DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES WHITE PAPER NATURE’S BENEFITS: THE IMPORTANCE OF ADDRESSING BIODIVERSITY IN ECOSYSTEM SERVICE PROGRAMS ABOUT THIS PUBLICATION Defenders of Wildlife has been a leader in addressing ecosystem services and market-based programs, one of the first nonprofit organizations to explore policies guiding these programs. This white paper examines the process for addressing ecosystem services in decision-making, in hopes that these concepts encourage policy-makers to balance the interests of nature and society. Author: Sara Vickerman Designer: Kassandra Kelly Defenders of Wildlife is a national, nonprofit membership organization dedicated to the protection of all native wild animals and plants in their natural communities. Jamie Rappaport Clark, President and CEO Donald Barry, Executive Vice President © 2013 Defenders of Wildlife 1130 17th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036-4604 202.682.9400 www.defenders.org Cover images, clockwise from top: Black-footed ferret, photo by Ryan Hagerty, USFWS; Burrowing owls, photo by Lee Karney, USFWS; Western painted turtle, photo by Gary M. Scholtz, USFWS; Canada geese, Nisqually NWR, photo by Bruce Taylor; Student at Wetzel Woods Conservation Easement during Alterna- tive Outdoor School, photo courtesy of the Friends of Tualatin River NWR and the Conservation Registry. Back cover: Rockefeller Forest, Humboldt Redwoods State Park, photo by Bruce Taylor. INTRODUCTION he concept of ecosystem services – or the benefits that nature provides – has gained tremendous attention over the past decade. It is a common-sense approach to manage- ment that recognizes and makes the most of nature’sT contributions to human communities. Solutions based on ecosystem services generally avoid up-front costs and expensive maintenance of highly engineered alternatives. Interest in the topic has sparked a growing number of articles, conferences, and technical tools to evaluate, quantify, and monetize these services. The idea of meas- uring the values provided by natural systems and using that information to make better decisions in natural Camassia blossoms in the William L. Finley National Wildlife Refuge, Willamette Valley, Oregon. Photo by George Gentry, resource management has captured the attention of a USFWS. Varieties of camas were an important food source wide range of audiences, from conservation groups to for native peoples in the west. social welfare groups to developers and extractive industries. that it offers such fertile ground to define and implement However, significant ambiguities remain around what the new paradigm according to their own expertise and the concept means and how it should be implemented. value systems. As a result, it has been difficult to explain to policy-mak- Despite these complexities, the use of ecosystem ers, planners, and business interests who struggle to services in decision-making holds considerable promise. understand how an assessment of ecosystem services dif- Including the full range of ecosystem benefits and costs fers from multiple use management, impact assessment, may lead to better decisions in the long term by encour- or compliance with existing environmental regulations. aging decision-makers to balance the interests of nature The concept has also been difficult to translate into and society with those of the industry or agency respon- policy and management and, in particular, to apply sible for development and/or management. The concept consistently across the public and private sectors. is also useful for helping to manage the diverse expecta- The notion of quantifying the ecological outputs tions stakeholders have of public lands. For example, the associated with specific sites and management systems Forest Service recently adopted a new planning rule that inevitably means different things to different people. For mentions ecosystem services and has the potential to some, it opens the door to large-scale impact mitigation, greatly expand the range of values addressed in the land through the marketing of certain services to regulated management planning process (Forest Service, 2012). parties to “offset” damage to those resources elsewhere, Many Forest Service staff believe that an ecosystem serv- as in wetland and conservation banking and carbon ices approach will improve integration across programs, trading. Others expect calculating the economic value of encourage the agency to think about fundamental attrib- nature to provide more compelling justification for saving utes and processes, and move land management drivers it. It may be that part of the broad appeal of the ecosys- away from utilitarian outputs like board feet and acres to- tem services concept among economists, ecologists, ward more sophisticated objectives. It is also a powerful policy wonks, and advocates is actually due to the fact tool to support collaborative approaches to management. NATURE’S BENEFITS: The Importance of Addressing Biodiversity in Ecosystem Service Programs 1 There are potential benefits and hazards associated will be relatively straightforward to implement, that with applying an ecosystem service framework to allows for continuous learning and improvement over resource decisions. The advantages include: time, and could appeal to business and conservation interests. • Improving accountability as measurement systems evolve to address ecological values that have not be- Despite these complexities, the use of quantified in the past; ecosystem services in decision-making holds • Making investments more strategic as a result of considerable promise. Including the full range objective assessment of options; of ecosystem benefits and costs may lead to • Engaging a more diverse set of stakeholders in deci- better decisions in the long term by encouraging sion-making; decision-makers to balance the interests of • Providing alternative compliance options for nature and society with those of the industry or developers; agency responsible for development and/or • Diversifying income for landowners who provide management. ecosystem services; • Creating jobs in research, monitoring, consulting and restoration; and • Improving the overall effectiveness of resource EFINING THE ONCEPT management on public and private lands. 1 D C : UTILITARIAN AND INTRINSIC The potential disadvantages include: APPROACHES • Exacerbating the existing fragmented approach to The diversity of perspectives on and expectations of management by adding yet another layer of assess- an ecosystem services approach results in part from the ment requirements and goals, thereby undermining difficulty interested parties have had in coming to agree- rather than encouraging systems approaches; ment on a definition. Extractive industries, for example, • Ignoring the complexity of ecosystems and often see agriculture and timber production as the ulti- oversimplifying management objectives; mate ecosystem services – products provided by nature • Shifting the emphasis of management to a limited for the benefit of humans. Even among conservation suite of utilitarian goals, thereby alienating stake groups, a similarly utilitarian definition sometimes holders who traditionally support conservation; and emerges. • Continuing to overlook the fundamental ecological For example, in developing a framework for address- attributes and processes that contribute to the func- ing ecosystem services based on the Millenium Ecosys- tioning of healthy ecosystems. tem Assessment, academic researchers and government officials developed a classification for the “services” de- The ecosystem services approach is the latest in a rived from nature but tend to neglect to address biodiver- long list of conceptual approaches that are intended to sity and other underlying attributes that make it possible improve the practice of natural resource conservation for people to enjoy and consume the services. The as- and management yet tend to be replaced by the “next sessment has led to the creation of four categories of shiny object” before they reach fruition. As a result, there services: provisioning – which include commodities like is a limited window of time in which to get this approach timber, water, and food; supporting – which include right and to capture what conservation benefits are valu- things like nutrient cycling and soil formation; regulating able from its somewhat unique conceptual frame. This – which refers to protection from climate extremes and report outlines an approach to ecosystem services that disease outbreaks; and cultural services that capture 2 DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES WHITE PAPER aesthetic, spiritual and recreational benefits (Millennium accumulation, resistance to disease and disturbance, and Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). Biodiversity – or nature – other environmental conditions that affect human wel- got lost in the shuffle and is generally not included as a fare.” (Smith, et al., 2011). “service” in many typologies. A 2012 paper in Bioscience discussed the notion that This interpretation – which is based on two funda- these two approaches represent fundamentally different mental assumptions – set the stage for continuing contro- value systems. Biodiversity advocates support a bio-cen- versy about whether the ecosystem services paradigm is tric view which assigns intrinsic value to all life on earth. good or bad for nature. These assumptions include the Ecosystem service supporters hold anthropocentric notion that services must benefit humans directly to be views in which nature