natural capital, gis, earth economics
TRANSCRIPT
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
GIS in Natural Capital Valuation and Beyond
The Value of Natural Capital: Theory,
Practice, and Policy
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Overlay
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Terminology and Overview of GIS • Uses of GIS
Data analysis
Design/Planning
Cartography/Visualization
Participatory GIS
Data creation
• Types of Data
Point Data
Line Data
Polygon Data
Raster Data
• Operations
Arc Toolbox
Clip
Overlay
Batch Processing
Huff Model
Summary Statistics
Selecting and Exporting Data
Editor
Geocoding/Digitizing
Buffering
• Other important words:
Python Scripts
“Geodesign”
Spatial Statistics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Cool GIS Links • Mapping Applications
Social Explorer
Food Access Research Atlas
Age of Humans “Story Map”
Map of Play
Discover the Forest
Oh Ranger!
California Water Rights
• Cool GIS Projects
Bay Game
Hestia Project
National Geographic: Field Expedition
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics
Work Flow Diagram
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Study Overview • $90,000 RFP, 5 Modules, 8 months
Economic Contribution of all outdoor recreation in Washington State
Economic Contribution of outdoor recreation on Washington State public lands
Economic Contribution of outdoor recreation on Washington State private lands
Economic Impact of expenditures on outdoor recreation by non-local visitors
Economic Value of recreation-related ecosystem services
All Modules with results broken down by State-wide, County, Legislative District, Activities,
Managing Entities, Visitor Types
• $21.6 Billion in annual expenditures; $20.5 billion in economic contributions
• 200,000 jobs
• $9.1 billion in out-of-state “leakages”
• 56 Days of recreation per year per Washingtonian
• 19 million acres of public recreation land provide $115 to $248
billion in ecosystem service benefits per year
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Washington State: 6th in the Nation for
Outdoor Recreation Economy
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Washington State: Tied for Last in State Level Investment
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Public Outdoor Recreation Lands & Non-Public Timberland
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Private Outdoor Recreation
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Ecosystem Services • $115 billion to $248 billion in ecosystem service benefits per year
• Consumer Surplus of $19.6 billion to $31.2 billion
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Sample Map Distributed to All Legislators
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Outdoor Recreation Businesses
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Outdoor Recreation as an Economic Driver
• Redistribution of Wealth from Urban to Rural Areas
• Outdoor recreation economic activity influences all sectors
• Tourists inject extra money into the economy, while using few
taxpayer resources
• Outdoor recreation is something that all classes, ages, races, and
political parties share
• Outdoor recreation provides immense physical and mental health
benefits
• Outdoor recreation provides a funding mechanism for conservation
of natural capital
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Case Study: Florham Park, New Jersey • Objective: Use ESV to measure the potential benefits of restoration
and recreational access to a 96 acre Property
Figure 1. The Project Site outlined in purple, north of Route
24 (thick yellow) and south of the Columbia Turnpike 510.
Inset: Location of the Project Site in Northeast USA, 30
miles west of New York City
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Case Study: Characterization of Land Cover
Land Cover
Area in Present State (Acres)
Area in
Hypothetical
Restoration Plan (Acres)
Forest 36 57
Wetland 45 19
Grassland
/ Shrub 11 18
Developed <1 0
Fresh Water
4 1
Total 96 96
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Case Study: Selection of Studies “Before” Scenario “After” Scenario
Fo
res
t
Fre
sh
Wa
ter
Gra
ss
lan
d
We
tla
nd
De
ve
lop
ed
Fo
res
t
Fre
sh
Wa
ter
Gra
ss
lan
d
We
tla
nd
De
ve
lop
ed
Regulating
Biological Control 2 2 2 2
Climate Stability 1 1 1 1 1 1
Moderation of
Extreme Events 1 1 1 1 1
Soil Retention 4 4
Waste Treatment 1 1 1 1 1 1
Water Regulation 1 1
Supporting Habitat and
Nursery 1 2 1 1
Information
Aesthetic
Information 3 4 3 1 4
Recreation and
Tourism 2 1 2
Science and
Education 1
Ecosystem service not produced by land cover
Ecosystem service produced by land cover, but not able to be valued
n Ecosystem service produced by land cover with number (n) of available estimates
Table 4. Ecosystem Services represented in the Earth Economics EVT
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Case Study: Conversion of Value
Acres
Low
($/acre/year)
High
($/acre/year) Low ($/year) High ($/year)
Forest 36 4,319 10,043 156,852 364,731
Wetland 45 17,038 25,044 759,903 1,116,981
Grassland/Shrub 11 24,053 25,726 256,925 274,796
Developed 0 - - - -
Fresh Water 4 - - - -
Total 96 1,173,679 1,756,508
Acres
Low
($/acre/year)
High
($/acre/year) Low ($/year) High ($/year)
Forest 57 4,811 11,064 275,083 632,701
Wetland 19 67,164 85,281 1,288,257 1,635,759
Grassland/
Shrub 18 41,462 43,135 760,933 791,639
Developed - - - - -
Fresh Water 1 24,803 57,130 30,260 69,699
Total 96 2,354,534 3,129,799
Table 6. The Value of Ecosystem Services Produced on the Project Site by Land Cover Type following
the Hypothetical Restoration Plan
Table 5. The Value of Ecosystem Services Produced on the Project Site by Land Cover Type in the
Present State
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Case Study: Maximizing Returns
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Case Study: Visualizing Returns
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
Ecosystem Service Focus: Recreation
• USGS Protected Area Database has
comprehensive set of conservation and recreation
areas
• ArcMap Huff Model determines probability of
visitation given “competing” sites (inputs: census
blocks, protected areas, and geographic
boundary)
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
FEMA and Flood Risk Reduction
Figure 2. Project Site providing flood risk reduction, a directional
ecosystem service, to downstream FEMA Flood Areas
• In 2013, all national flood policy for benefit-cost analysis adopted Earth Economics values and
methodology to recognize ecosystem services (including outdoor recreation) as a benefit to
flood-plain buyouts
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
http://www.upworthy.com/7-deadly-sins-map-how-does-your-state-stack-up
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics
© 2015 Earth Economics © 2015 Earth Economics