Special Issue "Ecosystem Service Valuation, Its Measurement and Uses"

Quicklinks

A special issue of Resources (ISSN 2079-9276).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 July 2013)

Special Issue Editors

Guest Editor
Prof. Dr. Richard F. Kazmierczak, Jr. (Website)

Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, LSU AgCenter, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803-5604, USA
Phone: 2257154341
Interests: (1) development, adoption, and management of technology to address environmental problems in coastal and marine systems; (2) use of market and non-market mechanisms for environmental and resource valuation and dispute resolution; (3) impacts of technology and risk on decision making and system sustainability; (4) the interaction of natural and human capital in the economic, environmental, and sociological sustainability of resource management
Guest Editor
Prof. Dr. Rex H. Caffey (Website)

Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, LSU AgCenter, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803-5604, USA
Phone: 225-578-2393
Interests: (1) cost-benefit analysis of coastal wetland restoration; (2) integration of ecosystem service values in project prioritization and selection; (3) economic assessment of commercial and recreational fisheries operations and management; (4) marine resource economics extension and technology transfer

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleague,

Ecosystems provide a wide range of goods and services to human populations, including many of the resources that form the building blocks of local and regional economic activity. As such, an understanding of both the market and non-market values of ecosystem-based resources is critical for planning and management. Unfortunately, the economic values of specific ecosystem-based resources are notoriously difficult to measure, in part because of the complexity involved in identifying the characteristics being measured and because of the way in which these characteristics tend to vary over geographic and temporal dimensions. In addition, attempts to value ecosystem-based resources have tended to focus on either market or non-market measures without making any real attempt to integrate the two sets of measures, even though this integrated value is important to decision making in the policy development process. This special issue of Resources will focus on recent attempts to bridge these gaps in our understanding of ecosystem service valuation, its measurement, and how the resulting values are used in resource management. Submissions that focus on market, non-market, and integrated valuation of ecosystem-based resources are welcome, particularly those that address how these values might vary across geographic, cultural, and temporal scales. Submissions that examine the use of these values in local, regional, national, and international management and policy processes are also encouraged.

Prof. Dr. Richard F. Kazmierczak, Jr.
Prof. Dr. Rex H. Caffey
Guest Editors

Submission

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. Papers will be published continuously (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are refereed through a peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Resources is an international peer-reviewed Open Access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 300 CHF (Swiss Francs). English correction and/or formatting fees of 250 CHF (Swiss Francs) will be charged in certain cases for those articles accepted for publication that require extensive additional formatting and/or English corrections.

Keywords

  • stated preference
  • revealed preference
  • market value
  • non-market value
  • ecosystem value
  • environmental planning
  • cost-benefit analysis

Published Papers (7 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-7
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

Open AccessArticle A Meta-Analysis of Hedonic Studies to Assess the Property Value Effects of Low Impact Development
Resources 2014, 3(1), 31-61; doi:10.3390/resources3010031
Received: 28 October 2013 / Revised: 24 December 2013 / Accepted: 7 January 2014 / Published: 21 January 2014
Cited by 4 | PDF Full-text (1138 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Stormwater runoff from urban areas is a significant source of water pollution in the United States. Many states are promoting low impact development (LID) practices, which provide a variety of direct and ancillary ecosystem services. We describe a meta-analysis designed to evaluate [...] Read more.
Stormwater runoff from urban areas is a significant source of water pollution in the United States. Many states are promoting low impact development (LID) practices, which provide a variety of direct and ancillary ecosystem services. We describe a meta-analysis designed to evaluate the property value benefits of LID practices that reduce impervious surfaces and increase vegetated areas in developments, and present an example application to a hypothetical land use scenario. From the many hedonic property valuation studies of the benefits of general open space, we identified 35 studies that valued open spaces that were similar in nature to the small, dispersed open spaces characteristic of LID. The meta-regression estimates the percent change in a home’s value for an observed percent change in open space within a specific radius of a parcel, based on changes expected to result from LID approaches that increase green spaces. Our results indicate that the design and characteristics of a project affect the magnitude of benefits, and that values decline with distance. More broadly, the meta-analysis shows percent change and proximity are robust determinants of household willingness to pay for aesthetic and other services associated with local availability of small, dispersed open spaces resulting from LID, but that values for other features, including type of vegetation and recreational use may be site-specific. Policymakers and developers could draw on our synthesis of site characteristics’ effects to maximize benefits from open space associated with LID. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecosystem Service Valuation, Its Measurement and Uses)
Open AccessArticle Preferences for Management of Near-Shore Marine Ecosystems: A Choice Experiment in New Zealand
Resources 2013, 2(3), 406-438; doi:10.3390/resources2030406
Received: 30 July 2013 / Revised: 26 August 2013 / Accepted: 4 September 2013 / Published: 17 September 2013
Cited by 2 | PDF Full-text (827 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
There is considerable interest in New Zealand in establishing “Customary Management Areas” (taiāpure and mātaitai) and Marine Reserves to support Māori cultural practices and restore declining biodiversity and fish stocks. Allocation of near-shore marine areas for these management systems potentially benefits the [...] Read more.
There is considerable interest in New Zealand in establishing “Customary Management Areas” (taiāpure and mātaitai) and Marine Reserves to support Māori cultural practices and restore declining biodiversity and fish stocks. Allocation of near-shore marine areas for these management systems potentially benefits the larger public, but it has often been vigorously opposed by recreational and commercial fishers. This paper reports estimates of the relative values held by the public toward four potentially conflicting uses of near-shore marine areas. These estimates come from a web-based choice survey completed by 1055 respondents recruited from throughout New Zealand. The response rate was especially high at 60%. We present results weighted to the characteristics of the population and test the results against a variety of well-known sources of survey bias. Scenario development suggests that some reallocation of near-shore marine areas to any of the management systems under discussion alternative to the status quo is likely to yield a welfare gain. A combination of marine reserves and taiāpure is most preferred. The exercise supports the use of discrete choice experiments to provide crucial information about difficult-to-quantify public values for aspects of management of near-shore marine areas, such as proposed taiāpure, mātaitai, or marine reserves. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecosystem Service Valuation, Its Measurement and Uses)
Open AccessArticle Services Evolution of Two Groundwater Dependent Wetland Ecosystems in the “Mancha Húmeda” Biosphere Reserve (Spain)
Resources 2013, 2(2), 128-150; doi:10.3390/resources2020128
Received: 26 April 2013 / Revised: 4 June 2013 / Accepted: 13 June 2013 / Published: 21 June 2013
PDF Full-text (1019 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
A wetland that does not comply with the ecological standards of EU Directive 2000/60/EC cannot properly provide its services. This paper presents a review of the criteria for wetland assessment based on the Spanish experience in two specific Ramsar areas: the Tablas [...] Read more.
A wetland that does not comply with the ecological standards of EU Directive 2000/60/EC cannot properly provide its services. This paper presents a review of the criteria for wetland assessment based on the Spanish experience in two specific Ramsar areas: the Tablas de Daimiel and the Ruidera Lakes. The aim of this article is to consider and promote a holistic awareness of the hydrological cycle and of the wetland area ecosystems within it. The methodology developed under the umbrella of the UNESCO project IGCP 604 is applied to describe the groundwater-wetland-human interrelationship. This methodology was chosen for two reasons: (a) it is designed to assess the services the wetlands provide; (b) it focuses on groundwater dependent wetlands such as the two cases presented here. In each case, although to a different extent, agricultural activities and water management have led to important changes in the services provided by the two ecosystems. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecosystem Service Valuation, Its Measurement and Uses)
Figures

Open AccessArticle Strange Bedfellows: Ecosystem Services, Conservation Science, and Central Government in the United Kingdom
Resources 2013, 2(2), 114-127; doi:10.3390/resources2020114
Received: 16 April 2013 / Revised: 22 May 2013 / Accepted: 7 June 2013 / Published: 19 June 2013
Cited by 6 | PDF Full-text (1444 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
The Natural Environment White Paper represents the most important shift in conservation policy in the United Kingdom for over 20 years. It formalizes the ecosystem services approach within policy objectives and emphasizes the economic value of ecosystem services. The ecosystem services approach [...] Read more.
The Natural Environment White Paper represents the most important shift in conservation policy in the United Kingdom for over 20 years. It formalizes the ecosystem services approach within policy objectives and emphasizes the economic value of ecosystem services. The ecosystem services approach embodies different meanings to different groups, each suggesting distinct governance paradigms and management tools. While conservationists’ support for the ecosystem services approach may stem from arguments for integrated and holistic management of natural systems, valuation efforts seek to apply economic tools to complex ecosystem processes as a means of increasing the policy salience of ecosystem services for management. Does this coupling make for strange bedfellows? We apply the Advocacy Coalition Framework to examine the alignment of the values and beliefs of key United Kingdom actors. Understanding core and peripheral values may help actors anticipate where cooperation and conflict arise, and the potential longevity of policy partnerships. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecosystem Service Valuation, Its Measurement and Uses)
Figures

Review

Jump to: Research

Open AccessReview Benefit Transfer: A Review of Methodologies and Challenges
Resources 2013, 2(4), 517-527; doi:10.3390/resources2040517
Received: 2 August 2013 / Revised: 12 September 2013 / Accepted: 11 October 2013 / Published: 21 October 2013
PDF Full-text (178 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
For policy makers, regulators and natural resource managers, the resources necessary for original empirical resource valuations are often unavailable. A common alternative to original valuation studies is the practice of benefit transfer—the use of an empirical value estimate or estimates from a [...] Read more.
For policy makers, regulators and natural resource managers, the resources necessary for original empirical resource valuations are often unavailable. A common alternative to original valuation studies is the practice of benefit transfer—the use of an empirical value estimate or estimates from a previous study or studies for application in a similar context. In order to reduce the error inherent in applying values from one parcel of land to another, researchers commonly use meta-analysis, or the “study of studies”, to provide a more thorough and statistically valid value estimate for use in a benefit transfer. In the practice of benefit transfer, much emphasis has been placed on improving the validity of values for transfer, but fewer studies have focused on the appropriate application of the established estimates. In this article, several often disregarded concerns that should be addressed when practicing benefit transfer are identified. A special focus is placed on spatial considerations and the recent progress that has been made to incorporate spatial trends. Geographic information systems (GIS) are advocated as a useful tool for incorporating the spatial aspects of benefit transfer. Consensuses and trends in the literature are acknowledged, and areas of potential improvement are highlighted. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecosystem Service Valuation, Its Measurement and Uses)
Open AccessReview Ecosystem Effects from Nutrient and Pesticide Pollutants: Catchment Care as a Solution
Resources 2013, 2(3), 439-456; doi:10.3390/resources2030439
Received: 8 July 2013 / Revised: 17 August 2013 / Accepted: 5 September 2013 / Published: 23 September 2013
Cited by 2 | PDF Full-text (613 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Agricultural chemicals include fertilisers (nitrogen and phosphorus) and biocides (herbicides, fungicides and insecticides). Environmental impacts in surface waters include algal blooms and disruption to ecological function. Strategies for protection of rivers from eutrophication include improved agricultural land management, conservation farming methods, recycling [...] Read more.
Agricultural chemicals include fertilisers (nitrogen and phosphorus) and biocides (herbicides, fungicides and insecticides). Environmental impacts in surface waters include algal blooms and disruption to ecological function. Strategies for protection of rivers from eutrophication include improved agricultural land management, conservation farming methods, recycling or retention of drainage and runoff water, and use of buffer strips and riparian vegetation for filtration. Reduction in pesticide use has been achieved by improved application technologies, precision farming, adoption of organic farming, and use of biological control methods. Australian river health audits show widespread deterioration, and protection using the “Polluter Pays Principle” is attractive. However, who should pay for environmental assessment, for adoption of new technologies or change in land use, and how will this be determined? Unfortunately, as demonstrated in two case studies on algal blooms and cotton pesticides, the links between pollutant source and environmental impact remain poorly understood, and the complexity of assessing environmental benefit of agricultural changes makes sheeting home the costs of pollution sources difficult. Alternatives to imposition of penalties include catchment-based targets and guidelines, benchmarking, and adoption of best management practice with an emphasis on incentives and encouragement. Many strategies for risk reduction in agricultural cropping systems are available for inclusion in a “Catchment Care” approach. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecosystem Service Valuation, Its Measurement and Uses)
Open AccessReview Valuing Ecosystem Services for Coastal Wetland Protection and Restoration: Progress and Challenges
Resources 2013, 2(3), 213-230; doi:10.3390/resources2030213
Received: 16 June 2013 / Revised: 10 July 2013 / Accepted: 16 July 2013 / Published: 15 August 2013
Cited by 9 | PDF Full-text (692 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Coastal wetlands, such as marshes, mangroves and forested swamps, are in decline globally. Although considerable progress has been made in quantifying and valuing some of the key ecosystem goods and services provided by these habitats, fundamental challenges remain. The biggest challenge is [...] Read more.
Coastal wetlands, such as marshes, mangroves and forested swamps, are in decline globally. Although considerable progress has been made in quantifying and valuing some of the key ecosystem goods and services provided by these habitats, fundamental challenges remain. The biggest challenge is inadequate knowledge to link changes in ecosystem structure and function to the production of valuable goods and services. Another problem is that very few ecosystem services are marketed. This review discusses recent advances in overcoming these challenges. To illustrate key valuation issues, the paper introduces three case studies from the US Gulf Coast state of Louisiana: quantifying ecosystem services and the 2012 Master Plan for coastal Louisiana; valuing storm protection by marsh in southeast Louisiana; and oil spills and the Natural Resource Damage Assessment approach to wetland compensation in lieu of restoration. The paper concludes with some final remarks on the state of coastal wetland valuation for protection and restoration. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecosystem Service Valuation, Its Measurement and Uses)

Journal Contact

MDPI AG
Resources Editorial Office
St. Alban-Anlage 66, 4052 Basel, Switzerland
resources@mdpi.com
Tel. +41 61 683 77 34
Fax: +41 61 302 89 18
Editorial Board
Contact Details Submit to Resources
Back to Top