Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
regional development. The best example of this
is the Mayes Brook restoration and Mayesbrook
Park enhancement scheme in urban east London.
Ecosystem service assessment also helped to
identify a range of cost-beneficial improvements to
scheme design in various case studies.
Studies also found that the weighting of likely
outcomes (e.g. for the east of England, Wareham
and the proposed Pancheshwar Dam case studies),
rather
drainage-led policy that supported food production
and urban development, in favour of working with
natural hydrological processes and recognizing
broader catchment services (Defra, 2005; Everard
et al
., 2009a).
Notwithstanding the novelty of the approach
and associated current shortfalls in practical
methods and its remoteness from current practice,
sustainable outcomes can more readily result
from systemic appraisal of ecosystems and their
wide-ranging beneficiaries. This highlights the
inter-dependencies between ecosystem services
and hence the wider ramifications of decisions
for a variety of stakeholders, including future
generations. It also supports the conclusion in the
east of England case study that: 'Decision making
in the region needs to take into account all the full
range of benefits the natural environment provides
if it is to be sustainable, the ecosystem services
approach offers a way of assessing such values'
(Glaves
than
full
valuation,
did
not
affect
the
confidence
associated
with
the
conclusions
and
recommendations
needed
for
decision-
making.
Discussion
Seven principal lessons emerge from the review of
case studies.
et al
., 2009).
1. System-level assessment may lead
to different outcomes compared with
traditional, discipline-focused
assessment
Ecosystem services provide a structured framework
to explore likely outcomes of proposals, policies or
actions at a systemic level. This avoids a narrow
disciplinary focus, because it considers impacts on
broader benefits, beneficiaries and the interactions
between them. The proposed Pancheshwar Dam
case study shows how consideration of socio-
ecological systems in a fully inter-dependent way
takes account of many wider effects on ecosystems
and the people dependent upon them. These
effects were not considered in the formal project
documentation, which concentrated solely on the
engineered benefits of stored water, hydropower
generation and flood storage. The east of England
case studies also concluded that an overtly habitat-
specific focus may overlook ecosystem services
benefits accruing from the interactions between
different habitats and their potential beneficiaries.
The ecosystem services approach therefore breaks
through the narrow thinking about how specific
habitats support disciplinary interests. Similar
conclusions emerge from the transition from land
2. Ecosystem restoration maximizes
value across all ecosystem services
All the English case studies addressed restoration
of habitat and/or ecosystem functioning, resulting
uniformly in the improvement or maintenance
of all four ecosystem service categories. This
compares with engineering-based solutions in the
Wareham case study and options for housing
development in an urban riparian site in the east of
England case studies. Likewise, the planned piped
water, hydropower and flood storage outcomes of
the proposed Pancheshwar Dam would result in
substantial net degradation of ecosystem services,
affecting the livelihoods of many people. Both the
Mayesbrook Park and Great Yarmouth (east of
England) case studies concluded that ecosystem
restoration was likely to provide a cost-effective
means for achieving health benefits and social
inclusion. One conclusion from the River Glaven
study was that flood risk benefits could justify the
catchment sea trout restoration scheme outright,
notwithstanding the fishery focus of scheme
design. The provision of public benefits, while
avoiding
unanticipated
negative
impacts,
is
a
