Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo

PtB of IEEP on Nature and Green Economy OPERAs to Oxford univ masters 17 March 2017

•
•
Institute for European Environmental Policy IEEP
Institute for European Environmental Policy IEEP

Lecture by Patrick ten Brink of IEEP on - Nature and the Green Economy, linked to OPERAs RTD project (and others) - to Oxford University Masters course 17 March 2017

1 of 36
Nature and its role in the transition to a Green Economy Patrick ten Brink, IEEP 4 Rue de la Science, Brussels 1000, Belgium 11 Belgrave Road, London, SW1V 1RB, UK www.ieep.eu drussi@ieep.eu ptenbrink@ieep.eu Oxford MSc Environmental Change and Management: 17th March 2017 Brussels
Presentation Structure ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 1. What is a green economy? 2. What is nature’s role in the transition to a green economy? 3. Questions to the audience 4. Conclusions
What is a ? UNEP defines a green economy as “one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities. (UNEP 2011). (UNEP 2011) ‘Towards a Green Economy – Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication, A Synthesis for Policy Makers’, Www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/GER_synthesis_en.pdf
A confusing landscape of similar terms? Green Growth (OECD, 2011) – “fostering economic growth and development, while ensuring that natural assets continue to provide the resources and environmental services on which our well-being relies” Arguably a narrower concept than the green economy. Green New Deals - gained prominence following the 2007-2008 economic and financial crises - Economic policy strategy for ensuring a more economically and environmentally sustainable world economic recovery that could act as a catalyst in a transition to a green economy. (ten Brink et al., 2012 building on UNEP’s March 2009 Policy Brief and Global Green New Deal, Barbier, 2010), …a shorter time scale stimulus to a green economy Sustainable Development (Brundtland Report; SD strategy) - development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. (The Brundtland Report, ‘Our Common Future’ WCED, 1987) …with its economic, social and environmental pillars, SD is arguably a wider concept than the green economy.
Source: building on REES (2003) Ecological Economic Worldview Matter /Energy Waste Solar Energy Heat Matter /Energy ECONOMIC PRODUCTION RECYCLE Waste GROWING ECONOMIC SYSTEM FINITE ECOSYSTEM
Nature and links to the Economy Society Environment Economic Sectors (examples) - Agriculture, hunting, forestry & fishing - Oil and gas; mining & quarrying - Wood and wood products - Food products, beverages & tobacco - Textiles, textile products & leather - Pulp, paper & paper products - Rubber & plastics products - Research & development Outputs from one sector can be intermediate inputs to another Outputs: Products&services Public Sector House- holds Private Sector Man-made capital (inc. financial capital) The Economy €€ € Exports € € Resource depletion InputsfromHumanandSocialCapital Labour,institutions InputsfromNaturalCapital Naturalresourcesandecosystemservices Abiotic resources Ecosystem services Abiotic subsoil assets e.g. provisioning, cultural, & regulating services Biodiversity (Ecosystems, Species, Genes) Abiotic flows e.g. solar energy, wind e.g. mineral, fossil fuels, construction materials Other Resource flows e.g. water DirectbenefitfromNature-inc.ecosystemservices Waste, waste water Pollution, GHGs Polluted land, soil Polluted marine env. Polluted air Climate change Biodiversity loss
GoodGovernance &funding Current Situation Declining Sustainability: Brown, Linear, Economy Resource over-exploitation & pollution pressures Climate Change Biodiversity and natural capital loss Critical ecological & resource thresholds passed or at risk Resource scarcity and limited access to a clean environment Health impacts and man- made natural disasters GDP growth driven An economy that is not resource efficient, low carbon and socially inclusive Ambitions for the Future A Green Economy Improved human well-being & social equity, while reducing env. risks and ecological scarcities Staying within a ‘safe operating space’: resource use within the planet’s regenerative capacities & avoid critical ecological thresholds No net loss of biodiversity & ‘acceptable’ climate change Sustainability for future generations & business: available natural capital, resources & clean environment Health and livelihoods for citizens and communities Beyond GDP metrics An economy decoupled from environmental impacts and resource use Building Blocks in the Transition to a Green Economy Business-as-Usual Approaches Avoiding Unsustainable Trade- offs + Environmental compliance & infrastructure Active environmental management Active Risk Management + Proactive Investment in Natural Capital Pursuing environmental sustainability Eco-efficiency + Circular Economy measures + Decoupling via Radical Innovation & Demand change + + Source: Patrick ten Brink, Leonardo Mazza, Jean-Pierre Schweitzer - own representation Building Blocks in the Transition to a Green Economy
Good governance: improving integration & coherence OPERAs WP4 • Understand how the NC/ESS concepts are integrated into Policy – at EU level and at the country level (Scottish exemplar) • Clarify where there are gaps and needs for further integration in policies • This will help identify cases of win-wins (i.e. good mainstreaming), opportunities for avoiding trade-offs (i.e. where NC/ESS not mainstreamed but where it should be) and overall improvement in the added value of policy making and good governance. • + create a basis for understanding which instruments can help Source: Kettunen et al 2014: WP 4 Deliverable 4.1
NC/ESS: status and opportunities of integration OPERAS WP4 Analysis: Categorising integration Level of integration Conceptual integration Operational integration Comprehensive and explicit All ecosystem services & recognition of contribution to human wellbeing Dedicated instruments enabling comprehensive integration. Explicit but not comprehensive Some ecosystem services & recognition of contribution to human wellbeing Some instruments that proactively address / build on ESS/NC within the policy area. Implicit and incomprehensive Generally focus on preventing negative impacts of a policy sector to ecosystem services and natural capital Some aspects - mainly avoid negative impacts on (some) ecosystem services - integrated into sectoral instruments. No specific integration No recognition (direct / indirect) of ecosystem services and natural capital No instruments exist that would in any way address ESS/NC. Source: Kettunen et al 2014: WP 4 Deliverable 4.1
NC/ESS: status and opportunities of integration OPERAS WP4 Analysis: working insights & examples Policy sector Conceptual integration Operational integration (examples) Air Clean Air Policy Package Clean Air Programme for Europe Negative effects of air pollution to ecosystems are addressed, but not the positive effects that ecosystems have on air quality or consequences of pollution on ESS. Soil Soil Thematic Strategy. EU Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe No dedicated policy instruments; Some aspects integrated into CAP & Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) Water Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources Some indirect proactive elements - e.g recognising the role of natural flood retention areas under the Flood Directive; None of the existing instruments explicitly recognise the role ecosystem services in maintaining water quality or maintaining ground water sources. Agriculture & rural dev. Some ESS promoted under Pillars of the EU Common Agriculture Policy (CAP). Some proactive elements (mainly agri-environment-climate, support to Natura 2000 areas, and non-productive investment measures in Member States’ RDPs) Forestry EU Forest Strategy No separate / dedicated instruments for forest ecosystem services. EU Treaties : limited EU competence for common forest policy Marine & coastal (incl. fisheries) Marine Strategy Framework Directive EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) Some pro-active elements recognising the role of ecosystem service. A number of instruments preventing negative impacts on ecosystems. Regional development / Cohesion Policy Regulations for Cohesion Policy funds (ERDF, ESF and CP) - recognise and addressed ecosystem services explicitly. Opportunities for win-wins of ESS and Reg. Dev / Cohesion policy objectives Not obligatory for the Member States to take up these opportunities. Nor obligatory to integrate ecosystem services into reporting on results / outputs of ERDF and CP funding. Climate Mitigation & Adaptation Mitigation: & EU LULUCF (Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry) accounting rules EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change recognises ecosystems services Mitigation: direct but not comprehensive. e.g. Wetlands Adaptation: mainly indirect, preventing negative impacts on ES / ESS. Only explicit instrument is support to ecosystem-based approaches under EU funds. Bio-energy Ecosystem services are referred to directly in the Renewable Energy Directive There are no EU-level sustainability criteria for solid biomass. Transport & grey infrastructure Union guidelines for the development of the trans- European transport network Indirect, preventing negative impacts on ecosystems - via EU environmental impact assessment procedure.
Nature at the core of the Green Economy ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 Working with nature should be at the heart of the transition to a green economy • Nature is essential to the health and growth of economies, societies and individuals through the provision of a multitude of ecosystem services. • In spite of this, the values of nature to economies and society have often been overlooked and not reflected in the decisions of policy makers, businesses, communities or citizens • This contributes to the loss of biodiversity and subsequent impacts on people and the economy.
Abiotic sub-soil assets: (geological resources) Minerals, earth elements, fossil fuels, gravel, salts... (Depletable) Other abiotic assets: Ozone layer, climate system… (Depletable) Solar Radiation … (Non-depletable) Abiotic flows: (linked to geophysical cycles) Solar, wind, geo-thermal, hydro… (Non-depletable) Material flows: phosphate, fertilizer, fossil fuels, gravel… (Depletable) Other flows: radiation protection (Depletable) Ecosystems as Assets - Ecosystem Capital: Extent, structure and condition of ecosystems e.g. forests, woodlands, rivers, lakes, oceans, coasts, wetlands, tundra, grasslands, croplands, heathlands and urban parks… Genes and Species as Assets (i.e. genetic capital): Rarity, diversity, uniqueness... Ecosystems service flows: Provision of food, fibre, water, energy, medicines… Regulation & maintenance, e.g. of climate, river flow, water purification, pollination, soil erosion… Cultural services, e.g. recreational and spiritual use of nature, scientific knowledge… (Depletable) “Biotic” Assets (linked to ecological systems, processes & their components) (Depletable) Natural Capital (Stock) Source: Components of Natural Capital and Flows of Goods and Services “Abiotic” Assets (linked to geo-physical systems, processes & their components) Flow of Goods and Services
Natural capital, ecosystem services, wellbeing and livelihoods and their integration into stakeholder decision making, policies and instruments HUMAN WELLBEING & LIVELIHOODS Direct livelihood support Food and materials, water… Security & resilience Food security, mitigation of natural disasters, climate change adaptation & mitigation Health (physical & mental) Access to clean air & water, disease control, micro-climate regulation & wellbeing Social relations Social cohesion, integration NATURAL CAPITAL Natura 2000 network and wider green infrastructure Human capital Man-made capital Social capital Source: Own Representation building on MA (2005) and TEEB (2011a) c INSTRUMENTS Planning and zoning (e.g. Natura 2000 site), permitting, regulation & enforcement, investment, EIA & SEA, MBIs, property rights, procurement, information, accounts & assessment et al. Impacts Understanding of benefits & integration in decision making Freedom of choice and action Opportunity to be able to achieve what an individual values doing and being – e.g. access to green space Supporting: nutrient cycling, soil formation, crop pollination ECOSYSTEM SERVICES Cultural: aesthetic, spiritual, recreational, knowledge… Provisioning: food, timber, raw materials, water… Regulating: water purification & retention, climate control, pest & disease control… Mainstreaming via integration in policy and use of instruments INSTITUTIONS & STAKEHOLDERS Government & public institutions, regional & local authorities, health sector, companies, communities, NGOs, academia & citizens. POLICIES Biodiversity, forestry, agriculture & food, fisheries, climate and energy, health, poverty, product policy, regional development, development co-operation, transport, water et al.
Managing the Transition to a Green Economy is Key ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 Managing the transition to a green economy will need to take into account not only the opportunity of win- wins, but also the risks of losses for certain groups and trade-offs across sectors and over time.
9632 584 584 584 1220 1220 8412 987 987 -9318 10821 -10000 -5000 0 5000 10000 15000 Subsidies Restoration costs Storm Protection Commercial profits from mangrove forest Commercial profits from shrimp farming Economic returns from mangrove including fish nursery Economic returns from shrimp farming excluding subsidies Economic value of mangroves including storm protection Economic value of shrimp farming and restoration costs All values are NPV over 9 years and a 10% discount rate, given in 1996 US$.Source: drawn from data from Barbier et al., 2007 and Hanley and Barbier, 2009 Fish nursery Understanding perspectives: Benefits provided by mangroves & shrimp farms: an economic illustration (in US$/ha NPV 9 years 10% discount rate) For further details see Chapter 2, page 13 of the TEEB Water and Wetlands report and associated references
Understanding Nature’s Values is important ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 There must be a clear understanding of the value of nature and how to take this value into account in public and private decisions in light of the multiple benefits it provides. This is one of many ways of assessing the role and importance of nature. Anthropocentric values are one part of the story – intrinsic values and ethical concerns also critical to consider in decision making.
EU’s Natura 2000 network: 28,000 sites ~ 18 % of EU Funding a challenge Costs ~ 5.8 bnEUR/yr Source: Gantioler et al 2010 Natura 2000 benefits Illustrative value of between €200-300 bn/yr ten Brink et al. (2012) Carbon Value: Natura 2000 network stores ~ 9.6 btC (equiv. 35 bt CO2), Worth ~ €607bn-€1,130bn (stock value in 2010) Markandya & Ding in ten Brink et al., 2012 European Commission using the argument of Natura 2000’s values to get support and funding… It also featured in the recent REFIT
Protected areas as promoters of regional economy (Finland) © Wikimedia Simo Räsänen Name or national park Some examples of total 37 Local, accumulative economic impacts of visits (EUR mil / year) Person- years of employme nt Nuuksio 2.1 16 Pallas- Yllastunturi 34.3 450 Oulanka 15.5 200 Etc. According to the assessment €1 investment in national parks and other key protected areas can results in €10 return to local economies. See Kettunen et al. (2012) TEEB Nordic , Kettunen and ten Brink (2013) and Metsahallitus for references
Human & societal well-being depends on nature ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 The rural poor in particular are fundamentally dependent on ecosystem services. Where natural capital is degraded and lost, there is a risk that the livelihoods of entire communities are undermined & humans suffer. Biodiversity is not a luxury of the rich but essential for many of the world’s poor.
Marine Protected Areas increase living standards MPA: Tubbataha Reefs, Philippines - UNESCO World Heritage site: 396 species of corals & higher species diversity than the Great Barrier Reef Problem Recognition – 1998 Bleaching & losses Policy Solution “No-take” areas agreed Tubbataha Reefs Natural Park Act in 2010 + 10 mile buffer zone around marine reserve Impacts of policy  Increase coral cover – 40% 1999-2003, 50% 2004  Fish biomass in nearby reefs doubled since 2000 and fish catches almost doubled 1999 – 2004 Survey: significant increase in living standards 2000 to 2004 Sources: Tongson 2007, Samonte-Tan et al. 2008, Dygico 2006; in TEEBCases for TEEB for local and regional Policy
Human & societal well-being depends on nature Also the Health and wellbeing of citizens in cities is affected significantly by (access to) nature See: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J.-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Tyrväinen L., Hujala T., Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection – Executive summary. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels. http://www.ieep.eu/assets/2073/Health_and_Social_Benefits_of_Nature_-_Final_Report_Executive_Summary_sent.pdf • Understand and communicate benefits • Understand the different stakeholder roles • Communicate the opportunities of integration • Develop recommendations for a way forward
Improved climatic conditions & avoiding heat stress Vitoria-Gasteiz and Salburua Wetlands 5 degree UHI and city high with a vulnerability to heatwaves • Green belt around the city connects urban areas and integrates wetlands, Salburua (Ramsar, No. 1263) and the Zadorra River. • Provide 250,000 citizens opportunities for cooling oases and recreation spaces. Never more than 300 meters from green or blue infrastructure • Vitoria-Gasteiz was European Green Capital in 2012 Natura 2000 Peri-urban GI
Finland, Kuopio – Moved by Nature • Aim: to promote collaboration with the health sector in Finland and allow vulnerable groups to benefit from access to physical activity in natural spaces across Finland • Activities in the pilot study in Kuopio: ice fishing, canoeing & swimming in Lake Kallavesi • 16 men at risk of Type-2 Diabetes involved - reduced average weight by 3.75 kilos each. • Funded by the European Union Social Fund (75%) and public and private organisations, with a total budget of 348 000 €. Outdoor recreation and physical activity Source: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Hujala T., Tyrväinen L., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels.
Physical and mental nature based rehabilitation Alnarp Rehabilitation Garden (Sweden) • Ongoing pilot into the effectiveness of nature based rehabilitation (NBR). Exploring impacts on stress related mental illness, post stroke rehabilitation and war neuroses (i.e. with refugees) • Alnarp garden was the first pilot site, now expanded to 11 gardens, supported by local universities and regional government. • Alnarp results– patients primary care cost dropped 28%, days in hospital fell 64% • 1.3 million euros to treat 250-300 patients per year Source: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Hujala T., Tyrväinen L., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels.
Investments in nature can save money ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 Investments in nature today – whether restoration or protected area management – can save money and promote economic growth in the long term and must therefore be seen as an integral part of the transition to and the foundation of a green economy.
1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 Coral reefs [7] Coastal systems/Mangroves/Estuaries [9] Marine [4] Woodland/Shrubland [7] Lakes/Rivers [26] Inland Wetlands [4] Tropical forest [10] Temperate forest [20] Grassland/Rangeland [6] 2 43 1 7 65 1415131211 10 89 16 Restoration: can be costly, but can offer good returns For example: Germany: peatland restoration: avoidance cost of CO2 ~ 8 to 12 €/t CO2 (0-4 alt. land use). Lower than many other carbon capture and storage options Sources:Aronsonetal.2010 For further details see Chapter 5, page 48 of the TEEB Water and Wetlands report and associated references (Costs: $/ha) Sources: Förster (2010); MLUV MV (2009); Schäfer (2009)
Social Cohesion and Regeneration via Nature Hoge Kempen National Park, Belgium • Closure of last coal mines in the province of Limburg left 40,000 unemployed & vast brownfield areas threatened with post-industrial decline, including large wetland lakes left from extraction areas • 2006: following efforts of local environmental NGO Regional Landschap Kempen en Maasland (RLKM) site became Belgium’s first national park, covering a number of Natura 2000 sites • Investments in conservation on the basis of economic argument - direct/indirect employment FTE 400 jobs, direct economic benefits of ~ 20 MEUR (Van den Bosh, 2012). • Total 128 MEUR invested in the park, compared to an annual indirect revenue creation of 191 MEUR Source: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Hujala T., Tyrväinen L., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels.
City Cooling and Public Access to Green-Blue infrastructure Lyon, Berges du Rhône, France • 2003: heat wave increased mortality in Lyon by 80%, above average for a French city • Rhône River which runs through the city has been at the heart of the solution. • Aim: to increase access to cool & shaded areas, rain water harvesting, sustainable drainage and reduce flood risk by increasing run off. • 2007: reopened public access to the banks of the river (Grand Lyon, 2014). €42 million redevelopment, Berges du Rhône - asphalt car park replaced with 5km of riverside pathway and green spaces • Riverside redevelopments to provide 25,000 new homes and 14,000 new jobs by 2030 Source: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Hujala T., Tyrväinen L., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels.
Identifying synergies: nature based solutions to Socio Economic priorities Brief introduction to an ongoing project & a couple of questions to you!
Nature base solutions can address national socio- economic priorities (project for DGENV, ongoing) Economic growth (incl. sector development / diversification, fiscal consolidation) Jobs and skills (incl. innovation) Public health Regional development Urban development/ regeneration & living environment Demographic change and social justice (incl. social cohesion/equity) Agriculture AT2, BE3, BG1, CY1, CZ2, DK1, FR3, EL2, HU1, IE1, IE4, IT1, IT2, IT3, LT1, LU1, LV2, NL1, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SK3, SI1, ES1, ES2, UK1, SE2 AT2, BE3, BG1, CY1, CZ2, DE2, DK1, FR3, EL2, HU1, IE4, IT1, IT2, IT3, LT1, LU1, LV2, NL1, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI1, ES1, ES2, UK1, SE2 AT2, BE3, BG1, CZ2, DE2, FR3, EL2, LT1, LU1, NL1, PL1, PT1, SI1, ES1 AT2, BE3, BG1, DE2 CY1, CZ2, FR3, EL2, IE1, IT2, IT3, LT1, LU1, LV2, NL1, PL1, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI1, ES1, SE2 BE3 BE3, CY1, CZ2, PL1, PT1, SI1, ES1 Forestry BG1, CY1, FI1, IE4, IT1, LT1, LV1, LV3, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI2, ES2, SE2 BG1, CY1, FI1, IE4, IT1, LT1, LV1, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, SK1, SI2, ES2, SE2 BG1, FI1, LT1, LV3, PL1, PT1 BG1, CY1, FI1, LT1, LV1, PL1, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI2, SE2 FI1, PL1, PT1, SI2 Fisheries CY3, IE4, IT4, PL3, PT3, ES3, SE2 CY3, IE4, IT4, ES3, SE2 ES3 CY3, IT4, ES3, SE2 Tourism AT1, BG3, CY2, CY3, DE3, FI2, FR2, EL3, HU3, LT2, LU2, MT2, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, RO1, RO2, SK2, SE1, SI1, SI3, ES2, ES3, UK1, UK3 AT1, BG3, CY2, CY3, DE3, FI2, FR2, EL3, HU3, LT2, LU2, MT2, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, RO1, RO2, SK2, SE1, SI1, SI3, ES2, ES3, UK1, UK3 BG3, FI2, EL3, LT2, PL3, PT2, RO1, RO2, SK2, SI3, ES2 AT1, BG3, CY2, DE3, FI2, FR2, EL3, HU3, LT2, LU2, MT2, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, RO1, RO2, SK2, SI3, ES2, SE1 AT1 Climate AT3, BE1, BE2, CY1, CY3, CZ1, DK2, FR4, EL1, IE4, LT3, LV1, MT3, NL3, PT3, RO3, ES4, UK1, SE3 AT3, BE1, BE2, CY3, CZ1, DK2, FR4, EL1, IE4, LT3, LV1, MT3, NL3, PT3, RO3, ES4, UK1 AT3, BE1, BE2, DE1, DK3, CY3, CZ1, FR1, FR4, EL1, IE1, LT3, LU3, NL3, PL2, PT3, RO3, SK3, ES4, UK1, SE3 CY1, CY3, CZ1, EL1, LT3, LV1, PT3, SK3, ES4, UK1 AT3, BE1, BE2, CY3, DE1, DK3, FR1, FR4, EL1, IE1, MT3, NL3, RO3, SK3, SE3 AT3, FR4, EL1, PL2, RO3 Health AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FI4, EL1, IE4, MT1, UK3 AT3, BE2, FI4, EL1, MT1 AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FI4, FR1, FR4, EL1, IE2, IE4, , MT1, UK3 CZ3, FI4, UK3 AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FR1, FR4, EL1, IE2, MT1 AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FI4, FR4, EL1, IE2, MT1 Construction, Energy and Transport AT3, BE1, BE2,IE3, IE4, IT1, MT3, NL2, PT1, PT3, ES2, UK2 AT3, BE1, BE2, IE3, IE4, IT1, MT3, NL2, ES2, UK2 AT3, BE1, BE2, DE1, DK3, IE3,, NL2, UK2 AT3, LU3 AT3, BE1, BE2, DE1, DK3,IE3,, LU3, MT3, NL2, UK2, SE3 AT3, BE1, BE2, IE3, LU3
Promising Area: Eco-tourism (Example Luxembourg) Illustrative indicators: • Total area of Natura 2000 and wider attractive landscapes • Availability of nature based recreation areas Current Situation Natura 2000 Accessibility EU Funds Lack of awareness Social norms and habits Labelling schemes Landscape degradation Future potential Agri-tourism, wine tourism, cycle tourism Promotion of physical activity Guides, nature conservation, sport and recreation services Increased rural income and viability RD Links with green infrastructure investments UD Viability of rural communities DSJ Benefits PH JS EG Local/regional investments in infrastructure (hiking trails, cycle paths, etc.) Contribution to priorities: outcomes LU: 66 Natura 2000 sites 83k ha ESF, ERDF, LIFE, EMFF LU: 1000km cycle path 2021 Bed+Bike, Ecolabel Attitude - behaviour gap Goal: develop Luxembourg as a location for eco- tourismLaw on sustainable development in rural areas Lack of visitor management plans Luxembourg Some initiatives in place but potential for growth
Realising Nature based Solutions Questions to you: • What do you as important nature based solutions in your countries – existing ones and ones that should be promoted in the future • What do you see as policy / intervention needed to make it happen? • Who should / could make this happen?
Capitalising on the Benefits: Who can do what? Actor Tools EU • Implementation • Integration and funding National authorities • Green roof regulation • Integration of nature City authorities • Air quality, climate and green infrastructure strategies • Tree planting campaigns Protected area managers • Recruitment: e.g. health wardens • Training volunteers Citizens • Citizen science, mobile applications, guerrilla gardening, advocacy NGOs • Information provision, advocacy Science • Research, dedicated mapping and climatology teams Private Sector • Pilot projects - e.g. care providers and partnerships Improvedcollaborationsforhealth-social-naturesynergies Out soon !
Conclusions 1. Nature, in all its diversity, provides a wide range of benefits and values to society and the economy, referred to as natural capital. But nature is more than “just” Natural capital. 2. A green economy aims to incorporate these values from ecosystem services and biodiversity into decision-making across all levels of governance – biodiversity proofing / mainstreaming. • Seeking to avoid or minimise trade-offs (green the brown) • Env benefits through resource efficiency ( green the brown) • Proactive investment in natural capital (build the green) 3. There are opportunities and risks in transitions to green economies as regards to human welfare and development -- transition management is critical for success. 4. PA management & Green Infrastructure are at the heart of a green economy transition 5. Integration and policy coherence are important governance solutions 6. A multi-stakeholder approach is critical for progress
PtB of IEEP on Nature and Green Economy OPERAs to Oxford univ masters 17 March 2017
Nature in the Transition to a Green Economy ten Brink et al., 2012 TEEB for National and International Policy Makers (ed Patrick ten Brink 2011) TEEB Water and Wetlands Russi et al., 2012 Guide to Multi-benefits of Cohesion Policy Investments in Nature & GI IEEP & Milieu 2013 & Book: On Benefits Assessment for Protected Areas Kettunen & ten Brink (2013) Social and Economic Benefits of Protected Areas - An Assessment Guide IEEP is an independent, not-for-profit institute dedicated to the analysis, understanding and promotion of policies for a sustainable environment. www.ieep.eu. ptenbrink@ieep.eu Further information The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection – ten Brink, Mutafoglu, Schweitzer J.-P., Kettunen M. et al (2016) http://www.ieep.eu/assets/2073/Health_and_Social_Benefits_of_Nature_- _Final_Report_Executive_Summary_sent.pdf

More Related Content

PtB of IEEP on Nature and Green Economy OPERAs to Oxford univ masters 17 March 2017

  • 1. Nature and its role in the transition to a Green Economy Patrick ten Brink, IEEP 4 Rue de la Science, Brussels 1000, Belgium 11 Belgrave Road, London, SW1V 1RB, UK www.ieep.eu drussi@ieep.eu ptenbrink@ieep.eu Oxford MSc Environmental Change and Management: 17th March 2017 Brussels
  • 2. Presentation Structure ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 1. What is a green economy? 2. What is nature’s role in the transition to a green economy? 3. Questions to the audience 4. Conclusions
  • 3. What is a ? UNEP defines a green economy as “one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities. (UNEP 2011). (UNEP 2011) ‘Towards a Green Economy – Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication, A Synthesis for Policy Makers’, Www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/GER_synthesis_en.pdf
  • 4. A confusing landscape of similar terms? Green Growth (OECD, 2011) – “fostering economic growth and development, while ensuring that natural assets continue to provide the resources and environmental services on which our well-being relies” Arguably a narrower concept than the green economy. Green New Deals - gained prominence following the 2007-2008 economic and financial crises - Economic policy strategy for ensuring a more economically and environmentally sustainable world economic recovery that could act as a catalyst in a transition to a green economy. (ten Brink et al., 2012 building on UNEP’s March 2009 Policy Brief and Global Green New Deal, Barbier, 2010), …a shorter time scale stimulus to a green economy Sustainable Development (Brundtland Report; SD strategy) - development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. (The Brundtland Report, ‘Our Common Future’ WCED, 1987) …with its economic, social and environmental pillars, SD is arguably a wider concept than the green economy.
  • 5. Source: building on REES (2003) Ecological Economic Worldview Matter /Energy Waste Solar Energy Heat Matter /Energy ECONOMIC PRODUCTION RECYCLE Waste GROWING ECONOMIC SYSTEM FINITE ECOSYSTEM
  • 6. Nature and links to the Economy Society Environment Economic Sectors (examples) - Agriculture, hunting, forestry & fishing - Oil and gas; mining & quarrying - Wood and wood products - Food products, beverages & tobacco - Textiles, textile products & leather - Pulp, paper & paper products - Rubber & plastics products - Research & development Outputs from one sector can be intermediate inputs to another Outputs: Products&services Public Sector House- holds Private Sector Man-made capital (inc. financial capital) The Economy €€ € Exports € € Resource depletion InputsfromHumanandSocialCapital Labour,institutions InputsfromNaturalCapital Naturalresourcesandecosystemservices Abiotic resources Ecosystem services Abiotic subsoil assets e.g. provisioning, cultural, & regulating services Biodiversity (Ecosystems, Species, Genes) Abiotic flows e.g. solar energy, wind e.g. mineral, fossil fuels, construction materials Other Resource flows e.g. water DirectbenefitfromNature-inc.ecosystemservices Waste, waste water Pollution, GHGs Polluted land, soil Polluted marine env. Polluted air Climate change Biodiversity loss
  • 7. GoodGovernance &funding Current Situation Declining Sustainability: Brown, Linear, Economy Resource over-exploitation & pollution pressures Climate Change Biodiversity and natural capital loss Critical ecological & resource thresholds passed or at risk Resource scarcity and limited access to a clean environment Health impacts and man- made natural disasters GDP growth driven An economy that is not resource efficient, low carbon and socially inclusive Ambitions for the Future A Green Economy Improved human well-being & social equity, while reducing env. risks and ecological scarcities Staying within a ‘safe operating space’: resource use within the planet’s regenerative capacities & avoid critical ecological thresholds No net loss of biodiversity & ‘acceptable’ climate change Sustainability for future generations & business: available natural capital, resources & clean environment Health and livelihoods for citizens and communities Beyond GDP metrics An economy decoupled from environmental impacts and resource use Building Blocks in the Transition to a Green Economy Business-as-Usual Approaches Avoiding Unsustainable Trade- offs + Environmental compliance & infrastructure Active environmental management Active Risk Management + Proactive Investment in Natural Capital Pursuing environmental sustainability Eco-efficiency + Circular Economy measures + Decoupling via Radical Innovation & Demand change + + Source: Patrick ten Brink, Leonardo Mazza, Jean-Pierre Schweitzer - own representation Building Blocks in the Transition to a Green Economy
  • 8. Good governance: improving integration & coherence OPERAs WP4 • Understand how the NC/ESS concepts are integrated into Policy – at EU level and at the country level (Scottish exemplar) • Clarify where there are gaps and needs for further integration in policies • This will help identify cases of win-wins (i.e. good mainstreaming), opportunities for avoiding trade-offs (i.e. where NC/ESS not mainstreamed but where it should be) and overall improvement in the added value of policy making and good governance. • + create a basis for understanding which instruments can help Source: Kettunen et al 2014: WP 4 Deliverable 4.1
  • 9. NC/ESS: status and opportunities of integration OPERAS WP4 Analysis: Categorising integration Level of integration Conceptual integration Operational integration Comprehensive and explicit All ecosystem services & recognition of contribution to human wellbeing Dedicated instruments enabling comprehensive integration. Explicit but not comprehensive Some ecosystem services & recognition of contribution to human wellbeing Some instruments that proactively address / build on ESS/NC within the policy area. Implicit and incomprehensive Generally focus on preventing negative impacts of a policy sector to ecosystem services and natural capital Some aspects - mainly avoid negative impacts on (some) ecosystem services - integrated into sectoral instruments. No specific integration No recognition (direct / indirect) of ecosystem services and natural capital No instruments exist that would in any way address ESS/NC. Source: Kettunen et al 2014: WP 4 Deliverable 4.1
  • 10. NC/ESS: status and opportunities of integration OPERAS WP4 Analysis: working insights & examples Policy sector Conceptual integration Operational integration (examples) Air Clean Air Policy Package Clean Air Programme for Europe Negative effects of air pollution to ecosystems are addressed, but not the positive effects that ecosystems have on air quality or consequences of pollution on ESS. Soil Soil Thematic Strategy. EU Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe No dedicated policy instruments; Some aspects integrated into CAP & Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) Water Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources Some indirect proactive elements - e.g recognising the role of natural flood retention areas under the Flood Directive; None of the existing instruments explicitly recognise the role ecosystem services in maintaining water quality or maintaining ground water sources. Agriculture & rural dev. Some ESS promoted under Pillars of the EU Common Agriculture Policy (CAP). Some proactive elements (mainly agri-environment-climate, support to Natura 2000 areas, and non-productive investment measures in Member States’ RDPs) Forestry EU Forest Strategy No separate / dedicated instruments for forest ecosystem services. EU Treaties : limited EU competence for common forest policy Marine & coastal (incl. fisheries) Marine Strategy Framework Directive EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) Some pro-active elements recognising the role of ecosystem service. A number of instruments preventing negative impacts on ecosystems. Regional development / Cohesion Policy Regulations for Cohesion Policy funds (ERDF, ESF and CP) - recognise and addressed ecosystem services explicitly. Opportunities for win-wins of ESS and Reg. Dev / Cohesion policy objectives Not obligatory for the Member States to take up these opportunities. Nor obligatory to integrate ecosystem services into reporting on results / outputs of ERDF and CP funding. Climate Mitigation & Adaptation Mitigation: & EU LULUCF (Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry) accounting rules EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change recognises ecosystems services Mitigation: direct but not comprehensive. e.g. Wetlands Adaptation: mainly indirect, preventing negative impacts on ES / ESS. Only explicit instrument is support to ecosystem-based approaches under EU funds. Bio-energy Ecosystem services are referred to directly in the Renewable Energy Directive There are no EU-level sustainability criteria for solid biomass. Transport & grey infrastructure Union guidelines for the development of the trans- European transport network Indirect, preventing negative impacts on ecosystems - via EU environmental impact assessment procedure.
  • 11. Nature at the core of the Green Economy ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 Working with nature should be at the heart of the transition to a green economy • Nature is essential to the health and growth of economies, societies and individuals through the provision of a multitude of ecosystem services. • In spite of this, the values of nature to economies and society have often been overlooked and not reflected in the decisions of policy makers, businesses, communities or citizens • This contributes to the loss of biodiversity and subsequent impacts on people and the economy.
  • 12. Abiotic sub-soil assets: (geological resources) Minerals, earth elements, fossil fuels, gravel, salts... (Depletable) Other abiotic assets: Ozone layer, climate system… (Depletable) Solar Radiation … (Non-depletable) Abiotic flows: (linked to geophysical cycles) Solar, wind, geo-thermal, hydro… (Non-depletable) Material flows: phosphate, fertilizer, fossil fuels, gravel… (Depletable) Other flows: radiation protection (Depletable) Ecosystems as Assets - Ecosystem Capital: Extent, structure and condition of ecosystems e.g. forests, woodlands, rivers, lakes, oceans, coasts, wetlands, tundra, grasslands, croplands, heathlands and urban parks… Genes and Species as Assets (i.e. genetic capital): Rarity, diversity, uniqueness... Ecosystems service flows: Provision of food, fibre, water, energy, medicines… Regulation & maintenance, e.g. of climate, river flow, water purification, pollination, soil erosion… Cultural services, e.g. recreational and spiritual use of nature, scientific knowledge… (Depletable) “Biotic” Assets (linked to ecological systems, processes & their components) (Depletable) Natural Capital (Stock) Source: Components of Natural Capital and Flows of Goods and Services “Abiotic” Assets (linked to geo-physical systems, processes & their components) Flow of Goods and Services
  • 13. Natural capital, ecosystem services, wellbeing and livelihoods and their integration into stakeholder decision making, policies and instruments HUMAN WELLBEING & LIVELIHOODS Direct livelihood support Food and materials, water… Security & resilience Food security, mitigation of natural disasters, climate change adaptation & mitigation Health (physical & mental) Access to clean air & water, disease control, micro-climate regulation & wellbeing Social relations Social cohesion, integration NATURAL CAPITAL Natura 2000 network and wider green infrastructure Human capital Man-made capital Social capital Source: Own Representation building on MA (2005) and TEEB (2011a) c INSTRUMENTS Planning and zoning (e.g. Natura 2000 site), permitting, regulation & enforcement, investment, EIA & SEA, MBIs, property rights, procurement, information, accounts & assessment et al. Impacts Understanding of benefits & integration in decision making Freedom of choice and action Opportunity to be able to achieve what an individual values doing and being – e.g. access to green space Supporting: nutrient cycling, soil formation, crop pollination ECOSYSTEM SERVICES Cultural: aesthetic, spiritual, recreational, knowledge… Provisioning: food, timber, raw materials, water… Regulating: water purification & retention, climate control, pest & disease control… Mainstreaming via integration in policy and use of instruments INSTITUTIONS & STAKEHOLDERS Government & public institutions, regional & local authorities, health sector, companies, communities, NGOs, academia & citizens. POLICIES Biodiversity, forestry, agriculture & food, fisheries, climate and energy, health, poverty, product policy, regional development, development co-operation, transport, water et al.
  • 14. Managing the Transition to a Green Economy is Key ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 Managing the transition to a green economy will need to take into account not only the opportunity of win- wins, but also the risks of losses for certain groups and trade-offs across sectors and over time.
  • 15. 9632 584 584 584 1220 1220 8412 987 987 -9318 10821 -10000 -5000 0 5000 10000 15000 Subsidies Restoration costs Storm Protection Commercial profits from mangrove forest Commercial profits from shrimp farming Economic returns from mangrove including fish nursery Economic returns from shrimp farming excluding subsidies Economic value of mangroves including storm protection Economic value of shrimp farming and restoration costs All values are NPV over 9 years and a 10% discount rate, given in 1996 US$.Source: drawn from data from Barbier et al., 2007 and Hanley and Barbier, 2009 Fish nursery Understanding perspectives: Benefits provided by mangroves & shrimp farms: an economic illustration (in US$/ha NPV 9 years 10% discount rate) For further details see Chapter 2, page 13 of the TEEB Water and Wetlands report and associated references
  • 16. Understanding Nature’s Values is important ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 There must be a clear understanding of the value of nature and how to take this value into account in public and private decisions in light of the multiple benefits it provides. This is one of many ways of assessing the role and importance of nature. Anthropocentric values are one part of the story – intrinsic values and ethical concerns also critical to consider in decision making.
  • 17. EU’s Natura 2000 network: 28,000 sites ~ 18 % of EU Funding a challenge Costs ~ 5.8 bnEUR/yr Source: Gantioler et al 2010 Natura 2000 benefits Illustrative value of between €200-300 bn/yr ten Brink et al. (2012) Carbon Value: Natura 2000 network stores ~ 9.6 btC (equiv. 35 bt CO2), Worth ~ €607bn-€1,130bn (stock value in 2010) Markandya & Ding in ten Brink et al., 2012 European Commission using the argument of Natura 2000’s values to get support and funding… It also featured in the recent REFIT
  • 18. Protected areas as promoters of regional economy (Finland) © Wikimedia Simo Räsänen Name or national park Some examples of total 37 Local, accumulative economic impacts of visits (EUR mil / year) Person- years of employme nt Nuuksio 2.1 16 Pallas- Yllastunturi 34.3 450 Oulanka 15.5 200 Etc. According to the assessment €1 investment in national parks and other key protected areas can results in €10 return to local economies. See Kettunen et al. (2012) TEEB Nordic , Kettunen and ten Brink (2013) and Metsahallitus for references
  • 19. Human & societal well-being depends on nature ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 The rural poor in particular are fundamentally dependent on ecosystem services. Where natural capital is degraded and lost, there is a risk that the livelihoods of entire communities are undermined & humans suffer. Biodiversity is not a luxury of the rich but essential for many of the world’s poor.
  • 20. Marine Protected Areas increase living standards MPA: Tubbataha Reefs, Philippines - UNESCO World Heritage site: 396 species of corals & higher species diversity than the Great Barrier Reef Problem Recognition – 1998 Bleaching & losses Policy Solution “No-take” areas agreed Tubbataha Reefs Natural Park Act in 2010 + 10 mile buffer zone around marine reserve Impacts of policy  Increase coral cover – 40% 1999-2003, 50% 2004  Fish biomass in nearby reefs doubled since 2000 and fish catches almost doubled 1999 – 2004 Survey: significant increase in living standards 2000 to 2004 Sources: Tongson 2007, Samonte-Tan et al. 2008, Dygico 2006; in TEEBCases for TEEB for local and regional Policy
  • 21. Human & societal well-being depends on nature Also the Health and wellbeing of citizens in cities is affected significantly by (access to) nature See: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J.-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Tyrväinen L., Hujala T., Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection – Executive summary. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels. http://www.ieep.eu/assets/2073/Health_and_Social_Benefits_of_Nature_-_Final_Report_Executive_Summary_sent.pdf • Understand and communicate benefits • Understand the different stakeholder roles • Communicate the opportunities of integration • Develop recommendations for a way forward
  • 22. Improved climatic conditions & avoiding heat stress Vitoria-Gasteiz and Salburua Wetlands 5 degree UHI and city high with a vulnerability to heatwaves • Green belt around the city connects urban areas and integrates wetlands, Salburua (Ramsar, No. 1263) and the Zadorra River. • Provide 250,000 citizens opportunities for cooling oases and recreation spaces. Never more than 300 meters from green or blue infrastructure • Vitoria-Gasteiz was European Green Capital in 2012 Natura 2000 Peri-urban GI
  • 23. Finland, Kuopio – Moved by Nature • Aim: to promote collaboration with the health sector in Finland and allow vulnerable groups to benefit from access to physical activity in natural spaces across Finland • Activities in the pilot study in Kuopio: ice fishing, canoeing & swimming in Lake Kallavesi • 16 men at risk of Type-2 Diabetes involved - reduced average weight by 3.75 kilos each. • Funded by the European Union Social Fund (75%) and public and private organisations, with a total budget of 348 000 €. Outdoor recreation and physical activity Source: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Hujala T., Tyrväinen L., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels.
  • 24. Physical and mental nature based rehabilitation Alnarp Rehabilitation Garden (Sweden) • Ongoing pilot into the effectiveness of nature based rehabilitation (NBR). Exploring impacts on stress related mental illness, post stroke rehabilitation and war neuroses (i.e. with refugees) • Alnarp garden was the first pilot site, now expanded to 11 gardens, supported by local universities and regional government. • Alnarp results– patients primary care cost dropped 28%, days in hospital fell 64% • 1.3 million euros to treat 250-300 patients per year Source: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Hujala T., Tyrväinen L., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels.
  • 25. Investments in nature can save money ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy. http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157 Investments in nature today – whether restoration or protected area management – can save money and promote economic growth in the long term and must therefore be seen as an integral part of the transition to and the foundation of a green economy.
  • 26. 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 Coral reefs [7] Coastal systems/Mangroves/Estuaries [9] Marine [4] Woodland/Shrubland [7] Lakes/Rivers [26] Inland Wetlands [4] Tropical forest [10] Temperate forest [20] Grassland/Rangeland [6] 2 43 1 7 65 1415131211 10 89 16 Restoration: can be costly, but can offer good returns For example: Germany: peatland restoration: avoidance cost of CO2 ~ 8 to 12 €/t CO2 (0-4 alt. land use). Lower than many other carbon capture and storage options Sources:Aronsonetal.2010 For further details see Chapter 5, page 48 of the TEEB Water and Wetlands report and associated references (Costs: $/ha) Sources: Förster (2010); MLUV MV (2009); Schäfer (2009)
  • 27. Social Cohesion and Regeneration via Nature Hoge Kempen National Park, Belgium • Closure of last coal mines in the province of Limburg left 40,000 unemployed & vast brownfield areas threatened with post-industrial decline, including large wetland lakes left from extraction areas • 2006: following efforts of local environmental NGO Regional Landschap Kempen en Maasland (RLKM) site became Belgium’s first national park, covering a number of Natura 2000 sites • Investments in conservation on the basis of economic argument - direct/indirect employment FTE 400 jobs, direct economic benefits of ~ 20 MEUR (Van den Bosh, 2012). • Total 128 MEUR invested in the park, compared to an annual indirect revenue creation of 191 MEUR Source: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Hujala T., Tyrväinen L., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels.
  • 28. City Cooling and Public Access to Green-Blue infrastructure Lyon, Berges du Rhône, France • 2003: heat wave increased mortality in Lyon by 80%, above average for a French city • Rhône River which runs through the city has been at the heart of the solution. • Aim: to increase access to cool & shaded areas, rain water harvesting, sustainable drainage and reduce flood risk by increasing run off. • 2007: reopened public access to the banks of the river (Grand Lyon, 2014). €42 million redevelopment, Berges du Rhône - asphalt car park replaced with 5km of riverside pathway and green spaces • Riverside redevelopments to provide 25,000 new homes and 14,000 new jobs by 2030 Source: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Hujala T., Tyrväinen L., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection. A report for the European Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels.
  • 29. Identifying synergies: nature based solutions to Socio Economic priorities Brief introduction to an ongoing project & a couple of questions to you!
  • 30. Nature base solutions can address national socio- economic priorities (project for DGENV, ongoing) Economic growth (incl. sector development / diversification, fiscal consolidation) Jobs and skills (incl. innovation) Public health Regional development Urban development/ regeneration & living environment Demographic change and social justice (incl. social cohesion/equity) Agriculture AT2, BE3, BG1, CY1, CZ2, DK1, FR3, EL2, HU1, IE1, IE4, IT1, IT2, IT3, LT1, LU1, LV2, NL1, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SK3, SI1, ES1, ES2, UK1, SE2 AT2, BE3, BG1, CY1, CZ2, DE2, DK1, FR3, EL2, HU1, IE4, IT1, IT2, IT3, LT1, LU1, LV2, NL1, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI1, ES1, ES2, UK1, SE2 AT2, BE3, BG1, CZ2, DE2, FR3, EL2, LT1, LU1, NL1, PL1, PT1, SI1, ES1 AT2, BE3, BG1, DE2 CY1, CZ2, FR3, EL2, IE1, IT2, IT3, LT1, LU1, LV2, NL1, PL1, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI1, ES1, SE2 BE3 BE3, CY1, CZ2, PL1, PT1, SI1, ES1 Forestry BG1, CY1, FI1, IE4, IT1, LT1, LV1, LV3, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI2, ES2, SE2 BG1, CY1, FI1, IE4, IT1, LT1, LV1, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, SK1, SI2, ES2, SE2 BG1, FI1, LT1, LV3, PL1, PT1 BG1, CY1, FI1, LT1, LV1, PL1, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI2, SE2 FI1, PL1, PT1, SI2 Fisheries CY3, IE4, IT4, PL3, PT3, ES3, SE2 CY3, IE4, IT4, ES3, SE2 ES3 CY3, IT4, ES3, SE2 Tourism AT1, BG3, CY2, CY3, DE3, FI2, FR2, EL3, HU3, LT2, LU2, MT2, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, RO1, RO2, SK2, SE1, SI1, SI3, ES2, ES3, UK1, UK3 AT1, BG3, CY2, CY3, DE3, FI2, FR2, EL3, HU3, LT2, LU2, MT2, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, RO1, RO2, SK2, SE1, SI1, SI3, ES2, ES3, UK1, UK3 BG3, FI2, EL3, LT2, PL3, PT2, RO1, RO2, SK2, SI3, ES2 AT1, BG3, CY2, DE3, FI2, FR2, EL3, HU3, LT2, LU2, MT2, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, RO1, RO2, SK2, SI3, ES2, SE1 AT1 Climate AT3, BE1, BE2, CY1, CY3, CZ1, DK2, FR4, EL1, IE4, LT3, LV1, MT3, NL3, PT3, RO3, ES4, UK1, SE3 AT3, BE1, BE2, CY3, CZ1, DK2, FR4, EL1, IE4, LT3, LV1, MT3, NL3, PT3, RO3, ES4, UK1 AT3, BE1, BE2, DE1, DK3, CY3, CZ1, FR1, FR4, EL1, IE1, LT3, LU3, NL3, PL2, PT3, RO3, SK3, ES4, UK1, SE3 CY1, CY3, CZ1, EL1, LT3, LV1, PT3, SK3, ES4, UK1 AT3, BE1, BE2, CY3, DE1, DK3, FR1, FR4, EL1, IE1, MT3, NL3, RO3, SK3, SE3 AT3, FR4, EL1, PL2, RO3 Health AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FI4, EL1, IE4, MT1, UK3 AT3, BE2, FI4, EL1, MT1 AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FI4, FR1, FR4, EL1, IE2, IE4, , MT1, UK3 CZ3, FI4, UK3 AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FR1, FR4, EL1, IE2, MT1 AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FI4, FR4, EL1, IE2, MT1 Construction, Energy and Transport AT3, BE1, BE2,IE3, IE4, IT1, MT3, NL2, PT1, PT3, ES2, UK2 AT3, BE1, BE2, IE3, IE4, IT1, MT3, NL2, ES2, UK2 AT3, BE1, BE2, DE1, DK3, IE3,, NL2, UK2 AT3, LU3 AT3, BE1, BE2, DE1, DK3,IE3,, LU3, MT3, NL2, UK2, SE3 AT3, BE1, BE2, IE3, LU3
  • 31. Promising Area: Eco-tourism (Example Luxembourg) Illustrative indicators: • Total area of Natura 2000 and wider attractive landscapes • Availability of nature based recreation areas Current Situation Natura 2000 Accessibility EU Funds Lack of awareness Social norms and habits Labelling schemes Landscape degradation Future potential Agri-tourism, wine tourism, cycle tourism Promotion of physical activity Guides, nature conservation, sport and recreation services Increased rural income and viability RD Links with green infrastructure investments UD Viability of rural communities DSJ Benefits PH JS EG Local/regional investments in infrastructure (hiking trails, cycle paths, etc.) Contribution to priorities: outcomes LU: 66 Natura 2000 sites 83k ha ESF, ERDF, LIFE, EMFF LU: 1000km cycle path 2021 Bed+Bike, Ecolabel Attitude - behaviour gap Goal: develop Luxembourg as a location for eco- tourismLaw on sustainable development in rural areas Lack of visitor management plans Luxembourg Some initiatives in place but potential for growth
  • 32. Realising Nature based Solutions Questions to you: • What do you as important nature based solutions in your countries – existing ones and ones that should be promoted in the future • What do you see as policy / intervention needed to make it happen? • Who should / could make this happen?
  • 33. Capitalising on the Benefits: Who can do what? Actor Tools EU • Implementation • Integration and funding National authorities • Green roof regulation • Integration of nature City authorities • Air quality, climate and green infrastructure strategies • Tree planting campaigns Protected area managers • Recruitment: e.g. health wardens • Training volunteers Citizens • Citizen science, mobile applications, guerrilla gardening, advocacy NGOs • Information provision, advocacy Science • Research, dedicated mapping and climatology teams Private Sector • Pilot projects - e.g. care providers and partnerships Improvedcollaborationsforhealth-social-naturesynergies Out soon !
  • 34. Conclusions 1. Nature, in all its diversity, provides a wide range of benefits and values to society and the economy, referred to as natural capital. But nature is more than “just” Natural capital. 2. A green economy aims to incorporate these values from ecosystem services and biodiversity into decision-making across all levels of governance – biodiversity proofing / mainstreaming. • Seeking to avoid or minimise trade-offs (green the brown) • Env benefits through resource efficiency ( green the brown) • Proactive investment in natural capital (build the green) 3. There are opportunities and risks in transitions to green economies as regards to human welfare and development -- transition management is critical for success. 4. PA management & Green Infrastructure are at the heart of a green economy transition 5. Integration and policy coherence are important governance solutions 6. A multi-stakeholder approach is critical for progress
  • 36. Nature in the Transition to a Green Economy ten Brink et al., 2012 TEEB for National and International Policy Makers (ed Patrick ten Brink 2011) TEEB Water and Wetlands Russi et al., 2012 Guide to Multi-benefits of Cohesion Policy Investments in Nature & GI IEEP & Milieu 2013 & Book: On Benefits Assessment for Protected Areas Kettunen & ten Brink (2013) Social and Economic Benefits of Protected Areas - An Assessment Guide IEEP is an independent, not-for-profit institute dedicated to the analysis, understanding and promotion of policies for a sustainable environment. www.ieep.eu. ptenbrink@ieep.eu Further information The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection – ten Brink, Mutafoglu, Schweitzer J.-P., Kettunen M. et al (2016) http://www.ieep.eu/assets/2073/Health_and_Social_Benefits_of_Nature_- _Final_Report_Executive_Summary_sent.pdf