RESUMO
By embedding a spatially explicit ecosystem services modelling tool within a policy simulator we examine the insights that natural capital analysis can bring to the design of policies for nature recovery. Our study is illustrated through a case example of policies incentivising the establishment of new natural habitat in England. We find that a policy mirroring the current practice of offering payments per hectare of habitat creation fails to break even, delivering less value in improved flows of ecosystem services than public money spent and only 26% of that which is theoretically achievable. Using optimization methods, we discover that progressively more efficient outcomes are delivered by policies that optimally price activities (34%), quantities of environmental change (55%) and ecosystem service value flows (81%). Further, we show that additionally attaining targets for unmonetized ecosystem services (in our case, biodiversity) demands trade-offs in delivery of monetized services. For some policy instruments it is not even possible to achieve the targets. Finally, we establish that extending policy instruments to offer payments for unmonetized services delivers target-achieving and value-maximizing policy designs. Our findings reveal that policy design is of first-order importance in determining the efficiency and efficacy of programmes pursuing nature recovery. This article is part of the theme issue 'Bringing nature into decision-making'.
Assuntos
Conservação dos Recursos Naturais , Ecossistema , Política Ambiental , Recursos Naturais , Modelos Teóricos , Inglaterra , Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/métodos , BiodiversidadeRESUMO
Background: A shift toward human diets that include more fruit and vegetables, and less meat is a potential pathway to improve public health and reduce food system-related greenhouse gas emissions. Associated changes in land use could include conversion of grazing land into horticulture, which makes more efficient use of land per unit of dietary energy and frees-up land for other uses. Methods: Here we use Great Britain as a case study to estimate potential impacts on biodiversity from converting grazing land to a mixture of horticulture and natural land covers by fitting species distribution models for over 800 species, including pollinating insects and species of conservation priority. Results: Across several land use scenarios that consider the current ratio of domestic fruit and vegetable production to imports, our statistical models suggest a potential for gains to biodiversity, including a tendency for more species to gain habitable area than to lose habitable area. Moreover, the models suggest that climate change impacts on biodiversity could be mitigated to a degree by land use changes associated with dietary shifts. Conclusions: Our analysis demonstrates that options exist for changing agricultural land uses in a way that can generate win-win-win outcomes for biodiversity, adaptation to climate change and public health.