IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v69y2010i7p1479-1487.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing ecosystem services on the basis of service-providing units: A potential approach to address the 'endpoint problem' and improve stated preference methods

Author

Listed:
  • Kontogianni, Areti
  • Luck, Gary W.
  • Skourtos, Michalis

Abstract

Standardized methods are required to measure ecosystem services in order to value them. In this paper, we argue that the service-providing unit (SPU) concept may help achieve this objective by promoting the systematic quantification of the key components of nature that provide services (e.g., population density of a key pollinator) and linking these with measurable outcomes for human well-being. We discuss and provide examples of the potential role of the SPU concept in improving economic valuation of ecosystem services. Further, we suggest the concept may contribute to addressing the endpoint problem, which can be defined simply as the inability of researchers to communicate the implications of environmental change in a way that is understood by a broad cross-section of society. The endpoint problem is of particular relevance to stated preference approaches, and we discuss the capacity of the SPU concept to refine these approaches. We argue that the concept enhances interdisciplinary collaboration, promoting more validated, well-informed valuation applications. It also has the potential to minimize 'warm glow effects' and put the notion of marginal changes in the provision of ecosystem services in a new light.

Suggested Citation

  • Kontogianni, Areti & Luck, Gary W. & Skourtos, Michalis, 2010. "Valuing ecosystem services on the basis of service-providing units: A potential approach to address the 'endpoint problem' and improve stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1479-1487, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:69:y:2010:i:7:p:1479-1487
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(10)00076-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nunez, Daisy & Nahuelhual, Laura & Oyarzun, Carlos, 2006. "Forests and water: The value of native temperate forests in supplying water for human consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 606-616, June.
    2. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    3. Knoche, Scott & Lupi, Frank, 2007. "Valuing deer hunting ecosystem services from farm landscapes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 313-320, December.
    4. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Jude, Simon, 2009. "Reducing gain-loss asymmetry: A virtual reality choice experiment valuing land use change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 106-118, July.
    5. Zafonte, Matthew & Hampton, Steve, 2007. "Exploring welfare implications of resource equivalency analysis in natural resource damage assessments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 134-145, February.
    6. Ing-Marie Gren & Carl Folke & Kerry Turner & Ian Batemen, 1994. "Primary and secondary values of wetland ecosystems," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(1), pages 55-74, February.
    7. Dunford, Richard W. & Ginn, Thomas C. & Desvousges, William H., 2004. "The use of habitat equivalency analysis in natural resource damage assessments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 49-70, January.
    8. Ming, Jiang & Xian-guo, Lu & Lin-shu, Xu & Li-juan, Chu & Shouzheng, Tong, 2007. "Flood mitigation benefit of wetland soil -- A case study in Momoge National Nature Reserve in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 217-223, March.
    9. Corso, Phaedra S & Hammitt, James K & Graham, John D, 2001. "Valuing Mortality-Risk Reduction: Using Visual Aids to Improve the Validity of Contingent Valuation," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 165-184, September.
    10. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 93-107, January.
    11. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    12. McConnell, Kenneth E. & Bockstael, Nancy E., 2006. "Valuing the Environment as a Factor of Production," Handbook of Environmental Economics,in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 14, pages 621-669 Elsevier.
    13. Andreas Kontoleon & Timothy Swanson, 2003. "The Willingness to Pay for Property Rights for the Giant Panda: Can a Charismatic Species Be an Instrument for Nature Conservation?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(4), pages 483-499.
    14. Gallai, Nicola & Salles, Jean-Michel & Settele, Josef & Vaissière, Bernard E., 2009. "Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 810-821, January.
    15. Tianhong, Li & Wenkai, Li & Zhenghan, Qian, 2010. "Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use changes in Shenzhen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1427-1435, May.
    16. R. Turner & G. Daily, 2008. "The Ecosystem Services Framework and Natural Capital Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(1), pages 25-35, January.
    17. Swinton, Scott M. & Lupi, Frank & Robertson, G. Philip & Hamilton, Stephen K., 2007. "Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 245-252, December.
    18. Hougner, Cajsa & Colding, Johan & Soderqvist, Tore, 2006. "Economic valuation of a seed dispersal service in the Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 364-374, September.
    19. Sandhu, Harpinder S. & Wratten, Stephen D. & Cullen, Ross & Case, Brad, 2008. "The future of farming: The value of ecosystem services in conventional and organic arable land. An experimental approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 835-848, February.
    20. Limburg, Karin E. & O'Neill, Robert V. & Costanza, Robert & Farber, Stephen, 2002. "Complex systems and valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 409-420, June.
    21. Nicholas E. Flores & Jennifer Thacher, 2002. "Money, Who Needs It? Natural Resource Damage Assessment," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 20(2), pages 171-178, April.
    22. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    23. Gregory, Robin & Lichtenstein, Sarah & Slovic, Paul, 1993. "Valuing Environmental Resources: A Constructive Approach," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 177-197, October.
    24. Boyd, James & Wainger, Lisa, 2003. "Measuring Ecosystem Service Benefits: The Use of Landscape Analysis to Evaluate Environmental Trades and Compensation," Discussion Papers dp-02-63, Resources For the Future.
    25. Ninan, K.N. & Sathyapalan, Jyothis, 2005. "The economics of biodiversity conservation: a study of a coffee growing region in the Western Ghats of India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 61-72, October.
    26. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    27. Barkmann, J. & Glenk, K. & Keil, A. & Leemhuis, C. & Dietrich, N. & Gerold, G. & Marggraf, R., 2008. "Confronting unfamiliarity with ecosystem functions: The case for an ecosystem service approach to environmental valuation with stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 48-62, March.
    28. Ingraham, Molly W. & Foster, Shonda Gilliland, 2008. "The value of ecosystem services provided by the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System in the contiguous U.S," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 608-618, November.
    29. Turner, R. Kerry & Paavola, Jouni & Cooper, Philip & Farber, Stephen & Jessamy, Valma & Georgiou, Stavros, 2003. "Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 493-510, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hearnshaw, Edward J.S. & Cullen, Ross, 2010. "The Sustainability and Cost-Effectiveness of Water Storage Projects on Canterbury Rivers: The Opihi River Case," 2010 Conference, August 26-27, 2010, Nelson, New Zealand 97265, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Johnston, Robert J. & Russell, Marc, 2011. "An operational structure for clarity in ecosystem service values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2243-2249.
    3. Kontogianni, A. & Tourkolias, C. & Machleras, A. & Skourtos, M., 2012. "Service providing units, existence values and the valuation of endangered species: A methodological test," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 97-104.
    4. Johnston, Robert J. & Segerson, Kathleen & Schultz, Eric T. & Besedin, Elena Y. & Ramachandran, Mahesh, 2011. "Indices of biotic integrity in stated preference valuation of aquatic ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1946-1956, September.
    5. M. Skourtos & D. Damigos & D. Tsitakis & A. Kontogianni & C. Tourkolias & N. Streftaris, 2015. "In Search of Marine Ecosystem Services Values: The V-MESSES Database," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1-27, December.
    6. H. Spencer Banzhaf & James Boyd, 2012. "The Architecture and Measurement of an Ecosystem Services Index," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 4(4), pages 1-32, March.
    7. Sagoff, Mark, 2011. "The quantification and valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 497-502, January.
    8. Mateo Cordier & José Pérez Agúndez & Walter Hecq & Bertrand Hamaide, 2013. "A guiding framework for ecosystem services monetization in ecological-economic modeling," Working Papers CEB 13-018, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    9. repec:eee:ecomod:v:222:y:2011:i:16:p:2924-2928 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. repec:eee:ecoser:v:7:y:2014:i:c:p:160-166 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. repec:eee:ecoser:v:15:y:2015:i:c:p:35-44 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Rodríguez-Entrena, Macario & Espinosa-Goded, María & Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesús, 2014. "The role of ancillary benefits on the value of agricultural soils carbon sequestration programmes: Evidence from a latent class approach to Andalusian olive groves," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 63-73.
    13. Guignet, Dennis, 2012. "The impacts of pollution and exposure pathways on home values: A stated preference analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 53-63.
    14. Patrick POINT (GREThA, CNRS, UMR 5113), 2012. "Valuation of wetland ecosystems services. Some methodological principles (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA 2012-19, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:69:y:2010:i:7:p:1479-1487. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.