IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v27y2017ipap1-14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using ecosystem services to underpin cost–benefit analysis: Is it a way to protect finite soil resources?

Author

Listed:
  • Greenhalgh, S.
  • Samarasinghe, O.
  • Curran-Cournane, F.
  • Wright, W.
  • Brown, P.

Abstract

Urban encroachment onto versatile land is a global challenge, and as the pressure to develop this land mounts there are moves to assess the broader impacts of these decisions. One common decision support tool for policy decisions is cost–benefit analysis (CBA), and despite criticisms of the approach it enjoys widespread use. Using a case of urban development onto versatile rural land in New Zealand, two issues relating to the use of CBA are tackled – the monetisation of all values and what values to include – along with a discussion of irreversible decisions. To identify which costs and benefits to include in a CBA we provide a structured process using an ecosystem services framework early in a CBA to provide a comprehensive means to identify and justify the costs and benefits to include. Using members of the community to decide which ecosystem services are most important for a given context allows more robust deliberation of values and what to include in the CBA. To demonstrate the value of non-market values (e.g. regulatory services) we use soil characteristics. Our assessment demonstrates the challenges facing decision-makers and ongoing methodological shortfalls as CBA approaches are applied to non-substitutable resources and irreversible decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Greenhalgh, S. & Samarasinghe, O. & Curran-Cournane, F. & Wright, W. & Brown, P., 2017. "Using ecosystem services to underpin cost–benefit analysis: Is it a way to protect finite soil resources?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 1-14.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:27:y:2017:i:pa:p:1-14
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041616304715
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Nick Hanley, 2001. "Cost — Benefit Analysis and Environmental Policymaking," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(1), pages 103-118, February.
    2. Sumaila, Ussif R. & Walters, Carl, 2005. "Intergenerational discounting: a new intuitive approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 135-142, January.
    3. Pearce, David, 1998. "Cost-Benefit Analysis and Environmental Policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 14(4), pages 84-100, Winter.
    4. John Turnpenny & Duncan Russel & Andrew Jordan, 2014. "The Challenge of Embedding an Ecosystem Services Approach: Patterns of Knowledge Utilisation in Public Policy Appraisal," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 247-262, April.
    5. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    6. Capozza, Dennis R. & Helsley, Robert W., 1990. "The stochastic city," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 187-203, September.
    7. Porter, Richard C., 1982. "The new approach to wilderness preservation through benefit-cost analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 59-80, March.
    8. Goodin, Robert E., 1982. "Discounting Discounting," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 53-71, February.
    9. Dominati, E. & Mackay, A. & Green, S. & Patterson, M., 2014. "A soil change-based methodology for the quantification and valuation of ecosystem services from agro-ecosystems: A case study of pastoral agriculture in New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 119-129.
    10. Florian V Eppink & Matthew Winden & Will C C Wright & Suzie Greenhalgh, 2016. "Non-Market Values in a Cost-Benefit World: Evidence from a Choice Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-12, October.
    11. Matuschke, Ira, 2009. "Rapid Urbanization and Food Security: Using Food Density Maps to Identify Future Food Security Hotspots," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51643, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Clive L. Spash, 2006. "Non-Economic Motivation for Contingent Values: Rights and Attitudinal Beliefs in the Willingness To Pay for Environmental Improvements," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(4), pages 602-622.
    13. Dominati, Estelle & Patterson, Murray & Mackay, Alec, 2010. "A framework for classifying and quantifying the natural capital and ecosystem services of soils," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1858-1868, July.
    14. Bai, Xuemei, 2012. "Landscape urbanisation and food security," 2012: The Scramble for Natural Resources: More Food, Less Land?, 9-10 October 2012 152401, Crawford Fund.
    15. Joseph Henrich & Steve J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan, 2010. "The Weirdest People in the World?," RatSWD Working Papers 139, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    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. Yang, Qing & Liu, Gengyuan & Giannetti, Biagio F. & Agostinho, Feni & M.V.B. Almeida, Cecília & Casazza, Marco, 2020. "Emergy-based ecosystem services valuation and classification management applied to China’s grasslands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    2. Daigneault, Adam & Strong, Aaron L. & Meyer, Spencer R., 2021. "Benefits, costs, and feasibility of scaling up land conservation for maintaining ecosystem services in the Sebago Lake watershed, Maine, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    3. Hualin Xie & Zhenhong Zhu & Zhe Li, 2022. "Spatial Divergence Analysis of Ecosystem Service Value in Hilly Mountainous Areas: A Case Study of Ruijin City," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-17, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Choquet, Pauline & Gabrielle, Benoit & Chalhoub, Maha & Michelin, Joël & Sauzet, Ophélie & Scammacca, Ottone & Garnier, Patricia & Baveye, Philippe C. & Montagne, David, 2021. "Comparison of empirical and process-based modelling to quantify soil-supported ecosystem services on the Saclay plateau (France)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    2. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur, 2016. "Classification and valuation of soil ecosystem services," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 24-38.
    3. van den Belt, Marjan & Blake, Daniella, 2014. "Ecosystem services in new Zealand agro-ecosystems: A literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 115-132.
    4. Sébastien Foudi, 2012. "Exploitation of soil biota ecosystem services in agriculture: a bioeconomic approach," Working Papers 2012-02, BC3.
    5. Fengjiao Ma & A. Egrinya Eneji & Jintong Liu, 2014. "Understanding Relationships among Agro-Ecosystem Services Based on Emergy Analysis in Luancheng County, North China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-20, November.
    6. Villegas-Palacio, Clara & Berrouet, Lina & López, Connie & Ruiz, Aura & Upegui, Alba, 2016. "Lessons from the integrated valuation of ecosystem services in a developing country: Three case studies on ecological, socio-cultural and economic valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 297-308.
    7. Dominati, E.J. & Mackay, A. & Lynch, B. & Heath, N. & Millner, I., 2014. "An ecosystem services approach to the quantification of shallow mass movement erosion and the value of soil conservation practices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 204-215.
    8. Saez, Carmen Almansa & Requena, Javier Calatrava, 2007. "Reconciling sustainability and discounting in Cost-Benefit Analysis: A methodological proposal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 712-725, February.
    9. Silva-Olaya, Adriana M. & Ortíz-Morea, Fausto A. & España-Cetina, Gina P. & Olaya-Montes, Andrés & Grados, Daniel & Gasparatos, Alexandros & Cherubin, Mauricio Roberto, 2022. "Composite index for soil-related ecosystem services assessment: Insights from rainforest-pasture transitions in the Colombian Amazon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    10. Schon, N.L. & Dominati, E.J., 2020. "Valuing earthworm contribution to ecosystem services delivery," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    11. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Nikolaidis, Nikolaos P. & Giannakis, Georgios V., 2019. "Tools for Sustainable Soil Management: Soil Ecosystem Services, EROI and Economic Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 109-119.
    12. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    13. Mark V. Brady & Jordan Hristov & Fredrik Wilhelmsson & Katarina Hedlund, 2019. "Roadmap for Valuing Soil Ecosystem Services to Inform Multi-Level Decision-Making in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, September.
    14. Johannes Rüdisser & Erich Tasser & Thomas Peham & Erwin Meyer & Ulrike Tappeiner, 2020. "Hidden Engineers and Service Providers: Earthworms in Agricultural Land-Use Types of South Tyrol, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    15. Primmer, Eeva & Jokinen, Pekka & Blicharska, Malgorzata & Barton, David N. & Bugter, Rob & Potschin, Marion, 2015. "Governance of Ecosystem Services: A framework for empirical analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 158-166.
    16. van der Hoff, Richard & Rajão, Raoni & Leroy, Pieter, 2019. "Can REDD+ still become a market? Ruptured dependencies and market logics for emission reductions in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 121-129.
    17. Graves, A.R. & Morris, J. & Deeks, L.K. & Rickson, R.J. & Kibblewhite, M.G. & Harris, J.A. & Farewell, T.S. & Truckle, I., 2015. "The total costs of soil degradation in England and Wales," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 399-413.
    18. Vredin Johansson, Maria & Heldt, Tobias & Johansson, Per, 2006. "The effects of attitudes and personality traits on mode choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 507-525, July.
    19. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    20. Jason Allen & Robert Amano & David P. Byrne & Allan W. Gregory, 2009. "Canadian city housing prices and urban market segmentation," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(3), pages 1132-1149, August.

    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:ecoser:v:27:y:2017:i:pa:p:1-14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.