Cargando…
Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature
Ecosystem markets are proliferating around the world in response to increasing demand for climate change mitigation and provision of other public goods. However, this may lead to perverse outcomes, for example where public funding crowds out private investment or different schemes create trade-offs...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8754326/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35020743 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258334 |
_version_ | 1784632249967181824 |
---|---|
author | Reed, Mark S. Curtis, Tom Gosal, Arjan Kendall, Helen Andersen, Sarah Pyndt Ziv, Guy Attlee, Anais Fitton, Richard G. Hay, Matthew Gibson, Alicia C. Hume, Alex C. Hill, David Mansfield, Jamie L. Martino, Simone Olesen, Asger Strange Prior, Stephen Rodgers, Christopher Rudman, Hannah Tanneberger, Franziska |
author_facet | Reed, Mark S. Curtis, Tom Gosal, Arjan Kendall, Helen Andersen, Sarah Pyndt Ziv, Guy Attlee, Anais Fitton, Richard G. Hay, Matthew Gibson, Alicia C. Hume, Alex C. Hill, David Mansfield, Jamie L. Martino, Simone Olesen, Asger Strange Prior, Stephen Rodgers, Christopher Rudman, Hannah Tanneberger, Franziska |
author_sort | Reed, Mark S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Ecosystem markets are proliferating around the world in response to increasing demand for climate change mitigation and provision of other public goods. However, this may lead to perverse outcomes, for example where public funding crowds out private investment or different schemes create trade-offs between the ecosystem services they each target. The integration of ecosystem markets could address some of these issues but to date there have been few attempts to do this, and there is limited understanding of either the opportunities or barriers to such integration. This paper reports on a comparative analysis of eleven ecosystem markets in operation or close to market in Europe, based on qualitative analysis of 25 interviews, scheme documentation and two focus groups. Our results indicate three distinct types of markets operating from the regional to national scale, with different modes of operation, funding and outcomes: regional ecosystem markets, national carbon markets and green finance. The typology provides new insights into the operation of ecosystem markets in practice, which may challenge traditionally held notions of Payment for Ecosystem Services. Regional ecosystem markets, in particular, represent a departure from traditional models, by using a risk-based funding model and aggregating both supply and demand to overcome issues of free-riding, ecosystem service trade-offs and land manager engagement. Central to all types of market were trusted intermediaries, brokers and platforms to aggregate supply and demand, build trust and lower transaction costs. The paper outlines six options for blending public and private funding for the provision of ecosystem services and proposes a framework for integrating national carbon markets and green finance with regional ecosystem markets. Such integration may significantly increase funding for regenerative agriculture and conservation across multiple habitats and services, whilst addressing issues of additionality and ecosystem service trade-offs between multiple schemes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8754326 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87543262022-01-13 Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature Reed, Mark S. Curtis, Tom Gosal, Arjan Kendall, Helen Andersen, Sarah Pyndt Ziv, Guy Attlee, Anais Fitton, Richard G. Hay, Matthew Gibson, Alicia C. Hume, Alex C. Hill, David Mansfield, Jamie L. Martino, Simone Olesen, Asger Strange Prior, Stephen Rodgers, Christopher Rudman, Hannah Tanneberger, Franziska PLoS One Research Article Ecosystem markets are proliferating around the world in response to increasing demand for climate change mitigation and provision of other public goods. However, this may lead to perverse outcomes, for example where public funding crowds out private investment or different schemes create trade-offs between the ecosystem services they each target. The integration of ecosystem markets could address some of these issues but to date there have been few attempts to do this, and there is limited understanding of either the opportunities or barriers to such integration. This paper reports on a comparative analysis of eleven ecosystem markets in operation or close to market in Europe, based on qualitative analysis of 25 interviews, scheme documentation and two focus groups. Our results indicate three distinct types of markets operating from the regional to national scale, with different modes of operation, funding and outcomes: regional ecosystem markets, national carbon markets and green finance. The typology provides new insights into the operation of ecosystem markets in practice, which may challenge traditionally held notions of Payment for Ecosystem Services. Regional ecosystem markets, in particular, represent a departure from traditional models, by using a risk-based funding model and aggregating both supply and demand to overcome issues of free-riding, ecosystem service trade-offs and land manager engagement. Central to all types of market were trusted intermediaries, brokers and platforms to aggregate supply and demand, build trust and lower transaction costs. The paper outlines six options for blending public and private funding for the provision of ecosystem services and proposes a framework for integrating national carbon markets and green finance with regional ecosystem markets. Such integration may significantly increase funding for regenerative agriculture and conservation across multiple habitats and services, whilst addressing issues of additionality and ecosystem service trade-offs between multiple schemes. Public Library of Science 2022-01-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8754326/ /pubmed/35020743 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258334 Text en © 2022 Reed et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Reed, Mark S. Curtis, Tom Gosal, Arjan Kendall, Helen Andersen, Sarah Pyndt Ziv, Guy Attlee, Anais Fitton, Richard G. Hay, Matthew Gibson, Alicia C. Hume, Alex C. Hill, David Mansfield, Jamie L. Martino, Simone Olesen, Asger Strange Prior, Stephen Rodgers, Christopher Rudman, Hannah Tanneberger, Franziska Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature |
title | Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature |
title_full | Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature |
title_fullStr | Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature |
title_full_unstemmed | Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature |
title_short | Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature |
title_sort | integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8754326/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35020743 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258334 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT reedmarks integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT curtistom integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT gosalarjan integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT kendallhelen integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT andersensarahpyndt integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT zivguy integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT attleeanais integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT fittonrichardg integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT haymatthew integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT gibsonaliciac integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT humealexc integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT hilldavid integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT mansfieldjamiel integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT martinosimone integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT olesenasgerstrange integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT priorstephen integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT rodgerschristopher integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT rudmanhannah integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature AT tannebergerfranziska integratingecosystemmarketstocoordinatelandscapescalepublicbenefitsfromnature |