Transcript REBEL – Review of Economics of Biodiversity Loss

Presenter: Heidi Wittmer,
Dept. of Environmental Politics
,
.
Authors:
Heidi Wittmer, Hugo van Zyl, Claire Brown, Julian
Rode, Ece Ozdemiroglu, Nick Bertrand, Patrick ten
Brink, Andrew Seidl, Marianne Kettunen, Leonardo
Mazza, Florian Manns, Jasmin Hundorf, Isabel
Renner, Strahil Christov, Pavan Sukhdev
International Expert Workshop
TEEB Country Studies: Learning form
Experience and How to Utilize the Results
Vilm, 21st-25th May, 2013
TEEB Guidance Manual for Country Studies
Focus: Guidance for countries which would like to do a TEEBCountry-Study (TCS).
Target audience: Person(s) in charge of conducting a TCS
or a TEEB project.
Format:
 Guidance to address the practical problems of doing a TCS.
 Problems, experience, obstacles and pitfalls from on-going
projects being compiled and integrated at all stages of the
guidance manual.
Timeline:
First draft available by mid 2013 on the TEEB-webpage.
Launch at Trondheim conference for biodiversity May 28th 2013
The final version will be available by 2015.
Structure of the Talk and the Manual
1. What is a TEEB country study and why does it make
sense to do one?
2. Scoping: How to set up the study?
3. How to do the study? Six Steps
4. What to do with the results?
Chapter 1: What is TEEB and how does it integrate
into the Policy Landscape?
1.1 Understand TEEB
1.2 Identify your reasons for doing a TCS
1.3 Identify TEEB-related processes and decide whether to do a TCS
in this context
At the outset: in your country is/was
TEEB primarily understood as:

Economic valuation of ecosystem
services
 Analysis of economic significance,
incentives, instruments of BES*
 Creating PES** schemes and
markets for BES*
•
•
* biodiversity & ecosystem services
** Payment for ecosystem services
Recommendations:
Make Nature’s values visible…
The destruction of nature has now reached levels where serious social
and economic costs are being felt – and will be felt at accelerating pace
under “business as usual“
 Assess and communicate the role of biodiversity and ecosystem
services in the economy
 Ensure public disclosure of, and accountability for, impacts on
nature
Ch.1,3,4
Ch.1,3
Ch.2,3
Recommendations:
Accounting for risk and uncertainty…
Ecosystem services can help recognize values, but do not explain how
ecosystems function.
Economic valuation is less useful in situations characterized by: non
marginal changes, radical uncertainty, or ignorance about tipping points.“
 Apply safe minimum standard or precautionary principles
Ch. 2,5
Ch.7
Ch. 6
TEEB Recommendations
Measuring better to manage better: from indicators to national accounts,
Changing the incentives: payments, taxes, charges, subsidy reform, markets
Protected areas: biodiversity riches that can also offer value for money, recreation
and cultural identity, tourism.
Natural capital and poverty reduction: investment for synergies –
livelihoods, food, water, fuel.
Financial disclosure and net positive impact: disclose all major
externalities and reflect all environmental liabilities and changes in natural assets – apply
principles of ‘no net loss’ or ‘net positive impact’
Invest in ecological infrastructure public health, adaptation to climate
change
Mainstream the economics of nature: Economic, trade and development
policies , transport, energy and mining , agriculture, fisheries, forestry, planning…
Slide inspired by Patrick ten BrinK,
How was your TCS
(discussion) started:

Policy decision by environmental
ministry
 Policy involving more than
environment ministry (in initiation)
 Science or NGO or donor started to
push discussion and played an
important role in convincing
policy…
Was/is your TCS policydriven? And if so:

A specific question from policy
 An unspecific request: „economic
arguments for nature protection“
 A decision to do TEEB before
knowing what exactly to address
Did/do you consider
‚open architecture‘?

Yes, important element of our TCS
 We considered, and decided on
a limited role
 Did not consider, or decided
totally against
Your biggest concern:

The scientific credibility of our TCS
 The political relevance of our TCS
 The legitimacy of our TCS
Chapter 2: How to select the scope and
objectives of the TCS and how to set up
the process?
2.1 Outputs of the scoping phase
2.2 Identifying the thematic focus: scope and objectives
2.3 How to design the study and the process?
2.4 Getting stakeholders on board: Who should be involved?
How to engage them
TCS architecture: Do you have








Yes – variation
Study leader / chair – „a face to the study“
Steering committee – management,
Advisory board (only scientific)
Stakeholder group(s)
Different coordinators for different reports
Author teams (core teams)
Reviewers (extended review involving users)
Our TCS will contain








Certainly – maybe, not clear yet
Mapping
Indicators
Models, scenarios, forecasting techniques
cost-benefit, valuation,
Policy instrument proposals
Decision support systems and processes
Answers to specific questions by policy
Chapter 3: Main Study Phase
STEP 1: Refine the objectives of a TCS by specifying and
agreeing on the key policy issues with stakeholders
STEP 2: Identify the most relevant ecosystem services
STEP 3: Define information needs and select appropriate methods
STEP 4: Assess and value ecosystem services
STEP 5: Identify and outline the pros and cons of policy options,
including distributional impacts
STEP 6: Review, refine and report: Produce an answer to each of
the questions
Chapter 4: How to use the findings and
recommendations of the TCS?
4.1 Stakeholder engagement for using the TCS findings
4.2 Communicate the findings
4.3 Think beyond the TCS
Create stories that relate to policy concerns at this
particular moment in time
Specific challenges of TCS…
• Show the „added value“ of a TEEB-approach – of
an economic perspective
– Gap analysis, feasibility study…
– The economics vs. The politics of ES & Biodiv
• Balance credibility – relevance – legitimacy
– Governance structure, open architecture, involving
other ministries
• Translate results into arguments for policy debates
– Beyond the „converted“
– Impact on the ground