Contribution of site assessment toward prioritising investment in natural capital

In prioritising investment in natural capital, site-scale indicators are increasingly used to capture fine-scale variation inherent in complex ecosystems. However, site assessment is costly, has high skill demand, and is time-consuming. We assess the marginal gain associated with including site-scale indicators in metrics typically used by agri-environmental stewardship schemes and payments for ecosystem services. We developed 18 landscape-scale and 14 site-scale indicators to prioritise sites for on-ground works in a real-world conservation auction in South Australia. We used the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to weight them and multi-attribute utility theory to combine them in quantifying site priority. Bid benefit was calculated as the product of impact of the proposed works and the site priority. Cost-utility analysis was used to rank and select bids with benefits calculated using: i) landscape-scale indicators, and; ii) both landscape- and site-scale indicators. We found that the inclusion of site-scale indicators has limited influence on the ranking and selection of bids for investment when cost of investment is included in the decision-making process. We suggest that, depending on the nature of costs and benefits, and if landholder engagement, information sharing, and trust-building can be achieved in more efficient ways, site assessment may not be necessary. Thereby a significant barrier to the adoption of cost-effective agri-environment schemes and payments for ecosystem services may be eliminated.

[1]  G. Daily,et al.  Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales , 2009 .

[2]  Daniel L. Schmoldt,et al.  Expert panel assessment of attributes for natural variability benchmarks for biodiversity , 2007 .

[3]  P. Ferraro.  Assigning priority to environmental policy interventions in a heterogeneous world , 2003 .

[4]  Sven Wunder,et al.  Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: A tool for boosting conservation benefits , 2008 .

[5]  A. Solow,et al.  Measuring biological diversity , 2006, Environmental and Ecological Statistics.

[6]  Glen Osmond,et al.  An invasive plant and climate change threat index for weed risk management: Integrating habitat distribution pattern and dispersal process , 2011 .

[7]  Michael J. Hill,et al.  Multi-criteria decision analysis in spatial decision support: the ASSESS analytic hierarchy process and the role of quantitative methods and spatially explicit analysis , 2005, Environ. Model. Softw..

[8]  T. Saaty.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[9]  Stefan Hajkowicz,et al.  Measuring the benefits of environmental stewardship in rural landscapes , 2009 .

[10]  Katharine R. E. Sims,et al.  Designing payments for ecosystem services: Lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  Gretchen C Daily,et al.  Conservation Planning for Ecosystem Services , 2006, PLoS biology.

[12]  Dana L. Hoag,et al.  Environmental indices and the politics of the Conservation Reserve Program , 2001 .

[13]  Neville D. Crossman,et al.  An invasive plant and climate change threat index for weed risk management: Integrating habitat distribution pattern and dispersal process , 2011 .

[14]  A. Magurran,et al.  Measuring Biological Diversity , 2004 .

[15]  Hugh P Possingham,et al.  Delaying conservation actions for improved knowledge: how long should we wait? , 2009, Ecology letters.

[16]  Luis A. García,et al.  Comparison of different multicriteria evaluation methods for the Red Bluff diversion dam , 2000, Environ. Model. Softw..

[17]  Andrea Cattaneo,et al.  Review of Agri-Environment Indexes and Stewardship Payments , 2009, Environmental management.

[18]  Philip Gibbons,et al.  An operational method to assess impacts of land clearing on terrestrial biodiversity , 2009 .

[19]  Ross Cullen,et al.  Integrating Economics into Priority Setting and Evaluation in Conservation Management , 2003 .

[20]  B. Bryan,et al.  Exploring the Cost Effectiveness of Land Conservation Auctions and Payment Policies , 2008 .

[21]  Neville D. Crossman,et al.  Systematic landscape restoration using integer programming , 2006 .

[22]  Margaret A. Palmer,et al.  Restoration of Ecosystem Services for Environmental Markets , 2009, Science.

[23]  John Rolfe,et al.  Exploring the efficiencies of using competitive tenders over fixed price grants to protect biodiversity in Australian rangelands , 2008 .

[24]  Jacob McC. Overton,et al.  A landscape approach for estimating the conservation value of sites and site-based projects, with examples from New Zealand , 2008 .

[25]  N. Crossman,et al.  Systematic regional planning for multiple objective natural resource management. , 2005, Journal of environmental management.

[26]  Christopher W. Zobel,et al.  Stakeholder ranking of watershed goals with the vector analytic hierarchy process: Effects of participant grouping scenarios , 2010, Environ. Model. Softw..

[27]  Stephen Polasky,et al.  Why conservation planning needs socioeconomic data , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  H. Possingham,et al.  Cost-effective global conservation spending is robust to taxonomic group , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  U. Latacz-Lohmann,et al.  Auctioning Conservation Contracts: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application , 1997 .

[30]  Andrew J. Higgins,et al.  The multiple criteria analysis tool (MCAT): A new software tool to support environmental investment decision making , 2009, Environ. Model. Softw..

[31]  Paroma Basu.  Forestry: A green investment , 2009, Nature.

[32]  Andre Zerger,et al.  A method for predicting native vegetation condition at regional scales , 2009 .

[33]  T. Blaschke.  The role of the spatial dimension within the framework of sustainable landscapes and natural capital , 2006 .

[34]  Dan van der Horst,et al.  Spatial cost–benefit thinking in multi-functional forestry; towards a framework for spatial targeting of policy interventions , 2006 .

[35]  Andrew Higgins,et al.  Evaluating water quality investments using cost utility analysis. , 2008, Journal of environmental management.

[36]  David Zilberman,et al.  Targeting Tools for the Purchase of Environmental Amenities , 1997 .

[37]  R. D. Groot,et al.  Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services , 2006 .

[38]  Hugh P Possingham,et al.  Setting Conservation Priorities , 2009, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[39]  W. Edwards,et al.  Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research , 1986 .

[40]  N. Crossman,et al.  Identifying cost-effective hotspots for restoring natural capital and enhancing landscape multifunctionality , 2009 .

[41]  David Cheal,et al.  Assessing the quality of native vegetation: The 'habitat hectares' approach , 2003 .

[42]  Catherine Greene,et al.  The Use of Markets to Increase Private Investment in Environmental Stewardship , 2008 .

[43]  Lisa A. Wainger,et al.  Development of Indicators to Assess Economic Vulnerabilities to Changes in Ecosystem Services: Case Study of Counties in Maryland, USA , 2004, Environmental management.

[44]  S. Andelman,et al.  Conserving Biodiversity Efficiently: What to Do, Where, and When , 2007, PLoS biology.

[45]  Loris Strappazzon,et al.  Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trial , 2003 .

[46]  Sue McIntyre,et al.  From plant neighbourhood to landscape scales: how grazing modifies native and exotic plant species richness in grassland , 2007, Plant Ecology.