Solutions for Sustaining Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services:Designing Socio-Ecological Institutions; Salzau, June 7-11, 2010

Elisa Morri, Fabio Pruscini, Riccardo SantoliniDepartment of Human, Environmental and Natural Sciences [DiSUAN]

University of Urbino "Carlo Bo“ - Italy

elisa.morri@uniurb.itriccardo.santolini@uniurb.it

Soil protection

Climate regulation

Habitat Water regulation and supply

Nutrient cycling

Waste regulation

Timberfirewood

Recreation

AestheticCO2 fixation and O2 release

Italian forests size (ha x 1000)(1954-2002)

Italian forests categories (ha x 1000)(1954-2002)

Resinous Timber

Broad livedTimber

Mixed timber

Coppice Mixed Coppice

Mediterranean forests

Ecosystems provide a wide array of goods and services of value to people Provision of ecosystem services often is not factored into important decisions that affect ecosystemsDistortions in decision‐making damage the provision of ecosystem services making human society and the environment poorer 

Motivation for an economic evaluation of ecosystem services

Combining ecological production functions with economic valuation methods can generate estimates of the value of ecosystem services in monetary terms 

(Cavatassi, 2004; Pearce, 2001)

Total Economic Value (TEV) of Italian Forest(Croitoru and Merlo, 2005. Valuing Mediterranean forests) 

Aims of the study

•to relate Ess value to ecological state of riverbasin•to suggest forest management actions to localadministrators to recognize a value to people in maintaining naturalcapital

Natural slope After deforestation

• to identify some forest ecosystem services•to evaluate part of indirect use value of forest

Study Area Foglia river basin =700 Km2, 28% are forested.Marecchia river =610 Km2, 33% are forested.

The ecomosaic is characterized by patches of cropland, natural fragments located in the hill slopes of the valley and urban and industrial areas that are developed along the river.

San Marino State

Rimini

Material and Methods

Methodscategories

ecosystemservices

evaluation method indicator references

Water

water conservancy

Avoided cost/ direct market price

forest's annual value of waterregulation

 Xue and 

Tisdell, 2001Hao et al., 

2008water 

purificationavoided cost

forest's annual value of waterpurification

  Hao et al., 2008

Soil soil

protectionreplacement cost

forest's annual value of soil fixation

Hao et al., 2008

CO2

CO2 storage emission permit priceForest’s annual value of CO2

storage

Guo et al., 2001; Xue and Tisdell, 2001; APAT, 2002;Goio et al,2008

Replacementcost

Avoidedcost

Cost of actions taken to avoid damages, as a measure of the benefits provided by an

ecosystem(Pimentel et al., 1997; Kremen et al., 2000;

Merlo and Croitoru, 2005)

Cost of replacing an ecosystem or its services as an estimate of

the value of the ecosystem and the value of property protected

(Gunatilake and Vieth, 2000; Brauer and Marggraf, 2004;

Ming et al, 2006)

Water conservation and Purification

11 meteorological stations (precipitation and evapotranspiration) in 1955-1985 period

Runoff (mm) X cost for unit volume of water (€/m3) X forest area (ha)

Xue and Tisdell, 2001;Hao et al., 2008

Forest canopy can slow down runoffof precipitation and can fosterinfiltration of rainwater to groundwater.

Average price derived from water bill orriver detention basin/water capacity

Soil protectionsoil loss estimated by the erosion difference between woody land and non woody land X forest area (ha) X cost for digging and transporting unit volume of earth cube (€ /m3)/soil unit weight (g/cm3)Xue and Tisdell, 2001;Hao et al., 2008

0102030405060

0‐1 1‐3 3‐5 5‐10 10‐20 20‐40 > 40

%

erosion class (ton/ha*y) Woody land Cropland

Average Erosion rate: 9/10 t/ha/y cropland0,5 t/ha/y woody land

ASSAM, 2008

CO2 StorageCO2 fixation capacity of forest’s typology (tCO2/ha) X forest area (ha) X CO2 avoided value (€ /tCO2)

I is the annual average increment of trees (m3) per-hectareWD is the wood density of trees (dry biomass per unit of tree volume)BEF- Biomass Expansion Factor is the ratio of total aboveground dry biomass to dry biomass of inventoried volumeCF is the ratio of elemental carbon to dry biomass, by mass (IPCC-average value of 0,5)3,67 carbon to CO2 conversion rate

CO2 storage (t/ha/y)=I × WD × BEF × CF x 3,67

‐43%

‐9%

‐48%

Living biomass Dead organic matter Soils

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)-Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry-IPCC 2003

Tallis et.al, 2010

Results

Foglia river basin Marecchia river basin

3%

71%

21%

5% soil protection

water regulation

water purification

co2 storage total

4%

67%

24%

5%3%

74%

19%

4%

62%

15%10% 11% 9% 11%

3% 3% ‐17% ‐6%

‐600

‐400

‐200

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

water

shed pro

tection

net w

ood increm

ent

Timbe

r

Firewoo

d

NW

FPs

Hun

ting and 

recrea

tion

graz

ing

carb

on seq

uestration

Dam

age by flood

s

eros

ion an

d ot

her

Million

Euro

Main components of the TEV of Italian Forests(Merlo and Croitoru; 2005. Valuing Mediterranean Forests) 

good

services

year1

year3

year6 

year10

year15

€ Million 292 0 0 0 292

year1

year3

year6

year10

year15

€ Million 296 296 296 296 296

tmanagement?

Conclusions

•increase natural resources awareness and responsibility to local administrators and community

This study is a tool to:•underline the importance of a strategic management of forest resources (30% natural wood; 70% coppice)

• plan riverbasin management as, according to some authors (Hao et al.,2008; Merlo and Croitoru, 2005), the greatest value was for water conservation

•assess natural capital value and to implement a proportional assessment of natural resources in economical/political decisions

•recognize a value to upstream landowners to protect forests

Thank you for your attention