Conceptual Framework and Methodology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 Chapter 2: Conceptual Framework and Methodology Coordinating Lead Authors: Georgina M. Mace and Ian Bateman Lead Authors: Steve Albon, Andrew Balmford, Claire Brown, Andrew Church, Roy Haines-Young, Jules N. Pretty, Kerry Turner, Bhaskar Vira and Jonathan Winn 2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 12 2.2 Overall Conceptual Framework .......................................................................................................................... 12 2.3 Ecosystems and Broad Habitats ......................................................................................................................... 13 2.4 Ecosystem Processes.......................................................................................................................................... 15 2.4.1 Physical, Chemical and Biological Processes .................................................................................................................15 2.4.2 Biodiversity .......................................................................................................................................................................15 2.4.3 Geodiversity ......................................................................................................................................................................16 2.5 Ecosystem Services ............................................................................................................................................ 16 2.6 Goods ................................................................................................................................................................. 18 2.7 Human Well-being .............................................................................................................................................. 20 2.7.1 Economic Value ................................................................................................................................................................21 2.7.2 Health Values ....................................................................................................................................................................22 2.7.3 Shared (Social) Values .....................................................................................................................................................22 2.8 The Changing UK Environment .......................................................................................................................... 23 2.9 Scenarios ............................................................................................................................................................ 23 2.10 Response Options ............................................................................................................................................. 24 References ................................................................................................................................................................ 24 Setting the Scene | Chapter 2: Conceptual Framework and Methodology 11 2.1 Introduction the pleasure they bring to many people, form one kind of cultural ecosystem service. This chapter introduces a conceptual framework and methodology for the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (UK NEA). It is intended that this will provide a readily understood, logical and consistent approach to enhance 2.2 Overall Conceptual coherence across chapters and permit the derivation of clear and generally applicable conclusions. A conceptual Framework framework is a representation of the main components of a system or issue of interest, showing their interrelationships or linkages. It serves to develop a common understanding of The conceptual framework is based around the processes which issues should be included in an assessment. It provides that link human societies and their well-being with the a basis for different groups to contribute their analyses environment (Figure 2.1). Taking the core UK NEA of specific issues and linkages, and for these analyses to questions as a starting point, the conceptual framework combine in a logical manner in an overall assessment. The emphasises the role of ecosystems in providing services that framework should also assist in the identification of data or bring improvements in well-being to people. knowledge gaps–in the context of the UK NEA, these gaps Here, we provide an overview of the conceptual may form a focus for extending the assessment in the future. framework illustrated in Figure 2.1, with each component The framework described here is based on existing being described in more detail later in the chapter. Starting methods, especially those used for the Millennium Ecosystem at the bottom right of Figure 2.1, we see that the basis Assessment (MA) (MA 2005). The MA framework—in for ecosystems (Section 2.3) are the fundamental earth particular, its broad definition of ecosystem services and processes on land, and in water and air—processes which their classification into provisioning, regulating, supporting involve all living things. The most widely accepted definition and cultural services—has proven to have traction for both of an ‘ecosystem’ is: “A dynamic complex of plant, animal science and policy development. However, the UK NEA also and micro-organism communities and their non-living incorporates post-MA advances, especially for the economic environment interacting as a functional unit” (MA 2005;). valuation of ecosystem services and procedures developed Thus, an ecosystem is a complex where interactions among to avoid the double counting of such services. Therefore, the biotic (living) and abiotic (non-living) components of we take particular note of conceptual advances proposed that unit determine its properties and set limits to the types for The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) of processes that take place there. Ecosystems vary widely project (Ring et al. 2010; Balmford et al. 2011), those used in spatial scale and their key processes operate across a for the review of ecosystem services in Europe (Fitter et al. range of rates that are overlapping in time and space. In 2010), as well as detailed suggestions for enabling economic practice, ecosystems are usually defined by the scope of the valuation of ecosystem services (Fisher & Turner 2008) . function, process or problem being studied. For the purposes The framework has some additional distinctive elements. of the UK NEA, we use the Broad Habitat types from the Firstly, we recognised at the outset that a major objective Countryside Survey as the basis for the classification of of the UK NEA was to incorporate, as far as possible, a ecosystems (Section 2.3). systematic and comprehensive valuation of ecosystem People are part of ecosystems and, like all other living services. Therefore, we developed a framework which organisms, affect the processes taking place there, as would yield the type of information which economists need well as deriving welfare gains from them. Compared to for monetary valuation, but also incorporated flexibility other organisms, people have an enormous influence on to allow non-monetary valuation of services that cannot ecosystems, both in the UK and elsewhere, as a result of the be meaningfully assessed in monetary terms. Secondly, population numbers and densities, patterns of consumption we have explicitly identified elements for incorporation and use of technology. into the assessment that are relevant for the UK; hence, The definition of ‘ecosystem services’ developed by the the classifications of ecosystems (Broad Habitat types), UK NEA is the outputs of ecosystems from which people ecosystem services, change processes and outcomes derive benefits (MA 2005). In the UK NEA, we distinguish impinging on human well-being are all significant in the between the ‘ecosystem processes and intermediate UK context. Thirdly, the methodology clearly recognises the ecosystem services’ (Section 2.4) and the ‘final ecosystem remit of the UK NEA to consider policy-relevant changes services’ that directly deliver welfare gains and/or losses occurring over a defined timescale. These are implemented to people (Section 2.5). This distinction is important to through a series of scenarios and response options involving avoid double counting in the valuation of ecosystem feasible and decision-pertinent changes in the environment, services (Fisher & Turner 2008). Section 2.4 also introduces markets and policy. Finally, we have taken a slightly different biodiversity and geodiversity and details the way that these approach to the treatment of biodiversity and have separated components of the natural environment are related to out the underpinning natural processes that depend to a ecosystems and their services. greater or lesser degree on biodiversity, from landscapes, There are many outputs from ecosystems, but while seascapes, habitats and wild species. These latter elements ecosystems function and deliver services, people benefit in of biodiversity are part of our natural heritage and, through well-being terms from the outcomes of those services. The 12 UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report Social feedbacks, institutional interventions and responses Drivers of Change (Direct and Indirect) Future Demographic, economic, socio-political, technological and behavioural