ISEP Identification of Stakeholders and Evaluation of PESlike Instruments in Flanders (Belgium)

Transcriptie

1 ISEP Identification of Stakeholders and Evaluation of PESlike Instruments in Flanders (Belgium) Dieter Mortelmans Montpellier, Pesmix- 11,12 & 13 June 2014

2 Contents PART I: Some background on ISEP PART II: Key considerations for PES in Flanders

3 PART I: Some background on ISEP Who are we? Goal ISEP What has been done Some language issues

4 Who are we? Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO) Flemish government Headquarters in Brussels ~ 250 staff Main role: Policy support Member of EU research networks

5 Goal ISEP Support of ES by current financial policy instruments for nature conservation in Flanders Support ecosystem managers Who are the ES-beneficiaries? Identify ES-stakeholders Focus: PES (Payment for Ecosystem Services) Goal: work towards practical implementation Question: how do policymakers decide when and where PES is appropriate?

6 PES definitie Government Tax Payers Subsidies and PES

7 Important questions Why pay for no action? Only if there is an opportunity cost Regulation and voluntary instruments Transaction costs, monitoring capacities Innovation, flexibility Impact on intrinsic motivations

8 ISEP in a nutshell Extensive litterature review: Factors contributing to success of PES Defining characteristics of PES List of (selected) successfactors Method to identify ES-Stakeholders 4 case studies Gentse Kanaalzone Agri-Env Landscape Features Melsterbeek Agri-Env Erosion control Doode Bemde Design nature areas & access for nature areas Instrument: beheer- en monitoringsubsidie voor erkende natuurreservaten Opportunity analysis PES

9 Language issues Market Based Instruments (MBI) <--> Hard Regulation (Voluntary) Economic Instruments (for providers) Environmental services and ecosystem services, what difference? Consensus: Payment for ecosystem services, input measures/ ES output

10 PART II: Key considerations for PES Defining characteristics Successfactors Opportunity analysis for PES Some potential implications

11 ES Provision Defining characteristics of PES A PES scheme is a transparent system for the additional provision of environmental services trough conditional payments to voluntary providers. (Tacconi 2012) Additionality ( sustainability) Conditionality Transparant With PES Without PES Voluntary participation of ecosystem managers PES beyond legally compulsary! PES Time

12 Successfactors Part 1: Dependency and relation to ES SC1: Is there a clear link between the land use practices and ES provision? SC2: To what extent the ES is under pressure? SC3: Is there a study ascertaining spatial provision of ES? SC4: Leakage and trade-offs

13 Successfactors Part 2: Costs & payments SC5: Is ES provision uniform (homogeneous) in the area? Is the cost of land use practices to maintain or improve ES provision uniform? SC6: Is the payment large enough? SC7: Transaction costs

14 Current situation Payments for ES Agriculture Agriculture + additional ES Maximal payment (in theory) ES benefits Benefits farmers Benefits farmers Payment interval Minimal payment = Opportunity cost

15 Successfactors Risks & trust SC8: Are there enough guarantees for ES managers and ES users within contractual agreements? SC9: To what extent are contracts enforcable? SC10: Is there a chance for high impact events to occur, which could impact ES provisioning? SC11: Is there enough adequate facilitation? SC12: Are ecosystem managers participating voluntary?

16 Successfactors Part 4: Strategy, structure of PES instrument SC13: Is there a clear goal and strategy for the PES instrument? SC14: Is there a risk for perverse incentives? SC15: Is there enough support for new land use practices? SC16: Property rights clearly established and enforced?

17 Bundle Stratify Flagship ES Pollination Clean water Clean water free Clean water Mooi landschap Erosion control Landscape scenery Erosion control Landscape scenery Erosion control pollination free free Pollination

18 Opportunity analysis PES A clear (enough) relationship between input measures and the delivery of ES by ecosystems. Demand for ES Identify ES stakeholders Enough benefits for ecosystem managers and ES-beneficiaries Optional: Is there room for additional or adapted land use practices that can improve ES delivery?

19 Demand ES NOT EFFICIËNT FOR PES EFFICIËNT FOR PES MarginalvalueofaunitofES Shift from individual value to total value (vb diamond-water paradox) Biofysiche,economische drempelwarde (vb voedseltekort) Value increases rapidly with decreasing ES availability Vb. voedselzekerheid,veiligevoel,enz. Value ES stable Demand ES Stock of ecosystem services

20 Identify ES stakeholders Policy instrument Stakeholders 1 2 Goal (expressed in Goal terms of ES) Other ES 1. Which ES are also impacted by the instrument? 2. Which stakeholders receive benefits or disservices? How? Practical guideline for stakeholder identification.

21 SD (CICES-be) Benefits Demand ES Link land use and ES SD niet gedekt door het instrument COSYSTEM MANAGERS aterzuivering en oxygenatie + utriëntenregulatie Nutriënten worden vastgehouden in bodem Onbelangrijk voor landbouwers Matig odemvorming en compositie humus vorming Onduidelijk Onduidelijk atuurlijke landschappen en soorten voor atuurervaring en educatie Indirecte baat: Draagvlak creëren, promoten van duurzaam imago, enz. Redelijk hoog in het geval van duurzame bedrijven (bv. milieu labels en certificering). Anders zeer context afhankelijk. Onduidelijk, moet onderzocht worden. egulatie van globaal klimaat door eductie van broeikasgasconcentraties Behoud van het klimaat Laag. Effecten op lange termijn en grote schaal. Zwak S USERS aterzuivering en oxygenatie + utriëntenregulatie Waterzuivering Waterzuivering steeds belangrijker. Kostelijk grijs alternatief Onduidelijk, moet onderzocht worden. egulatie van globaal klimaat door eductie van broeikasgasconcentraties Behoud van het klimaat Belang voor de maatschappij is groot, en stijgt naarmate de schaal. Overheid heeft hier een rol. Zwak (lokaal) Sterk (internationaal) andschap voor buiten recreatie Recreatie (wandelen, paarden, enz.) Er is er belangrijke vraag naar ruimte voor recreatie in Vlaanderen Matig (weining additionele oppervlakte voor recreatie) atuurlijke omgeving rond gebouwen voor onen, werken en studeren Mooi landschap, uitzicht. De vraag naar gevarieerd groen is groot. Huisprijzen worden hierdoor beïnvloed. Sterk

22 - + Payment Personal ES benefit Opportunity cost Other benefits (risk, insurance,...) balance ecosystem manager

23 - + Payment ES benefits (economic and non economic values) Opportunity cost (eg 'gray' solutions) Other benefits Balance ES beneficiaries Both balances must be positive, for PES to make sense.

24 Payment for ES Agriculture and ecosystem management for ES Value ESbenefits Theoretical Maximum payment PAYMENT INTERVAL Mixed funds For ES delivery Other public funds Subsidy Income LOSS farmers Minimal payment PES Private funds Income farmers

25 Many thanks for your attention! Questions? Contact: