Entry Points for Considering Ecosystem Services within Infrastructure Planning: How to Integrate Conservation with Development in Order to Aid Them Both

New infrastructure is needed globally to support economic development and improve human well-being. Investments that do not consider ecosystem services (ES) can eliminate these important societal benefits from nature, undermining the development benefits infrastructure is intended to provide. Such tradeoffs are acknowledged conceptually but in practice have rarely been considered in infrastructure planning. Taking road investments as one important case, here we examine where and what forms of ES information have the potential to meaningfully influence decisions by multilateral development banks (MDBs). Across the stages of a typical road development process, we identify where and how ES information could be integrated, likely barriers to the use of available ES information, and key opportunities to shift incentives and thereby practice. We believe inclusion of ES information is likely to provide the greatest development benefit in early stages of infrastructure decisions. Those strategic planning stages are typically guided by in-country processes, with MDBs playing a supporting role, making it critical to express the ES consequences of infrastructure development using metrics relevant to government decision makers. This approach requires additional evidence of the in-country benefits of cross-sector strategic planning and more tools to lower barriers to quantifying these benefits and facilitating ES inclusion.

[1]  M. Feldman,et al.  Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: From promise to practice , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[2]  C. Ramalingam,et al.  Addressing the environmental impacts of butachlor and the available remediation strategies: a systematic review , 2015, International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology.

[3]  David P. Edwards,et al.  A global strategy for road building , 2014, Nature.

[4]  S. O. Link,et al.  Valuation of ecological resources , 1995 .

[5]  L. Serven,et al.  Infrastructure, Growth, and Inequality: An Overview , 2014 .

[6]  Luis Enrique Sánchez,et al.  Is the ecosystem service concept improving impact assessment? Evidence from recent international practice , 2015 .

[7]  W. Laurance,et al.  Agricultural expansion and its impacts on tropical nature. , 2014, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[8]  Claire A. Montgomery,et al.  Where to put things? Spatial land management to sustain biodiversity and economic returns , 2008 .

[9]  P. Kareiva,et al.  Coastal habitats shield people and property from sea-level rise and storms , 2013 .

[10]  Davide Geneletti,et al.  Reasons and options for integrating ecosystem services in strategic environmental assessment of spatial planning , 2011 .

[11]  Benjamin P. Bryant,et al.  Inclusive Wealth as a Metric of Sustainable Development , 2015 .

[12]  William R. Sheate,et al.  Ecosystem services in environmental assessment — Help or hindrance? , 2013 .

[13]  K. Chomitz,et al.  The nexus between infrastructure and environment , 2007 .

[14]  P. V. Beukering,et al.  Valuation of ecosystem services and strategic environmental assessment - Lessons from influential cases , 2008 .

[15]  W. Laurance,et al.  Impacts of roads and linear clearings on tropical forests. , 2009, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[16]  Jiang Ru,et al.  Strategic environmental assessment in China: motivations, politics, and effectiveness. , 2008, Journal of environmental management.

[17]  A. Bond,et al.  Demonstrating the benefits of impact assessment for proponents , 2015 .

[18]  J. Salles,et al.  Assessing and mapping global climate regulation service loss induced by Terrestrial Transport Infrastructure construction , 2013 .

[19]  S. O. Link,et al.  Valuation of Ecological Resources and Functions , 1998, Environmental management.

[20]  Christopher Wood,et al.  Environmental impact assessment: Retrospect and prospect , 2007 .