Advertisement

Environmental Management

, 48:710 | Cite as

Realizing the Potential of Ecosystem Services: A Framework for Relating Ecological Changes to Economic Benefits

  • Lisa Wainger
  • Marisa Mazzotta
Article

Abstract

Increasingly government agencies are seeking to quantify the outcomes of proposed policy options in terms of ecosystem service benefits, yet conflicting definitions and ad hoc approaches to measuring ecosystem services have created confusion regarding how to rigorously link ecological change to changes in human well-being. Here, we describe a step-by-step framework for producing ecological models and metrics that can effectively serve an economic-benefits assessment of a proposed change in policy or management. A focus of the framework is developing comparable units of ecosystem goods and services to support decision-making, even if outcomes cannot be monetized. Because the challenges to translating ecological changes to outcomes appropriate for economic analyses are many, we discuss examples that demonstrate practical methods and approaches to overcoming data limitations. The numerous difficult decisions that government agencies must make to fairly use and allocate natural resources provides ample opportunity for interdisciplinary teams of natural and social scientists to improve methods for quantifying changes in ecosystem services and their effects on human well-being. This framework is offered with the intent of promoting the success of such teams as they support managers in evaluating the equivalency of ecosystem service offsets and trades, establishing restoration and preservation priorities, and more generally, in developing environmental policy that effectively balances multiple perspectives.

Keywords

Benefit transfer Cost–benefit analysis Ecological-economic modeling Ecological indicators Ecosystem services Ecosystem valuation Environmental economics Environmental policy and management Spatial analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Funding to support this work was provided by the USEPA Ecosystem Services Research Program, but this work does not necessarily represent views of the USEPA. We thank the many colleagues who contributed ideas and thoughtful comments, in particular, Jim Boyd, Randy Bruins, Jan Keough, Betsy Smith, Brenda Rashleigh, Amanda Nahlik, Mark Rowe, and many others. In addition, we thank two anonymous reviewers and R. Kerry Turner for helping us to improve the manuscript.

References

  1. Baerenklau KA, Gonzalez-Caban A, Paez C, Chavez E (2010) Spatial allocation of forest recreation value. Journal of Forest Economics 16(2):113–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball IR, Possingham HP (2000) Marxan (v. 1.8.6): marine reserve design using spatially explicit annealing user manual (2000). http://www.uq.edu.au/marxan. Accessed June 2, 2011
  3. Barbier EB (2007) Valuing ecosystem services as productive inputs. Economic Policy 22(49):177–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbier EB, Koch EW, Silliman BR, Hacker SD, Wolanski E, Primavera J et al (2008) Coastal ecosystem-based management with nonlinear ecological functions and values. Science 319(5861):321–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bark RH, Osgood DE, Colby BG, Katz G, Stromberg J (2009) Habitat preservation and restoration: do homebuyers have preferences for quality habitat? Ecological Economics 68(5):1465–1475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bateman IJ, Day BH, Georgiou S, Lake I (2006) The aggregation of environmental benefit values: welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP. Ecological Economics 60(2):450–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beissinger SR, McCullough DR (eds) (2002) Population viability analysis. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  8. Bergstrom JC, Taylor LO (2006) Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: theory and practice. Ecological Economics 60(2):351–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blaug M (1997) Economic theory in retrospect. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Bockstael NE, McConnell KE (2006) Environmental and resource valuation with revealed preferences: a theoretical guide to empirical models. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  11. Bockstael NE, McConnell K, Strand E (1989) Measuring the benefits of improvements in water quality: the Chesapeake Bay. Marine Resource Economics 6(1):1–18Google Scholar
  12. Bockstael N, Costanza R, Strand I, Boynton W, Bell K, Wainger L (1995) Ecological economic modeling and valuation of ecosystems. Ecological Economics 14(2):143–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bockstaller C, Girardin P (2003) How to validate environmental indicators. Agricultural Systems 76(2):639–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bonter DN, Gauthreaux SA Jr, Donovan TM (2009) Characteristics of important stopover locations for migrating birds: remote sensing with radar in the great lakes basin. Conservation Biology 23(April):440–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Boomer KB, Weller DE, Jordan TE (2008) Empirical models based on the universal soil loss equation fail to predict sediment discharges from Chesapeake Bay catchments. Journal of Environmental Quality 37(December):79–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Box GEP, Draper NR (1987) Empirical model-building and response surfaces. Wiley, New York, p 424Google Scholar
  17. Boyd JW (2007) The endpoint problem. Resources 165(Spring):26–28Google Scholar
  18. Boyd JW, Banzhaf S (2007) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics 63(2–3):616–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Boyd J, Wainger LA (2002) Landscape indicators of ecosystem service benefits. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 84(5):1371–1378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Boyd J, Wainger LA (2003) Measuring ecosystem service benefits: the use of landscape analysis to evaluate environmental trades and compensation. Resources for the Future, Discussion Paper 02-63Google Scholar
  21. Breitburg DL, Sanders JG, Gilmour CC, Hatfield CA, Osman RW, Riedel GF et al (1999) Variability in responses to nutrients and trace elements, and transmission of stressor effects through an estuarine food web. Limnology and Oceanography 44(3):837–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Brinson MM, Rheinhardt R (1996) The role of reference wetlands in functional assessment and mitigation. Ecological Applications 6(1):69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Brookshire DS, Goodrich D, Dixon MD, Brand LA, Benedict K, Lansey K et al (2010) Ecosystem services and reallocation choices: a framework for preserving semi-arid regions in the Southwest. Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education 144(1):60–74Google Scholar
  24. Brown DM, Reeder RJ (2007) Farm-based recreation: a statistical profile. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, ERR-53, December 2007Google Scholar
  25. Brown TC, Bergstrom JC, Loomis JB (2007) Defining, valuing and providing ecosystem goods and services. Natural Resources Journal 47(2):329–376Google Scholar
  26. Bulte EH, van Kooten GC (1999) Marginal valuation of charismatic species: implications for conservation. Environmental and Resource Economics 14(1):119–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Calow P (ed) (1998) Handbook of environmental risk assessment and management. Blackwell Science, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  28. Carpenter SR, DeFries R, Dietz T, Mooney HA, Polasky S, Reid WV et al (2006) Millennium ecosystem assessment: research needs. Science 314(5797):257–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Carroll C, Noss RF, Paquet PC, Schumaker NH (2004) Extinction debt of protected areas in developing landscapes. Conservation Biology 18(4):1110–1120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Carson RT, Mitchell RC (1993) The value of clean water: the public’s willingness to pay for boatable, fishable and swimmable quality water. Water Resources Research 29(7):2445–2454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Carson RT, Mitchell RC, Hanemann M, Kopp RJ, Presser S, Ruud PA (2003) Contingent valuation and lost passive use: damages from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental and Resource Economics 25(3):257–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Cerco C, Noel M (2004) The 2002 Chesapeake Bay eutrophication model. United States Army Corps of Engineers. Prepared for: USEPA Region III Chesapeake Bay Program, EPA 903-R-04-004. http://www.chesapeakebay.net/modsc.htm
  33. Champ P, Boyle KJ, Brown TC (eds) (2003) A primer on nonmarket valuation. Kluwer, BostonGoogle Scholar
  34. Cho S-H, Kim SG, Roberts RK, Jung S (2009) Amenity values of spatial configurations of forest landscapes over space and time in the southern Appalachian highlands. Ecological Economics 68(10):2646–2657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Clark CW (1990) Mathematical bioeconomics: the optimal management of renewable resources. Wiley-Interscience, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Clemen RT (1997) Making hard decisions: an introduction to decision analysis. South Western Educational Publishing, CincinnatiGoogle Scholar
  37. Cockerill K, Tidwell V, Passell H (2004) Assessing public perceptions of computer-based models. Environmental Management 34(5):609–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Costanza R (2008) Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biological Conservation 141(2):350–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B et al (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387(6630):253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Daily G (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  41. Dale VH, Beyeler SC (2001) Challenges in the development and use of ecological indicators. Ecological Indicators 1(1):3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. de Groot RS, Wilson MA, Boumans RMJ (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics 41(3):393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Diamond PA, Hausman JA (1994) Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number? The Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(4):45–64Google Scholar
  44. Dietz TC, Stern PC (eds) (2008) Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  45. Dietz T, Tanguay J, Tuler S, Webler T (2004) Making computer models useful: an exploration of expectations by experts and local officials. Coastal Management 32(3):307–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ecosystem-Based Management Tools Network (2011) http://www.ebmtools.org. Accessed June 20, 2011
  47. Egan KJ, Herriges JA, Kling CL, Downing JA (2009) Valuing water quality as a function of water quality measures. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 91(1):106–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ehrlich PR, Ehrlich A (1981) Extinction: the causes and consequences of the disappearance of species. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  49. Eppink FV, van den Bergh JCJM (2007) Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: a critical review. Ecological Economics 61(2–3):284–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Feather P, Hellerstein D (1997) Calibrating benefit function transfer to assess the Conservation Reserve Program. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79(1):151–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Fisher B, Turner RK (2008) Ecosystem services: classification for valuation. Biological Conservation 141(5):1167–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Fisher B, Turner K, Zylstra M, Brouwer R, de Groot R, Farber S et al (2009) Ecosystem services and economic theory: integration for policy-relevant research. Ecological Applications 18(8):2050–2067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Freeman AM (2003) The measurement of environmental and resource values: theory and methods. RFF Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  54. Freemark KE, Boutin C, Keddy CJ (2002) Importance of farmland habitats for conservation of plant species. Conservation Biology 16(2):399–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Garber-Yonts BE (2005) Conceptualizing and measuring demand for recreation on national forests: a review and synthesis. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report. PNWGTR-645, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  56. Gleason RA, Laubhan MK, Euliss NH Jr (eds) (2008) Ecosystem services derived from wetland conservation practices in the United States prairie pothole region with an emphasis on the United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Reserve and Wetlands Reserve programs: United States Geological professional paper 1745Google Scholar
  57. Gotelli NJ, Ellison AM (2006) Forecasting extinction risk with nonstationary matrix models. Ecological Applications 16(1):51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Grimble R, Wellard K (1997) Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agricultural Systems 55(2):173–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Hanley N, Shogren JF (2005) Is cost–benefit analysis anomaly-proof? Environmental and Resource Economics 32(1):13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Harwell M, Cooper W, Flaak R (1992) Prioritizing ecological and human welfare risks from environmental stresses. Environmental Management 16(4):451–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Heberling MT, Garcia JH, Thurston HW (2010) Does encouraging the use of wetlands in water quality trading programs make economic sense? Ecological Economics 69(10):1988–1994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Hime S, Bateman IJ, Posen P, Hutchins M (2009) A transferable water quality ladder for conveying use and ecological information within public surveys. CSERGE Working Paper EDM 09-01Google Scholar
  63. Hoehn JP (2006) Methods to address selection effects in the meta regression and transfer of ecosystem values. Ecological Economics 60(2):389–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Hoehn JP, Lupi F, Kaplowitz MD (2003) Untying a Lancastrian bundle: valuing ecosystems and ecosystem services for wetland mitigation. Journal of Environmental Management 68(3):263–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Hruby T (2001) Testing the basic assumption of the hydrogeomorphic approach to assessing wetland functions. Environmental Management 27(5):749–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Iovanna R, Griffiths C (2006) Clean water, ecological benefits, and benefits transfer: a work in progress at the U.S. EPA. Ecological Economics 60(2):473–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Jackson ST, Hobbs RJ (2009) Ecological restoration in the light of ecological history. Science 325(5940):567–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Johnston RJ, Duke JM (2009) Willingness to pay for land preservation across states and jurisdictional scale: implications for benefit transfer. Land Economics 85(2):217–237Google Scholar
  69. Johnston RJ, Magnusson G, Mazzotta MJ, Opaluch JJ (2002) Combining economic and ecological indicators to prioritize salt marsh restoration actions. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 84(5):1362–1370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Kareiva P, Tallis H, Ricketts TH, Daily GC, Polasky S (2011) Natural capital: theory and practice of mapping ecosystem services. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  71. Kelly J, Harwell M (1990) Indicators of ecosystem recovery. Environmental Management 14(5):527–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Kiker GA, Bridges TS, Varghese A, Seager TP, Linkov I (2005) Application of multicriteria decision analysis in environmental decision making. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 1(2):95–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. King D, Mazzotta M (2000) Ecosystem valuation: descriptions and illustrations of tools and methods for non-economists. http://www.ecosystemvaluation.org. Accessed February 7, 2011
  74. Kinnell JC, Bingham MF, Mohamed AF, Desvousges WH, Kiler TB, Hastings EK et al (2006) Estimating site choice decisions for urban recreators. Land Economics 82(2):257–272Google Scholar
  75. Kliskey AD (2000) Recreation terrain suitability mapping: a spatially explicit methodology for determining recreation potential for resource use assessment. Landscape and Urban Planning 52(1):33–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Knowler D (2002) A review of selected bioeconomic models with environmental influences in fisheries. Journal of Bioeconomics 4(2):163–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Le Maitre DC, van Wilgen BW, Gelderblom CM, Bailey C, Chapman RA, Nel JA (2002) Invasive alien trees and water resources in South Africa: case studies of the costs and benefits of management. Forest Ecology and Management 160(1–3):143–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Lipton D, Hicks R (2003) The cost of stress: low dissolved oxygen and economic benefits of recreational striped bass (Morone saxatilis) fishing on the Patuxent River. Estuaries 26(2A):310–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Loomis JB, Rosenberger RS (2006) Reducing barriers in future benefit transfers: needed improvements in primary study design and reporting. Ecological Economics 60(2):343–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Mansfield E, Yohe G (2000) Microeconomics: theory/applications. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  81. Massey DM, Newbold SC, Gentner B (2006) Valuing water quality changes using a bioeconomic model of a coastal recreational fishery. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 52(1):482–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. McKinney RA, Wigand C (2006) A framework for the assessment of the wildlife habitat value of New England salt marshes. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  83. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  84. Miller TJ, Blair JA, Ihde TF, Jones RM, Secor DH, Wilberg MJ (2010) Fishsmart: an innovative role for science in stakeholder-centered approaches to fisheries management. Fisheries 35(9):424–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Milon JW, Shogren JF (1995) Integrating economic and ecological indicators. Praeger, GreenwichGoogle Scholar
  86. Mitchell RC, Carson RT (1989) Using surveys to value the benefits for public goods. Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  87. Morgan MG, Florig HK, DeKay ML, Fischbeck P (2000) Categorizing risks for risk ranking. Risk Analysis 20(1):49–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Munns JWR (2006) Assessing risks to wildlife populations from multiple stressors: overview of the problem and research needs. Ecology and Society 11(1):23Google Scholar
  89. Murdoch W, Polasky S, Wilson KA, Possingham HP, Kareiva P, Shaw R (2007) Maximizing return on investment in conservation. Biological Conservation 139(3–4):375–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Naidoo R, Ricketts TH (2006) Mapping the economic costs and benefits of conservation. PLoS Biology 4(11):e360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Nassauer JI (2004) Monitoring the success of metropolitan wetland restorations: cultural sustainability and ecological function. Wetlands 24(4):756–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. National Research Council (2005) Valuing ecosystem services: toward better environmental decision-making. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  93. Natural Capital Project (2010) Invest tools. http://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/InVEST.html. Accessed February 7, 2011
  94. Natural Resources Defense Council (2010) Climate change, water, and risk: current water demands are not sustainable. http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/watersustainability/. Accessed February 7, 2011
  95. Nelson E, Polasky S, Lewis DJ, Plantinga AJ, Lonsdorf E, White D et al (2008) Efficiency of incentives to jointly increase carbon sequestration and species conservation on a landscape. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105(28):9471–9476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Nelson E, Mendoza G, Regetz J, Polasky S, Tallis H, Cameron D et al (2009) Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7(1):4–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Niemi GJ, McDonald ME (2004) Application of ecological indicators. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 35(1):89–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Niemi G, DeVore P, Detenbeck N, Taylor D, Lima A, Pastor J et al (1990) Overview of case studies on recovery of aquatic systems from disturbance. Environmental Management 14(5):571–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Norgaard RB (2010) Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecological Economics 69(6):1219–1227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Ostrom E, Burger J, Field CB, Norgaard RB, Policansky D (1999) Revisiting the commons: local lessons, global challenges. Science 284(5412):278–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Palmer MA, Bernhardt ES, Allan JD, Lake PS, Alexander G, Brooks S et al (2005) Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology 42(2):208–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Polasky S (2008) What’s nature done for you lately: measuring the value of ecosystem services. Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm & Resource Issues 23(2):42–46Google Scholar
  103. Polasky S, Segerson K (2009) Integrating ecology and economics in the study of ecosystem services: some lessons learned. Annual Review of Resource Economics 1(1):409–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Randall A (2002) Valuing the outputs of multifunctional agriculture. European Review of Agricultural Economics 29(3):289–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Randhir T, Shriver DM (2009) Deliberative valuation without prices: a multiattribute prioritization for watershed ecosystem management. Ecological Economics 68(12):3042–3051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Rashleigh B, Cyterski M, Smith L, Nestlerode J (2009) Relation of fish and shellfish distributions to habitat and water quality in the Mobile Bay Estuary, USA. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 150(1):181–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Ready R, Navrud S (2006) International benefit transfer: methods and validity tests. Ecological Economics 60(2):429–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Reed MS (2008) Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biological Conservation 141(10):2417–2431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Ribaudo MO, Hoag DL, Smith ME, Heimlich R (2001) Environmental indices and the politics of the conservation reserve program. Ecological Indicators 1(1):11–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Ricketts TH, Dinerstein E, Olson DM, Loucks C, Eichbaum W, Kavanagh K et al (1999) Terrestrial ecoregions of North America: a conservation assessment. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  111. Roman HA, Walker KD, Walsh TL, Conner L, Richmond HM, Hubbell BJ et al (2008) Expert judgment assessment of the mortality impact of changes in ambient fine particulate matter in the U.S. Environmental Science and Technology 42(7):2268–2274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Romero C, Tamiz M, Jones DF (1998) Goal programming, compromise programming and reference point method formulations: linkages and utility interpretations. The Journal of the Operational Research Society 49(9):986–991Google Scholar
  113. Rosenberger RS, Loomis JB (2001) Benefit transfer of outdoor recreation use values: a technical document supporting the forest service strategic plan (2000 revision). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort CollinsGoogle Scholar
  114. Roughgarden J (1997) Production functions from ecological populations: a survey with emphasis on spatially explicit models. In: Tilman D, Kareiva P (eds) Spatial ecology: the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 296–317Google Scholar
  115. Ruhl JB, Salzman J, Goodman I (2009) Implementing the new ecosystem services mandate of the Section 404 compensatory mitigation program—a catalyst for advancing science and policy. Stetson Law Review 38(251):251Google Scholar
  116. Schlesinger WH (2010) Translational ecology. Science 329(5992):609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Smith VK, Desvousges WH (1985) The generalized travel cost model and water quality benefits: a reconsideration. Southern Economic Journal 52:371–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Smith RD, Ammann A, Bartoldus C, Brinson MM (1995) An approach for assessing wetland functions using hydrogeomorphic classification, reference wetlands, and functional indices. United States Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, VicksburgGoogle Scholar
  119. Smith VK, Van Houtven G, Pattanayak SK (2002) Benefit transfer via preference calibration: “prudential algebra” for policy. Land Economics 78(1):132–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Spash CL (2008) Deliberative monetary valuation and the evidence for a new value theory. Land Economics 84(3):469–488Google Scholar
  121. Spash CL, Vatn A (2006) Transferring environmental value estimates: issues and alternatives. Ecological Economics 60(2):379–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Stander E, Ehrenfeld J (2009) Rapid assessment of urban wetlands: do hydrogeomorphic classification and reference criteria work? Environmental Management 43(4):725–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Sugden R (2005) Anomalies and stated preference techniques: a framework for a discussion of coping strategies. Environmental and Resource Economics 32(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Tidwell VC, Van Den Brink C (2008) Cooperative modeling: linking science, communication, and ground water planning. Ground Water 46(2):174–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Tonitto C, David MB, Drinkwater LE (2006) Replacing bare fallows with cover crops in fertilizer-intensive cropping systems: a meta-analysis of crop yield and N dynamics. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 112(1):58–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Tschirhart J (2009) Integrated ecological-economic models. Annual Review of Resource Economics 1(1):381–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Turner RK (2007) Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects. Environmental and Resource Economics 37(1):253–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Turner RK, Georgiou SG, Fisher B (2008) Valuing ecosystem services: the case of multi-functional wetlands. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  129. United States Environmental Protection Agency (1999) The benefits and costs of the Clean Air Act 1990 to 2010: EPA report to Congress. USEPA, Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Policy, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  130. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2000) Guidelines for preparing economic analyses. USEPA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  131. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2009a) Risk and exposure assessment for review of the secondary national ambient air quality standards for oxides of nitrogen and oxides of sulfur-main content–final report. USEPA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  132. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2009b) Valuing the protection of ecological systems and services: a report of the USEPA Science Advisory Board. USEPA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  133. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2010) The national atlas. http://www.epa.gov/ecology/quick-finder/national-atlas.htm. Accessed February 7, 2011
  134. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (2006) National survey of fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated recreation. United States Department of the Interior, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  135. United States Office of Management and Budget (2003) Circular a-4. Subject: regulatory analysis. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda_m03-21. Accessed February 7, 2011
  136. van den Belt M, Deutsch L, Jansson A (1998) A consensus-based simulation model for management in the Patagonia coastal zone. Ecological Modelling 110(1):79–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Vaughan WJ (1986) The water quality ladder. Appendix B in Mitchell RC, Carson RT (eds) The use of contingent valuation data for benefit/cost analysis in water pollution control. USEPA, Office of Policy, Planning, and EvaluationGoogle Scholar
  138. Wainger LA, Boyd JW (2009) Valuing ecosystem services. In: McLeod K, Leslie H (eds) Ecosystem-based management for the oceans. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 92–111Google Scholar
  139. Wainger LA, King DM, Salzman J, Boyd J (2001) Wetland value indicators for scoring mitigation trades. Stanford Environmental Law Journal 20(2):413–478Google Scholar
  140. Wainger LA, King DM, Mack RN, Price EW, Maslin T (2010) Can the concept of ecosystem services be practically applied to improve natural resource management decisions? Ecological Economics 69(5):978–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Walker S, Price R, Stevens RTT (2008) An index of risk as a measure of biodiversity conservation achieved through land reform. Conservation Biology 22(1):48–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Wallace KJ (2007) Classification of ecosystem services: problems and solutions. Biological Conservation 139(3–4):235–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Wallace K (2008) Ecosystem services: multiple classifications or confusion? Biological Conservation 141(2):353–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Weber MA, Stewart S (2009) Public values for river restoration options on the Middle Rio Grande. Restoration Ecology 17(6):762–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Whitehead JC, Haab TC, Huang JC (2000) Measuring recreation benefits of quality improvements with revealed and stated behavior data. Resource and Energy Economics 22(4):339–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Willemen L, Hein L, Verburg PH (2010) Evaluating the impact of regional development policies on future landscape services. Ecological Economics 69(11):2244–2254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Wilson MA, Hoehn JP (2006) Valuing environmental goods and services using benefit transfer: the state-of-the art and science. Ecological Economics 60(2):335–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Wilson MA, Howarth RB (2002) Discourse-based valuation of ecosystem services: establishing fair outcomes through group deliberation. Ecological Economics 41(3):431–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Wossink A, Swinton SM (2007) Jointness in production and farmers’ willingness to supply non-marketed ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 64(2):297–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Zavaleta E (2000) The economic value of controlling an invasive shrub. Ambio 29(8):462–467Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Maryland Center for Environmental ScienceSolomonsUSA
  2. 2.EcoBenefits ResearchCharlestownUSA

Personalised recommendations