Topic: ecosystem services

ADVISORY: WRI's Stories to Watch 2013

James Anderson — Thu, 20 Dec 2012 14:03:26 -0500

WRI will host its 10th annual Stories to Watch event on Tuesday, January 15, 2013, at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. Dr. Andrew Steer, WRI’s President & CEO, will present insights into the big environmental and international development trends and events that will affect people and the planet in 2013.

Topics will likely include: What will the Obama Administration do to address climate and energy? How will China’s new leadership advance its goal of “ecological progress”? What countries will emerge on the forefront of sustainability? And, how will financial constraints impact businesses seeking to shift to a more sustainable pathway?

A continental breakfast will be served.

WHAT
World Resources Institute’s Stories to Watch 2013

WHO
Dr. Andrew Steer, President & CEO, World Resources Institute.

Dr. Steer is a leading expert on economic development and environmental issues. He has three decades of experience working on international development and on the front lines in Asia and Africa, and at a senior level in international policy roles.

WHERE
National Press Club
Holeman Lounge
529 14th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20045

CALL-IN INFO
USA (Toll Free): (866) 803-2143
International (Toll): + 1 (210) 795-1098

Access code: “WRI”

WHEN
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
9:00 - 10:30 a.m. ET

Use #STW2013 on Twitter.

RSVP required to press@wri.org

ADVISORY: WRI Experts to Speak at Annual Conference on Ecosystem Services in Ft Lauderdale

James Anderson — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 17:11:03 -0500

Experts from the World Resources Institute will be joining leaders from business, government, and environment communities at the annual ACES and Ecosystems Markets 2012 Summit. The summit will take place from December 10 – 14 in Ft. Lauderdale, FL.

The goal of the summit is advance ecosystem services science and practice in conservation, restoration, resource management, and development decisions. It is being organized by the University of Florida and sponsored by the U.S. EPA, U.S. Forest Service, American Forest Foundation, World Resources Institute, and others.

WRI experts will discuss ecosystems-for-water programs, coastal ecosystem evaluations in the Caribbean, and processes for incorporating ecosystem services into public and private decision making.

Ecosystem goods and services – like freshwater, fiber, food, flood control, water purification and waste treatment – provide important benefits to business and society. Improving how ecosystem services are incorporated into decision making impacts ecosystems and the quantity, quality and profitability of the benefits they provide.

Full Agenda: http://www.conference.ifas.ufl.edu/aces/glance.html

WRI Experts available for interviews:

Craig Hanson, Director, People and Ecosystems Program

Janet Ranganathan, Vice President, Science and Research

Lauretta Burke, Senior Associate, Coral Reefs Initiative

Todd Gartner, Senior Associate, Conservation Incentives and Markets

For more information, please contact:
James Anderson, Press Officer, World Resources Institute, janderson@wri.org, (202) 729-7608

Influence of Coastal Economic Valuations in the Caribbean: Enabling Conditions and Lessons Learned

Sarah Parsons — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 13:55:24 -0500

Executive Summary

Across the Caribbean, national economies are heavily dependent on coastal ecosystem services. Coral reefs, mangroves, and other coastal ecosystems provide fish habitat, attract tourists, and protect shorelines from storm damage. However, coastal habitats continue to degrade due to local and global pressures. For example, more than 75 percent of the Caribbean’s coral reefs are currently threatened by human activities. These threats to coastal ecosystems stem from both a lack of awareness of the benefits these ecosystems provide and the costs of insufficient protection, and a lack of political will to protect and sustainably manage these ecosystems. Many of the activities that damage coastal ecosystems arise from shortsighted and poorly informed decisions that fail to take long-term ecosystem values and the full range of benefits from coastal ecosystem services into account.

Economic valuation can contribute to better informed and more holistic decision making about resource use and identify opportunities for effective conservation. Over the past 30 years, the economic valuation literature on the Caribbean’s coastal and ocean resources has increased substantially. More than 200 coastal economic valuation studies of the monetary value of marine ecosystem goods and services in the Caribbean currently exist. However, despite this wealth of valuation studies and estimates, it is not clear whether these efforts have had a meaningful impact on policy or decision making concerning the management and use of these valuable natural resources; to date, there has been no assessment to address this critical question. It is also not immediately clear why some valuations have been more influential than others.

To get a more complete picture of the influence of past coastal valuations in the Caribbean, and to identify the key “enabling conditions” for valuations to influence policy, management, or investment decisions, the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership (MESP) conducted semi-structured interviews with more than thirty marine conservation and valuation experts. Several of these interviews took place in the five countries where WRI had conducted coastal valuations. WRI also reviewed past valuation studies in the Caribbean that informants identified as influential. The findings of this review are based on expert opinion and documented cases of influence. Given the large number of total valuations and the difficulty of tracking influence, this review is not exhaustive. This paper identifies a number of variables that likely influence policy, management, and investment outcomes; however, it does not identify the extent to which each variable contributes to influence. We encourage future research on this topic.

Overall, we found that although valuation studies have helped raise awareness about the economic importance of coastal ecosystems in the Caribbean, few have actually had a positive influence on conservation and management- oriented policy, legislation, or investment in the region. We identified only 13 valuation studies that have influenced policy. For example, valuation helped to convince the government of St. Maarten to establish the country’s first national marine park, and the government of Belize to legally ban bottom trawling. Still, these success stories highlight the potential for economic valuation to have influence. We were able to draw out key contextual, procedural, and methodological conditions that likely led to success.

The elements increasing the likelihood of policy influence included:

a clear policy question;
local demand for valuation;
strong local partnerships and stakeholder engagement;
good governance with high transparency;
opportunities for revenue-raising;
effective communications and access to decision makers and/or media; and
a clear presentation of methods, assumptions, and limitations.

This analysis suggests that getting the methodology right—a principal concern of economists—is only part of the equation. Valuation practitioners who aspire to achieve impact must also consider wider contextual and procedural factors (such as governance and stakeholder engagement) when assessing the likelihood that their valuation will be influential. Furthermore, absolute accuracy is not always essential, as many stakeholders use valuation results as a ballpark figure to guide decision making. For this reason, valuation should be done on a scale appropriate to the policy question, minimizing costs as far as possible. More precise valuation may be necessary for questions relating to fees and taxes. In all cases, clear presentation of methods, assumptions, and limitations is critical in order to address critiques and legitimize results.

In the Caribbean, interest in ecosystem valuation to inform smart choices about coastal resource conservation and management and associated land use continues to grow. However, based on the results of this analysis, it is clear that valuation practitioners need to do much more to ensure that valuation studies have greater influence. In order to achieve more meaningful impacts, greater effort is necessary to strategically choose, design, and execute valuation studies; communicate valuation results to target audiences; and share successes and failures of influence with other practitioners. We conclude with next steps for building on this analysis, including:

Conduct further consultations with experts and decision makers in the Caribbean and beyond to enlarge the catalog of valuation success stories, and explore additional opportunities for qualitative and quantitative analysis of trends and causality.
Develop standardized approaches to monitor and evaluate the influence of coastal valuations.
Research the “return on investment” of economic valuation for coastal conservation and management in relation to other conservation tools.

The results of this review will inform WRI and our partners’ efforts to produce a standardized framework for economic valuation of coastal ecosystems in the Caribbean. A standardized valuation framework would help produce comparable and credible values across the Caribbean, legitimizing their use among decision makers and increasing their uptake. Drawing from this review, the framework will also contain advice on how to make future economic valuations as influential as possible, so they can realize their potential to catalyze positive changes in policy, management, and investment—helping both to restore the productivity and increase the economic contributions of coastal resources, while safeguarding the Caribbean’s valuable coastal and marine resources for future generations.

WRI Annual Report 2011-2012

Sarah Parsons — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 14:20:00 -0400

Managing Land for Mining and Conservation in the Democratic Republic of Congo

Peter Veit — Thu, 09 Aug 2012 13:46:41 -0400

This paper originally appeared on the Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group website. The full text of the paper is available here.

Summary

With significant areas of overlapping high biodiversity resources and mineral wealth, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) faces increasing pressure from competing uses of land widely considered incompatible. This policy paper reviews the rise of commercial mining and the mining concessions afforded ostensibly at the expense of conservation efforts where protected areas and mining permits overlap. The paper highlights the need for the DRC to review and harmonize multiple and often contradictory laws, strengthen land use laws, and build implemetation and enforcement capacity.

Read the full paper

Reefs at Risk Revisited in the Coral Triangle

Sarah Parsons — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 10:53:54 -0400

Summary: Reefs at Risk Revisited in the Coral Triangle

Download the 2011 global analysis of threats to coral reefs, Reefs at Risk Revisited

The World Resources Institute produced the report in close collaboration with the USAID-funded Coral Triangle Support Partnership (CTSP). Reefs at Risk Revisited in the Coral Triangle was adapted from WRI’s 2011 global analysis of threats to coral reefs, Reefs at Risk Revisited, and supplemented with more recent and detailed data for the Coral Triangle region.

Threats to coral reefs in the Coral Triangle are much higher than the global average. More than 85 percent of reefs within the Coral Triangle Region are currently threatened by local stressors (such as overfishing, pollution, and coastal development), which is substantially higher than the global average of 60 percent. Nearly 45 percent are at high or very high threat levels. When the influence of recent thermal stress and coral bleaching is combined with these local threats, the percent of reefs rated as threatened increases to more than 90 percent, which is substantially greater than the global average of 75 percent.

Reefs at Risk Revisited in the Coral Triangle studies current and future threats to the Coral Triangle’s reefs, evaluates social and economic vulnerability to reef degradation and loss throughout the six countries, examines reef management initiatives, and identifies solutions to help safeguard reefs.

ADVISORY: New Report Outlines Key Steps to Reduce Poverty in a Green Economy

Michael Oko — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 16:21:48 -0400

Despite global development progress, some 1.3 billion people are living on less than US $1.25 per day, with 900 million facing hunger. Efforts to tackle poverty are being compounded by the continued degradation of ecosystems and the effects of climate change, to which poor communities are often most vulnerable.

A new report from the Poverty-Environment Partnership, a network of bilateral aid agencies, development banks, UN agencies and international NGOs, will set out the major opportunities for reducing poverty, promoting economic growth and ensuring environmental sustainability through the transition to a green economy.

Using case studies primarily from developing countries, Building an Inclusive Green Economy for All, will outline the key building blocks towards creating a shared agenda for more inclusive and sustainable human development.

Developing and middle-income countries are home to many growth industries such as ecotourism and organic agriculture. The report will demonstrate how strategic investments in these sectors, and in the ecosystem services that account for up to 89 percent of the so-called ‘GDP of the poor’, can reduce social inequity, boost employment and promote environmental sustainability.

Members of the Poverty-Environment Partnership, including the World Resources Institute and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), will present the main findings of the report.

For more information on the Poverty-Environment Partnership, visit: http://www.povertyenvironment.net/pep

WHAT
Report launch on green economy at Rio+20

WHO
Achim Steiner, Executive Director, UNEP
Kitty van der Heijden, Ambassador for Sustainable Development, Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Netherlands
Peter Hazlewood, Director of Ecosystems & Development, World Resources Institute, and a lead author of the report

DATE
Thursday, June 14, 2012

TIME
1:00 - 1:30 p.m. BRT (12:00 - 12:30 p.m. EDT)

WHERE
UN Media Centre, Pavilion 3, Rio Centro
Rio de Janeiro

For more information, contact:

Nick Nuttall, UNEP Spokesperson; Tel: +55 11 6593 8058 or +254 733 632755, E-mail: nick.nuttall@unep.org

Michael Oko, Media Director, World Resources Institute; Tel: +(202) 246-9269, E-mail: moko@wri.org

Parceria viabiliza inclusão de serviços ecossistêmicos nos planos de negócios das empresas

James Anderson — Thu, 10 May 2012 14:27:43 -0400

Ver texto em Português OR Read text in English here

Um grupo de empresas líderes brasileiras deu início hoje a uma parceria para incorporar serviços ecossistêmicos em suas estratégias de negócios. A Parceria Empresarial pelos Serviços Ecossistêmicos (PESE) representa um grande esforço para incluir a biodiversidade e os serviços ecossistêmicos na estratégia de negócios das empresas e melhorar o desempenho corporativo no Brasil, país sede da Conferência das Nações Unidas sobre Desenvolvimento Sustentável (Rio+20), no próximo mês.

A ideia é desenvolver estratégias que aliem o desempenho empresarial à gestão sustentável dos ecossistemas. Empresas líderes, como Anglo American, Grupo André Maggi, PepsiCo, Vale, Votorantim e Wal-Mart, estão entre as primeiras companhias participantes desta iniciativa. A parceria é coordenada pelo Conselho Empresarial Brasileiro para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável (CEBDS), Centro de Estudos em Sustentabilidade da Fundação Getúlio Vargas (GVces) e World Resources Institute (WRI), com apoio da Agência dos Estados Unidos para o Desenvolvimento Internacional (USAID).

“A indústria depende dos serviços ecossistêmicos, como produção de alimentos, água doce e limpa, um clima estável, e proteção contra riscos naturais como enchentes, entre outros benefícios,” explicou Craig Hanson, diretor do Programa de Pessoas e Ecossistemas do WRI. “A PESE irá capacitar as companhias brasileiras a gerenciar proativamente riscos e oportunidades nos negócios, decorrentes de suas dependências e impactos sobre os serviços ecossistêmicos.”

A parceria irá impulsionar novas soluções de negócios em meio à larga degradação dos ecossistemas através da aplicação local da Corporate Ecosystem Services Review (ESR), ou Revisão Corporativa dos Serviços Ecossistêmicos, metodologia líder de avaliação de serviços ecossistêmicos, desenvolvida pelo WRI, em cooperação com o World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD) e o Meridian Institute. Aplicando a ESR, cada empresa parceira da PESE vai desenvolver estratégias para melhor competir e ter sucesso em um mundo que cada vez mais esbarra nos limites naturais dos ecossistemas.

“As companhias que já utilizam a ESR têm sido capazes de descobrir novas estratégias rentáveis enquanto protegem e restauram os ecossistemas. Nosso objetivo é replicar esse sucesso no Brasil,” disse Marina Grossi, presidente do CEBDS (Conselho Empresarial Brasileiro para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável).

Um exemplo de uma companhia que registrou resultados positivos a partir do gerenciamento consciente dos escossistemas em que opera é a Mondi, maior companhia europeia de papel e celulose. A Mondi conduziu a ESR em três plantações de papel na África do Sul, em 2008. A ESR ressaltou estratégias que a companhia poderia implementar para aumentar o acesso à água doce, melhorando as bacias hidrográficas regionais, estreitando relações com a comunidade local e reduzindo custos operacionais.

Aproximadamente 300 empresas no mundo já implementaram a ESR, desde 2008. Conforme essa metodologia ganha força no Brasil, WRI, CEBDS e GVces promoverão assistência técnica e consultoria às empresas parceiras, com o objetivo de assegurar a qualidade e eficiência na aplicação da ESR.

Os parceiros também têm como objetivo criar uma rede de empresas ativas na gestão de serviços ecossistêmicos no Brasil, para comunicar resultados, contribuir com estudos de casos e intensificar as estratégias de sucesso. “Assim como a chegada do GHG Protocol há cinco anos, o lançamento da PESE hoje representa um passo adicional na gestão de serviços ecossistêmicos no ambiente empresarial brasileiro” explicou Mario Monzoni, coordenador do GVces.

O evento de lançamento da PESE aconteceu no dia 10 de maio de 2012, das 17h às 18h, no Jardim Botânico no Rio de Janeiro – RJ.

Para saber mais sobre a PESE, acesse o site http://insights.wri.org/pese

A realização da PESE é possibilitada pelo apoio generoso do povo norte-americano, por meio da Agência dos Estados Unidos para o Desenvolvimento Internacional (USAID). Seu conteúdo é de responsabilidade do WRI, GVces e CEBDS, e não reflete necessariamente a posição da USAID ou do Governo dos Estados Unidos.

Contact (in English)
World Resources Institute
James Anderson; Janderson@wri.org; +1 (202) 729 7600

Contato (em português)
GWA Comunicação Integrada
Kelly Souza; kelly.souza@gwacom.com; (11) 6620-2234

Contato (CEBDS)
In Press Porter Novelli
Tatiana Wolff; tatiana.wolff@inpresspni.com.br; (21) 3723-8095
Suzana Ribeiro; suzana.ribeiro@inpresspni.com.br; (21) 3723-8117

Corporate Leaders and NGOs Form New Partnership to Protect Ecosystems in Brazil

James Anderson — Thu, 10 May 2012 12:47:01 -0400

Read in English below OR Ver texto em Português

A group of leading companies and non-governmental organizations have embarked on a new partnership in Brazil today to incorporate ecosystem services into business strategies. The Parceria Empresarial pelos Serviços Ecossistêmicos (PESE), or Brazilian Business and Ecosystem Services Partnership, represents a major effort to demonstrate how biodiversity and ecosystem services can enhance corporate performance in Brazil, home of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio +20) next month.

The goal is to develop strategies that align business performance to the sustainable management of ecosystems. Leading companies, such as Anglo American, Grupo André Maggi, PepsiCo, Vale, Votorantim and Wal-Mart, are among the first companies participating in this initiative. The partnership was organized by the Brazilian Business Council for Sustainable Development (CEBDS), the Center for Sustainability Studies at the Getulio Vargas Foundation (GVces), and the World Resources Institute, with support from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

“Industry relies on ecosystem services, such as food production, clean water, a stable climate, protection from natural hazards, and more,” explained Craig Hanson, Director of the People and Ecosystems Program at WRI. “PESE will empower Brazilian companies to manage business risks and opportunities arising from their dependence and impacts on ecosystem services.”

The partnership will drive new business solutions to ecosystem degradation largely through local application of the Corporate Ecosystem Services Review (ESR), the leading assessment methodology developed by WRI in cooperation with the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the Meridian Institute. By applying the ESR, corporate partners will develop strategies to better compete and succeed in a world that is pushing against natural limits.

“Using the ESR, companies have been able to uncover new profitable strategies while protecting and restoring ecosystems. Our goal is to replicate these successes in Brazil,” said Marina Grossi, President of CEBDS.

One example of a company that has already experienced positive results from managing the ecosystems in which it operates is Mondi, Europe’s largest paper and pulp company. In 2008, Mondi conducted an ESR in three of its paper plantations in South Africa. The ESR highlighted strategies the company could implement to increase access to freshwater while improving regional watershed health, strengthening its relationship with local communities, and reducing operational costs.

An estimated 300 companies have already implemented the ESR worldwide since 2008. As this method gains traction in Brazil, WRI, CEBDS, and GVces will provide technical assistance and advice to corporate partners in order to enhance the quality and efficiency of applying the ESR.

The partners also aim to create a network of companies active in the management of ecosystem services in Brazil, in order to communicate results, contribute new case studies, and scale up successful strategies.

“As with the arrival of the GHG Protocol five years ago, the launch of PESE today represents another step towards sustainability for Brazilian business,” explained Mario Monzoni GVces coordinator.

Editor’s Note:

The PESE launch event will take place on May 10, 2012, from 5:00pm to 6:00pm at the Botanical Garden in Rio de Janeiro.

For more information, visit: http://insights.wri.org/pese

PESE is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of WRI, GVces, and CEBDS and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

Contact (in English)
World Resources Institute James Anderson; Janderson@wri.org; +1 (202) 729 7600

Contato (em português)
GWA Comunicação Integrada Kelly Souza; kelly.souza@gwacom.com; (11) 6620-2234

Contato (CEBDS)
In Press Porter Novelli
Tatiana Wolff; tatiana.wolff@inpresspni.com.br; (21) 3723-8095
Suzana Ribeiro; suzana.ribeiro@inpresspni.com.br; (21) 3723-8117

Insights from the Field: Forests for Water

Kevin Lustig — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 10:56:29 -0500

Summary

In the Neuse River Basin in North Carolina, WRI is working with partners to identify beneficiaries and their water-related dependencies. We learned that clear documentation of the risks that beneficiaries face from water pollution, drought, and watershed degradation will help jump-start their participation in emerging PWS programs.
In the Sebago Lake Watershed in Maine, WRI is finalizing a methodology for “green-gray” analysis that will provide beneficiaries a way to identify cost-effective green infrastructure solutions to water infrastructure demands of the 21st century. Green infrastructure comprises all natural, seminatural and artificial networks of multifunctional ecological systems within, around, and between urban areas at all spatial scales. We learned that, to convince public investment managers to invest in green rather than gray, it is important to make the financial and business case using the same basic methodologies that are used for calculating the costs and benefits of conventional gray approaches.
WRI is also working to develop PWS programs that help the city of Raleigh meet streetscape, conservation development, tree conservation, storm water management, and water quality goals contained in its Unified Development Ordinance in a least cost manner. We learned that market-based solutions like PWS can play a large role in land-use planning processes and that these processes may represent a large untapped demand driver for PWS programs throughout the South.

Insights from the Field: Forests for Species and Habitat

Kevin Lustig — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:22:56 -0500

Summary

Market-based mechanisms focused on candidate species conservation, also known as pre-compliance conservation, can provide preemptive and cost-effective interventions prior to a species becoming listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
To advance candidate conservation incentive programs, the World Resources Institute (WRI) is working with its partners to build demand, supply, and transactional infrastructure through a pilot initiative in the nonfederally listed range of the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) in the southern forests of the United States.
This innovative approach strives to create a scalable, voluntary, and science-based marketplace where conservation credits can be bought and sold prior to the enactment of a regulatory requirement, resulting in additional acres of southeastern forests being managed for habitat and species conservation.
Through this pilot initiative, landowners with southern pine forests capable of supporting healthy populations of the imperiled gopher tortoise can receive payments to conserve and manage their forests. These payments and stewardship activities are designed to offset habitat disturbance elsewhere and may help preclude the species from becoming listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA.
A candidate conservation marketplace may allow federal and private project developers to manage their environmental risk by investing in conservation on private lands in return for regulatory certainty from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). This process can help these stakeholders avoid the potential for costly project development delays and litigation since it front-loads much of the ESA review process and gives entities greater regulatory certainty.
Interest in candidate conservation incentive programs is rapidly growing in the private, public, and nongovernmental organization sectors as changes in land use across the country spark new challenges in balancing ecosystem management with residential and commercial development, national security, energy infrastructure, and climate change.

Nature in Performance:Integrating Ecosystem Services into Business Performance Systems

Kevin Lustig — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:37:16 -0500

Executive Summary

In 2008, the World Resources Institute (WRI), in collaboration with the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the Meridian Institute, published the Corporate Ecosystem Services Review (ESR). The ESR is a structured method that helps managers develop strategies to address business risks and capture opportunities arising from their company’s dependence and impact on ecosystems.

Over the course of the past few years, a number of business managers have inquired about how to integrate the ESR or, more fundamentally, considerations of ecosystem services into their existing business performance systems. Business performance systems are the range of tools, methods, techniques, approaches, and practices used by managers to guide, measure, monitor, and improve corporate performance. Examples include corporate strategy development procedures, product design guidelines, environmental management systems, environmental impact assessments, environmental and social impact assessments, environmental audits, and sustainability reporting.

Most companies already have their own established business performance systems. The question managers are now asking is “How can considerations about ecosystem services and their impacts on the bottom line be integrated into our existing systems?” This publication tackles this and a series of related questions. Key messages include:

Ecosystems provide businesses—as well as people and communities—with a wide range of benefits known as ecosystem services. Ecosystem services matter to companies because they are intimately linked in two fundamental ways. First, businesses depend upon ecosystems and the services ecosystems provide. Second, businesses impact ecosystems and the services ecosystems provide. These two linkages can pose a number of operational, regulatory/legal, reputational, market, or financing risks and opportunities to a company.
Basic principles that guide how to integrate ecosystem service considerations into business performance systems, regardless of the system, include: (1) consider all ecosystem services; (2) assess dependence; (3) identify opportunities; (4) look beyond the company boundaries; (5) engage stakeholders and experts; and (6) manage with incomplete data.
Ecosystem service considerations are relevant to a variety of business performance systems, including corporate strategy development processes, product design guidelines and life-cycle assessments, environmental and social impact assessments, environmental management systems, corporate sustainability reporting, and investment screening processes.
The ISO 14001 guidance on environmental management systems contains at least four components into which ecosystem service considerations could be readily inserted: (1) environmental policy, (2) aspects review, (3) objectives and targets, and (4) management review.
The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) reporting framework contains at least four guidance components into which ecosystem service considerations could be readily inserted: (1) materiality, (2) sustainability context, (3) organizational profile and strategy, and (4) performance indicators.
For further guidance and reference, a number of scientific assessments, business tools, and working groups exist and can help business managers integrate ecosystem services into their business performance systems.

The Corporate Ecosystem Services Review: Guidelines for Identifying Business Risks & Opportunities Arising from Ecosystem Change

Suzanne Ozment — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 16:32:54 -0500

Summary

Ecosystems provide businesses with numerous benefits or “ecosystem services.” Forests supply timber and wood fiber, purify water, regulate climate, and yield genetic resources. River systems provide freshwater, power, and recreation. Coastal wetlands filter waste, mitigate floods, and serve as nurseries for commercial fisheries.

However, human activities are rapidly degrading these and other ecosystems. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment— the largest audit ever conducted of the condition and trends in the world’s ecosystems—found that ecosystems have declined more rapidly and extensively over the past 50 years than at any other comparable time in human history. In fact, 15 of the 24 ecosystem services evaluated have degraded over the past half century. The Assessment projected further declines over coming decades, particularly in light of population growth, economic expansion, and global climate change. Left unchecked, this degradation could jeopardize future economic well-being, creating new winners and losers within the business community.

Ecosystem degradation is highly relevant to business because companies not only impact ecosystems and the services they provide but also depend on them. Ecosystem degradation, therefore, can pose a number of risks to corporate performance as well as create new business opportunities. Types of risks and opportunities include:

Operational

Risks such as higher costs for freshwater due to scarcity, lower output for hydroelectric facilities due to siltation, or disruptions to coastal businesses due to flooding
Opportunities such as increasing water-use efficiency or building an on-site wetland to circumvent the need for new water treatment infrastructure

Regulatory and legal

Risks such as new fines, new user fees, government regulations, or lawsuits by local communities that lose ecosystem services due to corporate activities
Opportunities such as engaging governments to develop policies and incentives to protect or restore ecosystems that provide services a company needs

Reputational

Risks such as retail companies being targeted by nongovernmental organization campaigns for purchasing wood or paper from sensitive forests or banks facing similar protests due to investments that degrade pristine ecosystems
Opportunities such as implementing and communicating sustainable purchasing, operational, or investment practices in order to differentiate corporate brands

Market and product

Risks such as customers switching to suppliers that offer eco-certified products or governments implementing new sustainable procurement policies
Opportunities such as launching new products and services that reduce customer impacts on ecosystems, participating in emerging markets for carbon sequestration and watershed protection, capturing new revenue streams from company-owned natural assets, and offering eco-labeled wood, seafood, produce, and other products

Financing

Risks such as banks implementing more rigorous lending requirements for corporate loans
Opportunities such as banks offering more favorable loan terms or investors taking positions in companies supplying products and services that improve resourceuse efficiency or restore degraded ecosystems.

Unfortunately, companies often fail to make the connection between the health of ecosystems and the business bottom line. Many companies are not fully aware of the extent of their dependence and impact on ecosystems and the possible ramifications. Likewise, environmental management systems and environmental due diligence tools are often not fully attuned to the risks and opportunities arising from the degradation and use of ecosystem services. For instance, many tools are more suited to handle “traditional” issues of pollution and natural resource consumption. Most focus on environmental impacts, not dependence. Furthermore, they typically focus on risks, not business opportunities. As a result, companies may be caught unprepared or miss new sources of revenue associated with ecosystem change.

The Corporate Ecosystem Services Review (ESR) is designed to address these gaps. It consists of a structured methodology that helps managers proactively develop strategies to manage business risks and opportunities arising from their company’s dependence and impact on ecosystems. It is a tool for strategy development, not just for environmental assessment. Businesses can either conduct an Ecosystem Services Review as a stand-alone process or integrate it into their existing environmental management systems. In both cases, the methodology can complement and augment the environmental due diligence tools companies already use.

The Ecosystem Services Review can provide value to businesses in industries that directly interact with ecosystems such as agriculture, beverages, water services, forestry, electricity, oil, gas, mining, and tourism. It is also relevant to sectors such as general retail, healthcare, consulting, financial services, and others to the degree that their suppliers or customers interact directly with ecosystems. General retailers, for example, may face reputational or market risks if some of their suppliers are responsible for degrading ecosystems and the services they provide.

This publication describes the five steps for performing an Ecosystem Services Review. It provides an analytical framework, case examples, and helpful suggestions for each step. It concludes by highlighting a number of resources managers can use when conducting an ESR, including a “dependence and impact assessment” spreadsheet, scientific reports, economic valuation approaches, and other issue-specific tools.

As of 2012, an estimated 300 companies have used the Ecosystem Services Review. In addition, complementary tools and guidance now exist to help companies more fully assess business risks and opportunities emerging from ecosystem change. For example, in 2011 the World Business Council for Sustainable Development released the Guide to Corporate Ecosystem Valuation (CEV), which provides information on how to quantitatively, or in some cases monetarily, assess risks and opportunities related to ecosystem services. CEV can therefore be a logical next step after undertaking an ESR. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (2010) highlighted new examples of the linkages between business and ecosystem services. The ESR remains a fundamental starting point for companies to assess business risks and opportunities related to ecosystem change.

Global degradation of ecosystems and the services they provide threatens to alter the landscape in which business operates. The Ecosystem Services Review is a proactive approach for companies to manage the risks and opportunities that are emerging. Furthermore, by helping companies make the connection between healthy ecosystems and the bottom line, it will encourage not only more sustainable business practices, but also business support for policies to protect and restore ecosystems.

WRI developed the ESR in collaboration with the Meridian Institute and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Five WBCSD member companies—Akzo Nobel, BC Hydro, Mondi, Rio Tinto, and Syngenta—road-tested the methodology, providing feedback and case examples. Since 2008, an estimated 300 companies have used the Ecosystem Services Review. Yves Rocher, Lafarge, and CEMEX have also contributed ESR case studies to demonstrate the experience and results of the method.

RELEASE: New Assessment Finds Management Efforts are Insufficient to Protect Mesoamerican Reef

Michael Oko — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:40:11 -0500

First-ever Eco-Audit of the Mesoamerican Reef Countries

Editor’s note: Online resources, including verification documentation, a description of the Eco-Audit indicators, summary results and more, are available at: www.wri.org/reefs and www.healthyreefs.org

The first-ever Eco-Audit of the Mesoamerican Reef (MAR) countries finds that despite some positive management efforts, more needs to be done to protect the region’s coral reefs. The evaluation, entitled “2011 Eco-Audit of the Mesoamerican Reef Countries,” was carried out by the Healthy Reefs Initiative (HRI), in collaboration with the World Resources Institute (WRI), and nearly 40 local organizations, government agencies and companies. The results are being launched simultaneously in Belize, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico.

The evaluation scored overall reef management as Fair (2.7 out of 5) across the region and for all thematic areas. This score indicates that, in general, the MAR ecosystem is not being adequately managed. The scores by country are: Belize 3.3, Honduras 2.7, Mexico 2.7 and Guatemala 2.2.

“Our evaluation has documented some positive steps in protecting reefs throughout the Mesoamerican region. However, there are many actions needed to protect the reefs that have been under discussion for decades. It’s time to complete and implement these actions,” said Dr. Melanie McField, director of the Healthy Reefs Initiative. “Reefs are a vital part of this region, providing both economic and cultural value to people in this area. We hope that this information will help to ensure that reefs can thrive for generations to come.”

The Mesoamerica Reef extends over 1,000 kilometers (over 600 miles), from Mexico to Honduras, and includes the Western Hemisphere’s longest barrier reef, located in Belize. Economies in the region are highly dependent on marine resources, especially from tourism and fishing industries. In Belize alone, the reef is estimated to contribute approximately $395 to $559 million (U.S.) in goods and services each year.

The Eco-Audit was developed and implemented using twenty-two standardized management indicators across seven thematic areas. This includes: Research, Education and Awareness, Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), Global Issues, Coastal Zone Management, Sustainability in the Private Sector, Ecosystem-based Fisheries Management, and Sanitation and Sewage Treatment. Over 300 supporting documents were provided as verification of the results.

“Through this highly collaborative process, involving diverse stakeholders, we have developed a collective understanding of reef management efforts supported by robust data,” said Benjamin Kushner, research analyst, World Resources Institute. “We hope that our transparently verified and publicly available results help coastal and fisheries managers, tourism operators, and others make smart decisions to create a healthy environment for reefs.”

“Stakeholders are now demanding unprecedented levels of transparency from organizations and governments, since our current economic and social conditions have been affected by unethical practices and a lack of transparency,” said Antonio Grijalba of PricewaterhouseCoopers Costa Rica. “This initiative has been a challenging process for HRI, but is a very important step to improve the transparency and accountability of the MAR region, align efforts to address the most critical issues, and share best practices to improve performance.”

To ensure the quality of the results, the financial and management auditing firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers Costa Rica reviewed the methodology and provided feedback on the processes and indicators, and the quality of the verification documentation.

The analysis revealed several key successes, including:

The extent of territorial sea included in MPAs is relatively high across the region;
Harmonization of regulations for the lobster fishery was a major regional success; and
There have been long-standing efforts to monitor reef health across the region, complemented by good availability of information on reef condition and threats.

However, it also showed key shortcomings, including:

A number of MPAs have been created, but their management is mostly inadequate;
Wastewater is not being treated at standards necessary to protect coral reefs; and
There is a lack of comprehensive coastal zone planning that has resulted in poorly planned and sited coastal developments.

This first Eco-Audit provides the foundation for subsequent Eco-Audits, which will be implemented every two years, assuring a routine accounting of efforts to improve the health of the MAR.

Read the analysis and find out more at: www.healthyreefs.org and www.wri.org/reefs

-END-

Contact:

Melanie McField, Director, Healthy Reefs Initiative (Belize City, Belize); email: mcfield@healthyreefs.org; tel: (501) 223-4898; or

Michael Oko, Director, Media Relations, World Resources Institute (Washington, D.C.); email: moko@wri.org; tel. (202) 729-7684

Ecosystem Services Review for Impact Assessment

Maggie Barron — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:30:06 -0500

Overview

Lending and government institutions, such as the International Finance Corporation and the US Council on Environmental Quality, now require the explicit consideration of ecosystem services in impact assessment.

Overview
Downloads
Get Involved
Timeline

More Information for Practitioners

Conceptual Framework
Why Use the Ecosystems Services Review for Impact Assessments?
Ecosystem Services Requirements in new IFC Performance Standards

However, according to a survey carried out by WRI, the guidance documents currently available for addressing ecosystem services in Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) are seen by practitioners as insufficiently detailed to move ESIA practices forward.

To fill this gap in practical guidance, the Ecosystem Services Review for Impact Assessment (ESR for IA) provides: (1) A conceptual framework of how the project, ecosystem services and human well-being are linked and (2) step-by-step instructions (PDF, 172 Kb) to systematically incorporate ecosystem services

Downloads

Working Paper 1 - Ecosystem Services Review for Impact Assessment: Introduction and Guide to Scoping (PDF, 1.1 Mb)
Impact Scoping Tool (Excel, 5.7 Mb)
Dependence Scoping Tool (Excel, 2.1 Mb)
Seven Steps to Address Ecosystem Services in Impact Assessment (PDF, 172 Kb)

Get Involved

We invite you to send us feedback and suggested improvements to the methodology.

Complete our survey. Practitioners are invited to share their feedback on the ESR for IA through this short online survey. The authors would like your opinion on the overall ESR for IA framework and your suggestions for improving the guidance.
Join our LinkedIn discussion. The authors are leading a guided discussion on the ESR for IA with the Business & Ecosystem Services Professionals group, which links managers, consultants, and thought leaders around pressing issues at the nexus of business and ecosystems. The forum allows members to share recent news and best practices, discuss important issues, and connect with peers.
Road-test the ESR for IA. From December 2012 to December 2013, the authors will work with selected project developers and impact assessment practitioners to road-test the ESR for IA on actual ESIA processes. This opportunity is ideal for environmental and social practitioners who work for companies that wish to identify more effective ways to mitigate negative impacts on ecosystem services, meet the new IFC Performance Standards, or establish themselves as leaders in addressing ecosystem services in environmental and social impact assessment. If you would like your project to be considered for road-testing, contact Florence Landsberg with a short description of the project and the planned ESIA timeline.
Contact us. You are also invited to share your general feedback on the ESR for IA directly with the authors.

Timeline

The ESR for IA will be presented in two successive working papers (WP): Ecosystem Services Review for Impact Assessment: Introduction and Guide to Scoping (available above) and Complementing Environmental and Social Impact Assessment to Address Ecosystem Services: The Ecosystem Services Review for Impact Assessment. WP 2 is due in the first quarter of 2013. It will provide a revised version of WP 1 and instructions to conduct the ESR for IA at the Impact Analysis and Mitigation Stages. It will also incorporate the comments from six retrospective road-tests (i.e. implementation of the ESR for IA on completed ESIAs).

Conceptual Framework

The ESR for IA’s conceptual framework builds on the elements and causal relations of the original Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) Framework (Figure 1). By explicitly recognizing the causal interactions between the project, human well-being and the indirect and direct drivers of ecosystem change, the ESR for IA framework supports an integrated assessment of elements commonly assessed separately in an ESIA.

Figure 1: Conceptual framework for assessing project impact and dependence on ecosystem services (Click to Enlarge)

Why Use the Ecosystems Services Review for Impact Assessments?

The ESR for IA helps social and environmental impact assessment practitioners deliver the following:

Systematic integration of environmental and socio-economic issues.
Assessment of project dependence on ecosystem services.
Consideration of multi-scale impacts and dependence.
Identification of indirect and cumulative impacts.
Identification, communication, and negotiation with stakeholders.
Comply with the new International Finance Corporation (IFC) performance standards.

Ecosystem Services Requirements in new IFC Performance Standards

Starting January 2012, IFC investments will be screened systematically for ecosystem service risks and impacts, which are mandated in multiple performance standards. These ecosystem service changes to the IFC standards are comprehensive and affect screening, mitigation, and compensation rules for future investments. They also include increased resources to strengthen IFC’s internal management capacity to assess ecosystem service risks and impacts. These additions to the performance standards complement existing requirements for safeguarding biodiversity and supporting sustainable natural resources management to reflect the importance of the environment for people’s health, culture and fundamental human rights.

The new standards include the following specific ecosystem services requirements:

Performance Standard 1-Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts – Identify all reasonably expected risks and impacts related to ecosystem services and use a broader definition of a project’s area of influence, which now includes indirect project impact on ecosystem services upon which Affected Communities’ livelihoods are dependent.
Performance Standard 4-Community Health, Safety, and Security – Assess and manage health, safety, and security risks to communities resulting from direct project impact on provisioning and regulating ecosystem services such as the loss of buffer areas (e.g., wetlands, mangroves, or upland forests.
Performance Standards 5-Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement – Assess impacts on and compensate for loss of provisioning ecosystem services resulting from land acquisition and involuntary resettlement.
Performance Standard 6-Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources – Carry out a systematic review (including participation of Affected Communities) of all ecosystem services a project will impact or is dependent upon to identify priority ecosystem services, and avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts on priority ecosystem services for which a client has direct management control or significant influence.
Performance Standard 7-Indigenous Peoples – Assess provisioning and cultural ecosystem services when examining projects affecting Indigenous Peoples.
Performance Standard 8-Cultural Heritage – Maintain or restore any ecosystem processes and ecosystem services when replicable cultural heritage is removed.

Topic: ecosystem services

ADVISORY: WRI's Stories to Watch 2013

ADVISORY: WRI Experts to Speak at Annual Conference on Ecosystem Services in Ft Lauderdale

Influence of Coastal Economic Valuations in the Caribbean: Enabling Conditions and Lessons Learned

Executive Summary

WRI Annual Report 2011-2012

Managing Land for Mining and Conservation in the Democratic Republic of Congo

Summary

Reefs at Risk Revisited in the Coral Triangle

Summary: Reefs at Risk Revisited in the Coral Triangle

ADVISORY: New Report Outlines Key Steps to Reduce Poverty in a Green Economy

Parceria viabiliza inclusão de serviços ecossistêmicos nos planos de negócios das empresas

Corporate Leaders and NGOs Form New Partnership to Protect Ecosystems in Brazil

Insights from the Field: Forests for Water

Summary

Insights from the Field: Forests for Species and Habitat

Summary

Nature in Performance:Integrating Ecosystem Services into Business Performance Systems

Executive Summary

The Corporate Ecosystem Services Review: Guidelines for Identifying Business Risks & Opportunities Arising from Ecosystem Change

Summary

Operational

Regulatory and legal

Reputational

Market and product

Financing

RELEASE: New Assessment Finds Management Efforts are Insufficient to Protect Mesoamerican Reef

Ecosystem Services Review for Impact Assessment

Overview

Table of Contents

Downloads

Get Involved

Timeline

Conceptual Framework

Why Use the Ecosystems Services Review for Impact Assessments?

Ecosystem Services Requirements in new IFC Performance Standards