1. Coordination Group for Biodiversity and Nature
Cost Estimate & Benefits of Natura A methodological Toolkit for assessing socio-economic benefits of Natura 2000
M. Kettunen
Coordination Group for Biodiversity and Nature
12 Feb 09
Brussels, BE

2. The essence & aims of the Toolkit
Scope
A standard methodology / approach to assess Natura 2000 related socio-economic benefits at site level
Target audience
Firstly, practitioners involved in the management of Natura 2000 sites (e.g. site managers)
Other stakeholders interested in the value of biodiversity & ecosystem services
Aims
Increase awareness on socio-economic benefits of Natura 2000
Help to identify and valuate these benefits in practise.
Improve the communication of these benefits to different stakeholders and the general public.
Overall goal: better understanding & increased communication of the Natura 2000 related socio-economic benefits helps to create a wider support to the network, including ensuring resources for its management.

3. Toolkit’s guiding principles
Socio-economic benefits identified via ecosystem services provided / supported by sites
Value of biodiversity & Natura 2000 is manifold & cannot always be captured in Euros (qualitative, quantitative and monetary values)
Identified benefits should be used sustainably respecting sites’ conservation goals and management plans
Ecosystem services are often linked. These linkages should be understood in order to
jointly manage and maintain them; and
not to overestimating the total value of a site.

4. Toolkit’s structure & application
Part 1: Contextual guidance
Part 2: Application of the Toolkit
Step 1: Rapid overall assessment of site’s possible benefits
Focus on all benefits
To obtain an initial overall picture of site’s benefits
To identify the relevant services and related benefits, e.g. prioritise them for more detailed analysis (Step 2) 1
Step 2: Estimating socio-economic value of different Natura 2000 related benefits
Focus on individual ecosystem services & their benefits
Introducing methods for qualitative, quantitative and monetary value estimates 2
Part 3: Framework & guidance to form an overall picture of the total value of the site
E.g. how to interpret, present & communicate the different values

5. Step 1: Rapid Assessment Framework - an example
Ecosystem service
Does the Natura site provide this service?
Who benefits from this service?
Local / regional / national / global stakeholders
Your own estimate
(NOTE: no need to distinguish between Options 1-3)
Significance of this service / service potential?
Your own rapid estimate
0– 5
Types of evaluation possible
Easy to obtain
Possible,
but laborious to obtain
Regulating services
Climate / climate change regulation
Carbon sequestration, maintaining and controlling temperature and precipitation
Option 1. The site has a high carbon sequestration capacity (e.g. forest area) and/or important role in regulating microclimate. There is also some relevant data available (amount of wood biomass, carbon capture capacity, estimates for sequestered carbon etc.)
YES
This service is of socio-economic relevance at the site
Regional
Global
(for example)
4 (for example)
(Monetary)
Quantitative
Qualitative
Monetary
Option 2. The site has a high carbon sequestration capacity (e.g. forest area) and/or important role in regulating microclimate but there is a lack of existing relevant data
Option 3. Site’s current climate regulation services could be enhanced via appropriate management and obtaining site’s favourable conservation status
This service could be of socio-economic relevance in the future
(potential value)
Step 1: Rapid Assessment Framework - an example

6. Step 1: Rapid Assessment: example outcome
Aims of the Rapid Assessment Framework:
Get the first overall picture of the ”benefit potential”
As a visual basis for initial dicussions with colleagues etc.
Identify the most relevant services for further detailed analysis (qualitative / quantitative / monetary)

7. Step 2: In-depth Analysis
Service-specific guidance provided by the Toolkit:
Section Provisioning services: Biodiversity resources
Section Provisioning services: Water
Section Cultural & social services: Ecotourism and recreation
Section Cultural & social services: Cultural values and inspirational services
Section Cultural & social services: Landscape and amenity values
Section Regulating services: Climate regulation
Section Regulating services: Water regulation
Section Regulating services: Water purification & waste management
Section Regulating services: Air quality regulation
Section Regulating services: Erosion regulation
Section Regulating services: Avalanche regulation
Section Regulating services: Storm damage control
Section Regulating services: Fire regulation
Section Regulating services: Biological control
Section Regulating services: Pollination & seed dispersal
Section Regulating services: Human health
Section Regulating services: Maintaining genetic & species
diversity
Section Supporting services
Section Wider socio-economic benefits
Following guidance provided for each service category:
What is this service?
Who maintains the service and who benefits from it?
Which Natura 2000 sites this service might be of potential relevance?
How to estimate the value of this service?
Valuation methods for qualitative, quantitative and monetary estimates.
Focus specifically on estimates considered feasible to be obtained by practitioners
How can the estimated value be turned into real money for the site?

8. Step 3. Final Synthesis & Key Messages
Outputs
1. A general case study template for site level
2. A synthesis table on the benefits
3. Key questions to interpret & discuss the results, e.g.
What were the important benefits & could they be valuated?
Are some of the identified benefits in danger?
Is the importance of any ecosystem service likely to increase in the future?
Can identified benefits be sustainably managed and promoted?
What are the trade-offs between different benefits?
What are the possible implications in the wider context of the Natura Network?
In the light of the results, what could / should the future actions be?

9. Step 3. Final Synthesis & Key Messages - an example

10. State of play – next steps
Toolkit being applied to / tested with 5 case studies (by WWF and RSPB partners)
Case study sites
Bialowieza forest (Poland)
Guadiana Natural Park (Portugal)
Oas-Gutai Plateau (Romania)
Pico da Vara / Ribeira do Guilherme protected area (Azores)
Abernethy forest (Scotland, the UK)
Revising the Toolkit based on comments / lessons learned from case studies
June 09 – final Toolkit & the end of the project

11. Thank you. Thank you! Marianne Kettunen mkettunen@ieep.eu
IEEP is an independent, not-for-profit institute dedicated to the
analysis, understanding and promotion of policies for
a sustainable environment in Europe.