Valuing Biodiversity Theo Stephens Department of Conservation February 2007 Assessing relative value using national databases

A discipline based approach… Value the biosphere attributes that sustain benefits supply….and enjoy the benefits! (Value the health of the goose, enjoy her golden eggs!) For biodiversity, attributes that sustain benefits are: The full range (benefit volume, diversity, distinctiveness & options) Healthy functioning state (high quality & fragile benefits)

Relative, not absolute value… Valuation based on relative contribution to persistence Not monetary Can do: Pattern assessment Forecast spread of pests Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Limited ability for: Process assessment (Note: Incursions affect processes) Can’t do: Cost Benefit Analysis Biodiversity Persistence = Conservation of Pattern and Process (The outcome we all want)

Relative value is indicated by contribution to: A full range (pattern) Healthy functioning state (process) We don’t know how to quantify the trade-off Assessment methods are better for pattern than process The conceptual frame…

Data describing biodiversity… Trying to know the unknowable… 90,000 species, distributions known for ~500 So we use surrogates Key properties for surrogates: Spatially comprehensive National coverage Stable, reproducible, auditable Known basis for surrogacy (what it represents)

So... what data do we have? Environmental classifications (potential full range) Land Environments (LENZ) River environments (FWENZ Offshore marine environments (MEC) Land cover (what remains) Land Cover Database (LCDB1 & LCDB2) Ecosat (forests only) Legally protected areas (security of what remains) DOC estate Protected Areas (PANZ – includes covenants) Pressure (damage to biodiversity) Freshwaters (under development) Terrestrial (under development)

Surrogates Three national databases: LENZ for potential biodiversity pattern (i.e. “the full range”) Indigenous cover (from Land Cover Database) for remaining native biodiversity Protected Area Network (multiple agencies) for legal protection

Value mapping: products Prioritisation & planning Priority sites Cost-effectiveness of conservation projects Risk assessment Biodiversity vulnerable to loss Wilding Pine spread Conservation performance reporting Change in risk to remaining biodiversity High Country land tenure reform The End

(5% random sample) Priority pixels Priority sites – where are they?

Cost-effectiveness: local projects

Remaining biodiversity Vulnerability to loss

Land Cover 1996/7 to 2001/2: Cumulative change in susceptibility to biodiversity loss Cumulative increase (and % C.I.) in susceptibility to biodiversity loss 1996/97 to 2001/02 NZ’s threatened environments

Tenure Review: Outcomes for biodiversity Tenure Review has increased risk to the most vulnerable biodiversity Increased risk, decreased security of biodiversity Low Risk >High Risk Change in Risk of Biodiversity Loss Decrease >Increase Increased security of biodiversity