IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i10p1696-d930366.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecosystem Service Valuation for a Critical Biodiversity Area: Case of the Mphaphuli Community, South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Khangwelo Desmond Musetsho

    (Department of Environmental Sciences, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, University of South Africa, Florida Campus, Johannesburg 1710, South Africa)

  • Munyaradzi Chitakira

    (Department of Environmental Sciences, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, University of South Africa, Florida Campus, Johannesburg 1710, South Africa)

  • Abel Ramoelo

    (Department of Geography, Geoinformatics and Meteorology, Centre for Environmental Studies, University of Pretoria, Hatfield Campus, Pretoria 0083, South Africa)

Abstract

The study of ecosystem services and the valuation of their contribution to human wellbeing is gaining increasing interest among scientists and decision-makers. The setting of this study was a critical biodiversity area on a portion of land largely presided over by a traditional leadership structure on behalf of a relatively poor local community in South Africa. The study identified several ecosystem services and performed an economic valuation of these services, and their importance both locally and globally using the Co$ting Nature V3 tool. The study identified ecosystem services such as the regulation of air quality, regulation of natural hazards, and provision of water. The economic valuation was carried out for all identified ecosystem services, realised and potential. The total realised economic value of ecosystem services was found to be US$528,280,256.00, whereas hazard mitigation potential was found to be US$765,598,080.00 across the study area. Artisanal fisheries were the least valued ecosystem service at US$5577.54. The values of the ecosystem services differed across the eleven land use land cover classes. The outcomes of the study focused on a very local scale, which was a departure from other studies previously carried out in South Africa, which focused more on the identification and valuation of regional and national scale ecosystem services.

Suggested Citation

  • Khangwelo Desmond Musetsho & Munyaradzi Chitakira & Abel Ramoelo, 2022. "Ecosystem Service Valuation for a Critical Biodiversity Area: Case of the Mphaphuli Community, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:1696-:d:930366
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/10/1696/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/10/1696/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacobs, Sander & Dendoncker, Nicolas & Martín-López, Berta & Barton, David Nicholas & Gomez-Baggethun, Erik & Boeraeve, Fanny & McGrath, Francesca L. & Vierikko, Kati & Geneletti, Davide & Sevecke, Ka, 2016. "A new valuation school: Integrating diverse values of nature in resource and land use decisions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 213-220.
    2. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John & Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2015. "The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 51-58.
    3. Holden, Stein T. & Otsuka, Keijiro, 2014. "The roles of land tenure reforms and land markets in the context of population growth and land use intensification in Africa," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 88-97.
    4. Chenai Murata & Sukhmani Mantel & Chris de Wet & Anthony R Palmer, 2019. "Lay Knowledge of Ecosystem Services in Rural Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: Implications for Intervention Program Planning," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(02), pages 1-29, April.
    5. Adam P. Hejnowicz & Murray A. Rudd, 2017. "The Value Landscape in Ecosystem Services: Value, Value Wherefore Art Thou Value?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-34, May.
    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. Xiaoyuan Zhang & Kai Liu & Shudong Wang & Xueke Li, 2025. "Ecological Monitoring and Service Value Assessment of River–Lake Shores: A Case Study of the Huanggang and Taihu Segments of the Yangtze River," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-18, 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. Schmidt, Stefan & Seppelt, Ralf, 2018. "Information content of global ecosystem service databases and their suitability for decision advice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 22-40.
    2. Gunton, Richard M. & Hejnowicz, Adam P. & Basden, Andrew & van Asperen, Eline N. & Christie, Ian & Hanson, David R. & Hartley, Sue E., 2022. "Valuing beyond economics: A pluralistic evaluation framework for participatory policymaking," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Nekane Castillo-Eguskitza & María F. Schmitz & Miren Onaindia & Alejandro J. Rescia, 2019. "Linking Biophysical and Economic Assessments of Ecosystem Services for a Social–Ecological Approach to Conservation Planning: Application in a Biosphere Reserve (Biscay, Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, May.
    4. 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).
    5. Folkersen, Maja Vinde, 2018. "Ecosystem valuation: Changing discourse in a time of climate change," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 1-12.
    6. Adam Jadhav & Sharolyn Anderson & Michael J. B. Dyer & Paul C. Sutton, 2017. "Revisiting Ecosystem Services: Assessment and Valuation as Starting Points for Environmental Politics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-20, September.
    7. Meya, Jasper N. & Drupp, Moritz A. & Hanley, Nick, 2021. "Testing structural benefit transfer: The role of income inequality," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    8. Biddulph, Robin, 2018. "The 1999 Tanzania land acts as a community lands approach: A review of research into their implementation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 48-56.
    9. repec:ags:ijag24:346816 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    11. Giger, Markus & Mutea, Emily & Kiteme, Boniface & Eckert, Sandra & Anseeuw, Ward & Zaehringer, Julie G., 2020. "Large agricultural investments in Kenya’s Nanyuki Area: Inventory and analysis of business models," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    12. Shunji Oniki & Melaku Berhe & Teklay Negash, 2020. "Role of Social Norms in Natural Resource Management: The Case of the Communal Land Distribution Program in Northern Ethiopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    13. Palola, Pirta & Bailey, Richard & Wedding, Lisa, 2022. "A novel framework to operationalise value-pluralism in environmental valuation: Environmental value functions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    14. Xiuling Ding & Qian Lu & Lipeng Li & Apurbo Sarkar & Hua Li, 2023. "Does Labor Transfer Improve Farmers’ Willingness to Withdraw from Farming?—A Bivariate Probit Modeling Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, August.
    15. Sironen, Susanna & Primmer, Eeva & Leskinen, Pekka & Similä, Jukka & Punttila, Pekka, 2020. "Context sensitive policy instruments: A multi-criteria decision analysis for safeguarding forest habitats in Southwestern Finland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    16. Rosalie Arendt & Till M. Bachmann & Masaharu Motoshita & Vanessa Bach & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2020. "Comparison of Different Monetization Methods in LCA: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-39, December.
    17. Jasper N. Meya, 2018. "Environmental Inequality and Economic Valuation," Working Papers V-416-18, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Dec 2018.
    18. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Krause, T. & Marbà, N., 2018. "The use of sociocultural valuation in sustainable environmental management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 158-167.
    19. Robert Peter Ndugwa & Clinton Kubondo Omusula, 2025. "Institutional Frameworks, Policies, and Land Data: Insights from Monitoring Land Governance and Tenure Security in the Context of Sustainable Development Goals in Kenya, Rwanda, Uganda, and Zambia," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-24, April.
    20. Sofía Monroy-Sais & Eduardo García-Frapolli & Francisco Mora & Margaret Skutsch & Alejandro Casas & Peter Rijnaldus Wilhelmus Gerritsen & David González-Jiménez, 2018. "Exploring How Land Tenure Affects Farmers’ Landscape Values: Evidence from a Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
    21. Hélène Barbé & Nathalie Frascaria-Lacoste, 2021. "Integrating Ecology into Land Planning and Development: Between Disillusionment and Hope, Questioning the Relevance and Implementation of the Mitigation Hierarchy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.

    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:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:10:p:1696-:d:930366. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.