IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnljfs/v67y2021i11id96-2021-jfs.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methods for monetary valuation of ecosystem services: A scoping review

Author

Listed:
  • Egor Selivanov

    (Department of Landscape Carbon Storage, Global Change Research Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Petra Hlaváčková

    (Department of Forest and Wood Products Economics and Policy, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Adequate assessment of ecosystem services is important for the development of policies and management plans related to forestry activities and the environment. Carefully identified ecosystem values can determine which options policy makers should prioritize to provide the greatest benefit. There are numerous methods used by researchers to evaluate ecosystem services. The most widely applied methods are monetary valuation methods, they are often deemed to be the most pragmatic language when it comes to communication with political and business institutions. The main goal of this review is to analyse available literature using the methodology particular to the scoping review approach in order to identify and describe valuation methods that can be applied for monetary assessment of ecosystem services. As a result of the scoping review, over 20 monetary valuation techniques (including several less common methods such as willingness to sell and Delphi method) were derived from 16 literature sources. In the process of compiling the range of different methods, a few flaws and gaps in the communication of methods were observed such as lack of consistency in the names of different methods and mixing up concepts. In addition, a few areas for future research are suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • Egor Selivanov & Petra Hlaváčková, 2021. "Methods for monetary valuation of ecosystem services: A scoping review," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(11), pages 499-511.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnljfs:v:67:y:2021:i:11:id:96-2021-jfs
    DOI: 10.17221/96/2021-JFS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/96/2021-JFS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/96/2021-JFS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/96/2021-JFS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Birara Endalew & Beneberu Assefa Wondimagegnhu & Kassahun Tassie, 2020. "Willingness to pay for church forest conservation: a case study in northwestern Ethiopia," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 66(3), pages 105-116.
    2. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    3. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    4. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood, 2009. "An Inferred Valuation Method," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(3), pages 500-514.
    5. Caterina Patrizia Di Franco & Gianmarco Lima & Emanuele Schimmenti & Antonio Asciuto, 2021. "Methodological approaches to the valuation of forest ecosystem services: An overview of recent international research trends," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(7), pages 307-317.
    6. McDonough, Kelsey & Hutchinson, Stacy & Moore, Trisha & Hutchinson, J.M. Shawn, 2017. "Analysis of publication trends in ecosystem services research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 82-88.
    7. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2019. "Global trend of forest ecosystem services valuation – An analysis of publications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    8. Christie, Mike & Fazey, Ioan & Cooper, Rob & Hyde, Tony & Kenter, Jasper O., 2012. "An evaluation of monetary and non-monetary techniques for assessing the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services to people in countries with developing economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 67-78.
    9. Torres-Miralles, M. & Grammatikopoulou, I. & Rescia, A.J., 2017. "Employing contingent and inferred valuation methods to evaluate the conservation of olive groves and associated ecosystem services in Andalusia (Spain)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 258-269.
    10. Ståle Navrud & Jon Strand, 2018. "Valuing Global Ecosystem Services: What Do European Experts Say? Applying the Delphi Method to Contingent Valuation of the Amazon Rainforest," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 249-269, May.
    11. Caparrós, Alejandro & Oviedo, José L. & Álvarez, Alejandro & Campos, Pablo, 2017. "Simulated exchange values and ecosystem accounting: Theory and application to free access recreation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 140-149.
    12. Hattam, Caroline & Böhnke-Henrichs, Anne & Börger, Tobias & Burdon, Daryl & Hadjimichael, Maria & Delaney, Alyne & Atkins, Jonathan P. & Garrard, Samantha & Austen, Melanie C., 2015. "Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment and valuation: Mixed methods or mixed messages?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 126-138.
    13. Spash, Clive L., 2013. "The shallow or the deep ecological economics movement?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 351-362.
    14. Pablo Villalobos & Carlos Huenchuleo, 2010. "Ecosystem Service Valuation of Ruil (Nothofagus Alessandrii) Forests in Central Chile: An Application of the Choice Experiment Method," Chapters, in: Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol (ed.), Choice Experiments in Developing Countries, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Ian Bateman & Georgina Mace & Carlo Fezzi & Giles Atkinson & Kerry Turner, 2011. "Economic Analysis for Ecosystem Service Assessments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 177-218, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Achille Amatucci & Vera Ventura & Anna Simonetto & Gianni Gilioli, 2024. "The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services: Meta-analysis and Potential Application of Value Transfer for Freshwater Ecosystems," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(11), pages 3041-3061, November.
    2. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    3. Alamanos, Angelos & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2022. "Economics of Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Water Resource Planning and Management," MPRA Paper 122046, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Cavalletti, B. & Di Fabio, C. & Lagomarsino, E. & Ramassa, P., 2020. "Ecosystem accounting for marine protected areas: A proposed framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    5. Márquez, Laura Andreina Matos & Rezende, Eva Caroline Nunes & Machado, Karine Borges & Nascimento, Emilly Layne Martins do & Castro, Joana D'arc Bardella & Nabout, João Carlos, 2023. "Trends in valuation approaches for cultural ecosystem services: A systematic literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Nápoles-Vértiz, Sonia & Caro-Borrero, Angela, 2024. "Conceptual diversity and application of ecosystem services and disservices: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    7. Jarmila Makovníková & Stanislav Kološta & Filip Flaška & Boris Pálka, 2023. "Potential of Regulating Ecosystem Services in Relation to Natural Capital in Model Regions of Slovakia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-22, January.
    8. Finisdore, John & Rhodes, Charles & Haines-Young, Roy & Maynard, Simone & Wielgus, Jeffrey & Dvarskas, Anthony & Houdet, Joel & Quétier, Fabien & Lamothe, Karl A. & Ding, Helen & Soulard, François & V, 2020. "The 18 benefits of using ecosystem services classification systems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    9. Hao Hong Do & Oliver Frör, 2022. "River Ecosystem Resilience: Applying the Contingent Valuation Method in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-19, September.
    10. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2019. "Global trend of forest ecosystem services valuation – An analysis of publications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    11. Schild, Johanna E.M. & Vermaat, Jan E. & de Groot, Rudolf S. & Quatrini, Simone & van Bodegom, Peter M., 2018. "A global meta-analysis on the monetary valuation of dryland ecosystem services: The role of socio-economic, environmental and methodological indicators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 78-89.
    12. Espécie, Mariana de Assis & de Carvalho, Pedro Ninô & Pinheiro, Maria Fernanda Bacile & Rosenthal, Vinicius Mesquita & da Silva, Leyla A. Ferreira & Pinheiro, Mariana Rodrigues de Carvalhaes & Espig, , 2019. "Ecosystem services and renewable power generation: A preliminary literature review," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 39-51.
    13. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    14. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    15. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.
    16. Rode, Julian & Le Menestrel, Marc & Cornelissen, Gert, 2017. "Ecosystem Service Arguments Enhance Public Support for Environmental Protection - But Beware of the Numbers!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 213-221.
    17. van der Hoff, Richard & Nascimento, Nathália & Fabrício-Neto, Ailton & Jaramillo-Giraldo, Carolina & Ambrosio, Geanderson & Arieira, Julia & Afonso Nobre, Carlos & Rajão, Raoni, 2022. "Policy-oriented ecosystem services research on tropical forests in South America: A systematic literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    18. Nicholas Tyack & Milan Ščasný, 2018. "Social Valuation of Genebank Activities: Assessing Public Demand for Genetic Resource Conservation in the Czech Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    19. Mohamed A. M. Abd Elbasit & Jasper Knight & Gang Liu & Majed M. Abu-Zreig & Rashid Hasaan, 2021. "Valuation of Ecosystem Services in South Africa, 2001–2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    20. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnljfs:v:67:y:2021:i:11:id:96-2021-jfs. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.