estimated from prices and quantities of goods and services traded in markets
(“market values”). Other ecosystem services generate values that affect human
wellbeing but are not observable from market transactions. These include the
non-market or intrinsic values derived from walking on a beach, for example. There
is some overlap between ecosystem service values and market values: for example,
the primary production that supports biological populations of food fish is an
ecosystem service, and its value is (partially) reflected in the commercial fisheries
landings data.
Most ecosystem service values cannot be observed from prices in markets, and
therefore must be estimated by quantifying the ecological service produced (for
example, tons of CO 2 absorbed by the ocean waters of the North Atlantic each year)
and then applying a unit value (in this case, the cost imposed by adding a ton of
CO 2 to the atmosphere—see US EPA (2016). Published estimates of ecosystem
service value from marine environments around the world span a very wide range,
from near zero to more than $100 million/year/km
2 ($1 million/year/ha), depending
on the location and the specific values included and assumptions used in the estimation. Using ecosystem service values in any particular planning context requires
careful attention to the ways in which resources are used and valued, and the
consequences of incremental management actions (Johnston and Russell 2011).
Ecosystem service value estimates are broadly indicative of orders of magnitude for
ecosystem services, but, as planning tools, they should be used with care.
In estimating the economic value derived from ocean space (habitat) in a particular location, it is necessary to take into account the particular qualities of local
coastal and marine resources, and the socio-economic context of nearby populations. In general, this requires a location-specific analysis. Where no such analysis
has been carried out, it is sometimes possible to develop rough estimates of economic value using a “benefit transfer” technique (see below).
Initial efforts to integrate results of ecosystem valuation studies from different
locations can be found in Costanza et al. (1997). More recently, researchers have
developed several databases, including the Ecosystem Services Valuation Database
(Plantier-Santos et al. 2012; Texas A&M University 2016) for the US Gulf of
Mexico, that summarize results of valuation studies from many locations.
Table 10.1 presents summaries of values for different types of ecosystems from the
meta-analysis by de Groot et al. (2012). Note that the point estimates summarized in
Table 10.1 are typically derived from several studies conducted for different
locations and different value categories.
Shoreline areas, and in particular beaches, provide significant value as aesthetic
and recreational resources. Pendleton (2008) summarized studies suggesting that
beaches along the coast of the United States see a total of approximately 800
million beach-visit-days per year. Those beach visits provide total recreational
value of $7—35 billion/year (2014 US$), or about $0.25 M/km
2 /year for the
average coastal land area (assuming approximately 9300 km of US coastline,
excluding Alaska, and an average width of coastal recreation area of 100 m, or
0.1 km
2 /km of coastline). The unit value of popular beaches is significantly higher
10 Economics of Multi-use and Co-location
239
(“market values”). Other ecosystem services generate values that affect human
wellbeing but are not observable from market transactions. These include the
non-market or intrinsic values derived from walking on a beach, for example. There
is some overlap between ecosystem service values and market values: for example,
the primary production that supports biological populations of food fish is an
ecosystem service, and its value is (partially) reflected in the commercial fisheries
landings data.
Most ecosystem service values cannot be observed from prices in markets, and
therefore must be estimated by quantifying the ecological service produced (for
example, tons of CO 2 absorbed by the ocean waters of the North Atlantic each year)
and then applying a unit value (in this case, the cost imposed by adding a ton of
CO 2 to the atmosphere—see US EPA (2016). Published estimates of ecosystem
service value from marine environments around the world span a very wide range,
from near zero to more than $100 million/year/km
2 ($1 million/year/ha), depending
on the location and the specific values included and assumptions used in the estimation. Using ecosystem service values in any particular planning context requires
careful attention to the ways in which resources are used and valued, and the
consequences of incremental management actions (Johnston and Russell 2011).
Ecosystem service value estimates are broadly indicative of orders of magnitude for
ecosystem services, but, as planning tools, they should be used with care.
In estimating the economic value derived from ocean space (habitat) in a particular location, it is necessary to take into account the particular qualities of local
coastal and marine resources, and the socio-economic context of nearby populations. In general, this requires a location-specific analysis. Where no such analysis
has been carried out, it is sometimes possible to develop rough estimates of economic value using a “benefit transfer” technique (see below).
Initial efforts to integrate results of ecosystem valuation studies from different
locations can be found in Costanza et al. (1997). More recently, researchers have
developed several databases, including the Ecosystem Services Valuation Database
(Plantier-Santos et al. 2012; Texas A&M University 2016) for the US Gulf of
Mexico, that summarize results of valuation studies from many locations.
Table 10.1 presents summaries of values for different types of ecosystems from the
meta-analysis by de Groot et al. (2012). Note that the point estimates summarized in
Table 10.1 are typically derived from several studies conducted for different
locations and different value categories.
Shoreline areas, and in particular beaches, provide significant value as aesthetic
and recreational resources. Pendleton (2008) summarized studies suggesting that
beaches along the coast of the United States see a total of approximately 800
million beach-visit-days per year. Those beach visits provide total recreational
value of $7—35 billion/year (2014 US$), or about $0.25 M/km
2 /year for the
average coastal land area (assuming approximately 9300 km of US coastline,
excluding Alaska, and an average width of coastal recreation area of 100 m, or
0.1 km
2 /km of coastline). The unit value of popular beaches is significantly higher
10 Economics of Multi-use and Co-location
239