to generate land cover accounts records


LEAC: from changes to flows of land cover

LCF3

LCF1

LCF2

LCF5

LCF4

LCF7

LCF6

LCF8

Change Matrix(44x43=1932

possible changes)summarized into

flows

LCF9

19

90

2000

Corine land cover types 1 2A 2B 3A 3B 3C 4 5

Land cover flows

Artif

icia

l are

as

Arab

le la

nd &

pe

rman

ent c

rops

Past

ures

&

mos

aics

Fore

sted

land

Sem

i-nat

ural

ve

geta

tion

Open

spa

ces/

bar

e so

ils

Wet

land

s

Wat

er b

odie

s

LCF1 Urban land management 737 15 19 0 8 0 0 780LCF2 Urban residential sprawl 1924 1867 200 145 8 3 2 4149LCF3 Sprawl of economic sites and infrastructures 77 2728 1595 665 451 35 22 53 5627LCF4 Agriculture internal conversions 17252 10062 27314LCF5 Conversion from other land cover to agriculture 273 935 1796 1734 155 96 50 5039LCF6 Withdrawal of farming 2393 2860 5253LCF7 Forests creation and management 254 35803 5166 1048 1063 3 43337LCF8 Water bodies creation and management 191 252 253 117 190 17 21 1042LCF9 Changes due to natural & multiple causes 311 44 15 1317 1323 1041 229 252 4534Total Consumption of 1990 land cover, km² 1843 24608 17607 39899 9018 2304 1413 381 97074

No Change 160016 1149717 802502 990736 255914 50289 45502 45473 3500149Total land cover 1990, km² 161860 1174325 820109 1030635 264932 52593 46915 45854 3597223LCF1 Urban land management 780 780LCF2 Urban residential sprawl 4149 4149LCF3 Sprawl of economic sites and infrastructures 5627 5627LCF4 Agriculture internal conversions 15695 11619 27314LCF5 Conversion from other land cover to agriculture 2450 2590 5039LCF6 Withdrawal of farming 1124 2792 1244 23 70 0 5253LCF7 Forests creation and management 42547 766 24 43337LCF8 Water bodies creation and management 21 1021 1042LCF9 Land Cover due to natural & multiple causes 4 2167 1790 313 260 4534Total Formation of 2000 land cover, km² 10556 18144 15333 45343 4177 1858 383 1280 97074

No Change 160016 1149717 802502 990736 255914 50289 45502 45473 3500149Total land cover 2000, km² 170572 1167861 817835 1036079 260090 52147 45885 46754 3597223

Tota

l, km

²


Accounting for and mapping flows: urban sprawl, by grid


Ecosystem accounts


Recurrent policy demand for ONE integrated indicator for

- Assessing the direct costs and benefits of environmental protection and management as well as the costs of inaction, at the local, regional & national levels

- Supplementing or mitigating GDP and National Income measurements of economic performance:

Should relate to sustainability and human well beingCan be physical, better in money

Should include a clear bottom lineExisting long lists of indicators don’t really work for that purpose

Previous attempts (e.g. “green GDP”) have not been convincing…

- November 2007: Beyond GDP International Conference in BrusselsEEA: Ecosystem accounts of assets and services open a new way forward…

Full costs of goods and services including non covered ecosystem maintenance and restoration costs for meeting stated targets

Total benefits for human wellbeing from ecosystem services , used after production and monetised as well as directly available for end use and free


Ecosystem approach within the SEEA: 4 questions

1 . is the renewable natural capital maintained over time at the amount and quality expected by the society?

physical measurement of stocks and resilience in reference to stated social norms. [no monetary valuation of ecosystem assets needed at this stage]

2. is the full cost of maintaining the natural capital covered by the price of goods and services?

measurement of additional costs not currently covered for maintaining and restoring domestic ecosystems potentials (provision for depreciation, consumption of ecosystem capital) and addition to the value of goods and services

3. is the full cost of ecosystems services covered by import prices? calculation of the “concealed cost” (virtual transfer in capital) and addition to the value

of imported goods and services

Add additional domestic costs (2.) and imported “hidden costs” (3.) to the value of products for calculating the full cost of goods of services (and in the full cost of the final demand after deduction of costs in exports

4. is the total of goods and services supplied to final uses by the market (and government institutions) as well as for free by ecosystems, developing over time?

measure and value free end-use services and add these benefits to Final Demand


Society

EconomyEcosystem

Economy and ecosystem: the conceptual model

Ecosystem

Maintenance/restoration of ecosystem functions

Input of fossil energy,materials

Services

CO2


Logic underlying the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment…

Biophysical structure or

process(e.g. woodland habitat or net

primary productivity )

Service(e.g. flood

protection, or harvestable products)

Service(e.g. flood

protection, or harvestable products)

Function(e.g. slow passage of water, or biomass)

Function(e.g. slow passage of water, or biomass)

Benefit(e.g. willingness to pay for woodland protection or for

more woodland, or harvestable products)

Benefit(e.g. willingness to pay for woodland protection or for

more woodland, or harvestable products)Σ Pressures

Limit pressures via policy action?

Maintenance, restoration

Courtesy Roy Haines-Young

Economic and social values (sometimes

market values).

Maintenance and restoration costs


Natural assets/ ecosystem capital Natural capital stocks, health/resilience, distance to objective (physical units, by sectors)• Consumption of Ecosystem Capital /restoration costs (€)• Consumption of Ecosystem Capital concealed in imports/exports (€)• NPV or market value of selected assets, SNA rules (NPV or market value of selected assets, SNA rules (€€))• Ecosystem assets inclusive wealth (€)

Supply & use of Supply & use of ecosystem ecosystem services by services by sectors, sectors, I-O analysis, I-O analysis, NAMEANAMEA

Functional Ecosystem Services[Marketed & Non-market end use

ES (physical units and €)]

SNA, SEEA2003 & Ecosystem Accounts

Sector accounts of ecosystem natural capital

Sector accounts of flows of ecosystem services

Counts of Counts of ecosystem ecosystem

integrity/healthintegrity/health(focus on vigor,

robustness, resilience, dependance from inputs, healthy populations &

stress)

Core accounts of Core accounts of assets & flowsassets & flows

systems: land systems, rivers, soil, sea, atmosphere... components: biomass, water, C, N, P, species...

Ecosystem RatingEcosystem Rating

& Aggregates& Aggregates

by E

cosy

stem

typ

es

Material/energy flowsMaterial/energy flows[biomass, water, nutrients, residuals, physical units]

SNASNAsectorssectors

activitiesactivitiesproductsproducts

flowsflows

assetsassets

Impacts to the ecosystem

Feedbacks to the economy


Mock-up account


Spatial Integration of Environmental & Socio-Economic Data Collection

Mapping

Sampling

Individual Sites Monitoring

Socio-EconomicStatistics

Socio-economic statistics


Scale, governance, accounts and payments

Derived from global monitoring programmes & international statistics

IPES: global trade of ecosystem permits

Simplified accounts

Global scale:

monitoring of International Conventions and framing & regulation of markets

Clearing house on [1] ES prices & [2] ecosystem mitigation costs

Prices & costs reference tables for legal compensation

Green taxes

Beyond GDP Accounting

SEEA 2012SEEA 2012

FrameworkFramework

National & regional government: environmental agencies, ministries of economy, statistical offices, courts

Corporate accounts, costs & benefits, trade of ES

PES: specific markets

Accounting guidelines, charts

Action level: local scale, site level, management, projects, case studies, business


Simplified ecosystem accounts

Markets need accounts, regulations [= control]

Land ecosystems are spatially distributed => grid data [e.g. 1 km2]

Globally, change matters [degradation or improvement of ecosystem functioning and attached cost], not the value of the stock

Global multicriteria rating based on a small number of ecological potential [derived from ecosystem accounts]:

Landscape ecological potential [LEP]Landscape ecological potential [LEP] HANPPHANPP Biodiversity rarefactionBiodiversity rarefaction Exergy loss [river basins]Exergy loss [river basins] Dependance from external inputs [material/energy, footprint]Dependance from external inputs [material/energy, footprint]

losses/gains of “points of ecological potential” computation of restoration costs [needed for compensating losses // or accumulated by gains of points]

Rating can be detailed as necessary for the policy [national, regional] and action scales [local, business]


Example of a first candidate: LEP

Corine land cover map (derived from satellite images)

Green Background Landscape Index (derived from CLC)

Naturilis (derived from Natura2000 & CDDA)

Effective Mesh Size (MEFF, derived from TeleAtlas and CLC)

net Landscape Ecological Potential (nLEP) 2000, by 1km² grid cell

nLEP 2000 by NUTS 2/3


1990

LEAC/ Landscape Ecological Potential 1990-2000, 1km² grid (Source: Ecosystem Accounting for Mediterranean Wetlands, an EEA feasibility study for TEEB)

Change 1990-2000

LEP, state and change by 1 km2 grid

Legend

Camargue Regional Park, France

Change in net LEP 1990 to 2000

1 km² grid, range : -100 to +100

Improvement/ Highest : 47

Degradation/ Lowest : -33

Natural Park of Camargue (France)Natural Park of Camargue (France)


LEP connects at the local level: e.g. effect of land cover change

UnitsAMVRAKIKOS

GREECECAMARGUE

FRANCEDANUBE DELTA

ROMANIADOÑANA

SPAIN

km² 1802 827 5858 1473

Urban temperature 2000 0-100 1.6 0.3 1.3 0.5

Change in Urban temperature 1990-2000 0-100 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1

Intensive Agriculture Temperature 2000 0-100 15.8 25.0 11.8 13.4

Change in Intensive Agriculture temperature 1990-2000

0-100 0.1 1.0 0.2 0.7

Landscape Net Ecological Potential 2000 0-100 n.a 39.5 n.a 48.2

Change in Landscape Net Ecological Potential 1990-2000

0-100 n.a -0.7 n.a -1.1

Nature designation index (combined N2000 & national)

0-100 21.5 96.1 90.7 80.0

Mean Effective Mesh Size in SES 2005 logN(MEFF) n.a 150.8 n.a 189.1

Population Density (inhab/km²) 2000 inhabitants 57.9 26.5 7.5 7.5

Surface of coastal Wetland SES

Wetland Socio-Ecological Systems

ME

AN

VA

LU

ES

PE

R K

M²

Overall budget of the Natural Regional Park of Camargue

2 620 000 €2 440 000 €2 360 000 €1 744 000 €TOTAL

1 020 000 €790 000 €760 000 €254 000 €Field actions’ budget

1 600 000 €1 650 000 €1 600 000 €1 490 000 €Staff and other fix costs

2008200720062005

2 620 000 €2 440 000 €2 360 000 €1 744 000 €TOTAL

1 020 000 €790 000 €760 000 €254 000 €Field actions’ budget

1 600 000 €1 650 000 €1 600 000 €1 490 000 €Staff and other fix costs

2008200720062005

PNRC, 2008.

Next step: calculation of ecosystem maintenance & restoration costs


Soil, sea and atmosphere

Soil (see session 4): start from priority services ==> fertility, carbon storage ==> accounts for organic matter/biomass/carbon [composition, quality], erosion and sealing [quantity] + additional salinisation and biodiversity counts + next, losses of income linked to soil degradation

Sea: start from coastal sea service of nursery [spawning] and fish stocks [including age structure and interactions between stocks]

Atmosphere: start from GHGs accounting


Land Use Functions & Ecosystem Services

Expert meeting on Land Use and Ecosystem accounting, 18-19 May 2006, EEA

LUF analysis and mapping address cross-cutting issues e.g.: Urban/Rural,

Agro/Environment detect & measure ES services = ecosystem functions which

benefit to people, somewhere


Valuation of ecosystem services interest:

inclusion of free services contributing to quality of life, health and the regulation of natural processes (pollination, water purification, floods, erosion, nursery for wildlife...);

extended calculation of impacts;

enforcement of legal compensations;

valuation of rents [e.g. bioprospecting...], creation of new activities/income.

difficulties

from micro to macro; the “benefit transfer” issue; the aggregation issue

shadow prices are linked to specific purposes of valuation – ranges of prices are acceptable in case studies, not so much in national accounting

feasibility; limits to calculation of the “total economic value”; case of the “non-use” or “existence values”; case of regulating services;

focus on “most important services” one by one and the multifunctional character of ecosystems


The Zanzibar table

adapted from Glenn-Marie et alii 2008


Perspectives

SEEA revision 2012/2013

from GlobCover to GlobCorine: European Space Agency & EEA

Source: ESA, 2008


Points for discussion Land accounts within volume 1 ?

Ecosystem accounts in volume 2 ?

SEEA-Ecosystem in perspective ?

Prioritisation:

1 - simplified accounts for all ecosystems [and input to MA2015] + focus on forests, wetlands

2 - support to initiatives at local & business levels

3 - full integrated accounts

Need further discussion of contents =

classification of ecosystem services

valuation of ecosystem services

definition of accounting units [socio-ecological systems]

calculation of ecosystem capital consumption

upscaling of ecological potential assessments

physical & monetary aggregates

==> periodic meetings of the sub-group enlarged to UNEP experts [IPES, MA. TEEB, Green Economics] ? Meeting on ES classification at EEA, 10 & 11 December 2008


Thank you!


Ecosystem Assets[stocks and resilience]

Subsoil Assets[stocks]

Environmental Expenditures, Taxes

Additional Ecosystem

Maintenance Costs

Material & Energy Flows

NAMEA

Ecosystem

Services

Natural capital / assets

SNA flows & assets

Additional Ecosystem

Costsin Imports

(less in Exports)

Ecosystem Services

Ecosystem Assets

[stocks and resilience]

Rest of the

World

SEEA Integrating Ecosystems Physical flows

Monetary flows/valuation

Assets valuation

Subsoil Assets[stocks]

london group meeting brussels, 29 september – 3 october 2008 land & ecosystem accounts within...

Documents

land ecosystem accounts

ecosystem accounts of

opinion of london group

ecosystem approach

market ecosystem services

ecosystem degradation

eurostat land

resource land assets