Ecosystem services of peat – Phase 1 Project code: SP0572 Lead project team: 1Bonn, A., 2Holden, J., 1Parnell, M., 3Worrall, F., 2Chapman, P.J., 4Evans. C.D., 5Termansen, M., 5Beharry-Borg, N., 6Acreman, M.C., 6Rowe, E., 4Emmett, B., 7Tsuchiya, A. Contributors: 1Davison, S., 1Maskill, R., 2Flynn, M., 4Hall, J., 6Harding, R.J., 2Kirkby, M.J., 6Lloyd, C., 6McNamara, N., 6Mountford, J.O., 6Mould, D., 4Norris, D., 6Purse, E., 6Stratford, C.J. 1Moors of the Future Partnership, Peak District National Park Authority 2water@leeds, School of Geography, University of Leeds 3Department of Geological Sciences, Durham University 4Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bangor 5Sustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds 6Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford 7Health economics and decision science, University of Sheffield Ecosystem Services of Peat- Phase I 2 1. Introduction 1.1. Scope There is now wide recognition of the importance to human well-being of services delivered by the peatland environment. Despite this, there remains little ecological understanding of ecosystem services, particularly in terms of how and where they are supplied and consumed at a regional or national scale. The new cross government Natural Environment PSA28 target aims 'to secure a diverse, healthy and resilient natural environment, which provides the basis for everyone’s well-being, health and prosperity now and in the future; and where the values of the services provided by the natural environment are reflected in decision-making'. Therefore, when taking action in peatlands, management should strive to achieve multiple benefits and not implement action to promote one service to the detriment of other vital services. This project is a scoping study to a bigger project on peatlands, which will inform the Defra Ecosystem Approach framework in light of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. It is novel and visionary work, bringing key stakeholders for peatlands together for strategic mapping and spatial analysis of public benefits. It should be emphasised, however, that as a scoping study the project evaluates and trials methodologies at case study sites and evaluates the extent to which these techniques could be rolled out to other sites. In doing so the project will also point to potential pitfalls and difficulties (e.g. data gaps) that make evaluation and mapping of some ecosystem services difficult and hence it highlights further work that is needed. The project objectives were as follows: 1) Assess the information available on the provision and quantification of peatland ecosystem services for each site. 2) For each case study identify and map ecosystem services provided by peat. 3) Determine suitable valuation data required to undertake peatland ecosystem service valuation based on peatland maintenance and restoration. 4) Determine the flows of costs and benefits for each site. 5) Assess the capacity of each site to increase its ecosystem service provision and assess the case for restoration, outline conflicts between service provisions and compare differences in ecosystem service provision between sites. 6) Assess the transferability of results from each case study to other areas. 7) Determine a feasible programme of work that could be carried out over the next 2 to 5 years to collect additional information required on peatland ecosystem services, valuation data to be used in cost-benefit analyses and prioritisation of management and restoration actions. 8) Produce a list of the top 10 criteria for assessing peatland ecosystem service provision that allows monitoring the health of ecosystems and which could be built in to future monitoring. 1.2 Peat ecosystem services Peatlands have been recognised as providing crucially important ecosystem services (Maltby et al. 1994). Peatlands are of national and international importance for provision of food and fibre, water supply, climate regulation, maintenance of biodiversity, as well as provision of opportunities for recreation, inspiration and cultural heritage. They are often of exceptional natural beauty, centres of species distinctiveness and richness, and historically have been extensively managed for food production, game or fuel extraction due to difficult terrain and thus low productivity. This is reflected in the fact that most peatlands in the UK receive national and international conservation designations. Globally, peatlands cover over 400 million ha (Bather and Miller, 1991). In the UK, peat covers 1.58 million ha, or about 7% of the land area. The main ecosystem services provided by peatlands are defined based on the commonly used categorisations of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA, 2005) and the Defra Total Economic Value (TEV) framework, which identify four major categories of ecosystem services that directly affect human well-being (Figure 1.1). The main peatland services are (Bonn et al 2009 a,c): a) Provisioning services which result from products being obtained from ecosystems, such as food, fibre, fresh water, and sources of energy. Blanket bog peats are used for rough grazing while fen peats are more fertile and hence often converted for agriculture. Most notably, upland catchments provide over 70% of fresh water in Britain. Milled peat, especially from lowland peats provides a variety of services but the most common use is to improve the soil and provide a growing medium for horticultural services. Peatlands can also provide a source for renewable energies such as wind power, small hydro-electric schemes and wood fuel and host major transport routes. b) Regulating services provide benefits from regulation of natural processes, including climate regulation, air quality regulation, water purification and natural hazard regulation. It is estimated that UK peatlands store over 5000 million tonnes of soil carbon which vastly exceeds the total carbon stored in UK woodland vegetation (92 million tonnes) (Milne and Brown, 1997). Peatlands also have Ecosystem Services of Peat- Phase I 3 a fine balance of greenhouse gas sequestration and emission (for a recent review see the 2009 Defra report SP0574 produced by Baird, Holden and Chapman at the University of Leeds). Furthermore, peatlands may play an important role in water regulation, affecting water quality and perhaps flood regulation, as well as natural hazard regulation, which including floods and wildfires. c) Cultural services provide non-material benefits from ecosystems such as recreation opportunities, enjoyment of landscape aesthetics, biodiversity and cultural heritage as well as spiritual enrichment and educational experiences. While providing the largest tracts of unfragmented landscapes, they are a major tourist destination for countryside recreation. d) Supporting services are defined as services that are necessary for the production of all other ecosystem services. They include services such as nutrient cycling, microclimate regulation, soil formation and photosynthesis. Figure 1.1: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment classification of ecosystem services In this study we consider supporting services not as separate services, but as intermediate services, as they underpin all other services, to avoid double counting in cost benefit analyses. Supporting services do not directly provide measurable services and benefits to people, but do so through mediation of the secondary provisioning, regulating and cultural services. While enjoyment of biodiversity is often considered as a cultural service (incl. non-use values) and there are some aspects, such as genetic resources, contributing to provisioning service, biodiversity itself is not defined as an Ecosystem Service in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA, 2005). Rather biodiversity is seen as closely related to the concept of the ecosystem, and thus as underpinning the rest of the services, also as supporting services. Following discussions within the team and with study stakeholders, we perceive biodiversity to encompass more than ecosystem services, i.e. some form of nature’s benefits to humans. We therefore consider biodiversity separately here. For this scoping study we use a GIS mapping approach to map and quantify the spatially explicit distribution of key ecosystem services for each case study site, focussing in-depth on key ecosystem services, as listed in the Defra tender specifications, such as protecting carbon stores, reducing flood risks, protecting water quality and biodiversity. Ecosystem Services of Peat- Phase I 4 Mapping the spatial distribution of ecosystem services (Balmford et al 2008, Bonn et al 2009c, Chan et al., 2006, Daily 1997; Defra, 2007a, b; Egoh et al., 2007 MA, 2005, Rodriguez et al., 2006) can help to: • Enhance communication and participation Communicate relevance of ecosystem services Visualise through maps as powerful communication tool Facilitate cross-sectoral involvement of stakeholders/ experts • Develop understanding of status quo & change Understand provision and quantification of ecosystem services Evaluate change through scenario based approaches Develop focused research and monitoring approaches • Inform costs & benefits for management options Assess synergies & trade off between competing land use Identify affected population Highlight spatial disaggregation of providers and beneficiaries • Inform policy Evaluate policy interventions Highlight cases for potential payments for ecosystem service schemes 2. Case study site identification There are two main peatland types in the UK: bogs and