Lithuania: Current Status and Challenges for TEEB Approaches

Transcription

1 Lithuania: Current Status and Challenges for TEEB Approaches Dr. Vytautas Naruševičius, Environmental Protection Agency Dr. Gintaras Matiukas, Centre for Environmental Solutions Exchange on TEEB Processes in European Countries, International Expert Workshop, 11/10/ /10/2011

2 Content of Presentation State of play Hard questions First steps Suggestions 2

3 What could be profitable to start with? Environmental monitoring system, as main data source for ecosystems and biodiversity stocks, state and distribution, some drivers of change Existing systems for calculation of compensations for damage, caused to the environment, and taxes for use of natural resources, as baseline for economic evaluation 3

4 Current situation of national monitoring, as the initial data source for TEEB Legal background: Law on the Environment Protection Law of the Environmental Monitoring The Regulation of the State Environmental Monitoring The State Environmental Monitoring Programme 4

5 Current situation of national monitoring, as the initial data source for TEEB Environmental monitoring National Environmental Monitoring Scheme Components of Environment Air Water Soil Biodiversity Ecosystems Landscape Ambient air Background air Air radiology Groundwater Surface water Baltic Sea Forest Field Habitats&species of EU concern Forest Regulated game species Fish Seminatural ecosystems Agroecosystems Structure changes on national/ regional level Structure changes on local level Climate change and stratospheare Transitional waters Lakes Rivers Invasive species Problematic and protected landscapes 5

6 Current situation of national monitoring, as the initial data source for TEEB Main environmental issues, important for TEEB, addressed: Air quality Ground water resources & quality Water resources & marine and inland water bodies ecological status Soil quality & impact State of habitats & species (including their habitats) of EU importance abundance (area), conservation status Forest ecosystems - resources, quality and health 6

7 Current situation of national monitoring, as the initial data source for TEEB Main environmental issues, important for TEEB, addressed: State of fish and regulated game species abundance and distribution Invasive plant and animal species distribution Critical levels and loads of pollution to ecosystems Land cover changes on national and regional levels Land cover changes in areas with most vulnerable potential (local level) State of protected landscapes 7

8 Current situation of national monitoring, as the initial data source for TEEB In summary : State of main ecosystems, most important biodiversity elements, quantity of most recognized for human well-being resources are monitored Most important impacts to ecosystems and biodiversity are monitored But quite few ecosystem services and goods (provisioning, regulating), mainly indirectly, are taken into account 8

9 Digital maps of selected ecosystems distribution, as the initial data source for TEEB Corine Land Cover 1995, 2000, 2006 map&database Woodland Key habitats inventory map&database Grassland inventory map&database Forest State cadastre digital database Digital map of wetlands Digital map of protected areas Ongoing inventory of Habitats of EU importance (till 2015) 9

10 Existing national valuation systems, as the starting point economic valuation source for TEEB Legal background: Law on the Environment Protection states, that: Compensation is necessary, if damaged is made not only to environmental elements, but also to their functions; State of the environment should be restored by recovering damaged environmental elements or their functions 10

11 Existing national valuation systems, as the starting point economic valuation source for TEEB Legal background: Calculation methodologies and basic values established for compensation of damage, caused to main ecosystems, biodiversity and natural resources: Air, water, soil Forest, natural vegetation and its genetic resources Wildlife species and their habitats Protected species and their habitats Natural landscapes and their elements Taxes established, inter alia, for: peat, minerals and water resources use 11

12 Existing national valuation systems, as the starting point economic valuation source for TEEB Main principles of compensation of damage: Compensation based on Consumer Price Index, value depends on: Potential danger for ecosystem/landscape (toxicity, impact area&severity) Ecosystem destruction degree Ecosystem/landscape vulnerability, ability to recover/possibility to restore Ecosystem/site importance for biodiversity and human well-being Impact to animal habitats/breeding sites Species vulnerability, individual age, category of rareness, protection level Economic value of ecosystem goods (forest resources, fish, game species) Importance of supporting/regulating/provisioning services damaged (water purification; hydrological regime maintenance; pest control; habitats for rare species, natural framework, wild foods and medicine, etc.) 12

13 Existing national valuation systems, as the starting point economic valuation source for TEEB Main principles: For destroyed/damaged biodiversity CV depends on: Size of animal species Category of species rareness and protection level (strictly protected species - 300% of species basic compensation value (BCV)) Impact to animal habitats/breeding sites (destroyed % of species BCV) Site importance for biodiversity (damage for species/habitats/breeding grounds, made in protected area - 200% of overall compensation value) Importance of supporting/regulating/provisioning services damaged (water purification; hydrological regime maintenance; pest control; habitats for rare species, natural framework, wild foods and medicine, etc.) 13

14 Existing national valuation systems, as the starting point economic valuation source for TEEB Main principles: For destroyed/damaged biodiversity CV depends on: Ecosystem destruction degree (e.g. by fire, chemicals, wastewater, oil % of overall compensation value) Economic value (forest resources, fish, game species) For destroyed/damaged natural landscape CV depends on: Damaged area and features (relief, vegetation cover, hydrology, hydrography, islands, springs, river-beds, shoals, lakes) Landscape vulnerability (protected landscape % of overall compensation value) 14

15 Existing national valuation systems, as the starting point economic valuation source for TEEB In summary : Importance of ecosystems and biodiversity services and goods is taken into account, but quite generally and indirectly, For use as baseline for economic valuation most suitable are compensation values for destroyed ecosystems and their elements and taxes for use of natural resources 15

16 Main challenges and questions for TEEB in Lithuania during initial period, when issue is new while budget so limited: What it is and why we should take care of? Understanding of importance by stakeholders/high level policy makers What is most important to us? Clear set of ecosystem services, highly important for human well being in Lithuania Where and of what state? Data availability ecosystem services and biodiversity stocks inventory and mapping, status evaluation, monetary values identifying Do community will accept and support? Successful step by step introduction to community, currently being: - suspicious after the Natura 2000 establishment process; - highly sensitive to every sentence with words payment for < > services, additional taxes and similar terrible terms 16

17 Main challenges and questions for TEEB in Lithuania Primary technical questions: As the idea of ecosystem services is quite new and somehow overwhelming, there is obvious lack of common understanding in classification of services and methods/approaches for inventory and valuation Better understanding (more suitable explanations/evidences) of biodiversity and ecosystem services interconnections 17

18 First steps further Pilot study: Initiative name: Lithuanian ecosystem services inventory and valuation: Pilot study Research institution: Center for Environmental Solutions Started: 2010 Initial support: own sources, 2 municipalities, forest enterprises 18

19 First steps further Pilot study: Main tasks for stage I ( ): 1. To establish a primary set of ecosystem services and goods, relevant to Lithuania 2. To elaborate and implement a small-scale national case study, demonstrating ES and their importance to public and policy makers as well as visualizing/proving of procedure/methods for valuation Main tasks for stage II ( /2012): 3. Based on experience and available data, establish a sufficient network of model sites, most average and typical to the regions by demographic, social, natural conditions and ecosystem services set 4. To identify, map and evaluate ES in one of model sites 19

20 First steps further Pilot study: Main tasks for stage III (dependent on funding perspectives): 5. To identify, map and evaluate ES in rest of model sites (spring, 2013) Ambitions (or stage IV?), dependent on funding/capacity/cooperation perspectives: Based on other available (GIS/statistics/monitoring/inventories) data and Pilot study results extrapolation, perform the baseline inventory, mapping and economic evaluation of ecosystem services for the territory of Lithuania 20

21 First steps further Stage I: List of ecosystem services (not itemized) established: Provisioning Regulating Food: Food crops Livestock Capture fisheries&aquaculture Wild Foods Fibre: Timber Linen Wood fuel Fuel crops Peat & minerals Genetic resources Biochemicals & medicines Freshwater Air quality regulation: CO 2 sequestration N, P, S removal Climate regulation: global regional and local Erosion regulation: soil water erosion soil wind erosion Water purification Soil quality regulation Detoxification of waste Disease regulation Pest regulation Noise regulation Natural hazard regulation 21

22 First steps further Stage I: List of ecosystem services (not itemized) established: Cultural Recreation & Amenity Scientific values Educational values Spiritual & religious values Aesthetic values Inspiration Social relations Sense of place Supporting Energy capture (primary production) Nutrient cycling Pollination Habitat Soil formation Main approach and classification - according MA and TEEB, not CICES for this initial stage. 22

23 First steps further Stage I: Small-scale case study procedures: Case study site, common to local community and with recent notable changes, selected Ecosystem services comparative degree of significance for small-case study area evaluated ES with high and medium degree of significance selected for itemisation and further analysis Main ES extent and use evaluated Main ES economic value identified 23

24 First steps further Stage I: Small-scale case study methods: Services/goods availability and actual use intensity: - In-situ observations (inventory and monitoring); - Interviews; - Questionnaires; Monetary evaluation methods: - Market value; - Cost-based (shadow or substitution pricing). 24

25 First steps further Stage I: Small-scale case study - site description: Ecosystem type boreal deciduous forest Distance to big settlement/city 3 km Total area 8.55 ha: - forest 6.5 ha - agricultural area, water, infrastructure 2.05 ha Rivulet segment length 0.2 km 25

26 First steps further Stage I: Small-scale case study - impact: clear-cut (6 ha), 32 ha of agricultural area opened for prevailing winds PREVAILING WINDS

27 First steps further Importance valuation & specifying ES for case study site before impact 27

28 First steps further Results of economic valuation of ES in case study site 28

29 First steps further Stage I: Small-scale case study limitations: Only final ecosystems services and goods ( final products ) taken into account! Mainly actual use of services was analyzed, not the capacity of ecosystem to provide a service! ES, important to the area, but not taken into account: - Provisioning: wild berries, wild flowers, medicine plants, - Regulating: hydrological regime stability, - Cultural: one-day camping, schoolchildren excursions, birdwatching, - All Supporting services, including quite important pollination and habitat services 29

30 E.g. habitat fragmentation: First steps further

31 E.g. habitat fragmentation: First steps further

32 First steps further Stage I: Small-scale case study main added value: In well understandable, clear and acceptable manner introduces to local community the idea of ecosystem and biodiversity services and their importance 32

33 First steps further 3 Stage II: Preliminary set of model sites defined: In Central Lithuania (Kelme district) 2. In Samogitian highlands (Mazeikiai district) 3. Baltic Sea shore (Silute district) 4. In North-East Lithuania (Zarasai district) 5. In the most populated region (Vilnius/Trakai districts) 6. In South-West Lithuania (Vilkaviskis district) 7. Additional area (Kaisiadorys/ Kaunas districts) 8. Additional area (Dainava plain) 33

34 First steps further Stage II: Investigations in first model site started (Sept, 2011) Site name: Tytuv nai Regional Park Background for selection: partially protected area, average density of inhabitants, relatively in the middle of country (climatic factor), relatively close (not too close) to one of five bigger cities, coverage by forest, water bodies, agriculture land close to average, wetlands presence&area is typical, biodiversity conservation areas and recreation areas established 34

35 How situation could be improved? By convincing national stakeholders: Organizing of the first conference in Lithuania on Ecosystem services for national scientists and policymakers (expected: late Nov/early Dec, 2011, in Vilnius) By building capacity a.s.a.p.: Involving of relevant experts from Lithuania into existing and forthcoming joint regional or EU level initiatives 35

36 How situation could be improved? Suggestions for near future: Suggestion 1: Establish an informal (?) network, joining organizations, directly working on ecosystem services evaluation, mapping, inventory or monitoring (e.g. NESIE - Network for Ecosystem Services Inventory and Evaluation, or, alternatively, regional network Balt-NESIE for Baltic Sea, as key ecosystem, region), dedicated to: - have contact list of members and webpage for info upload and storage, - have access to fora for experience exchange, - share of success stories, - discuss problems and methodological peculiarities, - introduce new ideas and initiatives for development or implementing. 36

37 How situation could be improved? Suggestions for near future: Suggestion 2: Establish prioritized list of ecosystem services, containing 2 parts: - Core Set of Ecosystem Services - suitable for measures: conservation, restoring, PES establishment, etc., available to include into policies immediately and to take care of, according to EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2020 (Target 2); - List of other identified ES, requiring more in-deep research, but not ready to include into sectoral policies for the time being. 37

38 Thank You! 38