Transcript Economic Localization in the Bay Area

Partnerships for
Ecosystem Services Research:
three examples
Steve Colt & Aaron Poe
UAA & Chugach National Forest
[email protected] & [email protected]
Alaska EPSCoR 2012 All-hands
May 24, 2012
Challenges of ES Research
“the benefits people obtain from ecosystems” (MEA)
Challenges: multiple disciplines
“the benefits people obtain from ecosystems”
Eco-nomics
(social science)
Eco-logy
(natural science)
More challenges
• Multiple entities
– science providers (FS, FWS, UAA, UAF…)
– mgmt jurisdictions (FS, FWS, NPS, …)
– funding sources
– stakeholders / users / decision-makers
(…)
–
Example 1:
Chugach & Kenai
Climate Vulnerability Assessment
Chugach National Forest
UAA – ISER, ENRI, AKNHP
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge
Forest Service Research - PNW
UAF - SNAP
National Park Service – SW AK Network
USGS Climate Science Center
State and Private Forestry
NOAA – NMFS Habitat Conservation
Steve Colt
Aaron Poe
Greg Hayward
Classrooms for Climate
May 4 -7, 2011
A Symposium on the changing Chugach, northern
ecosystems and the implications for
science & society
www.uaa.alaska.edu/classroomsforclimate
Project Purpose: Assess vulnerability of key
ecosystem and social/economic services
Useful to managers – set adaptation priorities
Useful to constituents – make business
decisions
C Pat and Greg Hayward
It’s getting hot in here…
Projected
Projected
2090-2099
Historical 2050-2059
1960-99
Adaptation
LCC boundaries as Sub-regions of Analysis
CLIMATE CHANGE
Downscale Models
Vulnerability
Projections andAssessmnt
trends
Economic/Social/Ecological
Characteristics
SENSITIVITY
Degree to which asset is
likely to be impacted
Potential Impact
Changes that may occur
without adaptation action
EXPOSURE
Types and amounts of stress
experienced by asset
Adaptive Capacity
Ability to cope with expected
change
Describe Vulnerability
Five Emphasis Areas…
Coasts and Sea-scapes Tourism, productive systems
Snow and Ice Snow sports, visuals, hydrology, etc.
Cultural Resources sites, historic districts and practices
Salmon A defining ecological service of the region
Vegetation and Species biome shift through lens of key tree
species, important ungulates, and invasive species
Common Analysis Parameters..
• A2 and A1B emission scenarios
• Down-scaled climate data for 20, 40, and 60 year
horizons from SNAP
• 1969-1990 historical range for baseline of observed
• Focus on means and extremes…
Forest Service ‘knows’ UNCERTAINTY…
Northwest Forest Plan,
• FS experienced
managing stressed -- Tongass LMP, Grassland
management
ecosystems
Therefore, FS is well positioned to play
-- leadership role in management of
wildlands
• Managing in face
Different form of uncertainty
of climate change -- Need different expertise
Need careful ID of priorities
WILL be different
Critical need for partnerships
Our first steps toward
Forest Plan Revision…
• Climate Vulnerability
Assessment
• Distinct Roles and
Contributions --a
landscape-values
analysis with Dr.
Shannon Donovan
Example 2 (2 min):
ES in Mat-Su Borough
The Nature Conservancy
UAA-ISER
Earth Economics, USFWS,
Bulliitt Foundation, Greatland
Trust, MSB Planning
1. Relationship of property values to ES
2. Fiscal impacts of alternative land use policies
3. Choice experiment
Which services
do people value,
and how much?
Example 3 (2 min):
Valuation of saltwater charter sport
fishing in Southeast Alaska
Ginny Fay, Darcy Dugan, Steve Colt
AK Conservation Fdn, Moore
Fdn, of
BP-CP
UAand
Fdn,
Wilderness
Society, ADF&G, UAAInstitute
Social
Economic
Research
ISER, UAF-SNAP
University of Alaska Anchorage
UAA-CNF Climate Symposium
May 5, 2011
Interruption: Quiz:
What SE Alaska tourism sub-industry
generated $16 million in revenue from
one activity in 2006?
Helicopter-based dog
mushing excursions, Juneau
Back to sport fishing
How much revenue from charter
sport fish operations?
Which communities get it?
• ADF&G pre-existing (but dormant!) data
– Quantity (fishing effort by area fished)
• Interviews & Web
– Price information
• Business licenses & Web
– associated reality checks
Results:
Total SE AK:
143,000 clients
37,560 trips
$73.5 million
gross revenue
Example of
geographic
specificity
Variation in revenue per square km
Revenue per square km, by stat area
average = $2,023
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
1
11
21
31
41
51
61
71
81
91
101
111
121
131
141
151
161
171
181
191
201
211
221
231
-
Highest revenue per
square km:
Logbook Areas 101451
and 101452 averaged
together
$49,294 per square km
So What?
• Collaboration can be same-time, same-place
– Needs effort and commitment
– Especially from middle-upper mgmt. of science
provider institutions
– (Got Match?)
• Can also be asynchronous, “virtual”
– Use existing data in new ways
– Requires sharing
– (Got Data?)
• Funders pay piper; can call tune
References
•
•
N. Raheema, , , S. Coltb, , E. Fleishmanc, m, 1, , J. Talberthd, , P. Swedeene, , K.J. Boylef, ,
M. Ruddg, , R.D. Lopezh, 2, , D. Crockeri, , D. Bohanj, , T. O'Higginsk, , C. Willerl, , R.M.
Boumansm, . 2012. Application of non-market valuation to California's coastal
policy decisions. Marine Policy. Available online 23 February 2012.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.01.005
Fay, G.; Dugan, D.; Fay-Hiltner, I.; Wilson, M.; Colt, S. 2007. Testing a methodology
for estimating the economic significance of saltwater charter fishing in Southeast
Alaska. Anchorage: ISER.
http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu/Publications/EconSE_Saltwater_Charter_Fish_070
530.pdf