Introduction- Property Value How are other researchers evaluating stacked ecosystem services? – Payments for Ecosystem Services StudyLocationResults Costanza et al. 1997GlobalAverage value of annual ecosystem services Costanza et al. 2006New JerseyValue NJ’s natural capital Troy & Wilson, 2006Case Sites: Massachusetts, Maury Island Washington, three counties in California Standardized ecosystem service value for changing spatial scale

Introduction- Property Value How are we evaluating stacked ecosystem services? – Property Value vs. Stacked Ecosystem Service Value Stack One: Nutrient Retention, Carbon Sequestration, Pollination Stack Two: Carbon Storage, Water Runoff – In an area with rapid development and increasingly high land values, will the value of stacked services be able to compete? – Is there potential for creating markets for carbon storage and water runoff?

Study Site Upper Neuse River Basin, Central North Carolina – Current Population = 190,000 – Projected Population in 2025 = 280,000

Property Value Methods Property Value – Taken from Triangle Land Conservancy – Convert Property Value to $/900 sq-m (30 meter resolution) – 20 year values

Property Value Methods Division of Quantiles – Property value ($) divided by stacked ecosystem service value ($) – Order of Magnitude – No Data Ecosystem Service Value is 0 No data on property value: Govt. Owned Sites CategoryRange 1100, ,000, , ,000 31, , , No Data

Nutrient Retention Methods Nitrogen Loading Caps – NCAC 15A Rule.0234 and Rule.0234 (6) (A) Cost – NC DENR/DWQ WARMF Report – Estimates nitrogen offset rate of $44/lb of nitrogen Translates to $97/kg for a 20 year period at 1% discount rate* Data NameValue Maximum Allowable Nitrogen Loading (Entire Upper Neuse Watershed) 58, kg N/yr Nitrogen Loading (At point of interest – Falls Dam) 8, kg N/yr Cost97.00 $/kg*

Water Runoff Methods InVEST Water Yield Model – Convert all agricultural and forest land cover/land use data to urban – Assume change in water yield is the run-off expected Costs of storm-water BMP’s for Upper Neuse River Basin – Substituted values for study performed in Mecklenburg County, NC (American Forests, 2010) – Unit cost of $2-6/cubic ft to mitigate additional storm-water runoff

Carbon Storage Methods – Output from InVEST model – Social Cost: $154/tCO 2 (Frankhauser and Tol 1996) – Current European Market Cost: $74/tCO 2 LULC CodeLULC NameC_aboveC_belowC_soilC_dead 1Open Water0000 2Urban Barren Forest Grassland Agriculture Wetland

Carbon Sequestration Methods – Annual NPP for each land cover in watershed at both social and middle cost – 20 year period with 1% discount rate LULC CodeLULC NameC_aboveC_belowC_soilC_dead 1Open Water0000 2Urban Barren Forest Grassland Agriculture Wetland

Pollination Methods InVEST Model Output – Normalize relative scale – Reclassify to percentiles Managed Pollinator Estimate Best Pollination Service Dollar Value: – $50 for 1 pallets, 1 acre, 1 season – INPUT VALUE = $300 for 2 pallets, 1 acre, year = 3 seasons – Convert $/acre to $/pixel at 30 meter resolution – 20 year value with a 1% discount rate* Data NameValue Local Bee Keeper Quote$40-60/acre/season Best Pollination Service$300/acre/yr Value per Pixel$66.72/pixel/yr*

Stacked ES Values Methods Overlay all value maps: Areas of high dollar value for ES are lighter.

Stacked ES Values Methods One-time ES costs – Carbon Storage – Water Runoff 20-Year Value – Carbon Sequestration – Nutrient Retention – Pollination

Results

FINAL REMARKS We have shown that ES can compete with Tax values – Carbon and stacked values, esp top quartile Would this actually work? – Currently carbon trades for $0.10 tCO2 Heterogeneity – Link results to heterogeneity

Final Remarks Big Picture of ES & Biodiversity & Stacked Services

THANKS! Taylor Ricketts, Other people we worked with at WWF Contributing Professors The Triangle Land Conservancy (TLC) Others?

LITERATURE CITED