Mapping and valuing habitat services: Two applications at local scale

International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management

Volumn 8, Issue 1-2, 2012, Pages 80-92

  La Notte, Alessandra ^a  

^a JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE   (Italy)

Author keywords

biophysical mapping; classification of ecosystem services; economic valuation; environmental indicators; habitat services

Indexed keywords

BIOPHYSICS; CURRENCY DEVALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATOR; HABITAT MANAGEMENT; LAND MANAGEMENT; LAND USE PLANNING; VALUATION;

ITALY;

EID: 84863703081     PISSN: 21513732     EISSN: 21513740     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/21513732.2012.668562     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Adamowicz W, Boxall P, Williams M, Louviere J. 1998. Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. Am J Agric Econ. 80:64-75. (Pubitemid 128432280)
2. Adger WN, Brown K, Cervigni R, Moran D. 1995. Total economic value of forests in Mexico. Ambio. 24(5):286-296. (Pubitemid 26431493)
3. Agenzia per la Protezione dell'Ambiente e per i Servizi Tecnici. 2004. Carta della natura alla scala 1:50.000. Metodologia di realizzazione, Manuali e linee guida, n. 30/2004. Roma (Italy): APAT.
4. ARPAV Agenzia Regionale per la Protezione dell'Ambiente Veneto. 2010. Carta della Natura del Veneto alla scala 1:50.000. Roma (Italy): ISPRA. Rapporti No. 106/2010.
5. Alberini A, Galvan A, Longo A, Rosato P, Zanatta V. 2004. Information and willingness to pay in a contingent valuation study: the value of St. Erasmo in the Lagoon of Venice. Programma di Ricerca Corila 2000-2004, Linea di Ricerca 1.1. Working Paper No. Val01.
6. Alberini A, Longo A, Rosato P, Zanatta V. 2004. Il valore di non uso nell'analisi dei costi e dei benefici della salvaguardia ambientale. Programma di Ricerca Corila 2000-2004, Linea di Ricerca 1.1. Working Paper No. All07.
7. Alberini A, Longo A, Rosato P, Zanatta V. 2005. Information and willingness to pay in a contingent valuation study: the value of S. Erasmo in the lagoon of Venice. J Environ Plan Manage. 48(2):155-176.
8. Alessa L, Kliskey A, Brown G. 2008. Social-ecological hotspots mapping: a spatial approach for identifying coupled socialecological space. Landsc Urban Plan. 85:27-39. (Pubitemid 351305430)
9. Ban NC, Klein CJ. 2009. Spatial socioeconomic data as a cost in systematic marine conservation planning. Conserv Lett. 2(5):206-215.
10. Bateman I, Willis K, Garrod G. 1994. Consistency between contingent valuation estimates: a comparison of two studies of UK national parks. Reg Stud. 28(5):457-474.
11. Bateman IJ, Cole MA, Georgiou S, Hadley DJ. 2006. Comparing contingent valuation and contingent ranking: a case study considering the benefits of urban river water quality improvements. J Environ Manage. 79(3):221-231.
12. Bateman IJ, Day BH, Georgiou S, Lake I. 2006. The aggregation of environmental benefit values: welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP. Ecol Econ. 60(1): 450-460. (Pubitemid 44601974)
13. Bateman IJ, Langford IH, Nishikawa N, Lake I. 2000. The Axford debate revisited: a case study illustrating different approaches to the aggregation of benefits data. J Environ Plan Manage. 43(2):291-302. (Pubitemid 30222004)
14. Brown G. 2005. Mapping spatial attributes in survey research for natural resource management: methods and applications. Soc Nat Resour. 18(1):17-39. (Pubitemid 40117729)
15. Brown G, Smith C, Alessa L, Kliskey A. 2004. A comparison of perceptions of biological value with scientific assessment of biological importance. Appl Geogr. 24(2): 161-180. (Pubitemid 38693050)
16. Bryan BA, Raymond CM, Crossman ND, King D. 2010. Comparing spatially explicit ecological and social values for natural areas to identify effective conservation strategies. Conserv Biol. 25(1):172-181.
17. Campostrini P, editor. 2007. Scientific research and safeguarding of Venice, CORILA research program 2004-2006. 2006 results. Venezia (Italy): CORILA.
18. Christie M, Hanley N, Warren J, Murphy K, Wright R, Hyde T. 2006. Valuing the diversity of biodiversity. Ecol Econ. 58(2):304-317. (Pubitemid 43766820)
19. Costanza R, d'Arge R, de Groot RS, Farber S, Grasso S, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O'Neill R, Paruelo J, et al. 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature. 387:253-260.
20. Crossman ND, Bryan BA. 2009. Identifying cost-effective hotspots for restoring natural capital and enhancing landscape multifunctionality. Ecol Econ. 68(3):654-668.
21. de Groot RS, Wilson MA, Boumans RMJ. 2002. A typology for the classification, description, and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods, and services. Ecol Econ. 41(3): 393-408. (Pubitemid 34801001)
22. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. In: Pushpam Kumar, editor. An output of TEEB: The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. Cambridge (UK): Earthscan.
23. Gren I-M, Folke C, Turner K, Batemen I. 1994. Primary and secondary values of wetland ecosystems. Environ Resour Econ. 4(1):55-74. (Pubitemid 24432763)
24. Guerzoni S, Tagliapietra D. 2006. Atlante della Laguna. Venezia fra terra e mare. 1153. Venice (Italy): Marsilio Editori.
25. Hanley N, Wright RE, Adamowicz V. 1998. Using choice experiments to value the environment. Environ Resour Econ. 11(3-4):413-428.
26. Hatton MacDonald D, Morrison M, Rose JM, Boyle KJ. 2011. Valuing a multistate river: the case of the River Murray. Aust J Agric Resour Econ. 55(3):374-392.
27. Johnston RJ, Schultz ET, Segerson K, Besedin EY, Ramachandran M. 2012. Enhancing the content validity of stated preference valuation: the structure and function of ecological indicators. Land Econ. 88(1): 102-120.
28. Kaiser B, Roumasset J. 2002. Valuing indirect ecosystem services: the case of tropical watersheds. Environ Dev Econ. 7(4):701-714. (Pubitemid 135706223)
29. La Notte A, Turvani M, Giaccaria S. 2011. Economic valuation of ecosystem services at local level for policy makers and planners. The case of the Island of St. Erasmo in the Lagoon of Venice. J Environ Econ. 2(3):87-103.
30. Martin-Lopez B, Montes C, Benayas J. 2007. Influence of user characteristics on valuation of ecosystem services in Doñana Natural Protected Area (southwest Spain). Environ Conserv. 34:215-224. (Pubitemid 350211174)
31. Nelson E, Mendoza G, Regetz J, Polasky S, Tallis H, Cameron R, Chan KMA, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Lonsdorf E, et al. 2009. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front Ecol Environ. 7(1):4-11.
32. Polasky S, Camm JD, Garber-Yonts B. 2001. Selecting biological reserves cost-effectively: an application to terrestrial vertebrate conservation in Oregon. Land Econ. 77(1):68-78. (Pubitemid 32300685)
33. Raymond CM, Brown G. 2006. A method for assessing protected area allocations using a typology of landscape values. J Environ Plan Manage. 49(6):797-812. (Pubitemid 44597005)
34. Raymond CM, Brown G. 2007. The relationship between place attachment and landscape values: toward mapping place attachment. Appl Geogr. 27(2):89-111. (Pubitemid 46238328)
35. Ricketts TH, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, Michener CD. 2004. Economic value of tropical forest to coffee production. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 101(34):12579-12582. (Pubitemid 39122066)
36. Sherrouse BC, Clement JM, Semmens DJ. 2011. A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services. Appl Geogr. 31(2): 748-760.
37. Strange N, Rahbek C, Jepsen JK, Lund MP. 2006. Using farmland prices to evaluate cost-efficiency of national versus regional reserve selection in Denmark. Biol Conserv. 128(4): 455-466. (Pubitemid 43041874)
38. Troy A, Wilson MA. 2006. Mapping ecosystem services: practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer. Ecol Econ. 60(2):435-449. (Pubitemid 44601977)
39. Turner WR, Brandon K, Brooks TM, Costanza R, Da Fonseca GAB, Portela R. 2007. Global conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. BioScience. 57(10):868-873. (Pubitemid 350115537)
40. UK National Ecosystem Assessment. 2011. The UK national ecosystem assessment. Cambridge (UK): UNEP-WCMC. Technical Report, Chapter 22.