This project was carried out through a Scottish Natural Heritage graduate placement scheme. Chris Mellor Email: c_mellor@hotmail.couk

Monetising the Value of Ecosystem Services Provided by River Restoration Projects Acknowledgements: The project could not have been completed without the help and cooperation of SNH and numerous partners. In particular, contributions from Marshall Halliday of the Esk Rivers and Fisheries Trust, Simon McKelvey of the Cromarty Firth Salmon and Fisheries Trust and Helen Brown of the Water of Leith Conservation Trust were invaluable.

Ecosystem services are defined by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 1 as ‘...the benefits people obtain from

ecosystems’. Historical exploitation of natural resources and habitat modification has fractured many ecosystems to the point where these benefits are degraded or have been lost entirely 1-3. The limited worth placed on intact ecosystems owes much to the lack of a coherent framework for assigning value to their ‘natural capital’. Evaluating ecosystem service provision and monetising the associated benefits offers a potential solution and an opportunity to get nature on the ‘balance sheet’. Even if values assigned are wrong, the process ensures the wider benefits of ecosystems are considered in management decisions 4.

Monetising Ecosystem Services

• This was a desk based study. Changes in ecosystem service provision and the resulting monetisable benefits as a result of each project were estimated through discussion with key stakeholders and a review of the associated literature.

• The common international classification of ecosystem services (CISES) proposed by the European Environment Agency 11 was used as the framework to identify ecosystem services provided at each case study site.

• Once identified, the annual total economic value of the change in ecosystem services was estimated through current market valuation or via benefit transfer.

• Total monetary value of the change in ecosystem services was estimated by multiplying the annual benefit by the accepted environmental discount rate of 3.5% 12 over the lifetime of the project, taken as 25 years following Everard 10.

River restoration has the potential to reinstate or enhance many of the ecosystem services lost or impaired

through modification 5. Barrier removal/ remediation can improve the diversity and quality of riverine habitat through reinstating longitudinal processes and increasing the distribution migratory and non-migratory fish 6-7. Re-meandering and flood plain reconnection has restored natural erosional and depositional processes leading to improvements in habitat diversity at a number of sites 8. Despite clear shifts in ecosystem service provision the majority of river restoration projects are not economically evaluated, though Everard 9-10 illustrated that they can provide large economic benefits.

Case study 1: Rottal Burn 650m of canalised channel was remeandered and extended to increase the quantity of good quality habitat for juvenile salmon. The riparian zone was planted with native trees to enhance local biodiversity, contribute to local flood alleviation and sequester carbon.

Valuation of changes in ecosystem service provision: Salmon productivity £ 198,351 Climate regulation £ 19,319 Biodiversity £ 125,959 Flood mitigation £ 83,313 Education £ 28,146 Total ecosystem benefit gains over 25 years = £ 455,088

Case study 2: Dunglass Island A dry channel on Dunglass Island was re-watered to increase the area of good quality spawning and nursery habitat. The riparian area has developed into wet woodland, contributing to the sustainability of the local SAC and sequestering carbon.

Valuation of changes in ecosystem service provision: Salmon productivity £124, 283 Habitat enhancement £ 29, 551 Education £ 34, 023 Total ecosystem benefit gains over 25 years = £187, 857

Case study 3: Water of Leith Rather than a single, large intervention, the Water of Leith Conservation Trust and a related organisation, the volunteer bailiffs are engaged in regular, small scale interventions to enhance the condition of this heavily modified water body.

Valuation of changes in ecosystem service provision over 2013: Habitat improvement £ 16, 977 Engaging the community £ 45, 542 Education £ 9, 071 Recreational fishing £ 28, 590 Annual value of ecosystem benefits = £ 100, 180 Potential value over 25 years = £1, 708, 907

Conclusion: The ecosystems services approach provides an excellent framework with which to think about managing the environment.. The three case studies presented in this project

illustrate that it is possible to identify and assign monetary value to marginal gains in ecosystem services; and that these gains can be substantial. The project also highlighted the need for more primary research into valuation of ecosystem services, especially cultural services. to ensure benefit transfer is as representative as possible.

The aim of this project was to estimate the monetary value of the change in ecosystem services provided by

river restoration at a selection of case study sites.

1) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis, Washington DC, Island Press..2) Costanza et al., 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387, 253 – 260.3) Blaney, R. 2012. Scotland's Natural Capital Asset Index. Scottish Natural Heritage. 4) DEFRA. 2013. Realising nature’s value: The Final Report of the Ecosystem Markets Task Force. Ecosystems Markets Task Force. 5) Gilvear, et al., 2013. River rehabilitation for the delivery of multiple ecosystem services at the river network scale. Journal of Environmental Management, 126, 30-43. 6) Hart et al., 2002. Dam Removal: Challenges and Opportunities for Ecological Research and River Restoration. Bioscience, 52, 669-682. 7) Im et al., 2011. Changes of river morphology and physical fish habitat following weir removal. Ecological Engineering, 37, 883-892. 8) Roni et al., 2008. Global Review of the Physical and Biological Effectiveness of Stream Habitat Rehabilitation Techniques. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 28, 856-890. 9) Everard, 2009. Ecosystem services case studies. Report No. [SCHO0409BPVM-E-E ], Environment Agency. Bristol. 10) Everard, 2010. Ecosystem services assessment of sea trout restoration work on the River Glaven, North Norfolk. Report No. [SCHO0110BRTZ-E-E], Environment Agency. Bristol. 11) Haines-Young et al., 2013. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December 2012. [EEA/IEA/09/003], European Environment Agency. 12) HM Treasury. 2011. THE GREEN BOOK: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government.