DOCSLIB.ORG

David Batker Earth Economics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
David Batker Earth Economics Valuing Ecosystem Services David Batker Earth Economics History/Importance Identify Ecosystem Services Valuation Mapping and Modeling Funding Mechanisms The Big Picture Economy Environment Economy Environment The Big Picture Economy Environment Economy Environment Economies Change Economics Changes Caernarvon 1927 Flood risk reduction has never been more important Loss of Natural Capital Figure 1. Track of Hurricane Katrina, August 23-29, 2005, showing spatial extent and storm intensity along its path (source: NOAA) $200 Billion Identify Ecosystem Services Food Carbon Sequestration Recreation Medicinal Resources Ecosystem Services Constituents of Well-Being Provisioning Security Basic material for Freedom of Supporting Regulating good life choice and Health action Cultural Good social relations Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Provisioning Functions Water Supply Food Medicinal Resources Fiber and Fuel Regulation Functions Flood Protection Gas & Climate Stability Water Quality Soil Erosion Control Biological Control Soil Formation Water Regulation Supporting Functions Pollination Biodiversity and Habitat Nutrient Cycling Net Primary Production Cultural Functions Aesthetic Recreation Spiritual & historic Science & education Valuation of Ecosystem Services Rivers and Lakes Wetlands Riparian Forest Flood Protection x x x Gas and Climate Regulation x x Habitat Refugium x x x Pollination x Soil Erosion Control x x Water Flow Regulation x x x Nutrient Cycling x Water Supply x x x Water Quality x x x Biological Control x Aesthetic & Recreational x x x Soil Formation x x Food Provisioning x x x x x SERVES database of ecosystem service valuation studies Avoided Cost Replacement Cost Factor Income Travel Cost Hedonic Pricing Marginal Product Estimation Contingent Valuation Group Valuation Appropriate Method for Ecosystem Service Valuation Transferability Across Sites Ecosystem Serv. Value Quality Method Transferability Flood haz. red. High AC, RC, H, P Medium Waste treatment High RC, AC, CV Medium to high Genetic resources Low M, AC Low Spiritual resources None None None Rivers and Lakes Wetlands Riparian Forest Gas and Climate Regulation $29.43 $43.56 Flood Protection $117.87 $7.56 Habitat Refugium $17.13 $58.89 $269.85 Pollination x x Soil Erosion Control Water Flow Regulation x x x Nutrient Cycling x Water Supply $58.89 $199.11 $2,105 Water Quality x x Biological Control Aesthetic & Recreational $1.69 x $1,043 Soil Formation Food Provisioning x x Rivers and Lakes Wetlands Riparian Forest Gas and Climate Regulation $29.43 $43.56 Flood Protection $117.87 $7.56 Habitat Refugium $17.13 $58.89 $269.85 Pollination Soil Erosion Control Water Flow Regulation x x x Nutrient Cycling x Water Supply $58.89 $199.11 $2,105 Water Quality x x Biological Control Aesthetic & Recreational $1.69 x $1,043 Soil Formation Food Provisioning x x Biodiversity x x Total Low Value of Rivers and Lakes Rivers and Lakes Wetlands Riparian Forest Gas and Climate Regulation $29.43 $43.56 Flood Protection $117.87 $7.56 Rivers & Lakes Habitat Refugium $17.13 $58.89 $269.85 Pollination Soil Erosion Control Water Flow Regulation x x x $77.71 per acre Nutrient Cycling x Water Supply $58.89 $199.11 $2,105 Water Quality x x each year Biological Control Aesthetic & Recreational $1.69 x $1,043 Soil Formation Food Provisioning x x Biodiversity x x Rivers & Lakes Open Water Perennial Ice/Snow Deciduous Forest Evergreen Forest $77.71 per acre Mixed Forest Scrub/Shrub Grassland/Herbaceous each year Pasture/Hay Cultivated Crops Woody Wetlands Herbaceous Wetlands Rivers and Lakes Eelgrass Total Low Value of each Acres ] [ landcover type * Land Use Low Values High Values Fresh Water Marsh 2,834 11,077 Intermediate Marsh 1,832 4,430 Brackish Marsh 1,510 3,669 Saline Marsh 1,098 2,760 Wet Shrub-scrub 394 1,531 Forested Swamp 3,335 13,258 Open Fresh Water 428 2,960 Open Estuarine Water 68 6,823 Shrub-Scrub 9 135 Upland Forest 76 699 Agriculture and Pasture 38 43 Total 11,953 47,385 Annual Service Value of the Mississippi River Delta High $47 Billion Low $12 Billion Each Year Mississippi Delta Asset Value High $1,300 Billion Low $330 Billion BP Asset Value: $70 - $120 Billion Scenario Analysis Net Benefits $62 Billion Low $12 Billion With an Aggressive Restoration Mapping and Modeling Ecosystem Services Mississippi River Drainage Basin Basin Facts Drains 41% of continental U.S. Includes 31 states & 2 Canadian provinces Total area drained 1.2 million square miles Mississippi River Watershed 1 DOT = 20,000 acres drained land RED ZONE Coastal Zone Provisioning Assets Beneficiaries Impairments Critical Areas Providing Flood Protection Benefits Flood Protection Value Uncertainty Funding Mechanisms for Flood Hazard Reduction Combining Services Watershed Investment District Benefit/Cost Analysis Rate of Return on Investment Environmental Impact Assessment Economic Returns on Conservation Thank You [email protected] Loss of Natural Capital Provisioning Functions Water Supply Food Medicinal Resources Fiber and Fuel Regulation Functions Flood Protection Gas & Climate Stability Water Quality Soil Erosion Control Biological Control Soil Formation Water Regulation Supporting Functions Pollination Biodiversity and Habitat Nutrient Cycling Net Primary Production Cultural Functions Aesthetic Recreation Spiritual & historic Science & education Rivers and Lakes Wetlands Riparian Forest Flood Protection x x x Gas and Climate Regulation x x Habitat Refugium x x x Pollination x Soil Erosion Control x x Water Flow Regulation x x x Nutrient Cycling x Water Supply x x x Water Quality x x x Biological Control x Aesthetic & Recreational x x x Soil Formation x x Food Provisioning x x x x x Rivers and Lakes Wetlands Riparian Forest Gas and Climate Regulation $29.43 $43.56 Flood Protection $117.87 $7.56 Habitat Refugium $17.13 $58.89 $269.85 Pollination x x Soil Erosion Control Water Flow Regulation x x x Nutrient Cycling x Water Supply $58.89 $199.11 $2,105 Water Quality x x Biological Control Aesthetic & Recreational $1.69 x $1,043 Soil Formation Food Provisioning x x Rivers and Lakes Wetlands Riparian Forest Gas and Climate Regulation $29.43 $43.56 Flood Protection $117.87 $7.56 Habitat Refugium $17.13 $58.89 $269.85 Pollination Soil Erosion Control Water Flow Regulation x x x Nutrient Cycling x Water Supply $58.89 $199.11 $2,105 Water Quality x x Biological Control Aesthetic & Recreational $1.69 x $1,043 Soil Formation Food Provisioning x x Biodiversity x x Total Low Value of Rivers and Lakes Rivers and Lakes Wetlands Riparian Forest Gas and Climate Regulation $29.43 $43.56 Flood Protection $117.87 $7.56 Rivers & Lakes Habitat Refugium $17.13 $58.89 $269.85 Pollination Soil Erosion Control Water Flow Regulation x x x $77.71 per acre Nutrient Cycling x Water Supply $58.89 $199.11 $2,105 Water Quality x x each year Biological Control Aesthetic & Recreational $1.69 x $1,043 Soil Formation Food Provisioning x x Biodiversity x x Rivers & Lakes Open Water Perennial Ice/Snow Deciduous Forest Evergreen Forest $77.71 per acre Mixed Forest Scrub/Shrub Grassland/Herbaceous each year Pasture/Hay Cultivated Crops Woody Wetlands Herbaceous Wetlands Rivers and Lakes Eelgrass Total Low Value of each Acres [ landcover type * ] Land Use Low Values High Values Fresh Water Marsh 2,834 11,077 Intermediate Marsh 1,832 4,430 Brackish Marsh 1,510 3,669 Saline Marsh 1,098 2,760 Wet Shrub-scrub 394 1,531 Forested Swamp 3,335 13,258 Open Fresh Water 428 2,960 Open Estuarine Water 68 6,823 Shrub-Scrub 9 135 Upland Forest 76 699 Agriculture and Pasture 38 43 Total 11,953 47,385 Mississippi River Drainage Basin Basin Facts Drains 41% of continental U.S. Includes 31 states & 2 Canadian provinces Total area drained 1.2 million square miles Mississippi River Watershed 1 DOT = 20,000 acres drained land Thank You [email protected] .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nature's Value in Clallam County
    NATURE’S VALUE IN CLALLAM COUNTY: POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF FEEDER BLUFFS AND 12 OTHER ECOSYSTEMS Prepared by: 107 N. Tacoma Ave Tacoma, WA 98403 253-539-4801 www.eartheconomics.org | [email protected] November 2013 Suggested Citation: Flores, L., Harrison-Cox, J., Wilson, S., Batker, D. 2013. Nature’s Value in Clallam County: The Economic Benefits of Feeder Bluffs and 12 Other Ecosystems. Earth Economics: Tacoma, Washington. Authors: Lola Flores, Jennifer Harrison-Cox, Sara Wilson and David Batker Primary Data Contributors: Anne Shaffer at Coastal Watershed Institute, Dave Parks at Washington State Department of Natural Resources, and Clallam County Department of Community Development. Acknowledgements: Earth Economics would like to thank all who contributed valuable information to this project: Anne Shaffer and Nicole Harris from the Coastal Watershed Institute, Cathy Lear and Steve Gray from Clallam County, Dave Parks from Department of Natural Resources, George Kaminsky and Heather Barron from Department of Ecology, Kathryn Neal from the City of Port Angeles, Clea Rome from the WSU Extension, Ian Miller from WA Seagrant and Helle Andersen, formerly of CWI. We deeply appreciate those who helped review and edit this document, Donna J. Nickerson, Aaron Schwartz, Cathy Lear, Anne Shaffer and Dave Parks. We very much appreciate the professional project sponsorship and support: Margaret Mckeown project manager from the Department of Fish and Wildlife. We would also like to thank our Board of Directors for their continued support of Earth Economics: David Cosman, Josh Farley, Ingrid Rasch, and Josh Reyneveld. Earth Economics project team members for this study included: Tracy Stanton, Maya Kocian, Jonathan Kochmer, Rowan Schmidt, Zachary Christin, Nora Wahlund, Tedi Dickinson, Tania Briceno, TaNeashia Sudds; and our wonderful interns and volunteers: Lauren Travis, Anna Milliren, Hannah Fotherby, Danielle Begg, Yiyan Ge, Can Huynh, Bryan Hueber, Seth Wiggins and Deirdre Gabbay.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Capital in the Colorado River Basin
    NATURE’S VALUE IN THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN NATURE’S VALUE IN THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN JULY, 2014 AUTHORS David Batker, Zachary Christin, Corinne Cooley, Dr. William Graf, Dr. Kenneth Bruce Jones, Dr. John Loomis, James Pittman ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study was commissioned by The Walton Family Foundation. Earth Economics would like to thank our project advisors for their invaluable contributions and expertise: Dr. Kenneth Bagstad of the United States Geological Survey, Dr. William Graf of the University of South Carolina, Dr. Kenneth Bruce Jones of the Desert Research Institute, and Dr. John Loomis of Colorado State University. We would like to thank our team of reviewers, which included Dr. Kenneth Bagstad, Jeff Mitchell, and Leah Mitchell. We would also like to thank our Board of Directors for their continued support and guidance: David Cosman, Josh Farley, and Ingrid Rasch. Earth Economics research team for this study included Cameron Otsuka, Jacob Gellman, Greg Schundler, Erica Stemple, Brianna Trafton, Martha Johnson, Johnny Mojica, and Neil Wagner. Cover and layout design by Angela Fletcher. The authors are responsible for the content of this report. PREPARED BY 107 N. Tacoma Ave Tacoma, WA 98403 253-539-4801 www.eartheconomics.org [email protected] ©2014 by Earth Economics. Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. FUNDED BY EARTH ECONOMICS i ABSTRACT This study presents an economic characterization of the value of ecosystem services in the Colorado River Basin, a 249,000 square mile region spanning across mountains, plateaus, and low-lying valleys of the American Southwest.
    [Show full text]
  • Healthy Lands & Healthy Economies
    HEALTHY LANDS & HEALTHY ECONOMIES: NATURE’S VALUE IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUGGESTED CITATION Batker, D., Schwartz, A., Schmidt, R., Mackenzie, A., Smith, J., Robins, J. 2014. Nature’s Value in Santa Clara County. Earth Economics, Tacoma, WA & the Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority, San Jose, CA. PARTICIPATING AGENCIES • Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority • Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County • Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District Initiative team members include Andrea Mackenzie, Jake Smith, Matt Freeman, and Joelle Garretson (Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority); Karen Christensen and Sacha Lozano (Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County); and Karen Gaffney, Tom Robinson, Alex Roa, and Bill Keene (Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District). TECHNICAL PARTNERS • Alnus Ecological • Earth Economics Technical partners include Jim Robins (Alnus Ecological), David Batker, Rowan Schmidt, Aaron Schwartz, Tania Briceno, Angela Fletcher, Jacob Gellman, Jennifer Harrison-Cox, Zachary Christin, Brianna Trafton, Tedi Dickinson, Martha Johnson, Daniel Brent, Allen Posewitz, Josh Reyneveld and TaNeashia Sudd (Earth Economics). FUNDING PARTNERS • Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation • S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation • State Coastal Conservancy ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority would like to thank its Board of Directors, Initiative partners at the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County; and The Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District, Jim Robins of Alnus Ecological for providing regional coordination, Earth Economics and its Board of Directors for their support and guidance, and Kate Reza and Melanie Askay for research support. Report authors: David Batker, Aaron Schwartz, Rowan Schmidt, Andrea Mackenzie, Jake Smith, Jim Robins.
    [Show full text]
  • GIS Specialist
    GIS Specialist We all rely on services provided by nature, often without realizing it or in ways we don’t fully recognize. Earth Economics identifies and quantifies those benefits to ensure they are included in the decision-making process at all levels, so communities can mitigate risk, increase resilience, and protect their natural capital wealth. Earth Economics works to quantify and value the benefits nature provides. Our work drives effective decisions and systematic change through a combination of education, natural capital analysis, and policy recommendations. We envision a future where communities, nature, and industry all thrive together. Term Full-Time Employee Location Tacoma, WA Compensation Salary range $45,000 to $55,000, robust benefits package including: fully-paid employee healthcare benefits, work-life balance, opportunity for remote work, public transportation incentives, on-site parking, paid holidays, generous paid-time-off and sick leave accrual Apply Interested applicants should submit a cover letter, resume, and portfolio to [email protected] Position Overview We are looking for a skilled GIS Specialist (GS) to join our team. This role is ideal for someone seeking creativity, exposure to broad GIS applications, and opportunity for growth. Our team of researchers works collaboratively to apply principles of ecological economics to a range of economic and policy analyses. This role requires deep technical knowledge, confident cross-team communication, and a systems-thinking mindset to apply spatial tools, data, and analysis techniques across a wide range of topics. You will support Earth Economics’ Program and Project Directors to deliver innovative, high-quality analyses that will help leaders around the world understand, protect, and expand natural capital.
    [Show full text]
  • Accounting for Nature's Value with Usda-Nrcs Conservation Practices in the Central Great Plains Authors
    ACCOUNTING FOR NATURE'S VALUE WITH USDA-NRCS CONSERVATION PRACTICES IN THE CENTRAL GREAT PLAINS AUTHORS Angela Fletcher, Jordan Wildish, Ken Cousins of Earth Economics Loretta J. Metz of USDA-NRCS Suggested Citation: Fletcher, A., Metz, L. J., Wildish, J., Cousins, K. 2020. Accounting for Nature’s Value with USDA-NRCS Conservation Practices in the Central Great Plains. Earth Economics. Tacoma, WA. The authors are responsible for the content of this report. The findings and conclusions in this publication are those of the author(s) and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was funded under Agreement #67-3A75-17-469 by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Conservation Effects Assessment Project-Grazing Land Component (CEAP-GL). Mention of names or commercial products in this document does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Thanks to all who contributed to this effort: Jack Alexander, Society for Range Management, MT Dean Krehbiel, USDA-NRCS, KS Jay Angerer, Texas A&M University AgriLife Research, TX Kelly Maguire, USDA-ERS, MD David Archer, USDA-ARS Northern Great Plains Research Daniel Mullarkey, USDA-NRCS, MD Laboratory, ND Rachel Murph, USDA-NRCS, CO Steven Barker, Resource Management Systems LLC, AZ Johanna Pate, USDA-NRCS, TX Nadine Bishop, USDA-NRCS, NE Mark Peters, USDA-NRCS, MD Rooter Brite, JA Ranch, TX Jess Peterson, Society for Range Management, MT Roger Claassen, USDA-NRCS, MD Gary and Sue Price, 77 Ranch, TX Steven Glasgow, USDA-NRCS, OK Brenda Simpson, USDA-NRCS, TX Hal Gordon, USDA-NRCS, OR Charles Sims, University of Tennessee, TN Leroy Hall, USDA-NRCS, MD Jose R.
    [Show full text]
  • Valuing the Puget Sound Basin
    Valuing The Puget Sound Basin Revealing Our Best Investments 2010 Authors: David Batker and Maya Kocian Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank the board of Earth Economics, Josh Reyneveld, Ingrid Rasch, David Cosman and Josh Farley. This report would not be possible without the assistance from Jennifer Harrison‐Cox, Allyson Schrier, Tedi Dickinson, Jenn McFadden, Rowan Schmidt, Jon Roberts, Colin Cornin, Kellen Hawley, Jon Stout, Patrick Miller, Caleb Tomlinson, and Zac Chrisn. The board of Earth Economics provided unwavering and selfless support to help complete these studies. We would also like to thank Jan Kocian for the cover photo. This report was made possible by the generous support of The Russell Family Foundaon and Seale Venture Kids. This page intenonally le blank. Execuve Summary .............................................................................1 Introducon ........................................................................................6 Objecves of the Study and Report Organizaon ...........................................7 Secon 1: Economic Analysis Incenves and Investment .....................8 Accounng for Natural Capital .....................................................................10 Improving Jobs Analysis for Restoraon .......................................................12 Adopng New Industrial Indicators ..............................................................13 Redefining Green Jobs ..................................................................................15 Changing
    [Show full text]
  • Hale Parkway Improvements
    COMMUNITY BENEFITS OF THE HALE PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS The proposed Hale Parkway project is a multi-functional storm water facility and community asset that mitigates flooding, generates significant community benefits, and improves water quality. Community benefits can be obvious, like providing a new recreation opportunity or community gathering space, or more subtle, such as improving air quality or providing habitat for birds. These benefits, also known asecosystem services, enhance community resilience and well-being and increase the return on investment to the community. WHAT ARE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES AND HOW DO YOU PUT A DOLLAR VALUE ON THEM? Ecosystem services describe the benefits people receive from nature. The value of nature means many things to many people, but when it comes to considering nature in the decision-making process, an economic approach is key. The goods and services provided by an ecosystem can be valued as a dollar figure. Working together, economists and ecologists employ a range of valuation techniques to assess ecosystem service value dependent on the specific study context. THE DIFFERENCE AN ACRE MAKES IN ECOSYSTEM BENEFITS Converting existing pavement along Hale Parkway to vegetated green space generates significant environmental benefits. While an acre of pavement along the parkway currently provides no benefits, converting that same acre to grass or trees will generate hundreds $0 $593 $12,790 of dollars of value each year for the local community, from improving ACRE OF PAVEMENT ACRE OF GRASS ACRE OF TREES air
    [Show full text]
  • The Sociocultural Significance of Pacific Salmon for Tribes and First Nations
    The Sociocultural Significance of Pacific Salmon for Tribes and First Nations Special Report to the Pacific Salmon Commission Brown, N. Coast Salish Salmon. [Steel sculpture]. June 8, 2021 Earth Economics Report Contributors: Olivia Molden, Project Director Angela Fletcher, Senior Research Analyst Will Golding, Research Analyst Alice Lin, GIS Specialist Tena Ward, Research Assistant Rachel Kadoshima, Research Intern Ryan Smith, Research Intern Sam Meade, Research Intern Suggested citation: Earth Economics. The Sociocultural Significance of Pacific Salmon to Tribes and First Nations. 2021. Acknowledgements: Pacific Salmon Commission Tribal Caucus and First Nations Caucus Project Advisors: Murray Ned, Gord Sterritt, Russ Jones, Ron Allen, McCoy Oatman Expert Reviewers: Dr. Gary Morishima, Dr. Don Hall Pacific Salmon Commission Administrators Transcription: Talk To Type Transcription Design: Kauffman & Associates, Inc. Editing: Ken Cousins Support: Maya Kocian, Ken Cousins This project was funded by the Pacific Salmon Commission Southern Endowment Fund under the title Assessing the socioeconomics of food, social, and ceremonial salmon harvest and the grant ID SF-2020-I-16. Earth Economics is a non-profit organization based in Tacoma, WA, with a mission to value the benefits nature provides. Earth Economics identifies and accounts for the indirect and direct benefits nature provides to ensure they are included in the decision-making process at all levels so communities can mitigate risk, increase resilience, and protect their natural capital wealth. Earth Economics works with governments, private firms, NGOs, tribes, and communities globally to increase investment in nature using science-based economics. Earth Economics acknowledges that we operate on the lands of the Coast Salish peoples, specifically the ancestral homelands of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, and the 1854 Medicine Creek Treaty.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F Action Benefit-Cost Analyses
    Appendix F Action Benefit-Cost Analyses 305 306 7 Benefit-Cost Analysis of 2 0 1 Selected Actions from the Thurston Climate Adaptation CTOBER O Plan 307 Earth Economics http://www.eartheconomics.org/ [email protected] Report Version 1.2 Primary Authors: Corrine Armistead, GIS Analyst, Earth Economics Peter Casey, Research Lead, Earth Economics Maya Kocian, Senior Program Director, Earth Economics Lola Flores, Project Director, Earth Economics Year: 2017 Suggested Citation: Armistead, C., Casey, P., Kocian, M., Flores, L. 2017. Benefit-Cost Analysis of Selected Actions from the Thurston Climate Adaptation Plan. Earth Economics, Tacoma, WA. Funded By: Thurston Regional Planning Council Acknowledgements —Thank you to all who supported this project: Special thanks to Veena Tabbutt (TRPC), Michael Burnham (TRPC), Michael Ambrogi (TRPC) for their contributions to the completion of this report. Earth Economics: Jessica Hanson, Ken Cousins and Bennett Melville for their support. We would also like to thank Earth Economics’ Board of Directors for their continued guidance and support: Alex Bernhardt, David Cosman, Elizabeth Hendrix, George Northcroft, Greg Forge, Ingrid Rasch, Molly Seaverns, and Sherry Richardson. The authors are responsible for the content of this report. ©2017 by Earth Economics. Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. Cover Photo: Pioneer Park in Tumwater, Source: Orin Blomberg 308 Table of Contents Earth Economics http://www.eartheconomics.org/ Table of Contents .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Senior Research Analyst & Economist
    Senior Research Analyst Earth Economics is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization located in Tacoma, Washington with over 20 years’ of innovation and success in applied ecological economics. Our mission is to quantify and value the benefits nature provides. Our work drives effective decisions and system change through a combination of education, natural capital analysis, and policy recommendations. We envision a future where communities, nature, and industry all thrive together. Term: Full-Time Employee, 40 hours per week Location: Tacoma, Washington. This position may work remotely anywhere within the United States. Compensation Salary $55,000 to $65,000 based on qualifications, plus a robust benefits package that includes: fully paid employee healthcare benefits, work-life balance, public transportation incentives, paid holidays, generous paid-time-off and sick leave accrual. Apply Interested applicants should submit a cover letter, resume, and writing examples to [email protected]. Position Overview We are currently seeking a Senior Research Analyst to join our team. The Senior Research Analyst will conduct applied ecological economics research and analysis, developing and applying tools and models towards this end, and producing written material to support both project deliverables and business development opportunities. The goal is to estimate the economic value of ecosystem services—goods and services rarely traded in markets—to more fully reflect the contribution of nature. In this role, you will support Earth Economics’ Program and Project Leads to deliver innovative, high-quality analyses to help policymakers and communities better understand, protect, and expand investment in natural capital. The Senior Research Analyst will report to the Research Principal.
    [Show full text]
  • Healthy Lands & Healthy Economies
    HEALTHY LANDS & HEALTHY ECONOMIES: NATURE’S VALUE IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUGGESTED CITATION Batker, D., Schwartz, A., Schmidt, R., Mackenzie, A., Smith, J., Robins, J. 2014. Nature’s Value in Santa Clara County. Earth Economics, Tacoma, WA & the Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority, San Jose, CA. PARTICIPATING AGENCIES • Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority • Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County • Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District Initiative team members include Andrea Mackenzie, Jake Smith, Matt Freeman, and Joelle Garretson (Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority); Karen Christensen and Sacha Lozano (Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County); and Karen Gaffney, Tom Robinson, Alex Roa, and Bill Keene (Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District). TECHNICAL PARTNERS • Alnus Ecological • Earth Economics Technical partners include Jim Robins (Alnus Ecological), David Batker, Rowan Schmidt, Aaron Schwartz, Tania Briceno, Angela Fletcher, Jacob Gellman, Jennifer Harrison-Cox, Zachary Christin, Brianna Trafton, Tedi Dickinson, Martha Johnson, Daniel Brent, Allen Posewitz, Josh Reyneveld and TaNeashia Sudd (Earth Economics). FUNDING PARTNERS • Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation • S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation • State Coastal Conservancy ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority would like to thank its Board of Directors, Initiative partners at the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County; and The Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District, Jim Robins of Alnus Ecological for providing regional coordination, Earth Economics and its Board of Directors for their support and guidance, and Kate Reza and Melanie Askay for research support. Report authors: David Batker, Aaron Schwartz, Rowan Schmidt, Andrea Mackenzie, Jake Smith, Jim Robins.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Assessment of the Economic Value of Wisconsin's Wetlands
    Rapid Assessment of the Economic Value of Wisconsin’s Wetlands February 9, 2012 Prepared by: Prepared for: 1211 Tacoma Avenue South 222 S. Hamilton St., Suite 1 Tacoma, WA 98402 Madison, WI 53703 (253) 539-4801 (608) 250-9971 www.eartheconomics.org www.wisconsinwetlands.org Wisconsin’s Wetlands Page 1 of 16 Acknowledgments This study was commissioned by the Wisconsin Wetlands Association in order to communicate with policy makers and the public about the value of Wisconsin’s wetlands. Earth Economics would like to thank all who supported this project, including the staff, Board and volunteers at the Wisconsin Wetlands Association and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Thanks also to our Board of Directors, Joshua Reyneveld, Ingrid Rasch, David Cosman and Joshua Farley for your continued leadership and support of Earth Economics. Earth Economics project team members for this project included David Batker, Jennifer Harrison- Cox, Noelani Kirschner, Jonathan Kochmer, Rowan Schmidt, Yvonne Snyder, Tedi Dickinson, Zachary Christin and Maya Kocian. Cover photo Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District ©2012 by Earth Economics. Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. Wisconsin’s Wetlands Page 2 of 16 Introduction Economic sustainability and resiliency both rely upon environmental sustainability and resiliency. The loss of natural infrastructure has real economic costs. Safeguarding the health of a wetland area, like keeping a house in good condition, provides value for everyone who utilizes or benefits from it, directly or indirectly.
    [Show full text]