www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu

Social and economic benefits of protected areas in the urban context

Marianne Kettunen Principal Policy Analyst / Co-lead of Global Challenges Work Stream

Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP)

2 July 2015

Urban Biosphere Initiative (URBIS) Webinar series

Boulders Beach / Table Mountain NP / Cape Town © M Kettunen

• How cites and urban areas benefit from protected areas (PAs)?

• Policies, instruments and incentives supporting investment in PAs as natural solutions to urban challenges?

Content of the presentation

• Individual wellbeing and quality of life (mental and physical health)

• Communal wellbeing, social cohesion

• Drinking water supply • Drinking water quality

• Pollution management • Waste water management

• Safety from environmental risks (e.g. flooding)

• Sustainable economic development

What urban challenges PAs can respond to?

• Vitoria-Gasteiz / Basque Country / Spain (European Green Capital 2012)

• Affected by heatwaves • City centre up to 5 degrees warmer than

low-density areas • Duration of heatwaves expected to increase

in future

• Green belt around the city, connecting peri-urban areas - integrating Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites - continuously developed since early 1990s

• Tree lined corridors connect city centre with surrounding green belt: recreational opportunities and cooling comfort against urban heat

Regulating urban climate / mitigating heath stress

Natura 2000

Peri-urban green infrastructure

http://eucities-adapt.eu/cms/assets/NewFolder-2/NewFolder-3/Conference/Birmingham/Vitoria-Gasteiz.pdf

• Sonian Forest - EU Natura 2000 site / Brussels / Belgium

• Almost all of the metropolitan area in Brussels exceeds WHO limits for air pollution.

• Higher resolution reveals that natural spaces, particularly the large Sonian Forest, a Natura 2000 site, have less than half the levels of pollutants.

• Collserola Natural Park / Barcelona / Spain • As Barcelona has a relatively low level of city

vegetation, the Collserola Park is the biggest sink for pollutants in the city

Regulating urban pollution

References from IEEP et al. (forthcoming) Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection - project for European Commission

Sonian forest / Brussels (c) Vincent Brassinne Flickr

Mental and physical health

• Several PAs / city of Oulu / Finland • Dedicated initiatives focused on providing

quality natural outdoor environments for the citizens of Oulu

• Physical health: activating people towards

spending time in the outdoors and engaging in regular physical activity in green spaces.

• Communicated as a form of preventive medicine

• Mental health: finding new ways to provide therapy in natural environments and PAs for different target groups

http://www.metsa.fi/sivustot/metsa/fi/Hankkeet/Rakennerahastohankkeet/OpenAir/Sivut/openairenglish.aspx

Social integration and cohesion

• Urban and peri-urban PAs / cities of Lieksa, Rautavaara & Kuopio / Finland

• Pilots studies conducted to promote

social integration of new immigrants • Somali women (with high rates of

obesity) highly motivated to participate in nature walks.

• Walks also considered convenient for mothers staying at home with several small children to participate.

• Both for Somali men and women - learning to know Finnish nature, berries and mushrooms - improved their chances of receiving income through forest products.

http://www.metsa.fi/sivustot/metsa/fi/hankkeet/rakennerahastohankkeet/luontoliikuttamaan/sivut/default.aspx

• 1/3 of the world’s 100 largest cities draw a large part of their drinking water from PAs

• Catskill State Park / NY state and city / US • PAs & forests in Catskills / Delaware watershed

purify water for NY city • US$ 6 billion (total) savings in water treatment

costs

• Cayambe Coca and Antisana Ecological Reserves / Condor Bioreserve / Quito / Equador

• 80 - 90% of Quito’s drinking water originate from two PAs

• Information on PAs’ role in water retention and purification have been used to establish specific objectives, zones and tools for water management within PAs

Regulating urban water supply

New York © M Kettunen

Ashokan Reservoir / NY State © M Kettunen

Catskill State Park / NY State © M Kettunen

See Kettunen & ten Brink (2013) for references

• Nakivubo Swamp / Kampala / Uganda

• Provides a significant benefit to the city by purifying waste water and capturing nutrients

• Pressures to drain the wetland for other landuse purposes

• Maintaining wetland ~2 million $ / year avoided costs of running a sewage treatment facility

• Assessment of the benefits resulted in

gazetting Nakivubo Swamp as PA

Urban waste water purification

© Yannick Tylle

See Kettunen & ten Brink (2013) for references

• Muthurajawela-Negombo Ramsar wetland / city of Colombo / Sri Lanka

• Continued degradation of wetland has led to an increased frequency of flooding in the Colombo urban area

• Economic value of natural flood

attenuation benefits estimated around US$ 5.4 million / year (as replacement costs)

Environmental security / mitigation of flooding

See Kettunen & ten Brink (2013) for references

• Nuuksio National Park / greater Helsinki area / Finland

• Located around 30 km from Helsinki • Highly popular destination for both locals

and visitors to Helsinki

• Number of visitors: 285 200 / year (2014)

• Accumulative economic impacts of visits to greater Helsinki area: 2.2 EUR mil / year (2014)

Promoting urban economy

© Wikimedia Simo Räsänen See Kettunen et al. (2012) TEEB Nordic , Kettunen and ten Brink (2013) and Metsahallitus for references

Policies, instruments and incentives

Strategic planning • Green infrastructure plans as part of urban planning • PA management plans with links to socio-economic benefits • → integrating the two ! Evidence base • Biophysical (e.g. hydrology mapping, air quality measurements) • Socio-economic (e.g. benefit assessments, replacements costs) Urban env. governance • Awareness raising regarding possible benefits • Wide stakeholder involvement, inc. urban planners, PA managers, water

managers, health sector etc. Concrete instruments (e.g. funding) • Landuse plans and zoning • Compensation and/or PES schemes • One-off investment in restoration of green infrastructure (e.g. wetlands)

Conclusions

• As well as instruments for biodiversity conservation, PAs should be treated as an integral part of urban green infrastructure

• Benefits to both urban planning (cost-effective natural solutions) and biodiversity conservation (funding and public support)

• Further awareness of benefits and wider cooperation between key stakeholders (urban, water, health, nature …) needed!

Further information

• Kettunen & ten Brink (2013) Social and Economic Benefits of Protected Areas - An Assessment Guide

• The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) (2008 - )

• TEEB Water and Wetlands (2013)

This presentation also builds on an ongoing project for the European Commission on ‘Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection’ by IEEP et al. (2014 – 2015) For further details contact: Patrick ten Brink at (ptenbrink@ieep.eu)

www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu

Marianne Kettunen

Principal Policy Analyst / Co-lead of Global Challenges Work Stream

mkettunen@ieep.eu

IEEP is an independent, not-for-profit institute dedicated to the analysis, understanding and promotion of policies for a sustainable environment in Europe.

Thanks ! Boulders Beach / Table Mountain NP / Cape Town © M Kettunen