What are ecosystem services?

Ecosystem services are the benefits people obtain from ecosystems. These include provisioning services such as food and water; regulating services such as flood and disease control; cultural services such as spiritual, recreational, and cultural benefits; and supporting services, such as nutrient cycling, that maintain the conditions for life on Earth (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005).

Wetlands in their natural state are often seen as worthless, with their only value in their conversion to more profitable uses such as agriculture or power provision. Often when management decisions are taken that impact wetlands, consideration of the values from the majority of the ecosystem services (especially the non-marketed goods and services) that they provide are not taken. This does not just underestimate the importance of wetlands, it also marginalises the (often poor) groups who depend on these values (Emerton 2009). Therefore, to better inform management decisions an assessment of the variety of ecosystem services and their values to all stakeholders is needed.

This section of the toolkit (mostly taken from Emerton 2009), includes an overview to wetland valuation, a range of methods through which valuation can be made (both economic and non-economic), a review of research design techniques and requirements, analysis of wetland valuation data and the mapping of ecosystem services.

The key steps in undertaking a wetland ecosystem service valuation assessment is summarised in figure 1. Within the HighARCS project, a non-economic participatory valuation technique was undertaken (Stage III) – see HighARCS Ecosystem service valuation - training presentation in the Tools section. This approach has advantages when working with subsistence based economies, as it allows people to define wetland values within the context of their own perceptions, needs and priorities rather than according to externally-imposed categories or market prices (Emerton 2009). The “$” value of a service (the aim through economic valuations) often has little relevance to these subsistence based (non-market) economies and can undervalue a services ‘importance’ to the communities.

Major driving forces facing developing countries include industrialisation, globalisation, population growth, rural-urban migration and climate change, resulting in impacts on biodiversity, ecosystems and livelihoods, in particular the livelihoods of poor people, and increasingly in vulnerable upland and highland areas. Although the linkages between environmental degradation and heightened vulnerability for poor communities are well known, only limited information is available concerning communities in highland areas, and even less regarding those dependent on aquatic resources and associated ecosystem services in such settings. Furthermore, the role of aquatic resources, whether appropriated to irrigate agriculture, sustain fisheries or support small-scale aquaculture in poor livelihoods and food-insecure households is not well understood. Given the dynamic nature of highland aquatic resources, due to seasonality, climate induced shocks or anthropogenic trends, including global warming, there is an urgent need to develop improved knowledge of changing, and potentially conflicting demands.

Adopting an appropriate framework to guide the assessment of diverse livelihoods can help ensure a more complete understanding of constraints and opportunities for different user groups is developed. The Sustainable Livelihoods framework formulated by DFID constitutes a useful example (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Sustainable Livelihoods framework (DFID, 2001).¹

It is apparent that households and communities can have a range of capitals or assets (financial, human, natural, physical, social) upon which they depend, and can draw upon to structure their livelihoods and support social organisation. It is important that issues of both gender and generation are central to the development of livelihoods. Relationships between men and women, and between adults and children, need to be taken into account when devising policies and programmes to address inequalities within communities. Aspects of vulnerability, adverse trends in environmental health or commodity process, or sudden environmental and socio-economic shocks must also be assessed and socially marginalised, poor or food-insecure households will be particularly at risk. The role of policies, institutions and processes in governing what is permissible and possible is highlighted and integrated policy assessment can reveal opportunities for enhanced policy formation to enhance poor livelihoods whilst protecting biodiversity and ecosystem services that ensure the wellbeing of people, both locally, throughout catchments and globally. Major constraints to better informed policy-making and management of highland aquatic ecosystems in Asia are the lack of relevant information on the value stakeholders ascribe to such systems and the absence of a balanced assessment of biodiversity and ecosystem services, livelihoods and multiple uses. In order to ensure that effective development policies and programmes are created which benefit all sectors of the population, issues of both gender and age must also be considered. Integrated action planning and wetland assessment could address these concerns.

What is a Policy Assessment?

A wetlands policy assessment is an investigation into the legal frameworks, institutional set-ups and enforcement practices which govern the management of the natural resources of a given wetland area and access to the ecosystem services produced. They may be Environmental Protection Acts, Forestry Codes, Fisheries regulations or Land Use Regulations which set specific standards or limits to what activities can be allowed or how the wetlands may be used. There may be government programmes to promote livelihoods or conserve biodiversity. These rules and programmes may be well intentioned in order to provide the framework for the wise use of the resources, but they may not be enforced adequately due to lack of enforcement capacity. There may be a lack of competent or sufficient staff. Sometimes different parts of the legal system have competing or contradicting contents. This implies a need for extensive efforts of coordination and may sometimes lead to institutional conflicts at the detriment of wetlands management efficiency. Or there may oppositely be a lack of clear rules and regulations, which leaves the enforcing institutions without direction and therefore powerless to avoid a deterioration of the resource, such as for example over-fishing.

Why do we need a Policy Assessment?

Policies, governance, institutions, and markets are important to understand because they are mediating what rights or claims each of us have to access the natural resources, the ways we are allowed to manage them, and the often conflicting or competing purposes for which we are doing so. Strategies for better conserving natural resources and biodiversity cannot be devised without understanding how current policies, institutions, markets and governance structures interact with each other to shape our management practices of natural resources. The economic interests and livelihood concerns of various stakeholder groups are influenced by the policies, and at the same time they are also behind the processes which have led to current policies.

How to undertake a Policy Assessment?

A major task to do is to compile information on the specific legal frameworks actually in place concerning the environment as mentioned above. But legal frameworks covering other economic sectors such as forestry, agriculture, fisheries, transportation, urbanization, energy provision or industries are important to identify, depending on the locality.

It is important to remember to look at legal frameworks at different scales: internationally, nationally, provincially, and locally – and how these scales interact. It is also important to identify through which institutions and organisations these frameworks are enforced or practised. Who are the institutional actors?

Next, you need to study how these frameworks are applied, and observe any competing, conflicting or contradictory legal texts, and how adequate they are to cover all the management situations observed, how they are interpreted by stakeholders and authorities, and how effectively they are implemented.

Finally, you need to conclude on the needs for changes or further development of the legal frameworks, building capacity or advocating for allocation of additional staff and funding for enforcement, for improved coordination or for mediating conflicts.

As a part of the policy assessment, you should also be considering the market conditions. Does a market exist for the various aquatic resources in your area? Which resources or ecosystem services are managed through market conditions? How important are they? What are the rules governing marketed goods from the aquatic resources? How does that influence natural resource management patterns and how does this impact the state of the resources?

Policy Assessment Outputs

As for the biodiversity and livelihood assessments, the policy assessment has tangible (data) as well as more indirect outputs (working relations established, and policy-relevant knowledge and capacities shared and enhanced amongst relevant partners).

Legislation, institutions, conflicts and policies inventoried & assessed

Typical data-oriented outputs of policy assessment will be written documents with data, inventories, and analyses on existing relevant legislation, formal and informal rules, the institutional landscape, policies, programs and conflict issues.

The outputs having the form of written documents could be reports listing the relevant legislation, policies and various socio-economic development or environmental planning objectivities for the area.

Further, these reports could include reflections on the role, strengths and weaknesses of the policies and legal frameworks on the state of the wetlands and the capacity for wise use management of the resources.

Finally, the reports could include recommendations for policy action.

Working relations established

An important category of outputs which is often overlooked can be characterized as the establishment of practical working relations with relevant institutions, organizations or individuals. Such valuable social relations are sometimes referred to as “social capital” (Putnam 1993; Scoones 1998).

This output is more than a mere list of institutions and stakeholders having participated in project workshops or having been contacted by the project team. It entails having established personalized relationships of people within the various participating partner institutions who know and trust each other and have found reutilized ways of communicating, meeting and coordinating the implementation of activities and tasks which they have committed themselves to deliver as their respective on-going contributions to the creation (or production) of agreed targets.

Shared and enhanced policy-relevant knowledge and capacities

The third category of outputs produced through making a policy assessment is the increased awareness of laws and policies concerning the use or conservation of the wetland areas, including the identification of insufficiencies, inconsistencies or absence of legislation. Examples of outputs of increased awareness of laws and policies could be documented references made to specific laws and rules or programs made by the participating stakeholders during discussions, meetings or action planning sessions; or it could be observed instances of changed local aquatic resources management practices, where enforcement of rules or agreement on new ones happen with reference to the policy assessments made. This can be referred to as “human capital” (Scoones 1998).

Policy Assessment Tools

The HighARCS project integrated questions relevant for the policy analysis in the field work undertaken at the sites. They were included in the questionnaires and interview guides used by the project teams (http://www.higharcs.org/download/higharcs_interview_schedule_final_v3[1].pdf, the qualitative sections 3-7); referred to in the Stakeholder Delphi surveys conducted; and placed on the agenda for the discussions at the stakeholder meetings and workshops organized at the sites. Energy policies were assessed as an element of a local sustainable energy assessment framework reported separately (Guandong, China; Quang Tri, Vietnam; Uttarakhand and West Bengal, India).

Putnam, R.D. (1993, March 21). The Prosperous Community. The American Prospect, 4 (13).

Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis.
IDS Working Paper, 72.