IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v37y2017i4d10.1007_s10669-017-9645-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using expert judgments to inform economic evaluation of ecosystem-based adaptation decisions: watershed management for enhancing water supply for Tegucigalpa, Honduras

Author

Listed:
  • A. Procter

    (University of British Columbia
    CATIE)

  • T. McDaniels

    (University of British Columbia)

  • R. Vignola

    (CATIE)

Abstract

Acute concerns over the status of ecosystems providing benefits to human communities, and deep uncertainties over the consequences of future climate change, call for new policy choices, as well as improved methods for analysis. This paper considers the profoundly important and under-recognized role of structured judgments provided by technical specialists with local experience in relevant ecological and technological systems, in order to inform climate change adaptation choices, including ecosystem-based adaptation (EBA). It begins with a brief review of the concepts and methods for eliciting judgments from technical experts for complex decisions under uncertainty. Then, the case study is described: an expert judgment task to assess the performance of the recently approved watershed management plan for the Guacerique watershed near Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Several key variables including water yield in dry seasons, cost changes and also more broadly defined ecosystem service benefits, under two climate scenarios, are employed to consider performance. The results provide resource managers with information on how to maximize the adaptation potential of an already approved management plan. It shows that estimates of potential enhanced water flows in dry seasons could yield millions of dollars in annual benefits, based on current water prices paid to informal water suppliers, and depending on future climate scenarios. A broader implication of the study is to document a relatively accessible, cost-effective approach to support policy decisions related to EBA and infrastructure, which is relevant for decisions to help achieve the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Procter & T. McDaniels & R. Vignola, 2017. "Using expert judgments to inform economic evaluation of ecosystem-based adaptation decisions: watershed management for enhancing water supply for Tegucigalpa, Honduras," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 410-422, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:37:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-017-9645-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-017-9645-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-017-9645-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10669-017-9645-6?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. Robert T. Clemen & Robert L. Winkler, 1999. "Combining Probability Distributions From Experts in Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 187-203, April.
    2. Timothy L. McDaniels, 1995. "Using Judgment in Resource Management: A Multiple Objective Analysis of a Fisheries Management Decision," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 43(3), pages 415-426, June.
    3. Holly P. Jones & David G. Hole & Erika S. Zavaleta, 2012. "Harnessing nature to help people adapt to climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(7), pages 504-509, July.
    4. Harry Otway & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1992. "Expert Judgment in Risk Analysis and Management: Process, Context, and Pitfalls," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 83-93, March.
    5. Michael Oppenheimer & Christopher M. Little & Roger M. Cooke, 2016. "Expert judgement and uncertainty quantification for climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(5), pages 445-451, May.
    6. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    7. Lopez, Humberto, 2008. "The social discount rate : estimates for nine Latin American countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4639, The World Bank.
    8. Raffaele Vignola & Bruno Locatelli & Celia Martinez & Pablo Imbach, 2009. "Ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change: what role for policy-makers, society and scientists?," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 14(8), pages 691-696, December.
    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. Zachary A. Collier & James H. Lambert & Igor Linkov, 2017. "Global perspectives and case studies of environmental management and policy," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 379-380, December.
    2. Bo Zhong & Shuang Wu & Geng Sun & Ning Wu, 2022. "Farmers’ Strategies to Climate Change and Urbanization: Potential of Ecosystem-Based Adaptation in Rural Chengdu, Southwest China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-21, January.

    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. Ine H. J. Van Der Fels‐Klerx & Louis H. J. Goossens & Helmut W. Saatkamp & Suzan H. S. Horst, 2002. "Elicitation of Quantitative Data from a Heterogeneous Expert Panel: Formal Process and Application in Animal Health," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 67-81, February.
    2. Rezende, Camila Linhares & Fraga, Joana Stingel & Sessa, Juliana Cabral & de Souza, Gustavo Vinagre Pinto & Assad, Eduardo Delgado & Scarano, Fabio Rubio, 2018. "Land use policy as a driver for climate change adaptation: A case in the domain of the Brazilian Atlantic forest," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 563-569.
    3. Fathy, Mohammad & Kazemzadeh Haghighi, Foojan & Ahmadi, Mohammad, 2024. "Uncertainty quantification of reservoir performance using machine learning algorithms and structured expert judgment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    4. Ana Cousiño & Gil Penha-Lopes, 2021. "Ecosystem Based Adaptation: Concept and Terminology in Strategic Adaptation Planning (Municipal and Inter-Municipal) in Portugal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-13, May.
    5. Mario Paulo Brito & Gwyn Griffiths & Peter Challenor, 2010. "Risk Analysis for Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Operations in Extreme Environments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(12), pages 1771-1788, December.
    6. Timothy McDaniels, 2021. "Four Decades of Transformation in Decision Analytic Practice for Societal Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 491-502, March.
    7. Nazmul Huq & Antje Bruns & Lars Ribbe & Saleemul Huq, 2017. "Mainstreaming Ecosystem Services Based Climate Change Adaptation (EbA) in Bangladesh: Status, Challenges and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.
    8. Chabba, Meenakshi & Bhat, Mahadev G. & Sarmiento, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Risk-based benefit-cost analysis of ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction with considerations of co-benefits, equity, and sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    9. Thaís Pacheco Kasecker & Mario Barroso Ramos-Neto & Jose Maria Cardoso Silva & Fabio Rubio Scarano, 2018. "Ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change: defining hotspot municipalities for policy design and implementation in Brazil," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 981-993, August.
    10. Christine Wamsler & Stephan Pauleit, 2016. "Making headway in climate policy mainstreaming and ecosystem-based adaptation: two pioneering countries, different pathways, one goal," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 71-87, July.
    11. Brian H. MacGillivray, 2019. "Null Hypothesis Testing ≠ Scientific Inference: A Critique of the Shaky Premise at the Heart of the Science and Values Debate, and a Defense of Value‐Neutral Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(7), pages 1520-1532, July.
    12. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    13. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    14. Avner Engel & Shalom Shachar, 2006. "Measuring and optimizing systems' quality costs and project duration," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 259-280, September.
    15. Tony E. Wong & Alexander M. R. Bakker & Klaus Keller, 2017. "Impacts of Antarctic fast dynamics on sea-level projections and coastal flood defense," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 347-364, September.
    16. Admiraal, Jeroen F. & Wossink, Ada & de Groot, Wouter T. & de Snoo, Geert R., 2013. "More than total economic value: How to combine economic valuation of biodiversity with ecological resilience," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 115-122.
    17. Olivier Petit & Franck-Dominique Vivien, 2015. "When economists and ecologists meet on Ecological Economics: two science paths around two interdisciplinary concepts," Post-Print halshs-01249774, HAL.
    18. Franz Dietrich & Christian List, 2017. "Probabilistic opinion pooling generalized. Part one: general agendas," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(4), pages 747-786, April.
    19. Camila I. Donatti & Celia A. Harvey & David Hole & Steven N. Panfil & Hanna Schurman, 2020. "Indicators to measure the climate change adaptation outcomes of ecosystem-based adaptation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 413-433, February.
    20. McVittie, Alistair & Norton, Lisa & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Siameti, Ioanna & Glenk, Klaus & Aalders, Inge, 2015. "Operationalizing an ecosystem services-based approach using Bayesian Belief Networks: An application to riparian buffer strips," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-27.

    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:spr:envsyd:v:37:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-017-9645-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.