The Ecosystem Services Approach for water challenges:The DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework

Nadine Gerner1, Gerardo Anzaldua2, Manuel Lago2, Issa Nafo1 Sebastian Birk3, David Schwesig4

1 Emschergenossenschaft, 2 Ecologic Institute, 3 University of Duisburg-Essen, 4 IWW Water Centre

Overall aims of DESSIN

Components and foundations of the Framework

Figure 3: Procedural steps for the application of the DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework (from Anzaldua et al., submitted).

The European research project DESSIN has developed a structured approach

to measure changes in ecosystem services (ESS) provision, use and benefit:

the DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework. With it, the project brings the

concept of ESS (i.e. the benefits humans obtain from ecosystems) from

theory to practice - with special focus on application in the water sector.

DESSIN‘s overall aim is to demonstrate innovative solutions for water scarcity

and water quality related challenges. While novel solutions are necessary to

meet water challenges faced in Europe, they are typically confronted with

implementation barriers. By enabling assessments that consider broad

environmental and economic aspects when evaluating costs and benefits of

the new solutions, these barriers can be overcome. To this end, the

Framework supports decision-making and promotes the uptake of innovative

solutions. It can also facilitate the integration of the ESS concept into the EU

Water Framework Directive implementation.

20 partners from universities, research centres, as well as site operators and

SMEs from 7 countries work together in this 4 year FP7 project (2014-2017).

The DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework

Conceptual approach

Application in three case studies

Outlook

References

STEP 9.Quantify expected changes in State, Impact I and Impact II indicators

DRIVERS

STEP 2.

Gather an overview of

“the anthropogenic activities that may have environmental effects”

taking place in the defined environmental system of interest.

PRESSURES

STEP 3.

Identify

“the direct environmental effects of the drivers”

recognized in Step 1.

STATE

STEP 6.

Identify relevant parameters which dictate

the condition of the system

and are hypothetically affected by the PM.

IMPACT I (ESS Provision)

STEP 7.

Select indicators/ proxies for relating biophysical parameters (State) to relevant ESS.

IMPACT II (ESS Use and resulting benefits)

STEP 8.

Select indicators/ proxies to measure human wellbeing related to relevant ESS.

RESPONSES

STEP 4.

Describe the proposed measure (PM) and its capabilities.

STEP 5.

Identify the expected beneficiaries of the hypothetical changes induced by the PM.

STATE (before)

IMPACT I (before)

IMPACT II (before)

PART II: Problem characterization

PART IV: Impact evaluation

STATE (after)

IMPACT I (after) IMPACT II (after)

PART III: Response capabilities &

potential beneficiaries

Administrative details

Objectives of the assessment

Overview of the study area

Stakeholder list

PART I: Study description

SETTING THE SCENE

STEP 1.

Defining the decision case

PART V: Sustainability Assessment

STEP A.

Indicator selection

STEP B.

Defining additional indicators

STEP C.

Data collection and assessment

STEP D.

Results and discussion

STEP E.

Decision support

STEP F.

Figure 1: The DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework is based on existing approaches: the Common International Classification of ESS, the Drivers-Pressures-State-Impact-Response scheme, and the Final Ecosystem Goods and Services Approach.

Figure 2: The DPSIR circle (based on (Müller & Burkhard, (2012); van Oudenhoven et al. (2012); Haines-Young & Potschin (2010; 2013)) structures the DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework.

Figure 4: The three case studies Aarhus (Denmark), Llobregat (Spain) and Emscher (Germany).

The DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework was developed on the basis of the

Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES), the

adaptive management cycle DPSIR and the Ecosystem Goods and Services

Approach (FEGS-CS). The biophysical and economic evaluation of ESS is

supplemented by a Sustainability Assessment based on the five dimensional

sustainability approach of the project TRUST (Figure 1).

In the DPSIR scheme as applied in DESSIN, the innovative solutions are

considered Responses that may influence Drivers, Pressures and/or States.

From the resulting changes in ecosystem state, the changes in ESS provision

(Impact I) are estimated. An economic assessment of the subsequent

changes in the benefits and values perceived by society (Impact II) follows.

The estimated changes in ESS provision, use

and economic value serve to inform

policy and decision makers on

the resulting benefits of solutions.

The Framework has been

developed and tested through

application in three case studies

(Figure 4).

At the Aarhus study site, the impact

of a river opening coupled with a

real-time-control system of the

water network on ESS in the harbor

area was evaluated.

In Llobregat, groundwater recharge

via infiltration ponds was evaluated

with regard to the effect on water

provision.

In the Emscher case, the benefits

resulting from large-scale river

restoration measures on regulating

and cultural ESS were assessed

(Gerner et al., submitted).

The project will now apply the Framework to

five additional case studies in order to

determine how technical solutions with

positive effects on water quality and

quantity can enhance ESS.

The Framework provides a step-by-step guidance for the evaluation of ESS influenced

by a certain response (Figure 3). It thus links the innovative solution (Response) to the

specific ESS it influences. The user defines specific capabilities of the solution (e.g.

reduction of contaminants in the water) and relates these capabilities to specific ESS.

The changes in those ESS are then evaluated using indicators or models.

The Framework is available via www.dessin-project.eu Results & Downloads

DESSIN Ecosystem Services Valuation Toolkit.

The decision support software MIKE Workbench facilitates the application of the

Framework by guiding through each of the steps with examples of relevant

parameters and ESS as well as biophysical indicators and economic methods.

Anzaldua, G.; Gerner, N. V.; Lago, M.; Abhold, K.; Hinzmann, M.; Beyer, S.; Winking, C.; Riegels, N.; Krogsgaard Jensen, J.; Termes, M.; Amorós, J.; Wencki,K.; Strehl, C.; Ugarelli, R.; Hasenheit, M.; Nafo, I.; Hernandez, M.; Vilanova, E.; Damman, S.; Brouwer, S.; Rouillard, J.; Schwesig, D. & Birk, S. , Submittedto Ecosystem Services. Getting into the water with the Ecosystem Services Approach: the DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework.

Gerner, N.V., Nafo, I., Winking, C., Wencki, K., Strehl, C., Wortberg, T., Niemann, A., Anzaldua, G. & Birk, S., Submitted to Ecosystem Services. Large-scaleriver restoration pays off: A case study of ecosystem service valuation for the Emscher restoration generation project.

Haines-Young, R.; Potschin, M. (2010): The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. In: David G. Raffaelli und Christopher L.J. Frid (Eds.): Ecosystem ecology. A new synthesis. Cambridge University Press (BES Ecological Reviews Series). CUP, Cambridge, pp. 110-139.

Haines-Young, R.; Potschin, M. (2013): Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December2012. EEA Framework Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003.

Müller, F.; Burkhard, B. (2012): The indicator side of ecosystem services. In: Ecosystem Services 1 (1), pp. 26–30.

Van Oudenhoven, A. P. E.; Petz, K.; Alkemade, R.; Hein, L.; De Groot, R. S. (2012): Framework for systematic indicator selection to assess effects of landmanagement on ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators 21, pp. 110–122.