EPA/600/R-07/057
Research Prospectus
Willamette Ecosystem Services Project
Western Ecology Division
May 2007
Goal
The Willamette Ecosystem Services
Project seeks to quantify ecosystem
services and understand the effects
of anthropogenic stresses on those
services in order to provide a rigor-
ous scientific basis for valuing eco-
logical benefits of existing and pro-
posed policies.
Problem Statement
The EPA has not adequately valued the
ecosystems services that provide for human
well-being.
While the agency has achieved impressive reduc-
tions in point source pollution, further improvements in
environmental quality over the past decade have been
problematic. This is primarily because of economic con-
straints to implementing regulations and because of our
inability to influence non-point source pollution.
Economic constraints have led to requiring bene-
fit-cost analysis before regulations can be put in place.
The EPA uses traditional benefit-cost analysis to evalu-
ate proposed actions that are intended to protect the en-
vironment (http://www.epa.gov/regulations/follow.htm;
Executive Order 12866, 30 September 1993). Fre-
quently, these analyses are performed for single issue
problems with little spatial and temporal understanding
of how proposed decisions will affect the ecosystems
involved, or of their contribution to human well-being.
To that end EPA has been criticized by its Science Ad-
visory Board (SAB) for dramatically undervaluing im-
provements to ecosystems resulting from proposed
regulations (US EPA, 2006). Undervaluing ecosystem
services can result in failure to implement necessary
environmental regulations.
Non-point source pollution such as agricultural
runoff and greenhouse gas emissions, does not lend it-
self to traditional "end-of-pipe" regulation. Besides aris-
ing from dispersed, uncontrolled sources, non-point
pollutants become intricately linked with ecological
processes. Ecosystems can affect the amount of pollut-
ants entering the soil, air and water. Ecosystems can
influence pollutants in different ways depending on the
particular source and type. Ecosystems can remove or
sequester pollutants thereby providing a cleansing ser-
vice. However, ecosystems that are disturbed, or are in a
state of decline may not provide those services that con-
tribute to human well-being and can actually add to ad-
verse effects.
EPA's inability to value ecosystem services has
prevented full recognition of the benefits to human well-
being provided by proposed regulations and policies.
While today's technology and knowledge can reduce
considerably the human impacts on ecosystems, they are
unlikely to be deployed fully until ecosystem services
cease to be perceived as free and limitless, and their full
value is taken into account. We may know the techno-
logical cost of providing clean drinking water and clean
air, but we do not really know the value of lost or exist-
ing ecosystem services, which may perform the same
functions more economically. Without this understand-
ing we cannot realistically determine the cost of pollu-
tion-control regulations, nor can we calculate the eco-
nomic benefits of ecosystem services.
Project Objectives
• Provide a model-based ap-
proach that predicts responses of
ecosystem services to probable fu-
ture conditions.
• Identify critical knowledge gaps
in the ecological processes underly-
ing ecosystem services.
• Quantify ecosystem services, in-
cluding their distribution, status, and
responses to current and projected
future conditions.
• Evaluate net benefits of bundled
ecosystem services and tradeoffs
among management actions that
affect these services.
-------
EPA/600/R-07/057
Research Needs
The research proposed in this project addresses
some of the most complex, divisive, and important eco-
logical challenges that will be facing the nation through
this century. EPA's Regional and Program Offices have
a growing need to evaluate complex environmental
problems. This is particularly true for non-point source
pollution resulting from land use practices and widely
dispersed pollutants such as nitrogen deposition and
carbon dioxide emissions.
With the success of sulfur trading to control this
important source of acid rain, the EPA has demonstrated
the ability to achieve designated reductions in point
source pollutants using economic forces. Moreover,
trading has had limited success in regulating other eco-
logical goods and services such as fisheries and water
resources (Colby 2000). Similar approaches for control-
ling non-point pollutants—ranging from greenhouse
gases to water pollutants—by harnessing the power of
market economics are being considered. However, ef-
fective application of economic-based techniques to
non-point pollution requires the ability to apply value to
ecosystem services.
The EPA recognizes ecosystem services as the
outputs of ecosystem processes that contribute to human
well-being (USEPA 2006). To protect and manage eco-
systems in support of human well-being, we need to
know what services ecosystems provide, the distribution
of those services across the landscape, and what eco-
logical processes influence them. Applying the concept
of ecosystem services provides a way to value ecologi-
cal processes and their linkages to any end point of con-
cern.
The scientific community is increasing research
activities in an effort to articulate and measure the
gamut of ecosystem services. Early publications in-
clude Holdren and Ehrlich (1974), Costanza et al.
(1997) and the Ecological Society of America (1997).
These efforts, along with the more recent Millenium
Ecosystem Assessment (2005), provide a developing
scientific basis and conceptual organizing framework
for considering the range of ecosystem services that
influence human well-being. This knowledge needs to
be applied directly to issues facing the EPA.
In order to quantify ecosystem services we need
to understand the complex web of ecosystem processes
that create and sustain those services, and how human
and environmental stressors affect these processes.
Ecosystem processes can mitigate impacts of environ-
mental stressors, but processes can also be negatively
impacted, decreasing the amount or quality of ecosys-
tem services they provide.
Most importantly, we need to be able to quantify
the collective benefit of many ecosystem services to
human well-being. Restoration of riparian systems to
provide fish habitat, for example, would also enhance a
number of other ecosystem services such as nitrogen
control and carbon sequestration. Sequestering carbon
biologically not only removes greenhouse gases from
the atmosphere, it also improves soil structure, which
reduces nutrient losses and improves erosion control.
This notion of multiple, linked ecosystem services can
be viewed as "bundled services" and is a key compo-
nent of this project. That is, we will not examine ser-
vices individually in response to stressors, but will con-
sider bundles of services in relation to ecosystem proc-
esses and environmental stressors.
The immediate context for this research is the
Ecological Research Multi-Year Plan (ECO MYP) of
the Office of Research and Development. The plan's
focus on ecosystem services provides overall direction
for this research effort. Our most direct Regional Office
client will be Region X, in which our study area is lo-
cated (Figure 1), but we envision national applicability
across EPA Regions and Program Offices, and we will
seek to interact with Regions and other ORD research-
ers to help broaden the application of our efforts. In
addition, we will seek to understand and represent Pro-
gram Office needs in liaison with the Ecology National
Program Director.
Figure 1. The Willamette Ecosystem Service District.
-------
EPA/600/R-07/057
Approach
We propose to conduct research in an area of
western Oregon, roughly defined by the Willamette
River Basin, but including counties, ecological regions,
and other components of the appropriate spatial con-
text, termed the "Willamette Ecosystem Service Dis-
trict" after Heal et al. (2001) (Figure l). However, the
quantification of some services, such as carbon seques-
tration may require a larger, regional perspective.
Our approach is based on the concept of human-
centric ecology—the study of ecosystem structure and
functioning from the perspective of human well-being.
It is reflected in using "placed-based societal issues and
values" to provide context for the research (Figure 2.).
The place-based perspective allows the results to be
explicitly relevant to the stakeholders in the geographic
area. Societal issues and values provide the framework
for the selection of specific ecosystems services and
the formulation of future scenarios. Issues include na-
tional and regional concerns like global climate change
and air pollution, but they also include local concerns
like land use, fish and wildlife, agriculture, and timber
production.
The project builds upon a strong foundation of
research on landscape condition and projected future
change from the Baker et al. study (2004). The capa-
bilities of WED scientists in conjunction with collabo-
rators and existing scientific networks will provide for
characterization and evaluation of land use/land cover,
forest productivity, wildlife, agricultural practices, ri-
parian wetland and aquatic biota.
Within the place-based framework, natural and
human stresses to ecosystem structure and functioning
form the basis of scenario development for futures
analyses and for determining ecosystem service re-
sponse functions. Population trends, pollutants, land
use patterns and climate—past and predicted—provide
the forcing functions for changes in ecosystem struc-
ture and functioning.
Once the relations between specific ecological
processes and ecosystem services are quantified, re-
sponse functions are generated. In this way, ecological
effects of anthropogenic and natural forcing functions
are translated into effects on ecosystem services. More-
over, the linkages and trade-offs among bundles of
ecosystem services can be established.
Quantified responses of ecosystem services or
bundles of services, to changes in ecosystem structure
and functioning are the basis for developing futures
scenarios. Anticipated changes in ecosystem services
resulting from future policy changes or changes in
stressors, such as global climate change and land use,
will be evaluated for the study area as a whole (Figure
3). In this way, quantifiable future projections of
changes in ecosystem services can be calculated for use
in economic and policy analyses. These quantified bun-
dles of ecosystem services can also form the basis for
trading by establishing the ecological metrics for bene-
fit-cost analyses.
The targeted, integrated ecological research con-
ducted within this project will yield a framework and
knowledge-base for evaluating regulatory decisions
from the perspective of their impacts on ecosystem
services. Products will link validated ecosystem mod-
els with user-friendly interfaces. The results will help
EPA and others evaluate implications of regulatory
actions with regard to ecosystem services over large
spatial areas.
For further information contact: Dr. Dixon H. Landers
(Landers.Dixon@epa.gov)
References
Baker, J.P., D.W. Hulse, S.V. Gregory, D. White, J.
Van Sickle, P.A. Berger, and N.H. Schumaker.
2004. Alternative futures for the Willamette River
Basin, Oregon. Ecological Applications 14:313-
324.
Colby, B. G. 2000. Cap-and-trade policy challenges: a
tale of three markets. Land Economics 76: 638-
658.
Costanza, R., R. d'Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M.
Grasso, B. Harmon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R.V.
O'Neill, J. Paruelo, R.G. Raskin, P. Sutton, and M.
van den Belt. 1997. The value of the world's eco-
system services and natural capital. Nature
387:253-260.
Ecological_Society_of_America. 1997. Ecosystem
Services: Benefits Supplied to Human Societies by
Natural Ecosystems. Issues in Ecology 2.
Heal, G., G.C. Daily, P.R. Ehrlich, J. Salzman, C.
Boggs, J. Hellmann, J. Hughes, C. Kremen, and T.
Ricketts. 2001. Protecting natural capital through
ecosystem service districts. Stanford Environ-
mental Law Journal 20:333-364.
Holdren, IP., and P.R. Ehrlich. 1974. Human popu-
lation and the global environment. The American
Scientist 62:282-292.
Millenium_Ecosystem_Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems
and Human Weil-Being: Synthesis. Island Press,
Washington, D.C.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2006.
Ecological Benefits Assessment Strategic
Plan. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
EPA/600/R-07/057
-8
sill
C '= o
«
Q.
O
a
2,
-
ill
! E 3
:p5
E
0)
to
>,
w
o
o
LU
oC
HI
u.
U
0
a>
c
o
"o
-J
a.
t—
roductio
0.
f>
0
0
a.
5
-•=
&
ecompo
Q
CO
o
LL
0
ra
T3
'U
0>
0)
9
rr.
<
i_
(D
1
TJ
_i
s
0
a
2
2
S
•s , o e
ill!
HI!
^ bo
l!
w w
£l
§^
s a
II
a
fl
43 g5
bO >-.
g s
I 8
S J2
| I
u R
W
B o
^ X>
to s
a
.1
I 8
C\J p
O CL>
3 tn
S ^
c3 "t3
-------
EPA/600/R-07/057
Figure 3.
Depiction of the tradeoffs and bundling of ecosystem services within a land-use category. A land-use practice
might have a negative impact on a service as well as a positive impact on others. The evaluation of ecosystem
services must include the linkage and tradeoffs between services.
Hypothetical ecosystem service values:
Bundled by land use in the Willamette ESD
Nitive
01
03
t>
'«M
to
01
QL
Forest
Headwater
Wetland
Riparian Vegetated
foreit buffer
Rip Rap
slope
Rom-
crap
seed
Urban
Ecosystem Services.
• Nutrient rer>'oval
• Temperatjre 'e-gu a:icn
D Carbon Sequestration
• K-; :,v
• Flosd protection
Q Fooa &. Soods
'Relative value could be a rate, say kg/ha/yr, or represent economic or social value.
------- |