The Ecosystem Services Approach for water challenges:The DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework
Nadine Gerner1, Gerardo Anzaldua2, Manuel Lago2, Issa Nafo1 Sebastian Birk3, David Schwesig4
1 Emschergenossenschaft, 2 Ecologic Institute, 3 University of Duisburg-Essen, 4 IWW Water Centre
Overall aims of DESSIN
Components and foundations of the Framework
Figure 3: Procedural steps for the application of the DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework (from Anzaldua et al., submitted).
The European research project DESSIN has developed a structured approach
to measure changes in ecosystem services (ESS) provision, use and benefit:
the DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework. With it, the project brings the
concept of ESS (i.e. the benefits humans obtain from ecosystems) from
theory to practice - with special focus on application in the water sector.
DESSIN‘s overall aim is to demonstrate innovative solutions for water scarcity
and water quality related challenges. While novel solutions are necessary to
meet water challenges faced in Europe, they are typically confronted with
implementation barriers. By enabling assessments that consider broad
environmental and economic aspects when evaluating costs and benefits of
the new solutions, these barriers can be overcome. To this end, the
Framework supports decision-making and promotes the uptake of innovative
solutions. It can also facilitate the integration of the ESS concept into the EU
Water Framework Directive implementation.
20 partners from universities, research centres, as well as site operators and
SMEs from 7 countries work together in this 4 year FP7 project (2014-2017).
The DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework
Conceptual approach
Application in three case studies
Outlook
References
STEP 9.Quantify expected changes in State, Impact I and Impact II indicators
DRIVERS
STEP 2.
Gather an overview of
“the anthropogenic activities that may have environmental effects”
taking place in the defined environmental system of interest.
PRESSURES
STEP 3.
Identify
“the direct environmental effects of the drivers”
recognized in Step 1.
STATE
STEP 6.
Identify relevant parameters which dictate
the condition of the system
and are hypothetically affected by the PM.
IMPACT I (ESS Provision)
STEP 7.
Select indicators/ proxies for relating biophysical parameters (State) to relevant ESS.
IMPACT II (ESS Use and resulting benefits)
STEP 8.
Select indicators/ proxies to measure human wellbeing related to relevant ESS.
RESPONSES
STEP 4.
Describe the proposed measure (PM) and its capabilities.
STEP 5.
Identify the expected beneficiaries of the hypothetical changes induced by the PM.
STATE (before)
IMPACT I (before)
IMPACT II (before)
PART II: Problem characterization
PART IV: Impact evaluation
STATE (after)
IMPACT I (after) IMPACT II (after)
PART III: Response capabilities &
potential beneficiaries
Administrative details
Objectives of the assessment
Overview of the study area
Stakeholder list
PART I: Study description
SETTING THE SCENE
STEP 1.
Defining the decision case
PART V: Sustainability Assessment
STEP A.
Indicator selection
STEP B.
Defining additional indicators
STEP C.
Data collection and assessment
STEP D.
Results and discussion
STEP E.
Decision support
STEP F.
Figure 1: The DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework is based on existing approaches: the Common International Classification of ESS, the Drivers-Pressures-State-Impact-Response scheme, and the Final Ecosystem Goods and Services Approach.
Figure 2: The DPSIR circle (based on (Müller & Burkhard, (2012); van Oudenhoven et al. (2012); Haines-Young & Potschin (2010; 2013)) structures the DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework.
Figure 4: The three case studies Aarhus (Denmark), Llobregat (Spain) and Emscher (Germany).
The DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework was developed on the basis of the
Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES), the
adaptive management cycle DPSIR and the Ecosystem Goods and Services
Approach (FEGS-CS). The biophysical and economic evaluation of ESS is
supplemented by a Sustainability Assessment based on the five dimensional
sustainability approach of the project TRUST (Figure 1).
In the DPSIR scheme as applied in DESSIN, the innovative solutions are
considered Responses that may influence Drivers, Pressures and/or States.
From the resulting changes in ecosystem state, the changes in ESS provision
(Impact I) are estimated. An economic assessment of the subsequent
changes in the benefits and values perceived by society (Impact II) follows.
The estimated changes in ESS provision, use
and economic value serve to inform
policy and decision makers on
the resulting benefits of solutions.
The Framework has been
developed and tested through
application in three case studies
(Figure 4).
At the Aarhus study site, the impact
of a river opening coupled with a
real-time-control system of the
water network on ESS in the harbor
area was evaluated.
In Llobregat, groundwater recharge
via infiltration ponds was evaluated
with regard to the effect on water
provision.
In the Emscher case, the benefits
resulting from large-scale river
restoration measures on regulating
and cultural ESS were assessed
(Gerner et al., submitted).
The project will now apply the Framework to
five additional case studies in order to
determine how technical solutions with
positive effects on water quality and
quantity can enhance ESS.
The Framework provides a step-by-step guidance for the evaluation of ESS influenced
by a certain response (Figure 3). It thus links the innovative solution (Response) to the
specific ESS it influences. The user defines specific capabilities of the solution (e.g.
reduction of contaminants in the water) and relates these capabilities to specific ESS.
The changes in those ESS are then evaluated using indicators or models.
The Framework is available via www.dessin-project.eu Results & Downloads
DESSIN Ecosystem Services Valuation Toolkit.
The decision support software MIKE Workbench facilitates the application of the
Framework by guiding through each of the steps with examples of relevant
parameters and ESS as well as biophysical indicators and economic methods.
Anzaldua, G.; Gerner, N. V.; Lago, M.; Abhold, K.; Hinzmann, M.; Beyer, S.; Winking, C.; Riegels, N.; Krogsgaard Jensen, J.; Termes, M.; Amorós, J.; Wencki,K.; Strehl, C.; Ugarelli, R.; Hasenheit, M.; Nafo, I.; Hernandez, M.; Vilanova, E.; Damman, S.; Brouwer, S.; Rouillard, J.; Schwesig, D. & Birk, S. , Submittedto Ecosystem Services. Getting into the water with the Ecosystem Services Approach: the DESSIN ESS Evaluation Framework.
Gerner, N.V., Nafo, I., Winking, C., Wencki, K., Strehl, C., Wortberg, T., Niemann, A., Anzaldua, G. & Birk, S., Submitted to Ecosystem Services. Large-scaleriver restoration pays off: A case study of ecosystem service valuation for the Emscher restoration generation project.
Haines-Young, R.; Potschin, M. (2010): The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. In: David G. Raffaelli und Christopher L.J. Frid (Eds.): Ecosystem ecology. A new synthesis. Cambridge University Press (BES Ecological Reviews Series). CUP, Cambridge, pp. 110-139.
Haines-Young, R.; Potschin, M. (2013): Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December2012. EEA Framework Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003.
Müller, F.; Burkhard, B. (2012): The indicator side of ecosystem services. In: Ecosystem Services 1 (1), pp. 26–30.
Van Oudenhoven, A. P. E.; Petz, K.; Alkemade, R.; Hein, L.; De Groot, R. S. (2012): Framework for systematic indicator selection to assess effects of landmanagement on ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators 21, pp. 110–122.