Details zur Publikation

Kategorie Textpublikation
Referenztyp Zeitschriften
DOI 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.02.015
Titel (primär) Monetary accounting of ecosystem services: A test case for Limburg province, the Netherlands
Autor Remme, R.P.; Edens, B.; Schröter, M.; Hein, L.
Quelle Ecological Economics
Erscheinungsjahr 2015
Department iDiv; ESS
Band/Volume 112
Seite von 116
Seite bis 128
Sprache englisch
Keywords Monetary valuation; Ecosystem accounting; SEEA; Mapping; Monitoring; Spatial analysis
UFZ Querschnittsthemen RU1
Abstract Ecosystem accounting aims to provide a better understanding of ecosystem contributions to the economy in a spatially explicit way. Ecosystem accounting monitors ecosystem services and measures their monetary value using exchange values consistent with the System of National Accounts (SNA). We pilot monetary ecosystem accounting in a case study in Limburg province, the Netherlands. Seven ecosystem services are modelled and valued: crop production, fodder production, drinking water production, air quality regulation, carbon sequestration, nature tourism and hunting. We develop monetary ecosystem accounts that specify values generated by ecosystem services per hectare, per municipality and per land cover type. We analyse the relative importance of public and private ecosystem services. We found that the SNA-aligned monetary value of modelled ecosystem services for Limburg was around €112 million in 2010, with an average value of €508 per hectare. Ecosystem services with the highest values were crop production, nature tourism and fodder production. Due to the exclusion of consumer surplus in SNA valuation, calculated values are considerably lower than those typically found in welfare-based valuation approaches. We demonstrate the feasibility of valuing ecosystem services in a national accounting framework.
dauerhafte UFZ-Verlinkung
Remme, R.P., Edens, B., Schröter, M., Hein, L. (2015):
Monetary accounting of ecosystem services: A test case for Limburg province, the Netherlands
Ecol. Econ. 112 , 116 - 128 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.02.015