IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v67y2008i4p608-618.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The value of ecosystem services provided by the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System in the contiguous U.S

Author

Listed:
  • Ingraham, Molly W.
  • Foster, Shonda Gilliland

Abstract

Studies that demonstrate the economic value of the ecosystem services provided by public conservation lands can contribute to a more accurate appraisal of the benefit of these lands. The objective of this study was to estimate the economic value, in real (2004) dollars, of the ecosystem services provided by the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System) in the contiguous U.S. In order to estimate this value, we determined the ecosystems present on the Refuge System in the contiguous 48 states, the proportion in which they are represented, and the dollar value of services provided by each. We used land cover classes as an approximation of ecosystems present in the Refuge System. In a geographic information system (GIS), we combined land cover geospatial data with a map of the Refuge System boundaries to calculate the number of acres for each refuge and land cover class within the Refuge System. We transferred values for the following ecosystem services: climate and atmospheric gas regulation; disturbance prevention; freshwater regulation and supply; waste assimilation and nutrient regulation; and habitat provision. We conducted a central tendency value transfer by transferring averaged values taken from primarily original site studies to the Refuge System based on the ecoregion in which each study site and refuge was located and the ecoregion's relative net primary productivity (NPP). NPP is a parameter used to quantify the net carbon absorption rate by living plants, and has been shown to be correlated with spatially fungible ecosystem services. The methodologies used in the site studies included direct market valuation, indirect market valuation and contingent valuation. We estimated the total value of ecosystem services provided by the Refuge System in the contiguous U.S. to be approximately $26.9 billion/year. This estimate is a first cut attempt to demonstrate that the value of the Refuge System likely exceeds the value derived purely from recreational activities. Due to limitations of current understanding, methods and data, there is a potentially large margin of error associated with the estimate.

Suggested Citation

  • Ingraham, Molly W. & Foster, Shonda Gilliland, 2008. "The value of ecosystem services provided by the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System in the contiguous U.S," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 608-618, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:67:y:2008:i:4:p:608-618
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(08)00039-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Costanza, Robert & d'Arge, Ralph & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Stephen & Grasso, Monica & Hannon, Bruce & Limburg, Karin & Naeem, Shahid & O'Neill, Robert V. & Paruelo, Jose, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services: putting the issues in perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 67-72, April.
    2. Batie, Sandra S. & Wilson, James R., 1978. "Economic Values Attributable To Virginia'S Coastal Wetlands As Input In Oyster Production," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-8, July.
    3. 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.
    4. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    5. Smith, V. Kerry & van Houtven, George & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K., 1999. "Benefit Transfer as Preference Calibration," Discussion Papers 10607, Resources for the Future.
    6. Hovde, Brett & Leitch, Jay A., 1994. "Valuing Prairie Potholes: Five Case Studies," Agricultural Economics Reports 23391, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    7. Batie, Sandra S. & Wilson, James R., 1978. "Economic Values Attributable to Virginia's Coastal Wetlands as Inputs in Oyster Production," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 111-118, July.
    8. Costanza, Robert & Farber, Stephen C. & Maxwell, Judith, 1989. "Valuation and management of wetland ecosystems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 335-361, December.
    9. Woodward, Richard T. & Wui, Yong-Suhk, 2001. "The economic value of wetland services: a meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 257-270, May.
    10. Roberts, Lisa A. & Leitch, Jay A., 1997. "Economic Valuation Of Some Wetland Outputs Of Mud Lake, Minnesota-South Dakota," Agricultural Economics Reports 23406, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    11. Brouwer, Roy, 2000. "Environmental value transfer: state of the art and future prospects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 137-152, January.
    12. Loomis, John B. & White, Douglas S., 1996. "Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 197-206, September.
    13. Konarska, Keri M. & Sutton, Paul C. & Castellon, Michael, 2002. "Evaluating scale dependence of ecosystem service valuation: a comparison of NOAA-AVHRR and Landsat TM datasets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 491-507, June.
    14. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    15. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2006. "What Are Ecosystem Services?," RFF Working Paper Series dp-06-02, Resources for the Future.
    16. Pate, Jennifer & Loomis, John, 1997. "The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 199-207, March.
    17. Loomis, John & Kent, Paula & Strange, Liz & Fausch, Kurt & Covich, Alan, 2000. "Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 103-117, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pei, Sha & Zhang, Chunxiao & Liu, Chunlan & Liu, Xiaona & Xie, Gaodi, 2019. "Forest ecological compensation standard based on spatial flowing of water services in the upper reaches of Miyun Reservoir, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    2. Liu, Xiangping & Taylor, Laura O. & Hamilton, Timothy L. & Grigelis, Peter E., 2013. "Amenity values of proximity to National Wildlife Refuges: An analysis of urban residential property values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 37-43.
    3. Foody, G.M., 2015. "Valuing map validation: The need for rigorous land cover map accuracy assessment in economic valuations of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 23-28.
    4. Sha Pei & Gaodi Xie & Chunlan Liu & Changshun Zhang & Shimei Li & Long Chen, 2015. "Dynamic Changes of Water Conservation Service of Typical Ecosystems in China within a Year Based on Data from CERN," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Jing Ning & Jianjun Jin & Foyuan Kuang & Xinyu Wan & Chenyang Zhang & Tong Guan, 2019. "The Valuation of Grassland Ecosystem Services in Inner Mongolia of China and Its Spatial Differences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Armatas, Christopher A. & Venn, Tyron J. & Watson, Alan E., 2014. "Applying Q-methodology to select and define attributes for non-market valuation: A case study from Northwest Wyoming, United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 447-456.
    7. Lu Wen & Shikui Dong & Yuanyuan Li & Xiaoyan Li & Jianjun Shi & Yanlong Wang & Demei Liu & Yushou Ma, 2013. "Effect of Degradation Intensity on Grassland Ecosystem Services in the Alpine Region of Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-8, March.
    8. Ralf Buckley, 2009. "Parks and Tourism," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-2, June.
    9. Kontogianni, Areti & Luck, Gary W. & Skourtos, Michalis, 2010. "Valuing ecosystem services on the basis of service-providing units: A potential approach to address the 'endpoint problem' and improve stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1479-1487, May.
    10. Schägner, Jan Philipp & Brander, Luke & Maes, Joachim & Hartje, Volkmar, 2013. "Mapping ecosystem services' values: Current practice and future prospects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 33-46.
    11. Campbell, Elliott T., 2018. "Revealed social preference for ecosystem services using the eco-price," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 267-275.
    12. Campbell, Elliott & Marks, Rachel & Conn, Christine, 2020. "Spatial modeling of the biophysical and economic values of ecosystem services in Maryland, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    13. Patton, Douglas & Bergstrom, John C. & Moore, Rebecca & Covich, Alan P., 2015. "Economic value of carbon storage in U.S. National Wildlife Refuge wetland ecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 94-104.
    14. Eugenio Figueroa & Roberto Pasten, 2014. "Economically valuing nature resources to promote conservation: An empirical application to Chile's national system of protected areas," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93(4), pages 865-888, November.
    15. Jan Philipp Schägner & Luke Brander & Joachim Maes & Volkmar Hartje, 2012. "Mapping Ecosystem Services’ Values: Current Practice and Future Prospects," Working Papers 2012.59, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    16. Han Li & Radmila Petric & Zinah Alazzawi & Jake Kauzlarich & Rania H. Mahmoud & Rasheed McFadden & Niklas Perslow & Andrea Rodriguez Flores & Hadi Soufi & Kristina Morales & Matina C. Kalcounis-Rueppe, 2021. "Four Years Continuous Monitoring Reveals Different Effects of Urban Constructed Wetlands on Bats," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, October.
    17. Pindilli, Emily & Sleeter, Rachel & Hogan, Dianna, 2018. "Estimating the Societal Benefits of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration Through Peatland Restoration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 145-155.
    18. Yi, Hoonchong & Güneralp, Burak & Filippi, Anthony M. & Kreuter, Urs P. & Güneralp, İnci, 2017. "Impacts of Land Change on Ecosystem Services in the San Antonio River Basin, Texas, from 1984 to 2010," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 125-135.
    19. Villamagna, Amy M. & Angermeier, Paul L. & Niazi, Nicholas, 2014. "Evaluating opportunities to enhance ecosystem services in public use areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 167-176.

    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. Ping Zhang & Liang He & Xin Fan & Peishu Huo & Yunhui Liu & Tao Zhang & Ying Pan & Zhenrong Yu, 2015. "Ecosystem Service Value Assessment and Contribution Factor Analysis of Land Use Change in Miyun County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-24, June.
    2. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    3. Chris Dumas & Pete Schuhmann & John C. Whitehead, 2004. "Measuring the Economic Benefits of Water Quality Improvement with the Benefit Transfer Method: An Introduction for Non-Economists," Working Papers 04-12, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    4. Natacha LASKOWSKI, 2013. "Optimal allocation of wetlands: Study on conflict between agriculture and fishery," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2013-07, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    5. Brander, Luke M. & Ghermandi, Andrea & Kuik, Onno & Markandya, Anil & Nunes, Paulo A.L.D. & Schaafsma, Marije & Wagtendonk, Alfred, 2010. "Scaling up Ecosystem Services Values: Methodology, Applicability and a Case Study," Sustainable Development Papers 60689, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    6. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.
    7. Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2007. "An assessment of market-based approaches to providing ecosystem services on agricultural lands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 321-332, December.
    8. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John & Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2015. "The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 51-58.
    9. Sutton, Paul C. & Costanza, Robert, 2002. "Global estimates of market and non-market values derived from nighttime satellite imagery, land cover, and ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 509-527, June.
    10. Nahlik, Amanda M. & Kentula, Mary E. & Fennessy, M. Siobhan & Landers, Dixon H., 2012. "Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 27-35.
    11. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L., 2011. "Identifying the scope effect on a meta-analysis of biodiversity valuation studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 706-724, September.
    12. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 289(C), pages 124-132.
    13. Tiantian Chen & Li Peng & Qiang Wang & Shaoquan Liu, 2017. "Measuring the Coordinated Development of Ecological and Economic Systems in Hengduan Mountain Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-17, July.
    14. Poudel, Rajendra & Collins, Alan & Gazal, Kathryn & Wang, Jingxin, 2020. "Benefit transfer estimation of willingness-to-pay for U.S. wetlands conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    15. Jean-Michel Salles, 2011. "Valuing biodiversity and ecosystem services: why linking economic values with Nature?," Working Papers 11-24, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Dec 2011.
    16. de Groot, R. & Stuip, M. & Finlayson, Max & Davidson, N., 2006. "Valuing wetlands: guidance for valuing the benefits derived from wetland ecosystem services," IWMI Research Reports H039735, International Water Management Institute.
    17. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    18. Sinden, John Alfred & Griffith, Garry, 2007. "Combining economic and ecological arguments to value the environmental gains from control of 35 weeds in Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 396-408, March.
    19. Ik-Chang Choi & Hyun No Kim & Hio-Jung Shin & John Tenhunen & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2017. "Economic Valuation of the Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation in South Korea: Correcting for the Endogeneity Bias in Contingent Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.
    20. Dietrich Earnhart, 2001. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods to Value Environmental Amenities at Residential Locations," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 12-29.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:67:y:2008:i:4:p:608-618. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.