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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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