- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Business
- Politics
- School Zone
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Karen Telleen-Lawton: InVest-ing in Natural Capital
Talk about think globally, act locally. Someone has invented a tool to value “ecosystem services,” helping decision-makers such as government officials, conservation professionals and farmers improve their tradeoffs in natural resource use.
Ecosystem services are products and processes that are “free” as long as we take care of the system, such as seafood and game, air and water purification, pharmaceuticals, pollination, seed dispersal and recreation. The tool is a software program called InVest, and I wish I had invented it.
The “someone” is actually quite a few someones under the umbrella of the Natural Capital Project. Its three founders are Drs. Gretchen Daily, a biology professor at Stanford University, Peter Kareiva, chief scientist for The Nature Conservancy, and Taylor Ricketts, director of conservation science for the World Wildlife Fund.
Dr. Kareiva is also an adjunct professor at UCSB. “In this world, cost-benefit analysis and dollars are how decisions get made,” he explains in a podcast. “When the benefits of nature are not converted to dollars, then it can’t be on the table for those discussions and, in a way, nature’s not getting credit for what it’s doing.”
InVest systematically uses public data to estimate the future costs and benefits of decisions that affect people and the environment. From a user’s point of view, the first step is gathering data about an area, such as the percentage of land in crops or forest, and how much is privately managed. The decision-makers then gather to outline scenarios possible under varying land-use conditions, such as development, restoration or new government policies. Finally, they brainstorm desired outcomes, perhaps poverty alleviation, clean drinking water or carbon sequestration.
Then comes the black-box part. The InVest Web site says, “Each scenario is ... fed into InVEST’s unique modular structure: Each module represents a different life-support system that can be evaluated independently, or selected modules can be bundled together according to the specific scenarios and priorities in each place. InVEST can model and map the consequences of decisions on life-support systems in both economic and biophysical terms.”
The outputs are maps, trade-off curves and balance sheets that help answer such questions as: How will alternative patterns of urban growth impact the production of ecosystem services? How does a proposed hydropower management plan affect hydropower production, biodiversity, water quality and recreation? Where would reforestation achieve the greatest sustainable timber production and value for carbon sequestration and crop pollination?
Economists are taking note.
“Ecosystem-services researchers are now providing such balance sheets in more and more of the world,” according to a January issue of The Economist. “Poor countries such as South Africa and Tanzania have realized that if they study the provision of such services sensibly, they can make more rational decisions and avoid some of the costly mistakes made by those places that have already developed.”
Of course, with inputs as complex as this, the output could succumb to “garbage in, garbage out.” But the software is being tried around the world as well as nearby. An assessment of the health of California’s Sierra Nevada region using InVest has been in use since the mid-2000s.
InVest is free to use, though it requires specialized software that puts it beyond the reach of the merely curious. Perhaps some combination of the city and county of Santa Barbara, the Land Trust, Community Environmental Council or the Environmental Defense Center might make good beta sites for implementation. I’m just sayin’.
— Karen Telleen-Lawton’s column is a mélange of observations supporting sustainability. Graze her writing and excerpts from Canyon Voices: The Nature of Rattlesnake Canyon at www.CanyonVoices.com.
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use.
» on 05.04.10 @ 04:50 PM
Interesting, but how come the founders did not employ and economist or two to help with the algorithm? Actually natural systems and economics are quite similar so maybe the doctors decided they were smart enough to do it themselves. I’ll be looking at this quite closely particularly when you mention carbon sequestering. Not sure if they are talking about natural versus man produced sequestration.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
Karen Telleen-Lawton: A Day with a Chicken Farmer
From gleaning vegetables to butchering chickens, an unlikely birthday present proves to be a memorable adventure
Karen Telleen-Lawton: Environment Is Alive and (Pretty) Well in Santa Barbara
Environmental Defense Center's top 10 accomplishments in 2011 represent a breadth and depth expected from a larger organization
Karen Telleen-Lawton: Retirement Is for Baby Boomers, Part 2
A look at proposed changes to keep Social Security viable past 2037
Karen Telleen-Lawton: Backstage Bethlehem
Christianity’s 'living stones' can help ensure the early Christian culture survives
Karen Telleen-Lawton: California Murres Taking Flight Off San Miguel Island
After century hiatus, re-established colony takes up residence on islet of Prince Island
Weather: Fair 44.0º
Search Noozhawk »
