Taking stock of the empirical evidence on the insurance value of ecosystems

Taking stock of the empirical evidence on the insurance value of ecosystems
复制标题

DOI:
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106451
复制
发表时间:
2020-01
影响因子:
7
通讯作者:
M. Dallimer;J. Martin-Ortega;O. Rendón;S. Afionis;R. Bark;I. Gordon;J. Paavola
M. Dallimer;J. Martin-Ortega;O. Rendón;S. Afionis;R. Bark;I. Gordon;J. Paavola
中科院分区:
经济学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
M. Dallimer;J. Martin-Ortega;O. Rendón;S. Afionis;R. Bark;I. Gordon;J. Paavola

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

生态系统可以缓冲不利事件的影响,从而降低社会承担风险的成本;被称为“保险价值”的利益。虽然这个术语是最近才出现的,但这个概念却很古老,并且根源于生态恢复力。然而,缺乏从保险价值概念角度进行的综合研究。在这里,我们通过对生态系统保险价值的测量方式、地点和原因进行快速证据评估,填补了这一重要的知识空白。该审查强调了与自然生态系统的恢复、恢复或避免损失相关的实质性积极价值。然而,许多地区、生态系统和危害并未得到广泛研究。大多数研究都集中在森林、农业和湿地,通常强调栖息地恢复以减少洪水风险。超过一半的研究提供了非货币或货币价值估计,例如报告了生态功能的改善、已实现/可实现的成本降低或支付意愿。然而,证据基础仍然不完整,其特点是评估方法报告不一致。这排除了得出一般性结论的可能性。我们建议未来的保险价值研究采用通用方法,以促进建立更可靠的证据基础。
Ecosystems can buffer against adverse events and, by so doing, reduce the costs of risk-bearing to society; benefits which have been termed ‘insurance value’. Although the terminology is recent, the concept is older and has its roots in ecological resilience. However, a synthesis of studies through the lens of the insurance value concept is lacking. Here we fill this important knowledge gap by conducting a rapid evidence assessment on how, where and why the insurance value of ecosystems has been measured. The review highlighted the often substantial positive values that were associated with restoration, rehabilitation or avoidance of loss of natural ecosystems. However, many regions, ecosystems and hazards are not widely researched. Most studies focused on forests, agriculture and wetlands, often with an emphasis on habitat restoration to reduce flood risks. Over half the studies provided non-monetary or monetary estimates of value, reporting, for example, improved ecological function, achieved/achievable cost reductions or willingness-to-pay. Nevertheless, the evidence-base remains fragmentary and is characterised by inconsistent reporting of valuation methodologies. This precludes drawing general conclusions. We recommend that future studies of insurance value adopt a common approach to facilitate the development of a more robust evidence-base.