Search

The European Union (EU) Horizon 2020 Coordination and Support Action ESMERALDA aimed at developing guidance and a flexible methodology for Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) to support the EU member states in the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy's Target 2 Action 5. ESMERALDA's key tasks included network creation, stakeholder engagement, enhancing ecosystem services mapping and assessment methods across various spatial scales and value domains, work in case studies and support of EU member states in MAES implementation. Thus ESMERALDA aimed at integrating various project outcomes around four major strands: i) Networking, ii) Policy, iii) Research and iv) Application. The objective was to provide guidance for integrated ecosystem service mapping and assessment that can be used for sustainable decision-making in policy, business, society, practice and science at EU, national and regional levels. This article presents the overall ESMERALDA approach of integrating the above-mentioned project components and outcomes and provides an overview of how the enhanced methods were applied and how they can be used to support MAES implementation in the EU member states. Experiences with implementing such a large pan-European Coordination and Support Action in the context of EU policy are discussed and recommendations for future actions are given.

With a population of 34 million and an extremely high reliance on charcoal, Tanzania is a classic example of the social and environmental risks faced by many developing countries. About 85% of the total urban population uses charcoal for household cooking and energy provision for small and medium enterprises (Sawe 2004). In 1992 the total amount of charcoal consumed nationwide was estimated to be about 1.2 million tons (Sawe 2004). In 2002, the charcoal business generated revenues of more than 200 billion TShs (US$ 200 million), with more than 70 000 people from rural and urban areas employed in the industry (TaTEDO 2002b). Dar es Salaam, Tanzania’s largest city, accounts for more than 50% of all charcoal consumed in the country. The charcoal sector is far from sustainable. The forest resources that the industry is relying on are disappearing rapidly and the productivity of the sector has not seen any improvement either. The charcoal sector in Tanzania is operating economically, socially and environmentally in a suboptimal manner. However, solutions that safeguard the charcoal sector’s future are not straightforward.

Energy consumption by households plays an important part in the creation of greenhouse gasses and thus contributes to climate change. Decreasing this consumption can thus help to reduce emissions. In this article, we look at means to assist consumers in controlling their energy use, by giving them customized feedback on their electricity meter readouts. During a one-month test, customers of Dutch energy utility Greenchoice could upload their electricity meter readouts and receive information to monitor their consumption. Feedback on consumption is thought to stimulate consumers to use less energy. The results of the experiment support this theory, as participating customers consumed 6-7 percentage points less electricity compared to non-participants.

Mexico City has for years experienced high levels of ozone and particulate air pollution. In 1995-99 the entire population of the Mexico City metropolitan area was exposed to annual average concentrations of fine particulate pollution (particulates with a diameter of less than 10micrometers, or PM10) exceeding 50 micrograms per cubic meter, the annual average standard in both Mexico and the United States. Two million people were exposed to annual average PM10 levels of more than 75 micrograms per cubic meter. The daily maximum one-hour ozone standard was exceeded at least 300 days a year. The Mexico Air Quality Management Team documents population-weighted exposures to ozone and PM10 between 1995 and 1999, project exposures in 2010, and computes the value of four scenarios for 2010: A 10 percent reduction in PM10 and ozone. A 20 percent reduction in PM10 and ozone. Achievement of ambient air quality standards across the metropolitan area. A 68 percent reduction in ozone and a 47 percent reduction in PM10 across the metropolitan area. The authors calculate the health benefits of reducing ozone and PM10 for each scenario using dose-response functions from the peer-reviewed literature. They value cases of morbidity and premature mortality avoided using three approaches: Cost of illness and forgone earnings only (low estimate). Cost of illness, forgone earnings, and willingness to pay for avoided morbidity (central case estimate). Cost of illness, forgone earnings, willingness to pay for avoided morbidity, and willingness to pay for avoided mortality (high estimate). The results suggest that the benefits of a 10 percent reduction in ozone and PM10 in 2010 are about $760 million (in 1999 U.S. dollars) annually in the central case. The benefits of a 20 percent reduction in ozone and PM10 are about $1.49 billion annually. In each case the benefits of reducing ozone amount to about 15 percent of the total benefits. By estimating the magnitude of the benefits from air pollution control, the authors provide motivation for examining specific policies that could achieve the air pollution reductions that they value. They also provide unit values for the benefits from reductions in ambient air pollution (for example, per microgram of PM10) that could be used as inputs into a full cost-benefit analysisof air pollution control strategies.

Because ocean acidification has only recently been recognized as a problem caused by CO2 emissions, impact studies are still rare and estimates of the economic impact are absent. This paper estimates the economic impact of ocean acidification on coral reefs which are generally considered to be economically as well as ecologically important ecosystems. First, we conduct an impact assessment in which atmospheric concentration of CO2 is linked to ocean acidity causing coral reef area loss. Next, a meta-analytic value transfer is applied to determine the economic value of coral reefs around the world. Finally, these two analyses are combined to estimate the economic impact of ocean acidification on coral reefs for the four IPCC marker scenarios. We find that the annual economic impact rapidly escalates over time, because the scenarios have rapid economic growth in the relevant countries and coral reefs are a luxury good. Nonetheless, the annual value in 2100 in still only a fraction of total income, one order of magnitude smaller than the previously estimated impact of climate change. Although the estimated impact is uncertain, the estimated confidence interval spans one order of magnitude only. Future research should seek to extend the estimates presented here to other impacts of ocean acidification and investigate the implications of our findings for climate policy.