"Biodiversity underpins everything and there is an opportunity and obligation to reflect it in as many ways as possible in a natural capital account," writes AECOM's Sarah Krisht, in the lead-up to Ireland’s first National Biodiversity Conference on the 20th and 21st of February 2019.

How can we factor biodiversity into a natural capital account?

More than ever, we recognise that we need to take care of the natural capital assets that our environment provides; that we cannot survive without these assets. There are conferences, papers, reports, newsletters and blogs (like this one!), which are trying to push the discussion forward and raise awareness about the need to manage natural capital more sustainably. The hope is that these initiatives will spark the most important thing of all: ACTION.

One such action is for organisations to routinely account for their impacts and dependencies on natural capital. There are many frameworks to do this and many great examples of organisations that have done exactly this [see footnote 1]. They all are trying to answer the following questions:

1.What natural capital assets do they impact and depend on?
2.What benefits do those assets produce?
3.What is the value of those benefits? and
4.What does it cost to maintain those benefits?

Somewhere in every organisation and hopefully in their natural capital accounts, there is an important role played by biodiversity. It is an asset in itself but also underpins the productivity and health of all other natural capital assets. If ‘natural capital’ were a movie, then biodiversity would be a strong contender for Best Actor.

So how exactly can we factor biodiversity into a natural capital account? There are many answers.

Biodiversity is a natural capital asset in itself

It could feature in what we call the ‘natural capital asset register’ of an account. This is an inventory of indicators of the extent and condition (quantity and quality) of natural capital which, when tracked over time, helps us answer the first question above. We could reflect biodiversity in terms of species counts, environmental designations and even biodiversity metrics such the Defra metric, a habitat-based proxy of biodiversity value [see footnote 2].

Biodiversity is also an ecosystem service which provides benefits to wider society

It underpins other services that natural capital provides us like fisheries, timber and genetic resources but also recreation and aesthetic value. It also supports some of the processes which regulate our environment including its climate, air quality and resilience to environmental hazards. In this sense, biodiversity as an ecosystem service can be reflected in the physical flow of these other services because counting it separately would be double-counting.

There is a value to the benefits that biodiversity provides

It is also possible to estimate the monetary value of the benefits provided by biodiversity. Again, part of it will be reflected in the monetary value of other services it underpins. But, there is another part which will not: ‘non-use value’ which is the value we get from biodiversity without needing to use, consume or directly experience it. This can range from valuing biodiversity because it is important in itself, to valuing it for the sake of others including future generations. There is evidence that can be used to estimate the monetary value of this ‘non-use’ component of biodiversity. But, it is challenging to apply evidence that has been obtained in one particular context to another, even after making adjustments. There are, however, on-going efforts to develop more robust evidence of society’s current preferences for biodiversity, drawing on a variety of monetary and non-monetary valuation techniques.

So yes, there are many answers which themselves raise other questions. This is not a bad or confusing place to be. On the contrary, it makes evident the fact that biodiversity underpins everything and there is an opportunity and obligation to reflect it in as many ways as possible in a natural capital account, but more importantly in any decision involving the environment – especially because we are losing global biodiversity at an unprecedented rate in human history! [see footnote 3]

It is fitting that the Irish Forum on Natural Capital and the Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht are hosting Ireland’s first National Biodiversity Conference to discuss precisely these issues. Join them on the 20th and 21st of February 2019 to hopefully help spark the most important thing of all: ACTION.


Sarah Krisht is a Principal Environmental Economist at AECOM who specialises in developing economic evidence to inform decisions that affect natural capital. She is part of AECOM’s Policy and Appraisal team, which includes expertise in natural capital and ecosystem services, strategic environmental assessment, sustainability appraisal, and climate policy. For more information, please contact sarah.krisht@aecom.com.

1 See for example the Natural Capital Coalition’s website for more information: https://naturalcapitalcoalition.org/
2 See the proposed new biodiversity metric: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/6020204538888192
3 See WWF’s Living Planet Report 2018: https://www.wwf.org.uk/updates/living-planet-report-2018

Andrea brings a wealth of experience in sustainability, green economy, enterprise and energy. She has worked with over 500 businesses on issues as varied as environmental, energy, social and economic development and advised local government on sustainable development and economic development issues. She holds a BA in Environmental Geography, MSc in Environmental Resource Management and is currently completing an MBA in International Business.

We are also delighted to welcome Bernadette Phelan, Head of Sustainability Services at Business in the Community Ireland, as our new Deputy Chair.

Bernadette is a senior executive in corporate responsibility and sustainability practice, and has worked on regional, national and EU programmes at leading public and non-profit organisations. Currently she sits on the Management Team of BITCI, the leading Irish network for responsible business. She holds a Msc in Regional Development from UCD, a BA (mod) in Economics and Geography from Trinity College and an Advanced Certificate in Renewable Energy from Limerick IT.

Both Andrea and Bernadette have been members of IFNC since its inception, and served on the Steering Committee since 2016. For more information on the Board, Chairs and other SC members, see here.

Many thanks to our outgoing Chair Jane Stout from Trinity College Dublin who will continue to be closely involved with the Forum as a director and member of the Steering Committee

Great news for people across Ireland working on biodiversity; the 'Together for Biodiversity' awards, supported by Irish Wildlife Trust & Dublin Port, have just been launched. The winners will be announced in February at the National Biodiversity Conference (www.biodiversityconference.ie) in Dublin Castle, which is being co-organised by the Irish Forum on Natural Capital and the National Parks and Wildlife Service.

The Minister for Culture, Heritage & the Gaeltacht, Josepha Madigan, has welcomed these innovative awards: “The ‘Together for Biodiversity Awards’ are a fantastic opportunity to celebrate the wealth of work being done at local level to protect wildlife and create and restore habitats across Ireland. By inviting nominees to present their work at the National Biodiversity Conference and announcing the winners at the event, we are ensuring that the voices of community groups are represented at this major national conference. We are delighted to partner with Dublin Port Company and the Irish Wildlife Trust on this collaborative initiative and I look forward to meeting the nominees and hearing about their efforts to enhance Ireland’s biodiversity.

Have you or your community been involved in a project to help protect local wildlife or habitats this year? Perhaps you planted a school wildlife garden, made your village more pollinator friendly or helped protect a local wetland. If so, all you have to do to enter is tell us about the work you carried out and how it helped your local biodiversity. More information here.

The Together for Biodiversity Awards are part of the National Biodiversity Conference, which takes place at Dublin Castle on 20th and 21st February 2019. The National Biodiversity Conference is being organised by the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the Irish Forum on Natural Capital. 

There are categories for community groups, farmers, schools and individual biodiversity champions. The awards are a great opportunity to showcase the work of biodiversity champions in our society. The deadline for entries is December 3rd 2018. After this date, entries will be reviewed by the organisers and posted online so that the public can vote on their favourite. The projects with the highest number of public votes will progress to the judging panel, who will select the top three finalists in each category, along with the category winner.

Finalists will be invited to the the National Biodiversity Conference to exhibit a poster on their project. Winners will be announced by the Minister for Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Josepha Madigan, TD, and CEO of Dublin Port Company, Eamon O’Reilly. The winner of each category will receive €2,000 to spend on a future biodiversity project, while runners up will receive €500-worth of vouchers to support their work.

In 2012, the 'System for Environmental-Economic Accounts - Central Framework' (SEEA-CF) was published and approved by the UN Statistical Commission, becoming the international standard for Natural Capital Accounting (NCA). Today, work is underway to standardise an additional set of 'Experimental Ecosystem Accounts' that consider biodiversity and habitats. 

SEEA uses concepts, definitions, classifications and accounting rules that are consistent with Systems of National Accounts, and therefore are internationally comparable. In recent years, a number of other initiatives have emerged that aim to measure, value and account for natural capital. These include the Natural Capital Protocol, launched in 2015 by the Natural Capital Coalition and aimed at the private sector, and methodologies such as Corporate Natural Capital Accounting, led by the UK’s Natural Capital Committee. Today, efforts to harmonise this work are underway to progress a joint approach to recognising, valuing, protecting and restoring natural capital.

Carl Obst (IDEEA Group) is one of the architects of the SEEA Central Framework and the Experimental Ecosystem Accounts, and earlier this year, he joined us for a workshop at Trinity College Dublin to help us get to grips with the concepts and the methodology. This blog is a synopsis of his talk, but you can watch the video below and download the slides in PDF form.

​Types of Natural Capital Accounts

Natural Capital Accounting (NCA) is a tool to measure the changes in the stock of natural capital at a variety of scales and to integrate the value of ecosystem services into accounting and reporting systems at a variety of levels. Accounting for natural capital is seen as an important step in ensuring integrated economic and political decision-making, supporting inclusive development and improving economic management. It is said to add value to macro-economic policy and the development of macro-indicators alongside GDP, sectoral policies, responsible business practices and a globally consistent approach to accounting for ecosystems and their value.

The EU’s 7th Environmental Action Programme (EAP) defines natural capital as biodiversity, including ecosystems that provide goods and services. The SEEA however takes a broader view, defining “environmental assets” as biotic and abiotic components of the Earth, which may provide benefits to humanity. It does not specifically define natural capital.

SEEA enables effective and internationally comparable NCA by offering an organising framework for information that falls outside the production boundary of the economy. Typically, such information consists of environmental goods and services that are not traded in markets. SEEA captures the flows of ecosystem goods and benefits (i.e. ecosystem services) entering the economy, the residuals coming out, as well as residuals that may stay within the economy (for instance through recycling), and in doing so, supports a conceptualisation of the economy as a system within the environmental system, as opposed to outside it.

SEEA’s Central Framework comprises three main types of accounts:

1. Environmental Flow Accounts for physical assets like water, energy, waste and GHG emissions, which record information and link it to economic activity, allowing - for instance - resource use to be mapped through economic supply chains.
2. Natural Resource Accounts that assess stocks and use of ecosystem goods that have market value, such as timber, fish or minerals. These assets can be valued in either biophysical units, or in monetary units using the Net Present Value of individual resources.
3. Environmental Transaction Accounts, which comprise information on resource management expenditure, environmental taxes, subsidies and environmental protection expenditures. These transactions are already recorded in standard economic accounts but this account separates them out and facilitates connection to areas such as green jobs and green economy.

In 2014, the SEEA Experimental Ecosystem Accounts (SEEA-EEA) guidelines were published. An emerging area of statistics, this fourth type of account focuses on ecosystem assets and services to integrate biophysical data and track changes in their stocks and flows, and link them to economic activity. The asset, for example a forest, is measured in terms of its health (condition) and size (extent), which informs understanding of the state of the asset, how that state changes over time, which flows of services we get from which assets, the extent of their contribution to the economy and society, as well as the groups that benefit from those flows. Such information can support the analysis of competing policy outcomes and inform management decisions on investment in and/or exploitation of the asset.

Unlike the other three types of accounts within the SEEA that are done at national level, ecosystem accounts are done at a spatial level and can therefore be applied to a country, a county, a catchment, or a land parcel. Within each area, there will potentially be a number of types of ecosystem asset (stocks) delivering different sets of services (flows) that can be mapped and valued. This can be done using biophysical data and/or financial metrics: accounting for any type of stock and flow is essentially a quantitative description of relationships that emerge through transactions between economic units. Traditionally, these economic units have included businesses, households and Governments, etc. By creating a new set of economic units based on ecosystem assets, it is possible to map the transactions between them and existing economic units. How these relationships are defined (i.e. monetarily or biophysically) is a choice that depends on the type of decision that the analysis seeks to inform.


​

 - Applications for this position are now closed -
 
The Irish Forum on Natural Capital (IFNC) seeks a motivated, part-time, freelance/self-employed administration assistant. Tasks will include arranging Forum committee meetings, compiling agendas and minutes; promoting the Forum on social media, compiling a newsletter, updating the website, managing blogs; managing emails and member registrations; and occasionally attending relevant external meetings and writing up notes.

It is envisaged that these tasks should take approximately five days per month, at a rate of €200 per day. Applicants should have skills in administration and communications, a background in business/natural sciences and an interest in the natural capital concept. Applicants should send a short letter outlining their suitability for the post, plus a CV containing the names and contact details of at least two referees to Hannah Hamilton naturalcapitalireland@gmail.com.

Join us for a workshop exploring the UN's System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA), Ireland's progress in developing national natural capital accounts, and the ways in which accounting-based approaches can be used to monitor the environmental aspects of the National Planning Framework.

• When: 11am - 1pm, Thursday 3rd May 2018
• Where: Botany Lecture Theatre, Botany Department, Trinity College Dublin
• Speakers: Carl Obst (IDEEA Group), Gerry Brady (CSO)
• Registration: Free, but registration is required. Please RSVP to naturalcapitalireland@gmail.com

About the Workshop: 

Accounting for natural capital is a rapidly emerging area of work across business and government. At government level, much work is being driven through the implementation of the new United Nations standard, the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA), which covers accounting for environmental flows (such as water and energy), natural resources (minerals, timber, fish), environmental activities, and biodiversity, ecosystems and ecosystem services. For businesses, work is being driven through the application of the Natural Capital Protocol (NCP) established in 2016 through the Natural Capital Coalition. The NCP provides a standardised pathway for businesses to engage in a discussion on the relevance of natural capital.
​
These significant advances have developed through somewhat independent processes but are increasingly connecting as the reality bites that our natural capital must be managed through the joint action of business, government and the community. Accounting is providing a framework through which these different sectors can engage and is also a platform on which different disciplines – natural scientists, economists, geographers, statisticians and many others – can exchange perspectives. The Natural Capital Coalition’s Combining Forces initiative is leading a range of engagement in this cross-sector space.

This workshop aims to introducing the latest thinking in natural capital accounting, outline Ireland's progress to date and explore the relevance of this approach to the National Planning Framework. It will explain key ideas (including some mythbusting), place different pieces of work in context and provide an open forum for attendees to pose questions and engage in debate. It is open to people from all sectors, disciplines and roles, including both measurement technicians and users of information in decisions. Attendance is free, but spaces are limited - please RSVP to naturalcapitalireland@gmail.com.

​
Speakers

Carl Obst
Director at the Institute for Development of Environmental-Economic Accounting (IDEEA Group)

​Carl was the lead author and editor of the United Nation’s System of
Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) – the international standard for government work on accounting for natural capital. This work built on a long career at the Australian Bureau of Statistics, including five years as head of the Australian national accounts. In addition to advancing the development of measurement frameworks for assessing the sustainability of sectors such as tourism and agriculture, Carl is a leading player in closing the gap between national and corporate natural capital accounting approaches.

Where does the money come from? When we talk about the need to invest in our natural capital, the question of finance always looms large. IFNC Steering Committee member Orlaith Delargy attended a recent conference in London to explore a typology of projects, questions of scale, emerging policy and the systemic change that will be needed to drive impact. 

When it comes to investing in natural capital, the perennial issue is one of clashing cultures and foreign languages. Often those who care deeply about nature and the environment are not financial experts, and may even mistrust the financial system. On the other hand, financial actors can view conservationists as tree-huggers with no idea of how the ‘real world’ works. Both tribes speak complex, technical languages that sound alien to the outsider.
 
All the more need, then, for conferences like Natural Capital Investment 2018, run by the Ecosystems Knowledge Network. The conference on March 1st, the first day of Spring, attracted enthusiastic and intrepid participants, as proven by their commitment to reach the venue at the British Library from all corners for the UK despite Storm Emma and her heavy snow.


Exploring natural capital investments

​First, we heard from the financial sector. Bevis Watts of Triodos Bank provided a useful taxonomy of natural capital investments (see table below), with three broad groupings of projects and potential sources of finance for each. Many financial institutions want to back these types of projects, but there is a first-mover inertia as the market waits for proof that such projects deliver bankable outcomes. Enter the aptly-named Environmental Finance Ltd., an organisation that creates and partners with organisations like, say, WWF who develop innovative, investable environmental projects, often with corporates. Taking a blended finance approach, Environmental Finance helps to ensure that such projects are structured to deliver quality returns for investors, local communities and the environment at large.

​

Source: Bevis Watts, UK Managing Director of Triodos Bank


However, we must be realistic about the current levels of investment in nature: for every one dollar invested in enhancing natural capital, there are many multiples funding projects that will undermine it, as organisations from Christian Aid to Greenpeace have recently highlighted. Reversing this will require systemic change in the financial system. And Emma Knight-Strong of the Green Investment Group reminded that scale from an investment perspective is not just about size, but about having a consistent pipeline of similar, replicable projects. Given the diversity of natural capital projects from catchment to catchment and country to country, assuring investors of replicable, dependable profits is a challenge.

Much can be learned from the emerging field of Social Impact Investments. Triodos Bank spoke about their work on Social Impact Bonds that deliver solutions to intractable, costly social problems. Like many environmental issues, these problems are not considered ‘bankable’. However, financial vehicles can be developed to channel funds from government and socially-motivated high net worth private investors, who both have an interest in solving these issues. A bond like this usually requires three to four actors: an organisation, like a local authority, seeking a solution to a problem and commissioning an intervention; an organisation like an NGO, with the expertise to trial the suggested intervention; a consultancy to provide advice; and social investors to provide capital.
 
Environmental Impact Bonds do exist, too. Quantified Ventures provided a case study from Washington DC, where a $25 million tax-exempt bond was issued to address water quality issues in the Potomac river owing to combined sewer overflows systems. In this case, instead of constructing a new US$3 billion tunnel (grey infrastructure), the project delivered 365 acres of green infrastructure across the city (e.g. gardens, permeable pavements, green roofs, and rain barrels) to help absorb excess stormwater and reduce the amount flowing into combined city pipelines.
 
Financing was secured via a ‘Pay For Success’ model, which linked interest payments for investors to the performance of the green assets. This performance was gauged with a small pilot of 20 acres of green infrastructure. Interest pay outs were then based on the probability that the green infrastructure would:
​
            • Underperform - 2.5% probability
            • Perform as expected - 95% probability
            • Outperform - 2.5% probability


The policy landscape – how the UK is preparing for natural capital investments

​Renowned conservationist and the new Director of Advocacy and Campaigns at WWF, Tony Juniper, spoke of the carbon consensus – the near-unanimous view at international level that urgent action on climate change is needed. The Paris Agreement and, in the UK, the Climate Change Act (2008) have been instrumental in achieving this consensus and catalysing action. Now, there is a need for the ‘Environment Act’, to spark the same consensus for nature. Such an Act would require buy-in not just from Defra, but from the Treasury as well.
 
The UK’s recently published 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment was also discussed in detail. Shirley Trundle, Director for National Environmental Policy at Defra ran through some of the highlights: embedding environmental net gain as a principle for all new development; achieving zero avoidable plastic waste by 2042; and facilitating domestic carbon offsetting (that is, making it as easy as possible for companies to offset carbon within the UK, by investing in peatlands and woodlands among other things).
 
The next few months will see the government developing metrics to assess progress against this plan. One of the critical questions is how to define and measure environmental net gain. It was agreed that the plan should not gather dust on the shelf, but rather should be reviewed every 5 years, in line with election cycles and allowing each government to add their ideas and ramp up the ambition.
 

Dr Patrick Bresnihan explores the challenges associated with natural capital financing, and questions whether such arrangements can deliver simultaneous economic and environmental returns. Patrick is a member of the IFNC’s Steering Committee and Lecturer in Geography at Trinity College Dublin.

​
Proponents of natural capital accounting offer a compelling argument: by quantifying and valuing natural capital impacts and dependencies, and translating those assessments into systemised accounts, decision-makers in government and the corporate sector will be able to make more informed and, ultimately, sustainable decisions.
 
But can we assume that reliable and accurate economic information will translate into radical and effective action? It is over a decade since the Stern Review (2006) made the economic argument for climate action. The 700 page report concluded that failure to act would result in costs amounting to 5% of global GDP per year, now and forever. Despite the sound economic warnings, action on climate change has not moved ahead at anything like the pace that is required. So what, if anything, is different about natural capital; why and how will putting nature on the balance sheets make a difference to how governments and corporations make decisions?

 
The third biennial World Forum on Natural Capital took place from 28-29 November 2017 in Edinburgh. In keeping with previous years, it was a tightly packed agenda, with over one hundred speakers and 700 delegates from 60 countries coming together to explore this rapidly-developing area.

There was much to discuss! Natural capital is an expansive topic, spanning all of the natural sciences, a good chunk of the social sciences, business, economics, finance and accountancy, plus politics, international relations and information technology. Speakers included Environment Ministers, the heads of major international NGOs, leaders in business and finance, economists and scientists, as well as Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, who opened the event.

​She spoke authoritatively and passionately about the value of nature to Scotland: “You cannot put a price on the sense of joy, happiness and wellbeing that people get from nature,” she said. “If that was the only value, it would be enough to merit the priority that we attach. But that doesn’t take away from fact that it’s also economically significant ... The Scottish Government’s view is clear – we are more likely to abuse nature if it’s free, and more likely to treat it with care if we understand its value.”
 
If anything, the sheer scale of this conference and the calibre and range of speakers is evidence of the global attention that the natural capital concept has gained since the very first World Forum in 2013. To give you a sense of what was discussed, we’ve crammed together our top five messages from the conference into these bullet points:
 
1. There is a lot to do
Many of the conversations at the Forum – both on stage and off – were around what needs to be done to mainstream the natural capital approach, to put it at the heart of the green economy, to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, to engage corporate Boards, and to transform finance. While it was acknowledged that much has been achieved and that natural capital concepts are gaining traction and being implemented in some cases, there is still a long way to go.
 
2. Accounting can help tell better stories
The need for compelling narratives that engage both hearts and minds was articulated by many speakers, including Jessica Fries (A4S), who called for storytelling that flips the notion of economic primacy on its head. Carl Obst (IDEEA) explained how accounting for natural capital can help to tell the story of how the value of our natural assets has changed over time, while helping to make a clearer case for the connections between conservation policy and benefits to society: “These connections make most sense at local community level,” he said. “Accounting can help take pictures from the lower level context and translate them into something that can be aggregated and of meaning to someone working on macro scale.”
 
3. Companies need environmental limits
When is a business truly sustainable? As Gary Gillespie (Scottish Government) pointed out, companies can report on their own environmental impacts and set targets, but how do they know whether those targets are within environmental limits? Companies need clarity on environmental thresholds to understand what they’re measuring against. There is an urgent need to develop metrics that link decisions to consequences.
 
4. The boundaries of the natural capital approach must be understood
Natural capital is still a contested concept and speakers referred to the need to better understand the boundaries of the approach. Pushpam Kumar (UNEP) pointed to significant questions around scale and substitutability, along with the need for robust measurement and assessment, while Philippe Joubert (Earth On Board) and Oliver Greenfield (Green Economy Coalition) reinforced the idea that regulation and legal protection cannot be ignored in favour of purely economic assessments – “The market will not correct itself,” said Joubert. “We need rules, laws and regulations, and inside these lines the market can play. This will liberate energy of business which is 75 – 85% of the problem.”
 
5. We need money
To respond to environmental and social crises, very large scape deployment of capital is required. According to Richard Hardwicke (Trucost), we need $9bn per year to achieve the Sustainable Development goals, and government or philanthropy alone can’t do this. He says we need to harness the power of capital markets at scale, and doing so will depend on a mind-shift that revolutionises the way we think about value.

 
I attended the Valuing Nature Annual Conference in Edinburgh (18-19 October 2017). The aim of this conference is to bring together people from diverse research areas and from business, policy and practice, with the common goal of tackling Valuing Nature challenges. The Valuing Nature Network (http://valuing-nature.net/) aims to better understand and represent the complexities of the natural environment in valuation analyses and decision making, by looking at the economic, societal and cultural value of ecosystem services. To achieve this, these events encourage the building of an interdisciplinary research community capable of working across the natural, biological and social sciences, and the arts and humanities.


Nature underpinning a vibrant and thriving human society

The keynote address was delivered by Prof Georgina Mace, Head of the Centre for Biodiversity and Environment Research at University College London. Prof Mace framed the discussion well in her keynote address by highlighting the value of nature as an essential underpinning of a vibrant and thriving human society. She argued that we must acknowledge the multiple framings for nature conservation. Nature must be considered as more than just an obstacle to economic development or a passive victim of human population growth.
​
This theme of the inter-dependence of human society with the natural world was developed throughout the meeting by various speakers and presenters. Species and habitat restoration and conservation is both an end in itself, as well as supporting ecosystem functions and services. ‘Biodiversity’ (the variety of plant and animal life in the world or in a particular habitat) has multiple roles including as a regulator of ecosystem processes, a provider of ecosystem services, and as a “good” or benefit in itself.
 

Interdisciplinary challenges

Another general theme throughout the conference was the challenges and benefits of ‘interdisciplinarity’ in valuation projects. Nicola Beaumont discussed the importance of being able to translate complex natural science into terms which are meaningful in a social and economic context. The CoastWEB project was a good demonstration of an interdisciplinary approach including environmental science and economics, social psychology, art, policy and governance, to study flood risk management capacity of saltmarshes.

Many of the speakers highlighted the multi-faceted role of nature both as a provider of ecosystem services and as an intrinsic good, and the practical efforts to incorporate this into “on-the-ground” conservation efforts. These types of conferences represent a great opportunity for researchers and stakeholders from different backgrounds to get together to discuss the needs and opportunities at the science and policy interface, for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management.


“Conservation means development as much as it does protection”
​
In conclusion, Prof . Mace finished off her presentation with a quote from Theodore Rosevelt (1854-1919) that is still relevant for decision makers today: “The nation behaves well if it treats the natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased; and not impaired in value…Conservation means development as much as it does protection.”