自然恢复项目是否应能从生态系统服务中获得多种收入来源?全面影响会计是明确的前进方向

Phoebe Dunklin , Jacob Parry , Tom Gegg
{"title":"自然恢复项目是否应能从生态系统服务中获得多种收入来源?全面影响会计是明确的前进方向","authors":"Phoebe Dunklin ,&nbsp;Jacob Parry ,&nbsp;Tom Gegg","doi":"10.1016/j.nbsj.2024.100141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>“Private Finance” is increasingly positioned as being a solution to problems around nature degradation and combating climate change in the United Kingdom (UK). Payments for ecosystem services, when made by the private sector, are seen as an integral part of this shift in thinking. Stacking payments for different ecosystem services, that is, allowing land managers to sell multiple “products” from the same piece of land to one or more buyers, may help to facilitate greater uptake of nature restoration activities and nature-based solutions. However, this approach brings with it inherent financial, biological, and political risks to market integrity. The purpose of this policy analysis is to address some of these market risks by proposing two solutions to enabling the stacking of ecosystem service payments. Our methods are as follows: we conceptualize a market for ecosystem services in the UK, and describe how a functioning market should operate. We then analyse UK policy for managing market risk and provide examples of this in practice. We describe two potential solutions to enable stacking, and as a result of our analysis argue for full accounting on the demand side of the market as the optimal solution. We conclude by discussing the implications and supporting policy for this solution.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100945,"journal":{"name":"Nature-Based Solutions","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772411524000326/pdfft?md5=397dd423901cc4578b574b24ae004223&pid=1-s2.0-S2772411524000326-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Should nature restoration projects be able to stack multiple revenue streams from ecosystem services? Full impact accounting as a clear way forward\",\"authors\":\"Phoebe Dunklin ,&nbsp;Jacob Parry ,&nbsp;Tom Gegg\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.nbsj.2024.100141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>“Private Finance” is increasingly positioned as being a solution to problems around nature degradation and combating climate change in the United Kingdom (UK). Payments for ecosystem services, when made by the private sector, are seen as an integral part of this shift in thinking. Stacking payments for different ecosystem services, that is, allowing land managers to sell multiple “products” from the same piece of land to one or more buyers, may help to facilitate greater uptake of nature restoration activities and nature-based solutions. However, this approach brings with it inherent financial, biological, and political risks to market integrity. The purpose of this policy analysis is to address some of these market risks by proposing two solutions to enabling the stacking of ecosystem service payments. Our methods are as follows: we conceptualize a market for ecosystem services in the UK, and describe how a functioning market should operate. We then analyse UK policy for managing market risk and provide examples of this in practice. We describe two potential solutions to enable stacking, and as a result of our analysis argue for full accounting on the demand side of the market as the optimal solution. We conclude by discussing the implications and supporting policy for this solution.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nature-Based Solutions\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100141\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772411524000326/pdfft?md5=397dd423901cc4578b574b24ae004223&pid=1-s2.0-S2772411524000326-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nature-Based Solutions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772411524000326\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature-Based Solutions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772411524000326","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在英国,"私人融资 "越来越多地被定位为解决自然退化和应对气候变化问题的一种方法。由私营部门为生态系统服务付费被视为这种思维转变的一个组成部分。为不同的生态系统服务堆叠付款,即允许土地管理者将同一块土地上的多种 "产品 "出售给一个或多个买家,可能有助于促进更多的自然恢复活动和基于自然的解决方案。然而,这种方法会给市场完整性带来固有的金融、生物和政治风险。本政策分析的目的是通过提出两种解决方案来实现生态系统服务付款的叠加,从而解决其中的一些市场风险。我们的方法如下:我们将英国的生态系统服务市场概念化,并描述一个正常运作的市场应如何运作。然后,我们分析英国管理市场风险的政策,并提供实践案例。我们描述了实现堆叠的两种潜在解决方案,并根据我们的分析,认为市场需求侧的完全核算是最佳解决方案。最后,我们讨论了这一解决方案的影响和支持政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Should nature restoration projects be able to stack multiple revenue streams from ecosystem services? Full impact accounting as a clear way forward

“Private Finance” is increasingly positioned as being a solution to problems around nature degradation and combating climate change in the United Kingdom (UK). Payments for ecosystem services, when made by the private sector, are seen as an integral part of this shift in thinking. Stacking payments for different ecosystem services, that is, allowing land managers to sell multiple “products” from the same piece of land to one or more buyers, may help to facilitate greater uptake of nature restoration activities and nature-based solutions. However, this approach brings with it inherent financial, biological, and political risks to market integrity. The purpose of this policy analysis is to address some of these market risks by proposing two solutions to enabling the stacking of ecosystem service payments. Our methods are as follows: we conceptualize a market for ecosystem services in the UK, and describe how a functioning market should operate. We then analyse UK policy for managing market risk and provide examples of this in practice. We describe two potential solutions to enable stacking, and as a result of our analysis argue for full accounting on the demand side of the market as the optimal solution. We conclude by discussing the implications and supporting policy for this solution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信