EPA/600/R-20/267 | December 2020 |
www.epa.gov/research
United States
Environmental Proti
Aaencv
oEPA
National Ecosystem Services
Classification System
(NESCS) Plus
^Classifying^
Benefits from
.Nature a
-------
EPA/600/R-20/267
December 2020
National Ecosystem Services
Classification System
(NESCS) Plus
By
Tammy Newcomer-Johnson1, Faye Andrews2, Joel Corona3, Theodore
H. DeWitt4, Matthew C. Harwell5, Charles Rhodes6, Paul Ringold7,
Marc J. Russell8, Paramita Sinha9, George Van Houtven9
I. USEPA, Watershed & Ecosystem Characterization Division,
Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Cincinnati,
OH
2. ORAU Student Services Contractor at USEPA, Pacific Ecology
Division, Center for Public Health & Environmental Assessment,
Corvallis, OR
3. USEPA, Office of Water, Washington, DC
4. USEPA, Pacific Ecological Systems Division, Center for Public
Health & Environmental Assessment, Newport, OR
5. USEPA, Gulf Ecosystem Measurement & Modeling Division,
Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Gulf
Breeze, FL
6. Former ORISE participant at USEPA, Office of Water and Office
of Research and Development, Washington, DC; presently US
Geological Survey, Reston, YA
7. USEPA, Pacific Ecological Systems Division, Center for Public
Health & Environmental Assessment, Corvallis, OR
8. USEPA, Center for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Gulf
Breeze, FL
9. RTI International
2
-------
Notice/Disclaimer Statement
This document describes the National Ecosystem Services Classification System Plus (NESCS
Plus) which builds upon and replaces the previous versions, the 2013 Final Ecosystem Goods
and Services Classification System (FEGS-CS) and the 2015 National Ecosystem Services
Classification System (NESCS). This research was funded and conducted by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Office of Research and Development (USEPA-
ORD) and Office of Water (USEPA-OW) under an approved Quality Assurance Project Plan (E-
WED-031259-QP-1-0). It has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review and
has been approved for publication as a USEPA document. Mention of trade names or
commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This is a contribution to the USEPA ORD Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research
Program.
This report was partially fulfilled through Contracts EP-W-15-005 and EP-W-11-029 with RTI
International and HHSN316201200013W with General Dynamics Information Technology
(GDIT) under the sponsorship of the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
An important disclaimer is that NESCS Plus is a classification system for identification and
classification of ecosystem services. Individual users of NESCS Plus are responsible for
evaluating the uncertainties associated with the original datasets feeding into NESCS Plus and
characterizing NESCS Plus results for applicability, precision, accuracy, uncertainty, and other
data qualifications associated with usability of results.
The citation for this report is:
Newcomer-Johnson, T., Andrews, F., Corona, J., DeWitt, T.H., Harwell, M.C., Rhodes, C.,
Ringold, P., Russell, M.J., Sinha, P., and G. Van Houtven. 2020. National Ecosystem Services
Classification System (NESCS) Plus. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/R-
20/267.
The NESCS Plus webtool is available here:
https://www.epa.eov/eco-research/nescs-plus
3
-------
Acknowledgments
This work is the culmination of tremendous effort by many individuals. The foundational pieces
of FEGS-CS involved invaluable contributions by Dixon Landers, Amanda Nahlik, and many
others (see Additional Acknowledgements for the full acknowledgments). The foundational
pieces of NESCS involved invaluable contributions by Paramita Sinha, George Van Houtven,
Charles R. Rhodes, Joel Corona, Dixon Landers, John Powers, and many others (see Additional
Acknowledgements for the full acknowledgments).Important contributions have also been made
by the following team of Ecosystem Champions who are developing metrics and indicators at the
national and regional scale; Colin C. Phifer, Paul Ringold, Faye V. Andrews, Theodore R.
Angradi, Walter Berry, Timothy J. Canfield, Andrew Gray, Christina Horstmann, James S.
Latimer, Amanda Nahlik, Dave Peck, Deborah Santavy, Leah M. Sharpe, and Kimberly M.
Schuerger. The authors also acknowledge Chloe Jackson, Connie L. Hernandez, Arik Tashie,
Angelica Sullivan, Kirsten Winters, Charles Maurice, Gina Ferreira, Dave Bolgrien, and many
others for their engagement with NESCS Plus and previous versions of the classification system
and for providing feedback and research support during the development of this report. Please
note that acknowledgment of intellectual contribution to idea development or editorial quality of
this document does not imply absolute conceptual agreement on behalf of those acknowledged.
The authors thank external reviewers: Michael Bell (National Park Service), Elena
Bennett (McGill University, Canada), Jim Boyd (Resources for the Future, Washington DC), and
Francis Soulard (Environment Accounts and Statistics Division, Statistics Canada), and USGS
internal reviewer: C. Frank Casey, and EPA internal reviewers: Theodore Angradi, Walter Berry,
Allen Brookes, Tim Canfield, Christine Davis, Hugo Hoffman, Bryan Hubbell, Jacques
Kapuscinski, David Peck, Kathleen Williams. The response to this peer review was coordinated
by Tammy Newcomer-Johnson, Faye Andrews, Joel Corona, Theodore H. DeWitt, Matthew C.
Harwell, Paul Ringold, Charles R. Rhodes and Marc J. Russell. George Van Houtven was the
lead writer for the RTI report that was the basis of this document. Paramita Sinha was the
technical lead for updating the NESCS Plus codes and producing the core list of combinations.
4
-------
Table of Contents
Notice/Disclaimer Statement 3
Acknowledgments 4
1.0 Purpose 10
1.1 Why Focus on "Final" Ecosystem Services? 13
1.2 Why Have a Classification System for Final Ecosystem Services? 16
1.3 Why Do We Need a New Ecosystem Services Classification System? 17
2.0 What Is NESCS Plus? 22
2.1 NESCS Plus Conceptual Framework 22
3. NESCS Plus Classification Structure 26
3.1 NESCS Plus Use/User Classification Structure (Four Components) 28
3.2 NESCS Plus "Beneficiary" Classification Structure (Three Components) 36
3.3 "Core" Final ES Combinations 40
4.0 Recent Publications that Apply NESCS Plus Components 41
4.01 Piloting Ecosystem Accounts for the Southeastern U.S 41
4.02 Who are the Beneficiaries of Great Lakes Waterfront Revitalization? 42
4.03 How Can Recently Developed USEPA Tools Help Communities Include Ecosystem
Services in Decision Making? 43
4.04 Mapping and Identifying Linkages in USEPA's EnviroAtlas 44
4.05 Who Benefits from National Estuaries? Using an Ecosystem Services Classification
System to Identify Beneficiaries 45
4.06 How can EnviroAtlas and the Eco-Health Relationship Browser connect decision makers
to scientific data? 46
4.07 What are some Practical Strategies for Assessing Final Ecosystem Goods and Services
for Community Decision Making? 47
4.08 What Can We Learn from Coordinated Case Studies Across the United States? 48
4.09 Who Benefits from Coastal Habitats? 49
4.10 How Does Air Pollution Impact Ecosystem Services? 50
4.11 How can Nitrogen Loading in Freshwater Systems Impact Final ES? 51
4.12 Improving the Linkage between Biophysical and Economic Analyses 52
4.13 What Data Should We Collect? 53
5
-------
5.0 Example Applications 54
5.1 Example 1: Ecological restoration at a Superfund landfill site 54
5.2 Example 2: Benefits Analysis of an Environmental Policy Action - Proposed Revisions to
an Air Quality Standard for Nitrogen Oxides 60
5.3 Example 3: Analysis for a surface mine expansion project under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 67
5.4 Organizing final ES accounts 73
5.5 Cataloguing and retrieving final ES data 74
5.6 Key Issues and Considerations in Using NESCS Plus 75
6.0 Frequently Asked Questions 76
6.1 Do human-managed ecosystems produce Ecological End-Products or economic goods?. 76
6.2 Why is there no Ecological End-Product class for water quality, air quality, or other types
of environmental quality? 77
6.3 Why is carbon sequestration not listed as a class of ecosystem service in NESCS Plus?.. 77
6.4 Why is biodiversity not listed as an Ecological End-Product class in NESCS Plus? 78
6.5 How are the spatial and temporal scales of final ES addressed in NESCS Plus? 78
6.6 How does NESCS Plus handle extreme events? 79
7.0 Summary 80
References 82
Additional Acknowledgments 86
Appendix A. Glossary of Key Terms 88
Appendix B. Definitions of Environment Classes and Subclasses 97
Appendix C. Ecosystem Attributes for Ecological End-Product Metrics and Indicators . 102
Appendix D. Definitions of Direct Use Classes and Subclasses 106
Appendix E. Definitions of Direct User Classes and Subclasses 108
Appendix F. Definitions of Beneficiary Classes and Subclasses 125
6
-------
List of Figures
Figure 2 Conceptual framework that shows how final ecosystem services flow from the
environment to human systems. Final ecosystem services occur when Ecological End-Products
are directly used or appreciated by humans 24
Figure 3.1 The NESCS Plus "Use/User" structure (four components) 26
Figure 3.2 Alternative NESCS Plus "Beneficiary" structure (three components) 27
Figure 3.3 Links between Beneficiaries, Environments, and Ecological End-Products 39
Figure 5.1 Example 1: Landfill restoration conceptual model linking the environment to a
tabular list of final ES. Components of ecosystems are represented in green and human systems
in blue. In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows represent flows, and circles represent
processes 56
Figure 5.2 Example 1: Landfill restoration conceptual model linking the tabular list of final ES
to human well-being 57
Figure 5.3 Example 2: Air quality standard conceptual model linking the environment to a
tabular list of final ES 61
Figure 5.4 Example 2: Air quality standard onceptual model linking the tabular list of FES to
human welfare 62
Figure 5.5 Example 2: Conceptual model linking a proposed action (air quality standard) to a
tabular list of FES (with the Beneficiary classification) 65
Figure 5.6 Example 2: Conceptual model linking the tabular list of FES (with the Beneficiary
classification) to human welfare 66
Figure 5.7 Example 3: Conceptual model for Alternative 1 - Mining + Dewater deep
groundwater and infiltrate excess to alluvium 68
Figure 5.8 Example 3: Conceptual model for Alternative 2 - Mining + Dewater deep
groundwater and discharge to stream 69
Figure 5.9 Example 3: Second part of conceptual model for Alternative 1 - Mining + Dewater
deep groundwater and infiltrate excess to alluvium 71
Figure 5.10 Example 3: Second part of conceptual model for Alternative 2 - Mining + Dewater
deep groundwater and discharge to stream) 72
Figure 7 USEPA tools that can used together with components of NESCS Plus 81
7
-------
List of Tables
Table 1.1 NESCS Plus classification questions and components 11
Table 1.2 Final ES general approach (Adapted from Landers and Nahlik 2013) 15
Table 3.1 The Environment Classification (Code: WWW) addresses the question of where EEPs
are located when they are used, enjoyed, or appreciated 29
Table 3.2 Ecological End-Product Classification (Code: XXX) addresses the question of what in
nature is directly used or appreciated by humans 31
Table 3.3 Direct Use Classification (Code: YYYY) addresses the question of how Ecological
End-Products are directly used or appreciated by humans 32
Table 3.4 Direct User Classification and Codes (Code: ZZZZ) addresses the question of who
direct uses each Ecological End-Product 34
Table 3.5 NESCS Plus Coding System with 4-Components 35
Table 3.6 Beneficiary Classification and Codes (Code: BBB) 37
Table 3.7 NESCS Plus Coding System with 3 Components 39
8
-------
Acronyms and Abbreviations
BCA Benefit-Cost Analysis
CICES Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services
EEP Ecological End-Product
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPF Ecological Production Function
ES Ecosystem Services
ESML EcoService Models Library; https://esml.epa.eov/
EVRI Environmental Valuation Resource Inventory
FEG Final Ecosystem Good
FEGS Final Ecosystem Goods and Services
FEGS-CS FEGS Classification System - a precursor to NESCS Plus
FES Final Ecosystem Services
GDIT General Dynamics Information Technology
GDP Gross Domestic Product
ILK Indigenous and Local Knowledge
IPBES Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Services
ITIS Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS); https://www.itis.gov/
MA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
NESCS National Ecosystem Services Classification System - a precursor to NESCS Plus
NESCS Plus National Ecosystem Services Classification System Plus
NAICS North American Industrial Classification System
NAPCS North American Product Classification System
NARS USEPA's National Aquatic Resource Surveys
NCP Nature's contributions to people
NERRS National Estuarine Research Reserve System
NEP National Estuary Program
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NIPA National Income and Product Accounts
NLCD National Land Cover Database
N0X Nitrogen Oxides
OW Offi ce of Water
RIBs Rapid Injection Basins
SAV Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
STEPS Stressor-Ecological Production function-final ecosystem Services Framework
TEV Total Economic Value
TSN ITIS Taxonomic Serial Number
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
9
-------
1.0 Purpose
Understanding how ecosystems contribute to human well-being is critical to public- and
private-sector decision making. Broadly speaking, when humans receive contributions from
ecosystems those interactions are referred to as "ecosystem services." As the importance of these
services to society receives increasing attention, there is also growing awareness about the
complexity and diversity of these
connections between ecosystems and
human systems. The need to understand
and ultimately to quantify the value of
these connections to humans has been one
of the main motivating forces behind the
large and rapidly growing literature
focused on defining, classifying, and
measuring ecosystem services.
To support continuing efforts in this
area, this document introduces, defines,
and describes the National Ecosystem
Services Classification System (NESCS
Plus, pronounced "nex-us plus"). It is
named "NESCS Plus" because it includes
the original NESCS 4-component
framework (USEPA, 2015) "plus" a 5th
component, the Beneficiary list from the
Final Ecosystem Goods and Services
Classification System (FEGS-CS; Landers
and Nahlik, 2013). A key feature of this classification system is that it focuses on "Final
Ecosystem Services," which are described below, as well as Final ecosystem goods (FEGs, or
ecological end-products, EEPs) that are critical precursors of these services.
This document is intended to help a diverse audience of natural and social sciences
professionals understand and apply NESCS Plus. The main purpose of NESCS Plus is to serve as
a framework for analyzing how changes to ecosystems impact human welfare. This system can
aid in the analysis of different types of environmental management actions, policies, and
Final Ecosystem Services
Final ES are specifically defined as the services
from nature that are "directly [emphasis added]
enjoyed, consumed, or used to yield human
well-being" (Boyd and Banzhaf, 2007). This
separates them from ecosystem characteristics
and processes that help produce final ecosystem
goods.
Goods vs. Services
Natural scientists generally use "ecosystem
services" as a term to cover both goods and
services. Final ecosystem goods (FEGs, or
ecological end-products, EEPs) are the
biophysical components of nature that humans
directly use or appreciate in final ES. The
NESCS Plus is useful for classifying both final
ecosystem goods and final ES. In a general way,
the term final ES encompasses both the final
ecosystem goods and the final ES concepts.
10
-------
regulations. Quantifying and (as feasible) valuing how changes in ecosystems affect human well-
being first requires identification of the relevant final ES by answering the following four
questions shown in Table 1.1: "Where," "What," "How," and "Who?"
Table 1.1 NESCS Plus Classification Questions and Components
Where?
Component 1: Environment classes and subclasses are the soatial environments where each
Ecological End-Product is located when used or appreciated by humans.
What?
Comvonent 2: Ecological End-Product (EEP) classes are the relevant biophysical components
of nature that are directly used or appreciated by humans.
How?
Comvonent 3: Direct Use classes and subclasses
are the ways each Ecological End-Product is
directly used or appreciated by humans.
How?
Comvonent 5: Beneficiarv classes and
subclasses are the interests of
individuals, groups of people, or
organizations that drive their use or
appreciation of Ecological End-Products.
This component of the system is from the
FEGS-CS system and can be a simpler
option than the Use/User classes for
those unfamiliar with NAICS.
Who?
Comvonent 4: Direct User classes and subclasses
are the sector(s) of the economy that make direct
use of each Ecological End-Product. These are
linked to the North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS).
Answering these questions enables comprehensive identification of final ecosystem
services, ensuring that all beneficiaries are considered from the earliest stages of project scoping
to completion so that there is a full recognition of the ways people benefit from nature.
Identifying a comprehensive list of NESCS Plus codes sets a foundation for tracking
quantification and valuation. Potential applications include but are not limited to cost-benefit
analyses of environmental programs and natural capital accounting. Though NESCS Plus is not
an accounting system, it is designed to support systematic and comprehensive accounting of
changes in final ecosystem services.
The intended audience for this document includes individuals, communities, private and
public-sector firms, as well as non-profit organizations that may wish to measure, quantify, map,
model, and/or value a standard, but complete, set of ecosystem services anywhere on the Earth.
Technical practitioners (e.g., social scientists, economists, landscape architects, natural scientists,
11
-------
decision-makers, etc.) of ecosystem services will also likely appreciate the relatively fine
separation of ecosystem services achieved in this classification system and the common language
established in this document to efficiently communicate within and across disciplines and to the
public.
The classification system provides a common architecture, and it has been integrated into
several other EPA products aimed at supported standardized approaches to classifying and
assessing ecosystem services. For example, there is a companion FEGS Community Scoping
Tool for community engagement (Sharpe and Jenkins, 2018; Sharpe et al., 2020) and a report
that aids in the identification of metrics and indicators that matter most to people (Ringold et al.
2020). NESCS Plus has been integrated into the EcoService Models Library to aid in finding
models for estimating the production of ecosystem services and its components have been cross
walked to data layers in the EnviroAtlas which includes spatial datasets and visualizations
(Tashie and Ringold 2019). To date, components of the classification system have been included
in over a dozen publications (e.g., Angradi et al. 2019; Bell et al. 2017; Clark et al. 2017;
Bolgrien et al. 2018; Boyd et al. 2016; Harwell and Jackson 2018; 2019; Harwell and Moleda
2018; Irvine et al. 2017; Littles et al. 2018; Ringold et al. 2013; Warnell et al. 2020; Yee et al.
2019) including a new International textbook on "Ecosystem-Based Management, Ecosystem
Services and Aquatic Biodiversity," which includes multiple case studies demonstrating ORD
tools (DeWitt et al., 2020; Flood et al., 2020; Russell et al., 2020; Sharpe et al., 2020).
The NESCS Plus webtool is available here:
https://www.epa.eov/eco-research/nescs-plus
12
-------
1.1 Why Focus on "Final" Ecosystem Services?
An important distinction has been drawn between "final" (direct) versus "intermediate"
(indirect) ecosystem services to improve the understanding and measurement of ecosystem
services (DeWitt et al. 2020). Ecosystems depend on and perform a wide variety of intermediate
processes and functions, which contribute to final ecosystem services. For simplicity,
"intermediate ecosystem services" as used in this report,1 are ecosystem characteristics or
processes that precede and support Ecological End-Products (also referred to as FEGs). Final ES
are outputs from nature that are directly used or appreciated by humans in diverse ways. For
example, water flowing in a stream is used for kayaking; this water provides a final ES to
recreational users. The water for kayaking final ES is supported by multiple intermediate
ecosystem services (plant transpiration, cloud formation, precipitation, etc.). Plant transpiration
is a process through which plants use soil moisture as an input and release water to the
atmosphere as an output. Ecosystems perform a wide variety of processes and functions that
influence the quantity and/or quality of final ES but do not themselves qualify as final ES
(because they are not directly enjoyed, consumed, or used). NESCS Plus refers to these
processes and functions as intermediate ecosystem services.
The distinction between final and intermediate services is important for several reasons:
1. Recognition of connections from ecosystems to human well-being. Final ES play a unique
role in the steps of identifying connections from ecological changes to effects on humans.
To fully understand any specific connection, it is often necessary to trace out a sequence
of input-output relationships, connecting ecological inputs to those outputs that people
directly use. These can vary in length and complexity, involving multiple intermediate
ecosystem services and they can be quantified using ecological production functions as
demonstrated in USEPA's EcoService Models Library (ESML; https://esml.epa.eov/). In
the end, however, each individual chain must eventually lead to and contain a final ES
connection, where the output from nature represents a direct value to humans.
2. Useful way of communicating to the public how ecosystems contribute to human well-
being. A focus on final ES highlights the features of ecosystems that are most likely to
matter to humans, which are also often the features that are most familiar to them.
3. Help identify environmental metrics and indicators that matter most to people. By
focusing on the components of nature that are most tangible to the public (Boyd et al.
1 The United Nations Statistics Division uses "intermediate ecosystem services" in a more limited way to refer to
services that flow between environment classes (UNSD 2012). Here the term is used more broadly to refer to
services the flow both within and between environment classes.
13
-------
2016; USEPA, 2017; Ringold et al. 2020), it can therefore improve efforts to monitor and
measure changes in environmental conditions. These advantages of using final ES for
communicating and quantifying ecosystem changes also extend to economic valuation
methods for ecosystem services. Whether eliciting preferences through surveys (a "stated
preference" approach) or deducing preferences through observed behaviors (a "revealed
preference" approach), it is helpful to use indicators that are most relevant to humans
(Sinha et al. 2018).
4. Systems approaches help identify the full set of ecosystem services. A focus on final ES
can help address the potential problem of undercounting ecosystem services, i.e., not
identifying, quantifying or assigning values to the full set of benefits. This can happen
because of a limited number of biophysical models or metrics (e.g., Chestnut and Mills
2005), a limited ability to assign a value to a predicted biophysical change, or an
oversight in identifying the full range of benefits or challenges associated with an
environmental change. The classification system is expected to assist in addressing this
problem by providing a complete list of the ways in which people benefit from ecosystem
change and, in the long run, encouraging the development of a broader set of biophysical
models, metrics, and indicators (Ringold et al. 2020). Additionally, the companion FEGS
Community Scoping Tool can help users identify the components of NESCS Plus using a
structured, transparent, repeatable process (Sharpe and Jenkins, 2018; Sharpe et al.,
2020).
5. Avoid double counting in environmental accounting. Several studies have noted (Boyd
and Banzhaf, 2007; Wainger and Mazzotta, 2011), the distinction between intermediate
and final services is critical for many types of environmental accounting, such as cost-
benefit analysis of environmental programs, natural capital accounting, and measurement
of "green" gross domestic product (green GDP). A fundamental best-practice for any
accounting process is to avoid double counting of constituent parts. Because an
intermediate ecosystem service is an input to a final ecosystem service, it is embedded
within the value calculated for that final service. Therefore, to avoid duplication (i.e.,
double counting) when adding up environmental values, the value of an intermediate
service should not be added to that of a final service. Importantly, this focus on final ES
for environmental accounting does not mean that intermediate ecosystems services are of
secondary importance. On the contrary, it recognizes that their contribution to human
well-being is a major contributor to the value of final ES. It is also worth noting,
14
-------
however, that double counting of ecosystem service values is not a main concern for all
types of ecosystem service analyses and applications.
For NESCS Plus, the focus on final ES should also not be interpreted as a decision to ignore or
minimize the importance of ecosystem characteristics and processes, and elements of ecosystem
condition such as biodiversity. Rather, it reflects a decision about where to draw boundaries on
the scope of this classification system. In no way does it limit or preclude the development of
complementary classification systems for intermediate ecosystem services. Moreover, a
classification system focused on final ES is not expected to address the needs of all ecosystem
service analyses. Rather, NESCS Plus will need to be applied in combination with other tools,
data, and methods, especially those used to describe and quantify ecological and economic
production processes and human preferences. For example, the FEGS Community Scoping Tool
(Sharpe and Jenkins, 2018; Sharpe et al., 2020), EcoService Models Library (ESML;
https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/ecoservice-models-library). and EnviroAtlas
(https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas). and the Ringold et al. (2020) Metrics Report can be used
together. Table 1.2 outlines four general principles for identifying and quantifying final ES.
Table 1.2 Final ES General Approach (Adapted from Landers and Nahlik 2013).
Final ES Conceptual Principles
Defining, measuring, quantifying, valuing, and/or accounting for final ES requires a wholly
collaborative effort among natural scientists and social scientists.
Environmental processes and functions produce potential final ES, while people, groups, or
firms enjoy, use, or consume final ES.
Defining, identifying, and classifying a complete, but non-duplicative, set of final ES is the
foundation that can be used as a transdisciplinary approach to measure, quantify, map, model,
and value ecosystem services.
Because individuals enjoy, use, or consume final ES, an understanding of how they directly
use or appreciate Ecological End-Products is crucial to identify final ES and contribute to the
framing of the research and implementation plan.
15
-------
1.2 Why Have a Classification System for Final Ecosystem Services?
In general, classification systems (or taxonomies) are used for a wide range of scientific
applications, including for living organisms, land cover, human diseases, and economic sectors,
to name a few. Many of the main objectives of these systems (Sokal, 1974; Bruno and
Richmond, 2003) are also relevant for classifying final ecosystem services. Finisdore et al.
(2020) described 18 benefits of ecosystem services classification systems such as enabling final
ES to be more easily and precisely defined, simplifying knowledge transfer between studies, and
avoiding the redundancy and work of re-creating final ES identification systems.
The main objectives of NESCS Plus as a classification system are the following:
1. Provide a common language and framework for describing and visualizing final ES.
Establishing a common language is particularly important for facilitating communication
within the inherently interdisciplinary field of ecosystem services research. Ecologists,
economists, and other disciplines all gain from a having a common system that is clearly
defined and structured. To address this objective, NESCS Plus provides a conceptual
framework that describes key terms and concepts, and a classification structure for final ES
that is directly based on this framework. Together, these two features aim to clearly define
what ecosystem services are and how they can be grouped according to key characteristics.
2. Provide a structure for identifying and comprehensively listing distinct final ES. In general,
classification systems help to define, organize, and clarify the relationship between and
among specific items, so that those with similar characteristics can be grouped together. This
function is particularly important for systems involving large numbers of components. In the
case of NESCS Plus, classification can help users to develop lists of the distinct types of final
ES that flow from specific environments and ecosystems to different sectors and
beneficiaries. Classification can also be used to organize analyses that require identifying the
different "causal chains" pathways through which a management or policy action is expected
to propagate through linked ecosystems and human systems to ultimately affect human well-
being. NESCS Plus can play an important role in these analyses because each pathway must
include a distinct "point of hand-off' (i.e., final ES flow) from ecosystems to human systems.
3. Provide a structure that helps to organize the measurement of final ES and goods. For
example, NESCS Plus can be used to organize the development of final ES and goods
metrics and indicators, especially those that focus on the biophysical features of ecosystems
that are most relevant for specific human uses or beneficiaries, such as waterfowl abundance
for hunters or water quantity and salinity for agricultural irrigators (Ringold et al. 2009,
2013, 2020).
16
-------
4. Provide a structure that helps to organize the accounting and aggregation of final ES and
goods. In addition to measuring an individual final ES, there is often a need to add up values
(or changes) across multiple final ES, as a way of measuring the combined contributions of
multiple ecosystems services. For example, economic accounting practices such as cost-
benefit analysis of environmental programs or natural capital accounting, typically require
some aggregation of ecosystem service benefits. Similar to the economic classification
systems (e.g., NAICS) that provide an essential foundation for national income accounting,
NESCS Plus can provide a foundational structure for the systematic accounting of ecosystem
service benefits.
5. Provide a structure that helps to organize, catalogue, and retrieve information about final ES,
similar to a library, filing, or meta-data system. This function can include organizing
information on:
a. The different types of ecosystem services addressed by existing empirical analyses.
b. The different types of metrics and indicators used to quantify ecosystem services,
including monetary (e.g., willingness-to-pay estimates) and non-monetary (e.g.,
number of wildlife sightings per visit) metrics.
c. The different empirical estimates of ecosystem services generated in these analyses,
including monetary values and non-monetary values.
d. The different types of models used to quantify ecosystem services (e.g., fish
population dynamics or economic valuation models).
Additional explanations with examples of how NESCS Plus can be used to address these
objectives are provided in the "4.0 NESCS Plus: Example Applications" section.
1.3 Why Do We Need a New Ecosystem Services Classification System?
Existing literature on ecosystem services proposes various definitions and classification
approaches for ecosystem services (Flood et al. 2020; Finisdore et al. 2020). Although there is
broad consensus that ecosystems are natural assets that support human welfare, a convergence of
views has not been reached on the best conceptual approach for describing and classifying the
diverse processes, functions, stocks, flows, goods, services, and benefits embedded within or
provided by ecosystems. This lack of consensus can create confusion in the application of the
term ecosystem services (Nahlik et al, 2012), which makes it more difficult to organize a wide
array of information in support of policy analyses.
17
-------
The widely cited Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA, 2003, 2005) divides
ecosystem services into supporting, provisioning, cultural, and regulating service. However, the
MA report emphasizes that "the purpose [of these categories] is not to establish a taxonomy but
rather to ensure that the [MA] analysis addresses the entire range of services" (p. 38 MA 2003).
A more fully developed classification system is the Common International Classification
of Ecosystem Services (CICES; Haines-Young and Potschin, 2013, 2018). The CICES adapts
and expands the MA approach to provide a more detailed classification system. It includes more
attention to the differentiation between ecosystem services and the ecological processes that
contribute to those services. The CICES does not include supporting services as an ecosystem
service category. However, overlaps still exist among the three remaining categories of
ecosystem services (regulating, provisioning and cultural). A lack of explicit partitioning
between final and intermediate services in CICES limits its usefulness as a foundation for
accounting or for benefits analysis.
The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
(IPBES) has also developed a framework centered around the concept of "Nature's contributions
to people" (NCP). The stated objective of this framework is to include a "wider range of values
(e.g., relational and intrinsic values), valuation methods (e.g., socio-cultural methods), and
worldviews [e.g., indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) systems]" and provide an approach for
assessing the value of NCPs (Christie, et al (2019), IBPES (2018)). The IPBES approach
includes two different perspectives, one more typical of biophysical and economic sciences and
the other typical of local and indigenous knowledge. The first ("generalizable") perspective
identifies eighteen categories of NCPs that are organized into three partially overlapping groups:
regulating, material and non- material services. Under the second ("contextual") perspective, NCPs
are not classified. Therefore, although the concept of NCPs is like ecosystem services, IPBES does
not attempt to distinguish between final and intermediate; rather, it explicitly includes overlapping
categories.
Several key themes and implications for ecosystem service classification emerge from the
existing literature. First, if one wishes to support ecosystem service accounting or benefits
analysis at local, regional and national levels, it is important to distinguish between final
ecosystem goods, final ecosystem services, and the multitude of ecological processes that
contribute to them (i.e., intermediate services). As previously noted, failing to make a clear
distinction between intermediate and final ecosystem services can be particularly problematic for
18
-------
ecosystem service valuation and accounting because it increases the likelihood of either
incomplete or double-counting. Duplication can occur because the value of the intermediate
ecological processes is embedded within the value for final ES. This potential for double-
counting is a well-recognized and demonstrated drawback of the MA framework (Ojea et al.,
2012; Fu et al., 2011). For example, MA includes both regulating services, such as the process of
water purification, and provisioning services, such as freshwater supplies. The problem is that if
both regulating and provisioning services are valued, and then those values are added up, the
value of water regulation to water provisioning would be double counted. Similarly, IPBES
includes regulating NCPs (e.g., regulation of air quality, climate, freshwater quantity and quality
and soil) as well as material NCPs (e.g., food and feed, medicinal resources). If these NCPs are
all added up, this would result in double-counting. Despite distinguishing between intermediate
and final services in its documentation, the CICES classification also includes regulating and
provisioning services that are potentially overlap between intermediate and final services
groupings. For example, CICES includes categories for seed dispersal and control of erosion
rates. The value of these services is at least partly embedded within the value of other final
service categories such as wild plants used for nutrition.
Second, to reduce the risk of double counting it is also important to distinguish between
ecosystem goods and services and economic goods and services. If economic goods (e.g., the
amount of cotton harvested) are confused with ecosystem goods (e.g., the health of our soils),
decision makers may draw inappropriate conclusions about the environment's capacity to sustain
services on which people rely. For instance, MA and CICES include categories describing goods
that are typically produced by humans (using human labor, capital, and ecological inputs) and
often sold in markets, such as food (MA, 2005) and "Cultivated terrestrial plants (including
fungi, algae) grown for nutritional purposes" (Haines-Young and Potschin, 2018). Treating these
types of economic goods as ecosystem goods or services again runs the risk of double counting,
because ecosystem service values (e.g., from water inputs to agricultural production) are
embedded within the value of the economic goods.
Two recent efforts initiated by the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to
develop classification systems that address these issues include the Final Ecosystem Goods and
Services Classification System (FEGS-CS; Landers and Nahlik, 2013) and the National
Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS; USEPA, 2015). To avoid double counting
ecosystem goods and services, both FEGS-CS and NESCS focus on final ecosystem goods and
services. Although conceptually and structurally similar, the two systems have different features
and advantages. For example, FEGS-CS defines ecosystem goods and services as "components
19
-------
of nature," which implies they are countable stocks in nature (such as quantities of water at
specific times, fish abundance, water clarity and soil health that can be measured at a specific
point in time). In contrast, drawing mainly on economic approaches, NESCS treats services as
flows, which move over time from an origin to a destination. The FEGS-CS and NESCS also use
different approaches for categorizing the different ways humans benefit from these services.
Finally, whereas FEGS-CS provides a ready-to-use and finite list of final ecosystem goods and
services, NESCS provides lists for the components of final ES. The NESCS leaves it to the user
of the system to define how these components are combined to identify distinct final ES.
Therefore, the aim of NESCS Plus is to provide a new system that: (1) improves on
existing classification approaches; and (2) combines the desirable features of FEGS-CS and
NESCS. Key features of NESCS Plus are summarized in Text Box 1.3.
20
-------
Text Box 1.3. Key Features of NESCS Plus
Key features designed to support ecosystem service assessments are:
(1) Flexible and comprehensive: NESCS Plus provides a broad and flexible modular structure
intended to, as comprehensively as possible, capture potential pathways from ecosystems to
human beings, thus avoiding any omission of ecosystem service categories (including those
that may become important in the future).
(2) Minimizes double counting of ecosystem services: While supporting a comprehensive
accounting of ecosystem services, it avoids duplication by distinguishing between
intermediate and final ecosystem services, and by distinguishing between: (1) economic
goods and services; and (2) ecosystem goods and services. It also does this by striving to
define categories of final ecosystem goods and services that are mutually exclusive (i.e.,
non-overlapping).
NESCS Plus can also be characterized in part by what it does not do or include:
(1) Does not provide a system for identifying or classifying intermediate ecosystem
services, ecological production functions, or economic production functions. The user
must rely on other tools and sources of information to create these parts of the causal chains
from changes in the environment to changes in human well-being.
(2) Does not conduct valuation of ecosystem services: The NESCS Plus does not attempt to
conduct quantification or valuation. The goal is to support identification of pathways
between ecological and human systems, which can then be used as a basis or starting point
for quantification (e.g., metric identification) or valuation.
(3) Is not a macro-accounting system: The NESCS Plus draws from certain elements of
macro-accounting structures such as the North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS), the North American Product Classification System (NAPCS), and the National
Income and Product Accounts (NIPA). It might prove to be a useful tool for green Gross
Domestic Product accounting, although this is not the fundamental purpose of NESCS Plus.
(4) Does not define or categorize feedbacks from human systems to ecosystems: The
NESCS Plus defines flows from ecosystems to human systems and not feedback effects from
human to ecosystems. It is important to note that this is by design and does not limit
consideration of these dynamic and feedback effects when quantifying and valuing
ecosystem services. Feedbacks may generate more flows through the NESCS Plus system
and require that more of the existing final ecosystem goods pathways be considered.
However, considering these feedbacks does not imply that new pathways will need to be
defined and classified.
(5) Does not include a separate class for human health effects, but instead includes
multiple categories involving dimensions of human health and safety: Rather than
separating human health and safety into a single separate category, it includes multiple
human use categories for ecosystems that have health and safety implications, including
extractive uses for subsistence, recreation, and production of economic goods and services.
21
-------
2.0 What Is NESCS Plus?
The NESCS Plus provides two main tools for identifying final ES - a conceptual
framework and a classification structure.
2.1 NESCS Plus Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework provides a way to systematically link ecological systems that
produce ecosystem services with human systems that directly use these services (i.e., market
production systems and households) in specific and diverse ways.
The NESCS Plus conceptual framework is shown in Figure 2. The green half of the figure
includes a simplified representation of the "ecological production" processes in the environment.
These processes produce the biophysical components of nature (a "good") that are directly
beneficial to or directly valued or used by humans, more specifically, as "Ecological End-
Products" (EEPs). The blue half of the figure provides a simplified representation of human
production and consumption of economic goods and services and their contribution to human well-
being.
As previously discussed, the conceptual framework also distinguishes between stock and
flow concepts. In Figure 1, flows are represented as arrows and stocks are represented as boxes.
Circles represent processes (e.g., production). The Ecological End-Products are therefore
represented as the stocks in nature - e.g., wildlife (fauna), trees (flora), water - that are the direct
source of all final ES flows2.
Final ecosystem services occur at the point of hand-off between the ecological systems and
human systems. They are flows that contribute to human production or consumption processes. In
some cases, they may be thought of as flowing directly to human well-being, which is a summary
concept representing the overall condition and quality of life of humans and society. Whether
directly or indirectly, all final ES flows eventually contribute to human well-being.
2 In NESCS Plus, final ecosystem goods and EEPs are not treated as physical flows (to humans) because the process
of generating those flows - e.g., withdrawing water from a stream, catching fish, or harvesting wild mushrooms
- generally requires human input (i.e., labor), which implies that the flows are economic goods A similar
argument about the distinction between ecosystem and economic goods is made by Boyd and Banzhaf (2007).
22
-------
In contrast to final ES flows, which are intangible and usually cannot be directly observed,
Ecological End-Product stocks are typically observable and measurable.3 As a result, Ecological
End-Product measures are critically important as indicators or metrics (indirect biophysical
measures) of final ES flows, particularly when these measures have meaning and relevance for the
humans that receive the final ES (Ringold et al. 2020). For example, the abundance of adult deer
population in a forest preserve (Ecological End-Product stock measure) can be an important
indicator of the final ES flow provided by forest wildlife to recreational hunters.4 The number of
deer killed and harvested (a flow measure) could also be used as an indicator, but it is not a direct
measure of the final ES flow, because it also measures the labor and skill used by the hunter (i.e., it
is a direct measure of the economic good produced by the hunting activity).5
3 Like services produced in the economy - e.g., storage space rental, financial advice, automobile repair - the
service flows themselves cannot be directly observed. Instead, input or outcome indicators such as number of
storage units rented, number of financial reports produced, or number of labor hours provided can be used.
4 Depending on the context, additional information (for example about the hunters' access to or preferences for the
deer) may be needed to develop a more complete, and precise estimate of final ES.
5 A direct measure of the final ES from the deer population to the hunters could, for example, be the hunter's
willingness to pay for access to the forest reserve for hunting. As an analogy, if one wanted to measure the
economic services (also intangible) provided by a musical performance, one could use the price of the ticket as a
direct measure, or one could use measures of the musicians' experience and awards as an indirect indicator.
-------
Figure 2 Conceptual framework that shows how final ecosystem services flow from the
environment to human systems. Final ecosystem services occur when Ecological End-Products
are directly used or appreciated by humans6
For clarity and simplicity, the NESCS Plus framework separates ecological systems and
human systems; however, in practice it must be acknowledges that there are overlapping or
"gray" areas. For example, in heavily managed environments like urban cities, suburban parks,
or agroecosystems, identifying the relevant Ecological End-Product and corresponding "final"
ecosystem service flow can be challenging and requires both correct application of the tool and
use of relevant and appropriate judgment by the NESCS Plus user since the boundary between
ecosystems and human modified systems is often not clear.
In NESCS Plus, things produced using intentionally applied human inputs and sold in a
market7 are generally considered economic goods or services rather than final ES.8 However,
6 Although not shown explicitly on the diagram, the characteristics and attributes of the EEPs (e.g., water quality,
size of wildlife populations) are key determinants of the magnitude of final ES flows. Biophysical metrics or
indicators can be used to represent these magnitudes.
7 Not including regulatory-based enviromnental (i.e., cap-and-trade) markets.
8 For example, agricultural landscapes are produced using human inputs and humans may have aesthetic
appreciation for such landscapes. However, the view of these landscapes is not sold in the market, and it may be
considered a positive final ES externality that results from agricultural production systems.
24
-------
even in these cases, determining where to draw the line between ecosystems and human systems
may depend on the context and require user judgment. For example, if a private landowner
creates a nature park on his land, which users can access by paying a fee, it may require
appropriate judgment to determine what aspects of the park offer human-produced economic
services as opposed to ecosystem services.
25
-------
3. NESCS Plus Classification Structure
The NESCS Plus classification structure defines classes and subclasses, which are each
assigned a numeric code designed to identify and classify flows of services from ecosystems to
human beings in a comprehensive and mutually exclusive way. It consi sts of four main
components (Figure 3.1):
L Environment classes (code: WWW)
2. Ecological End-Product classes (code: XXX)
3. Direct Use classes (code: YYYY)
4. Direct User classes (code: ZZZZ)
Figure 3.1 The NESCS Plus "Use/User" structure (four components)
Environment
Classification
Where?
(Code: WWW
Ecological End-Product
Classification
Spatial units with
similar biophysical
characteristics,
located on or near
the Earth's surface,
that contain or
produce end-
products
Biophysical
components of
nature that are
directly used or
appreciated by
humans
What?
(Code: XXX)
Direct Use
Classification
Different ways in
which ecological
end-products are
used or
appreciated by
humans
How?
(Code: YYYY)
Direct User
Classification
Entities that directly
use or appreciate
ecological end-
products
Who?
(Code: ZZZZ)
26
-------
The NESCS Plus also offers an alternative three-component structure, where the last two
components representing human systems (i.e., the Direct Use/User classes) are replaced with a
single classification component for 'Beneficiaries." Beneficiaries are defined as the interests of
individuals, groups of people, or organizations that drive their direct use or appreciation of
Ecological End-Products. This alternative NESCS Plus structure, has the following three
components (Figure 3.2):
1. Environment classes (code: WWW)
2. Ecological End-Product classes (code: XXX)
3. Beneficiary classes (code: BBB)
Figure 3.2 Alternative NESCS Plus "Beneficiary" structure (three components)
Environment
Classification
Spatial units with
similar biophysical
characteristics,
located on or near
the Earth's surface,
that contain or
produce end-
products
Where?
(Code: WWW)
Ecological End-Product
Classification
Biophysical
components of
nature that are
directly used or
appreciated by
humans
What?
(Code: XXX)
Beneficiary
Classification
Human interests
that drive the use
or appreciation of
ecological end-
products
How?
(Code: BBB)
For all the classification components, NESCS Plus employs a nested hierarchical structure
so that each component can be represented at multiple levels of aggregation or detail (an
illustration of this hierarchy is shown later in Table 3.5). Tradeoffs exist between adding more
detail and keeping the system tractable—existing levels of detail in NESCS Plus attempt to balance
the two. To maintain flexibility for the future, additional levels of detail can be added to any class
or subclass. Also, other existing classification systems for specific categories in NESCS Plus (e.g.,
for wetlands or fauna) can be used to expand or complement the NESCS Plus structure, depending
on the user's needs.
27
-------
3.1 NESCS Plus Use/User Classification Structure (Four Components)
3.1.1 Environment Classification (Code: WWW)
The first component of NESCS Plus is the Environment classification, which spatially
divides the earth into areas with similar biophysical characteristics. Table 3.1 shows the 3-level
classification hierarchy for this component. It also includes a numeric coding structure, which
provides a short-hand notation for the hierarchy and a numeric identifier for each element. The
top level (single-digit) indicates two mutually exclusive environment classes - aquatic and
terrestrial - each of which is further subdivided into 2-digit (level I) sub-classes. These
subclasses are then further subdivided into 3-digit (level II) subclasses. The Terrestrial
Environment classes match the National Land Cover Database (NLCD)9, which is commonly
used by other tools and systems (e.g., USEPA's Enviro Atlas; https://www.epa.eov/enviroatlas).
When used to classify a final ES, the environment classes and subclasses specifically
refer to the environment in which the relevant Ecological End-Product is located when it is used
or appreciated by humans. This location is not necessarily the same as the location of the Direct
Use, User, or Beneficiary. Specific definitions of these classes and subclasses are in Appendix
B
9 Disclaimer: Individual users of NESCS Plus are responsible for evaluating the uncertainties associated with the
original datasets feeding into NESCS Plus, including the NLCD, and characterizing NESCS Plus results for
applicability, precision, accuracy, uncertainty, and other data qualifications associated with usability of results.
Users should particularly note that many sources of information that may be used to quantify EEPs are built on
spatial frameworks not congruent with the NLCD. This lack of congruence may need to be accounted for in
quantitative representations.
28
-------
Table 3.1 The Environment Classification (Code: WWW) addresses the question of where EEPs
Environment
Class
Subclass I
Subclass II
111. Rivers and Streams
11. Open Water
112. Lakes and Ponds
1. Aquatic
113. Near Coastal Marine/Estuarine
114. Open Oceans and Seas
12. Wetlands
121. Woody Wetlands
122. Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
211. Deciduous Forest
21. Forests
212. Evergreen Forest
213. Mixed Forest
22. Agroecosystems
221. Pasture/Hay
222. Cultivated Crops
23. Grasslands
231. Grassland/Herbaceous
24. Scrubland/Shrubland
241. Shrub/Scrub
251. Lichens
2. Terrestrial
25. Tundra
252. Moss
253. Dwarf Scrub
254. Sedge/Herbaceous
26. Ice and snow
261. Perennial Ice/Snow
271. Developed Open Space
27. Urban/suburban
272. Developed Low Intensity
273. Developed Medium Intensity
274. Developed High Intensity
28. Barren/rock and sand
281. Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)
29
-------
3.1.2 Ecological End-Product (EEP) Classification (Code: XXX)
The second component of NESCS Plus is the Ecological End-Product (EEP)
classification. Ecological End-Products represent the biophysical components in nature that
humans most directly use or appreciate. In this capacity, they can also be described as final
ecosystem goods. Table 3.2 shows the proposed single-level classification and coding system for
this component. It also provides definitions for the eight main classes of end-products10, and
examples for elements in the sub-class groupings.
One of the challenges in constructing this end-product classification is defining mutually
exclusive categories while also recognizing that there can be substantial complexity in what
people use appreciate or enjoy directly in nature. In addition to individual end-products, people
often care about combinations of them. For example, people may value an entire landscape in
addition to individual flora, fauna, water, etc., that are parts of the landscape. To account for this
issue, a class called "Composite" is included. Examples of end-products included in this class are
the different types of natural features or phenomena that directly matter to humans but can be
thought of as combinations of the other end-products.
It is important to emphasize that most biophysical components in nature that are the
direct source of final ES can also, in other settings, be the source of intermediate ecosystem
services. In other words, whether a specific biophysical component is identified and classified as
an Ecological End-Product depends on the Beneficiary or Use/User combination. For example,
when salmon are harvested by recreational anglers, they can be thought of as Ecological End-
Products classified as Fauna. However, when the salmon are consumed by bears, who are later
appreciated by wildlife viewers, they are one step removed from being an Ecological End-
Product.
Though not part of the formal classification system, an attributes table has been created to
support identification of metrics and indicators (available in Appendix C). These attributes have
been integrated into the FEGS Community Scoping Tool (Sharpe et al. 2020) and the FEGS
Metrics Report (Ringold et al. 2020).
10 There are 8 EEP categories identified in Table 4, including Fauna, Flora, and Fungi. It is important to recognize
that the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS; https://www.itis.gov/') classifies seven taxonomic
Kingdoms: Archaea, Bacteria, Protozoa, Chromista, Fungi, Plantae, Animalia); see Table 4.
30
-------
Table 3.2 Ecological End-Product Classification (Code: XXX) addresses the question of what in
nature is directly used or appreciated by humans.
Ecological
End-Product
Class
Definition
1. Atmosphere
Atmospheric conditions (e.g., wind, sunlight, cloud cover, air temperature,
and humidity) and components of the atmosphere (e.g., precipitation, water
vapor, oxygen, carbon dioxide, helium, nitrogen, and hydrogen). This class
excludes weather events (which are included under "Composite").
2. Soil
The unconsolidated mineral or organic matter on the surface of the Earth,
including for example mud, clay, loam, stones, rocks. This class excludes
materials suspended or dissolved in water (those are included under
"Water").
3. Water
Liquid and solid forms of water surface water and ground water including
components suspended or dissolved in water, which are indicators of water
quality. This class excludes water vapor and precipitation (which are
included under "Atmosphere"). This class excludes extreme events (which
are included under "Composite").
4. Fauna
All animal life (for example, mammals, fish, shellfish, birds, reptiles,
amphibians, insects). The Fauna class includes everything in the Kingdom
Animalia. Subclasses should use an Integrated Taxonomic Information
System (ITIS) Taxonomic Serial Number (TSN*).
5. Flora
All plant and unicellular life (for example trees, shrubs, herbs, grasses, ferns,
mosses, viruses, bacteria.) This class excludes fungal life (which is included
under "Fungi."). The Flora class includes everything in the Kingdoms
Plantae, Chromista, Protozoa, Bacteria, and Archaea. Subclasses should use
an Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) Taxonomic Serial
Number (TSN*).
6. Fungi
All fungal life including for example lichens and mushrooms. The Fungi
class includes everything in the Kingdom Fungi. Subclasses should use an
Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) Taxonomic Serial Number
(TSN*).
7. Other
Natural
Components
All other biota or biotic material that are not part of / attached to currently
living floral / faunal source, including for example driftwood not attached to
currently living tree, shells not attached to currently living clams.
8. Composite
A combination of elements and components of single or multiple
environmental classes, including for example: (1) site appeal (e.g., views,
sounds, scents; (2) extreme events and natural phenomenon (e.g., fire, hot
springs, geysers); and (3) integrated ecosystems.
* A TSN is a unique, persistent, non-intelligent identifier for a scientific name in the context of the Integrated
Taxonomic Information System (ITIS; https://www.itis. gov/). The ITIS provides a unique TSN for every level in the
taxonomic hierarchy.
31
-------
3.1.3 Direct Use Classification (Code: YYYY)
The Direct Use classification describes distinct ways in which end-products can be directly used
or appreciated by humans (Table 3.3). Consistent with the total economic value (TEV)
framework often used by economists (see for example Pearce and Pretty, 1993), this
classification component includes separate classes for "use" and "non-use." Many of the direct
use subclasses are then further subdivided into second level subclasses, according to whether
they involve extractive or in-situ use of the Ecological End-Product in question. Specific
definitions of these classes and subclasses are in Appendix D.
Table 3.3. Direct Use Classification (Code: YYYY) addresses the question of how Ecological End-
Products are directly used or appreciated by humans
Direct Use
Subclass I
Subclass II
1. Direct Use
101. Raw material for transformation
1011. Extractive use
102. Distribution to other users
1021. Extractive use
103. Industrial processing
1031. Extractive use
104. Transportation medium
1042. In-situ use
105. Waste disposal/assimilation
1052. In-situ use
106. Aesthetic appreciation
1062. In-situ use
107. Fuel/energy
1071. Extractive use
1072. In-situ use
108. Support of plant or animal cultivation
1081. Extractive use
1082. In-situ use
109. Support or protection of human health
and life or subsistence
1091. Extractive use
1092. In-situ use
110. Support for protection of human property
1101. Extractive use
1102. In-situ use
111. Recreation/tourism
1111. Extractive use
1112. In-situ use
112. Cultural/spiritual activities
1121. Extractive use
1122. In-situ use
113. Information, science, education, and
research
1131. Extractive use
1132. In-situ use
114. Other direct use
1141. Extractive use
1142. In-situ use
2. Non-use
201. Existence
1102. In-situ use
202. Bequest
1102. In-situ use
203. Other non-use
1102. In-situ use
32
-------
3.1.4 Direct User Classification (Code: ZZZZJ
The fourth component is the Direct Users classification (Table 3.4). This component
defines the separate economic sectors though which people directly use or appreciate end-
products. Following established classification structures adopted by the U.S. Census Bureau and
The United Nations, the first level includes broad sectors of the economy - Industry,
Households, and Government. To further subdivide the industry class, the existing North
American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) and coding system has been adopted in
NESCS Plus, which is the standard used by U.S. federal statistical agencies in classifying
business establishments.11 The NAICS coding system contains six digits (with four levels of sub-
classification), with details and definitions available at https://www.census.eov/cei-
bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch?chart=JO I ; however, Table 3.4 only shows the top level (2-digit)
classes.12 Specific definitions and a more detailed classification using 3-digit NAICS codes is
available in Appendix E.
Unlike commercial establishments, which tend to specialize in certain productive activities and
can therefore be assigned to individual NAICS categories, households do not specialize in the
same way and are therefore not divided into sub-classes. However, the diverse ways in which
households experience nature are captured in the myriad listings of direct uses (in Table 3.3).
11 Note, NAICS 814 (Private Households) are omitted. See https://www.census.gov/cgi-
bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch?chart=2012 for definitions. Separate categories for households and government were
included to ensure the capture a broader range of uses than that implied by the NAICS definition.
12 Some categories such as manufacturing and retail trade span more than one 2-digit class.
33
-------
Table 3.4 Direct User Classification and Codes (Code: ZZZZ) addresses the question of who
direct uses each Ecological End-Product
Direct User
Class
Subclass I
1. Industry
111. Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting
121. Mining
122. Utilities
123. Construction
131. Manufacturing - 31
132. Manufacturing - 32
133. Manufacturing - 33
142. Wholesale Trade
144. Retail Trade - 44
145. Retail Trade - 55
148. Transportation and Warehousing - 48
149. Transportation and Warehousing - 49
151. Information
152. Finance and Insurance
153. Real Estate Rental and Leasing
154. Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
155. Management of Companies and Enterprises
161. Educational Services
162. Health Care and Social Assistance
171. Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
172. Accommodation and Food Services
181. Other Services (except Public Administration)
2. Households
211. Households
3. Government
392. Public Administration
399. Other Government
Taken together, these four classification components can be used to identify individual
final ES. More specifically, each unique combination - with a single element drawn from each of
the four components - defines a separate potential final ES. The ability to define different
combinations allows the NESCS Plus structure to be flexible and comprehensive. For example,
the same Ecological End-Product class may be used in multiple ways (e.g., water can be used to
support human life as drinking water and as an energy source through hydropower production).
It also recognizes that a single use class or subclass can be linked to multiple different user
34
-------
categories. For example, water used to support plant cultivation is relevant both for the
agricultural sector and for households (e.g., lawn watering).
In total, there are over 120,000 possible combinations for the four components.13 The
NESCS Plus offers users the flexibility to define the combinations of the four components that
are relevant for their specific needs. However, it is worth noting that not every combination
necessarily represents a plausible ecosystem service. For example, it is difficult to envision a
combination that links the Ecological End-Product class Fungi with the Direct Use subclass of
Transportation Medium.
Each unique final ecosystem service can be easily identified using the NESCS Plus codes
shown in Tables 3.1-3.4, The coding system is summarized in Table 3.5. The general format of
the code is WWW.X.YYYY.ZZZZZZZ, where the first three digits (WWW) refer to the
Environment class and subclasses, the next digit (XXX) refers to the Ecological End-Product
class, the next four digits (YYYY) refer to the Direct Use class and subclasses, and the final
seven digits (ZZZZZZZ) refer to the Direct User classes and subclasses.
Table 3.5 NESCS Plus Coding System with 4-Components
Component
Environment
Ecological
End-Product
Direct Use
Direct User
WWW
.XXX
. YYYY
.ZZZZZZZ
Class
w
www.x
WWW.X.Y
WW.X.YYYY.Z
Subclass I
WW
www.xx
WWW.X.YYY
WW.X.YYYY.ZZZ
Subclass II
www
www.xxx
WWW.X. YYYY
WW.X.YYYY.ZZZZZZZ
Example
112
Aquatic—Open
Water—Lakes
and Ponds
112.3
Water
112.3.1081
Direct Use—
Support of plant or
animal
cidtivation—
Extractive Use
112.3.1081.1111333
Industry—Agriculture,
Forestry, Fishing, and
Hunting—Grape Vineyards
Because of the hierarchical structure of each classification component, the NESCS Plus
code can be used at various levels of detail, depending on the desired level of granularity or
13 With 24 Environment subclasses (level II), 8 EEP classes, 25 Direct Use subclasses (level II), and 25 Direct User
subclasses (level, I, assuming a 3-digit level of detail for this component), the total number of possible
combinations is 120,000, If a 4-digit level of detail is used for the Direct User component (i.e., using a 3-digit
NAICS code), then the number of combinations increases to over 600,000.
35
-------
aggregation for the specific context being considered. In its simplest form, it can be used to only
specify the top-level class for each component. For example, the combination of: (1)
Environment class = Terrestrial; (2) Ecological End-Product class = Fauna; (3) Direct Use class
= Direct Use; and (4) Direct User class = Industry can be represented by the code 2.4.1.1 (or
using all the digits: 2WW.4XX. 1YYY. 1ZZZZZZ).
At its most detailed level, it can make use of all 15 digits. For example, the combination
of: (1) Environment class = Aquatic—Open Water—Lakes and Ponds, (2) Ecological End-
Product class = Water; (3) Direct Use class = Direct Use—Support of plant or animal
cultivation—Extractive Use; and (4) Direct User class = Industry—Agriculture, Forestry,
Fishing, andHunting—Grape Vineyards can be represented bythe code 112.3.1081.1111333. In
this case, the last six digits are the same as the 6-digit NAICS code for the Grape and Vineyards
industrial subclass.
3.2 NESCS Plus "Beneficiary" Classification Structure (Three Components)
As indicated at the beginning of this section, NESCS Plus also offers an alternative three-
component structure as previously shown in Figure 3. In this case, the last two components
representing human systems (i.e., the Direct Use Classes and Direct User Classes) are replaced
with a single classification component for human Beneficiaries (Table 3.6).
Unlike the Direct User and Direct Use concepts, the Beneficiary concept does not
specifically separate the questions (1) Who benefits from nature? and (2) How do they benefit?
Therefore, it can be thought of as a combination of the two concepts. In some cases, the
Beneficiary definition also identifies connections to specific Ecological End-Products. For
example, the Agricultural Processors subclass is defined as "This beneficiary primarily consumes
water for washing edible products." Specific definitions of these classes and subclasses are in
Appendix F.
36
-------
Table 3.6 Beneficiary Classification and Codes (Code: BBB)
Beneficiary Class
Beneficiary Subclass I
01. Agricultural
011. Livestock Grazers
012. Agricultural Processors
013. Aquaculturists
014. Farmers
015. Foresters
016. Other Agricultural Beneficiaries
02. Commercial/Industrial
021. Food Extractors
022. Timber, Fiber, and Ornamental Extractors
023. Industrial Processors
024. Private Energy Generators
025. Pharmaceutical and Food Supplement Suppliers
026. Fur / Hide Trappers and Hunters
027. Private Drinking Water Plant Operators
028. Commercial/Industrial Property Owner
029. Other Commercial/Industrial
03. Government, Municipal, and
Residential
031. Municipal Drinking Water Plant Operators
032. Residential Property Owners
033. Public Sector Property Owners
034. Military / Coast Guard
035. Public Energy Generators
036. Other Government, Municipal, and Residential
04. Commercial/Military
Transportation
041. Transporters of Goods
042. Transporters of People
043. Other Commercial/Military Transportation
05. Subsistence
051. Water Subsisters
052. Food and Medical Subsisters
053. Timber, Fiber, and Fur/Hide Subsisters
054. Building Material Subsisters
055. Other Subsistence
06. Recreational
061. Experiences and Viewers
062. Food Pickers and Gatherers
063. Hunters
064. Anglers
065. Waders, Swimmers, and Divers
066. Boaters
067. Other Recreational
37
-------
Beneficiary Class
Beneficiary Subclass I
07. Inspirational
071. Spiritual and Ceremonial Participants and
Participants of Celebration
072. Artists
073. Other Inspirational
08. Learning
081. Educators and Students
082. Researchers
083. Other Learning
09. Non-Use
091. People Who Care (Existence)
092. People Who Care (Option /Bequest)
093. Other Non-Use
10. Humanity
101. All Humans
Therefore, one advantage of the Beneficiary approach is that it simplifies final ES
classification by constraining the combinations of uses and users (and in some cases Ecological
End-Products too) through a pre-defined list of beneficiaries. The downside of this approach,
however, is that it limits the flexibility to consider other combinations.
In contrast, one of the benefits of the Direct Use classes is that they are defined
"generically" so that they can be linked to multiple Direct User classes and Ecological End-
Product classes. For example, the subclass "Support of plant or animal cultivation" can apply to
households, multiple agricultural sectors, and potentially other sectors. It can also be linked to
multiple Ecological End-Product classes (as inputs) including soil, water, and flora. A possible
disadvantage of this flexibility is that it can result in a long and, in some cases, unwieldy list of
potential combinations to be considered.
In this case, the general format of the code is WWW.XXX.BBB, where the first three
digits (WWW) refer to the Environment class and subclasses, the next digit (XXX) refers to the
Ecological End-Product class, the three final digits (BBB) refer to the Beneficiary classes and
subclasses (Table 3.7).
38
-------
Table 3.7 NESCS Plus Coding System with 3 Components
Component
Environment
Ecological
End-Product
Beneficiary
WWW
.XXX
. BBB
Class
w
www.xxx
WWW.X.BB
Subclass 1
WW
WWW .X. BBB
Subclass II
www
Beneficiaries directly value one or more attributes of one or more ecosystems. These
combinations, produced by the final ecosystem goods, produce the final ES that people directly
value (Figure 3.3). Based on the attributes that directly matter to people identify metrics that
directly matter to each of the many ways in which people benefit from ecosystems can be
identified.
Figure 3.3 Links between Beneficiaries, Environments, and Ecological End-Products.
Many Environment Classes
t
Flora Fungi Sgi1
Water Fauna Composite
Atmosphere
Each Environment with multiple Ecological End-Products [i.e., Final Ecosystem Goods (FEG)]
Metrics of FEG
39
-------
3.3 "Core" Final ES Combinations
Although NESCS Plus provides users with the flexibility to select the 4-component or 3-
component final ES combinations that are most relevant for their applications, it is recognized
that, for some users, working with a more limited set of options may be preferable. Therefore,
NESCS Plus also offers a simpler, pre-defined, "core" set of final ES combinations (available
online at https://www.epa.eov/eco-research/nescs-plus).
The objective in defining this core set was to select the combinations that represent the
most common or recognizable final ES. This selection obviously entails making judgments, and
it is not intended to imply that combinations outside the core are unimportant or infeasible. The
core was initially defined by linking to work by Landers and Nahlik (2013), who conducted a
similar selection process using the FEGS-CS and NAICS classification systems.14 By adapting
their list to fit the NESCS Plus classification structure and then refining, modifying, and adding
based on inputs from our own experts and reviewers, a core set of 1,078 final ES combinations
for NESCS Plus was identified. This core set provides a relatively simple alternative to the over
600,000 total possible combinations using the 4-component NESCS Plus structure.
14 Landers and Nahlik (2013) started with a list of 589 combinations of environment, beneficiary, and final
ecosystem goods type. They then identified one or more "potentially relevant" 3-digit NAICS codes for many of
these combinations, creating a total of 1,260 combinations of environment, end-product, beneficiary, and NAICS
code. This is the list of combinations adapted for the "core" NESCS Plus list.
40
-------
4.0 Recent Publications that Apply
NESCS Plus Components
This section includes some examples of recent publications that use components of NESCS Plus.
4.01 Piloting Ecosystem Accounts for the Southeastern U.S.
USEPA researcher Dr. Marc Russell and collaborators have used NESCS Plus in the first effort
to develop Ecosystem Accounts for the U.S. at a broad scale. The team has explored the potential
for U.S. ecosystem accounting and explain their pilot accounts for a 10-state region in the
Southeast. The pilot accounts address air quality, water quality, biodiversity, carbon storage,
recreation, and pollination for selected years from 2001 to 2015. In their study, Testing
ecosystem accounting in the United States: A case study for the Southeast, they explain how
results can contribute to policy and decision making. For example, in Atlanta they show how
ecosystem accounts can help give a more complete picture of a local area's environmental-
economic trends.
Source: Warnell, K.J., M. Russell, C. Rhodes, K.J. Bagstad, L P. Olander, D.J. Nowak, R.
Poudel, P.D. Glynn, J.L. Hass, and S. Hirabayashi. (2020). Testing ecosystem accounting in the
United States: A case study for the Southeast. Ecosystem Services. 43:101099.
41
-------
4.02 Who are the Beneficiaries of Great Lakes Waterfront Revitalization?
Cleanup of Great Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs) and other waterfront areas restores
environmental benefits to waterfront communities and is essential for revitalization. In the study,
Goals, beneficiaries- and indicators of waterfront revitalization in Great Lakes Areas of Concern
and coastal communities, multidisciplinary USEPA researchers crosswalk waterfront
revitalization goals with NESCS Plus Beneficiaries. The also compiled indicators for tracking
these goals that that can be used in planning, for comparing alternative designs, and for tracking
revitalization progress.
Source: Angradi, T.R., K.C. Williams, J.C. Hoffman, and D.W. Bolgrien. (2019). Goals,
beneficiaries, and indicators of waterfront revitalization in Great Lakes Areas of Concern and
coastal communities. Journal of Great Lakes Research. 45(5):851—863.
https://doi.Org/10.1016/i.iglr.2019.07.001
42
-------
4.03 How Can Recently Developed USEPA Tools Help Communities Include
Ecosystem Services in Decision Making?
FY 18 Output SHC 2.61.3 -
Incorporation of Ecosystem
Goods and Services into
Community-Level Decision
Support Using EnviroAtlas and
Other Tools
SERA
fCn.'lf if Mill Pt«lKdCn/W>(Vl|
This synthesis report presents a suite of USEPA Sustainable and Healthy Communities research
on ecosystem services. The studies summarized in FY18 Output - Incorporation of Ecosystem
Goods and Services into Community-Level Decision Support Using EnviroAtlas and Other
Tools represent efforts to support community-level decision making by incorporating
quantitative information on ecosystem goods and services. This report discusses research to
evaluate the utility of decision support tools such as the FEGS-CS classification system (the
predecessor to NESCS Plus), the EcoService Models Library (ESML), the EnviroAtlas, Eco-
Health Relationship Browser and the FEGS Community Scoping Tool.
Source: Harwell, M.C., and Jackson, C. (2019). FY18 Output—SHC 2.61.3—Incorporation of
Ecosystem Goods and Services into Community-Level Decision Support Using EnviroAtlas and
Other Tools. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/R-19/087.
43
-------
4.04 Mapping arid Identifying Linkages in USEPA's EnviroAtlas
USEPA Researcher Dr. Paul Ringold and his postdoc Arik Tashie searched the USEPA's
EnviroAtlas for useful metrics for final ES. They selected the EnviroAtlas because it contains a
large fraction of the existing ecological data that is available at a national scale. The researchers
investigated linkages between NESCS Plus Environment and Beneficiary classifications and
EnviroAtlas data layers. In A critical assessment of available ecosystem services data according
to the Final Ecosystem Goods and Services framework. they created a database of over 14,000
linkages between 255 EnviroAtlas data layers. These linkages were classified as intermediate
ecosystem goods and services, final ecosystem goods and services, and social or economic
outcomes.
Source: Tashie, A., and P. Ringold. (2019). A critical assessment of available ecosystem services
data according to the Final Ecosystem Goods and Services framework. Ecosphere. 10(3):
e02665.
44
-------
4.05 Who Benefits from National Estuaries? Using an Ecosystem Services
Classification System to Identify Beneficiaries
USEPA researchers conducted a document analysis of national estuary management plans using
the final ecosystem goods and services (FEGS) Classification System (recently updated as
NESCS Plus). In Who Benefits from National Estuaries? Applying the FEGS Classification
System to Identify Ecosystem Services and their Beneficiaries. they present a suite of ecosystem
services relevant to management of National Estuary Programs (NEP) and the National Estuarine
Research Reserve System (NERRS), and explicitly link them to the beneficiaries who use them.
Source: Yee, S., A. Sullivan, K. Williams, and K. Winters. (2019). Who benefits from national
Estuaries? Applying the FEGS Classification System to identify ecosystem services and their
beneficiaries. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 16:2351.
45
-------
4.06 How can EnviroAtlas and the Eco-Health Relationship Browser connect
decision makers to scientific data?
Dr. David W. Bolgrien and other USEPA researchers use community case studies to demonstrate
how the EnviroAtlas and the Eco-Health Relationship Browser serve as gateways between
scientific data and decision makers. Successful community problem solving depends on such
gateways that facilitate effective communication among partners and make data accessible to
establish robust and mutually understandable decisions. In Ecosystem Goods and Services Case
Studies and Models Support Community Decision Making using the EnviroAtlas and the Eco-
Health Relationship Browser summarizes multiple lines of evidence, analytical tools, models,
and data for using ecosystems goods and services in community decision making. Particular
emphasis is put on using USEPA's publicly available, web-based EnviroAtlas and Eco-Iiealth
Relationship Browser to access ecosystem goods and services data at national and community
scales.
Source: Bolgrien, D.W., T.R. Angradi, J. Bousquin, T.J. Canfield, T.I I. Dewitt, R.S. Fulford,
M.C Harwell, M. J.C. Hoffman, J. C., T.P. Hollenhorst, T. P., J M Johnston, J.J Launspach, J.
J., Lovette, J., R.B. McKane, T.A. Newcomer-Johnson, M.J. Russell, M. J.,L.S. Sharpe, L. S.,A.
Tashie, A.,K. Williams, K., and S.H. Yee, S. H. (2018). Ecosystem Goods and Services Case
Studies and Models Support Community Decision Making using the EnviroAtlas and the Eco-
Health Relationship Browser. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-18/167.
https://doi.Org/10.13140/RG.2.2.31113.29286.
46
-------
4.07 What are some Practical Strategies for Assessing Final Ecosystem Goods
and Services for Community Decision Making?
SEFA
hSpASvMta k*
1
^1
fiF
FY 17 Output SHC 2.61
Practical Strategies for
Assessing Final Ecosystem
Goods and Services in
Community Decision
Making
ULS. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
NATIONAL HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS RESEARCH LABORATORY
GULF ECOLOGY WVI5J0N
This synthesis report describes the USEPA's Office of Research and Development's (ORD)
research to incorporate the sustainability of final ecosystem goods and services (FEGS)
production and benefits into community-scale decisions across the U.S. In FY 17 Output SHC
2.61 Practical Strategies for Assessing Final Ecosystem Goods and Services in Community
Decision Making, the reader can learn how community-based studies have previously utilized
ecosystem services to inform aspects of their decision making, to identify best practices that may
be transferred to other communities, and to identify gaps in those practices that need to be
addressed. This report builds upon "Practical Strategies for Integrating Final Ecosystem Goods
and Services into Community Decision Making" by Yee et al. (2017) and a number of other
deliverables in ORD's Sustainable Healthy Communities Research Portfolio covering work
through FY 17.
Source: Harwell, M.C., and C. Jackson. (2018). FY17 Output SHC 2.61.3 Practical Strategies for
Assessing Final Ecosystem Goods and Services in Community Decision Making. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/R-18/083.
47
-------
4.08 What Can We Learn from Coordinated Case Studies Across the United
States?
SEPA
2612
apftgcmti
FY 16 Output SHC 2.61
Ecosystem Goods and
Services Production and
Benefit Functions Case
Studies Report!
UJS. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
NATIONAL HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS RESEARCH LABORATORY
GULF ECOLOGY DIVISION
This synthesis report describes the USEPA's Office of Research and Development's research to
incorporate the sustainability of final ecosystem goods and services production and benefits into
community-scale decision-making at several study sites around the U.S. The five case study
locations are San Juan, Puerto Rico, Great Lakes Region, Coastal Gulf of Mexico, Pacific
Northwest, and Southern Plains Watersheds. The FY16 Output SHC 2.61- Ecosystem Goods and
Services Production and Benefit Functions Case Studies Report addresses: (1) how to estimate
the production of ecosystem goods and services, given the type and condition of ecosystems; (2)
how ecosystem services contribute to human health and well-being; and (3) how the production
and benefits of these ecosystem services may change under various decision scenarios and in
response to regional conditions.
Source: Harwell, M.C., and J Molleda. (2018). FY16 Output SHC 2.61- Ecosystem Goods and
Services Production and Benefit Functions Case Studies Report. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. EPA/600/R-18/189.
48
-------
4.09 Who Benefits from Coastal Habitats?
To support coastal communities in land-use planning and prioritization efforts, university
scientists and USEPA researchers, Theodore DeWitt and Matthew Harwell, examined the state
of the science for final ecosystem goods and services (FEGS) in coastal ecosystems. They
reviewed ~2,800 studies and documented how various human beneficiaries rely on coastal
habitats in Linking people to coastal habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and
services on the coast. Recreational (83%) and industrial (35%) users were most cited in
literature, with experiential-users/hikers and commercial fishermen most prominent in each class,
respectively. This work highlights the intricate relationship between healthy coastal
environments and the socio-economic systems they support. The authors hope communities and
other stakeholders will couple results from this study with other tools, such as USEPA's
EnviroAtlas, to recognize and protect existing FEGS, and plan for future ecosystem service
delivery.
Source: Littles, C.J., C.A. Jackson, T.H. DeWitt, and M.C. Harwell. (2018). Linking people to
coastal habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coast. Ocean and
Coastal Management. 165: 356-369. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.ocecoaman.2018.09 009.
49
-------
4.10 How Does Air Pollution Impact Ecosystem Services?
USEPA ORD researchers, Dixon Landers, Amanda Nahlik, and Chris Clark, worked together
with a team including USEPA's Office of Air and Radiation and Office of Water in a workshop
to introduce the STEPS (Stressor-Ecological Production function-final ecosystem Services)
Framework, a novel way to apply FEGS-CS as the foundation for identifying difficult and
unknown linkages between humans and components of the environment that may lead to human
well-being. In A framework to quantify the strength of ecological links between an
environmental stressor and final ecosystem services, the examine the ecological impacts of
nitrogen and sulfur pollutant emissions and deposition to changes in final ecosystem services.
This application is a means of defining a common approach to identify the potential beneficiaries
and possible metrics and indicators.
Source: Bell, M.D., J. Phelan, T.F. Blett, D. Landers, A.M. Nahlik, G. Van Floutven, C. Davis,
C.M. Clark, and J. Hewitt. (2017). A framework to quantify the strength of ecological links
between an environmental stressor and final ecosystem services. Ecosphere. 8(5): e01806.
https ://doi. org/'10.1002/ecs2.1806.
50
-------
4.11 How can Nitrogen Loading in Freshwater Systems Impact Final ES?
a;
U
4— .2
o .y
. 01
f- n
Critical Load (variable)
Chemical criterion (water nitrate N03and P concentration, variable)
"O"
Change in primary productivity
(algal and bacterial abundance and composition)
and macrophyte growth
~
Decrease in submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV)
~
Decrease in SAV-dependentfish and waterfowl
1
V
r
*
~
Decrease in
SAV
Presence and abundance of SAV-
water clarity
coverage
dependent fish and waterfowl
v.
\7
Experiencers and viewers, Resource-dependent businesses, Waders
swimmers and divers, Spiritual and ceremonial, Artists, Anglers,
Boaters, Researchers, Educators, People who care (Option), People
who care (existence/bequest), Residential property owners. Hunters,
Food subsisters, Food extractors, Aquaculturists
Ecosphere, Volume: 8. Issue: 7, First published: 24 July 2017, DOI: (10.1002/ecs2.1858)
USEPA ORISE post-doctoral research fellow Charles Rhodes, and USEPA researchers Jason
Lynch and Randall Waite, along with USEPA Office of Water economist Julie Hewitt, worked
together with three members from the US National Park Service, following a workshop to
introduce the STEPS (Stressor-Ecological Production function-final ecosystem Services)
Framework, a novel way to apply ecosystem services classification as the foundation for
identifying difficult and unknown links between humans and components of the environment
that may lead to human well-being. In Diatoms to human uses: linking nitrogen deposition,
aquatic eutrophication. and ecosystem services, the authors examine the ecological impacts of
air-based nitrogen deposition in freshwater ecosystems as effects may propagate to changes
important in final ecosystem services. This application focused on 154 of the 589 originally
proposed chains from air-based nitrogen deposition to final ecosystem services, and was one of
five focused papers out of the workshop to apply the STEPS framework (Ecosphere Special
Feature: Air Quality and Ecosystem Services).
Source: Rhodes, C., Bingham, A., Heard, A.M., Hewitt, J., Lynch, J., Waite, R., Bell, M.D.
(2017). Diatoms to human uses: linking nitrogen deposition, aquatic eutrophication, and
ecosystem services. Ecosphere. 8(7): e01858. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1858.
51
-------
4.12 Improving the Linkage between Biophysical and Economic Analyses
A team of natural and social scientists examined the ways in which ecosystems link to human
wellbeing and the way biophysical metrics and indicators should be defined to strengthen that
linkage. The paper develops principles to guide the identification of Final Ecosystem Goods and
Services (which it refers to as linking indicators); compares their features with those of more
commonly collected data from the point of view of conducting monetary valuation of ecological
outcomes ecological measures; and reviews empirical evidence pertinent to their identification,
definition, and performance. The first section introduces the issue. Section 2 articulates two
broad goals that the team argues can help frame the identification of linking indicators. The more
obvious of these is the desire for biophysical outcomes that lay audiences can relate clearly to
their own well-being. The second goal is to choose indicators that enhance the accuracy of social
evaluations. The authors show how both goals are related to the concept of ecological
production. Section 3 describes the deployment of linking indicators in various policy
applications. Section 4 identifies research questions pertinent to identification and evaluation of
linking indicators and reviews pertinent existing research. Section 5 summarizes the primary
findings of the evaluation and offers recommendations for indicator development. This strategy
should facilitate collaboration between natural and social scientists; improved understanding,
specification, and measurement of linking indicators; and more accurate and powerful
environmental policy analysis.
Source: Boyd, J., P. Ringold, A. Krupnick, R.J. Johnston, M.A. Weber, and K. Hall. (2016).
Ecosystem services indicators: Improving the linkage between biophysical and economic
analyses. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics. 8:359-443.
52
-------
4.13 What Data Should We Collect?
A team of natural and social scientists applied the Final Ecosystem Goods and Services (FEGS)
framework to identify metrics and indicators to link changes in policies to changes in human
well-being when that linkage is mediated by ecosystems. The six-step process presented enabled
the authors to propose metrics associated with streams that can be used in the analysis of human
well-being. The team illustrates these steps with data from a regional stream survey. Continued
refinement and application of this framework will require ongoing collaboration between natural
and social scientists. Application of this framework could result in more useful and relevant data,
leading to more informed decisions in the management of ecosystems.
Source: Ringold, P., J. Boyd, D. Landers, and M. Weber. (2013). What data should we collect? A
framework for identifying indicators of ecosystem contributions to human well-being. Frontiers
in Ecology and the Environment. 11:98-105.
53
-------
5.0 Example Applications
5.1 Example 1: Ecological restoration at a Superfund landfill site
The purpose of this section is to provide a relatively simple example illustrating how NESCS
Plus can be used as a tool to support decisions affecting ecosystem services. Please note that
applying NESCS Plus to support an ecological revitalization project could certainly be much
more detailed and complex than what is described here. This example is kept simple strictly for
illustrative purposes.
In this example, a Superfund site has a landfill that was capped three decades ago in a way that is
protective of human health and the environment. Weeds and non-native species dominate the
landfill site. In its current condition, the site provides negligible value to the local community
and nearby area. Federal, state, and local officials are collaborating on an ecological restoration
project aimed at promoting the well-being of the local community by broadly enhancing the
ecosystem services offered by the site.
The restoration project will primarily involve revegetation of the landfill cap with sustainable
and low maintenance native grasses and flowers. In completing the project design, the team
needs to evaluate available restoration options, based on current site conditions and constraints.
Using input from the community, they are also interested in identifying and assessing which
types of ecosystem services potentially offered by the project would be most relevant to, and
favored by, the community. They will use NESCS Plus to identify the ecosystem services of
interest and to communicate about them to diverse stakeholders.
The project involves two parts: (1) physical removal of non-native plants, by digging and pulling
them from the soil; and (2) planting and maintenance of native grasses and flowers.
To understand and evaluate the ecosystem services affected by these actions, the project team
wishes to identify the different environmental and societal pathways through which human well-
being may be affected. These pathways are represented through a conceptual model (flow
diagram; in Figure 5.1 and Figure 5.2; Olander et al., 2015).
The two connected figures show how NESCS Plus can be used in conjunction with conceptual
models to identify and list the distinct types of final ES potentially affected by a policy action.
Importantly, NESCS Plus is not by itself a tool for developing these conceptual models.
Constructing these flow diagrams may require the analyst to draw from a substantial body of
scientific knowledge and evidence that is not contained in NESCS Plus (Bell et al., 2017; Clark
et al., 2017; Irvine et al. 2017). However, when combined with this knowledge and evidence,
NESCS Plus provides a framework that can help to identify and articulate relevant pathways.
More specifically, it can help to identify those points in the pathways where natural systems are
directly used by human systems.
54
-------
In Figure 5.1, the model begins on the left side by showing the grassland restoration activities
under consideration. In the figure, each green oval represents an "ecological production
function" (EPF) that transforms inputs from nature into outputs, and these outputs can then be
used by other processes. Arrows are used to represent flows in and out of these processes, and
boxes represent stocks in nature.
Flows of final ES occur at the point where these ecological production processes connect to
human processes. Examples of different types of final ES that are potentially affected by the
restoration actions are listed in the table on the right side of the diagram. Each of the eight rows
in this table represents and provides a unique four-part code representing different types of final
ES flows.
Specifically, each final ES row is represented by a different combination of the four components
- Environment (WWW), Ecological End-Product (XXX), Direct Use (YYYY) and Direct User
(ZZZZ) - shown in the columns. Each row represents a final ES and includes the NESCS Plus
code for each component. The final column contains the complete NESCS Plus code for each
final ES example.
In this example, the first action - removal of invasive plants - directly affects the ecological
production process described as "growth of invasive plant species." In this case, it completely
halts and removes this process. The growth of invasive plant species is shown to be directly
connected to two main types of final ES. The first is the flow of final ES provided by the
invasive plants (Environment = Grassland; EEP = Flora) to aesthetic enjoyment by people in the
community (Direct Use = Aesthetic appreciation; Direct User = Households). The final ES code
corresponding to this four-component description is 231.5.1062.2111.
55
-------
Grassland Restoration
• Removal of invasive plants
• Planting of native species
LIST OF AFFECTED FINAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (FES)
Grassland/Herbaceous
Composite
Mi
Environment
Subclass II (WWW)
Ecological End-
Product Class (X)
Direct Use/Non-Use
Subclass II (YYYY)
Direct User
Subclass II (ZZZZ)
NESCS Plus ID
(WWW.X.YYYY.ZZZZ)
Grassland/Herbaceous
(231)
Flora
(5)
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ
(1062)
Households
(2111)
231.5.1062.2111
Grassland/Herbaceous
(231)
Flora
(5)
Property protection; in-situ
(1102)
Administration of
Environmental Quality
Programs (3924)
231.5.1102.3924
Grassland/Herbaceous
(231)
Flora
(5)
Recreation; in-situ
(1112)
Households
(2111)
231.5.1112.2111
Information/Education; in-situ
l(H32)
Education services
l(16H)
231,8.1132.1611
Grassland/Herbaceous
Fauna
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ
Households
231.4.1062.2111
[231)
[4)
[1062)
(2111)
Grassland/Herbaceous
Fauna
Recreation; In-situ
Households
231.4.1112.2111
[231)
[4)
[1112)
(2111)
Developed Open Space
(271)
Fauna
(4)
Plant cultivation; In-situ
(1082)
Households
(2111)
271.4.1082.2111
Cultivated Crops
(222)
Fauna
(4)
Plant cultivation; In-situ
(1082)
Crop Production
(1111)
222.4.1082.1111
Figure 5.1 Example 1: Landfill restoration conceptual model linking the environment to a tabular list of final ES. Components of ecosystems are
represented in green and human systems in blue. In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows represent flows, and circles represent processes.
56
-------
LIST OF AFFECTED FINAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (FES)
Environment
Subclass II (WWW)
Ecological End-
Product Class (X)
Direct Use/Non-Use
Subclass II (YYYY)
Direct User
Subclass II (ZZZZ)
NESCS Plus ID
(WWW.X.YYYY.ZZZZ)
Grassland/Herbaceous
[231)
Flora
(5)
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ
(1062)
Households
(2111)
231.5.1062.2111
Grassland/Herbaceous
(231)
Flora
(5)
Property protection; In-situ
(1102)
Administration of
Environmental Quality
Programs (3924)
231.5.1102.3924
Grassland/Herbaceous
[231)
Flora
(5)
Recreation; in-situ
(1112)
Households
(2111)
231.5.1112.2111
Grassland/Herbaceous
(231)
Composite
(8)
Information/Education; in-situ
(1132)
Education services
(1611)
231.8.1132.1611
Grassland/Herbaceous
[231)
Fauna
(4)
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ
(1062)
Households
(2111)
231.4.1062.2111
Grassland/Herbaceous
(231)
Fauna
(4)
Recreation; In-situ
(1112)
Households
(2111)
231.4.1112.2111
Developed Open Space
(271)
Fauna
Plant cultivation; In-situ
(1082)
Households
(2111)
271.4.1082.2111
Cultivated Crops
(222)
Fauna
(4)
Plant cultivation; In-situ
(1082)
Crop Production
(1111)
222.4.1082.1111
HUMAN
WELFARE
Figure 5.2 Example 1: Landfill restoration conceptual model linking the tabular list of final ES to human well-being. Components of
ecosystems are represented in and human systems in . In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows represent flows,
and circles represent processes.
57
-------
The second action - planting of native species - directly affects the ecological production
process described as "growth of native plant species." This production process is connected to
multiple final ES via several pathways. Like the growth of invasive species, it is directly
connected to several final ES categories, including the two described in the previous paragraph.
However, in this case, the final ES flows for aesthetic appreciation are likely to have a positive
value, and those for property protection may be greater than for invasive grasses. The growth of
native grasses is also directly connected to two other types of final ES. The first flows from the
plants themselves (Environment = Grassland; EEP = Flora) to those enjoying the native grasses
for recreational purposes (Direct Use = Recreation; in-situ) such as nature walks. The second
type of final ES flows to those who use the site to provide educational opportunities for others
(Direct Use = Information/education; in-situ; Direct User = Educational Services).
The growth of native plant species is also connected indirectly to several more final ES types.
These indirect pathways are shown in Figure 5.1 by the flows from this ecological production
process to two types of stocks - Bird Habitat and Pollinator Habitat - which then serve as inputs
to other ecological production processes - growth in native bird species and growth in pollinator
species. In other words, the growth of native plants increases the land area suitable for native
birds, which is a critical input for growth in native bird populations.
The native bird and pollinator processes are then directly connected to several types of final ES.
For example, the combination of native plant species, native bird species, and pollinators
together provide a "Composite" EEP category, which is used for educational purposes. The
native bird species are also directly linked to a final ES class that flows from the birds
themselves (Environment = Grassland; EEP = Fauna) to birdwatchers who visit the new
grassland (Direct User = Recreation; in-situ). The growth in pollinator species is linked to final
ES categories provided by other nearby environments. In the Urban/Suburban environment
category, the pollinator species (EEP = Fauna) support the growth of home gardens (Direct Use
= Plant cultivation; in-situ; Direct User = Households), and in the Agroecosystems environment
they support the growth of crops by local farmers (Direct User = Agricultural Sector).
The example shown in Figure 5.1 illustrates another important feature of EEP and final ES,
which is that many components of nature, such a flora and fauna, can provide both final and
intermediate ecosystem services. Whether the services they provide are final or intermediate
depends on whether they are being used directly and/or indirectly by humans. In this example,
the grassland flora is categorized as an EEP and a source of final ES for recreational users of the
park who directly view and appreciate their plant life. In addition, and at the same time, they
provide habitat for birds, which are then directly used by recreational birdwatchers. In this
second indirect role, the grassland flora are the source intermediate ecosystem services.
Figure 5.2 represents the continuation of the flow diagram in Figure 5.1 into human systems.
Therefore, the left side of this diagram contains the same list of FES combinations as are shown
on the right side of Figure 5.1. In Figure 5.2, each blue oval represents an "economic
production" process, where inputs from nature or from other economic production processes are
58
-------
converted into economic outputs. As in Figure 5.1, the input-output production processes can be
linked together through distinct pathways, and developing these parts of the pathways may
require users to draw on their own specialized knowledge of the case study context or on other
expert knowledge (in this case of human and economic systems) to develop them.
In Figure 5.2, all the final ES types including Households as the Direct User classes flow
directly to human welfare. In the other cases, however, the FES are inputs to production
processes. For example, the fourth row represents the flow of final ES from the grassland
ecosystem (Environment = Grassland; EEP = Composite) to those who use the ecosystem to
provide educational experiences for others (Direct Use = Information/Education; in-situ; Direct
User = Educational Services). In this case, the education providers use the composite inputs from
the environment to produce education services. This flow of education services is represented by
the arrow from the Education Services Production process to Human Welfare. Another example
is shown in the last row, which represents the flow of FES from pollinators (Environment =
Agroecosystems; EEP = Fauna) to farmers (Direct Use = Plant cultivation; in-situ; Direct User =
Agriculture). In this case, crop production is the directly affected economic production process.
However, the outputs from this process do not flow directly to households. Instead, they are
inputs to another production process (Food Manufacturing) which then produces outputs that
flow directly to human welfare.
59
-------
5.2 Example 2: Benefits Analysis of an Environmental Policy Action - Proposed
Revisions to an Air Quality Standard for Nitrogen Oxides
In this example, an air quality regulator is interested in estimating the benefits of a proposed
action to lower the allowable ambient concentration of nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the US to
protect potentially vulnerable ecosystems. Although this type of action is expected to provide
several benefits to humans, including direct human health benefits from reduced respiratory
exposures to airborne pollutants, for simplicity it is assumed that the specific focus of this
benefits analysis is on the changes in human well-being resulting from reductions in nitrogen (N)
deposition and its contribution to nutrient enrichment of soils and aquatic systems. In other
words, how will reductions in N deposition and nutrient enrichment alter the environment and
the ecosystem services that are ultimately received by humans?
It is also assumed the analysis will be part of a larger benefit-cost analysis (BCA) of the
proposed action. Therefore, to the extent feasible, the benefits need to be quantified in monetary
terms, so that they can be combined with other benefit estimates and directly compared to the
economic costs.
As a first step in this analysis, it will help to begin by identifying the pathways through which
human well-being may be affected by the proposed action. The conceptual model in Figure 5.3
and Figure 5.4 depicts the pathways for this example.
The model begins on the left side of the diagram with the proposed action under consideration
(air quality standard setting). In the diagram, the ecological stocks provide flows of inputs to the
ecological processes, and the processes generate output flows that alter the stocks. It is assumed
that the analyst builds these connections by drawing on evidence from the scientific literature
regarding the potentially affected environments and ecological processes. In this example, the
proposed action most directly affects the stock (concentration) of NOx in the atmosphere. From
there, the process of N deposition transforms these NOx inputs into stocks of N in soils and in
surfaces waters. These stocks then become the source of flows into other natural processes
including nutrient runoff, in-stream transport, and algae production (Rhodes et al. 2017).
Flows of FES occur at the point where these ecological production processes connect to human
processes. Examples of different FES categories that are potentially affected by the proposed
action (through the pathways) are listed in the table on the right side of the diagram. Each of the
12 rows in this table represents a different type of FES. Specifically, each FES row is represented
by a different combination of the four components shown in the columns. To simplify the
diagram, the table uses abbreviated terminology for many of the classes and subclasses of the
four components. To conserve on space, the NESCS Plus codes are not included in the diagrams
for this example (or the next one).
60
-------
Atmospheric
NOx
AIR
QUALITY
STANDARD
Freshwater N
/ lnstreamN\
V Transport J
Soil Fertility
Water Clarity
Dissolved
Oxygen
LIST OF AFFECTED FINAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (FES)
| ENVIRONMENT
END-PRODUCT
DIRECT USE
DIRECT USER
Streams
Streams
Near Coastal
Rivers and Streams
Near Coastal
Near Coastal
Near Coastal
Near Coastal
Near Coastal
Soil
Soil
Plant cultivation; In-situ
Recreation; In-situ
Plant cultivation; In-situ |
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ
Property protection; In-situ
Property protection; In-situ
Recreation; Extractive
Recreation; In-situ
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ
Distribution; Extractive
Recreation; Extractive
| Subsistence; Extractive
Agriculture sector
Forestry sector
Households
Households
Households
Accommodation sector
Households
Households
Households
Fishing sector
Households
Figure 5.3 Example 2: Air quality standard conceptual model linking the environment to a tabular list of final ES. Components of ecosystems are
represented in and human systems in . In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows represent flows, and circles represent processes.
61
-------
ENVIRONMENT END-PRODUCT DIRECT USE
DIRECT USER
Agroecosystems [Soil
Plant cultivation; In-situ Agriculture sector
Forests
Soil
1 Plant cultivation; In-situ Forestry sector
Rivers and Streams Water
Recreation; In-situ
Households
Rivers and Streams Water
Aesthetic
ion; In-situ Households
Near Coastal
Property protection; In-situ Households
Near Coastal
Water
Property protection; In-situ Accommodation sector
Rivers and Streams Fauna
Recreation; Extractive
Households
Near Coastal
Water
Recreation; In-situ
Households
Near Coastal
Water
| Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ Households
Near Coastal
Distribution; Extractive Fishing sector
Near Coastal
Fauna
Recreation; Extractive
Households
Near Coastal
Fauna
Subsistence; Extractive
Households
Figure 5.4 Example 2: Air quality standard conceptual model linking the tabular list of FES to human welfare. Components of ecosystems are
represented in and human systems in . In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows represent flows, and circles represent processes.
' Food >
Manufacturing
Crop
Production
f Timber
Harvesting and
Si. Transport J
Tree
Production
.odging Service^
. Production J
Fish Catch
Production
Managed Timber
Food Crops
Paper Products
HUMAN
WELFARE
Food Products
Wood Biomass
Lodging Space
~
62
-------
Several examples of pathways linking the proposed action (air quality standard) to individual
FES are shown in Figure 5.3. In this case, all the chains begin by affecting the nitrogen
deposition process, but from there they diverge. For example, one output from reducing nitrogen
deposition is that it reduces the stock (level) of N in freshwater. From there, changes in this N
stock are inputs to the instream algal production process, and one of the effects of limiting the
algal growth process in streams is that it increases the clarity of the water. Since this water clarity
in nature can be directly appreciated by humans, it can be linked to one or more FES
combinations. To apply NESCS Plus at this point, water clarity must first be categorized (on the
natural system "supply" side) into: (1) one of the NESCS Plus Ecological End-Product classes
(in this case, Water); and (2) the Environmental class in which this end-product is located
(Rivers and Streams).
To complete the FES classification for this pathway, the Environment/Ecological End-Product
combination must be linked to the human system "demand" side. In the example shown in
Figure 5.4, this means linking the combination to at least one Direct Use class and one Direct
User class (an example using the alternative Beneficiary classification is offered in Figures 5.5
and 5.6). The diagram includes two such connections - one involving in-situ recreational use by
households and another involving in-situ aesthetic appreciation by households.
Water clarity can also be on the part of a pathway that does not directly connect to human
processes, in which case it does not provide or directly contribute to a final ES. For example,
higher water clarity can promote the process of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) growth.
Assuming there are no direct human uses of SAV, additional connections are needed to identify
the affected final ES. One way is through SAV's contribution to the growth and propagation of
fish, which are directly used and valued by humans. Therefore, on the natural system "supply"
side, fish must be categorized into one of the NESCS Plus Ecological End-Product classes (in
this case, Fauna) and into the Environmental class in which this Ecological End-Product is
located (for example, Near Coastal Marine/Estuarine). Once again, to complete the FES
classification, each Environment-End-product combination must be linked to a human system
"demand" side combination. One example is commercial fish harvest, which in the NESCS Plus
system is a Direct Use of Distribution-Extractive and a Direct User class of Industry-Fishing.
In the end, each distinct FES combination identified and listed in the conceptual model can be
linked back to the proposed action through at least one modeled pathway. The length of these
pathways (i.e., the number of input-output processes) can vary widely depending on the context.
Figure 5.5 represents the continuation of the flow diagram in Figure 5.4 into human systems.
Therefore, the left side of this diagram contains the same list of final ES combinations as are
shown on the right side of Figure 5.4. In Figure 5.5, each blue oval represents an "economic
production" process, where inputs from nature or from other economic production processes are
converted into outputs. As in Figure 5.4, the input-output production processes can be linked
together through distinct pathways, and the user may need to draw on expert or scientific
knowledge (in this case of human and economic systems) to develop them. For example, the FES
63
-------
combination involving commercial fishing (Direct Use of Extractive-Distribution and a Direct
User class of Industry-Fishing) is directly associated with a fish catch production process. In this
example, the output of this process is landed fish, with the fishermen benefiting directly from the
FES. These fish are bought and sold in transactions between industries and households. In this
case, the fish caught by commercial fishermen enter as inputs into the food manufacturing
process. The food products that result from this second process are the economic goods that are
generally available for household consumption.
Figures 5.5 and 5.6 show how the same process of listing FES for this NOx application can be
done using the Beneficiary classification component instead of the Direct Use and Direct User
classification components. Therefore, the FES tables in these diagrams contain three columns
(components) rather than four.
64
-------
LIST OF AFFECTED FINAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (FES)
Figure 5.5 Example 2: Conceptual model linking a proposed action (air quality standard) to a tabular list of FES (with the Beneficiary
classification). Components of ecosystems are represented in and human systems in . In the flow diagram, boxes represent
stocks, arrows represent flows, and circles represent processes.
65
-------
LIST OF AFFECTED FINAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (FES)
Figure 5.6 Example 2: Conceptual model linking the tabular list of FES (with the Beneficiary classification) to human welfare.
Components of ecosystems are represented in and human systems in . In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows
represent flows, and circles represent processes.
66
-------
5.3 Example 3: Analysis for a surface mine expansion project under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
In this example, a federal agency is conducting a NEPA-required environmental impact
assessment for a proposed expansion of a surface gold mine on federal lands. This assessment
includes an evaluation of the socioeconomic effects of the proposed mine expansion. Three main
alternatives are under consideration, including a No-Action alternative and two action
alternatives. Although not specifically required under NEPA, analysts for the agency wish to
include an assessment of impacted ecosystem services under the action alternatives (compare to
the No Action alternative) as part of the socioeconomic analysis.
The mine expansion site being evaluated is in a predominantly sagebrush shrubland
environment. The area provides habitat for birds that forage and/or nest on the ground, and it is
occasionally used for hunting by nearby residents. The area drains to a river that is one mile
away. The area directly surrounding the mine includes a small number of ephemeral streams and
wetlands fed by groundwater. The proposed expansion of the mine would involve clearing
vegetation and regrading lands for roads, disposal areas, and for new excavation in a 1 million ft2
area (92,903 m2). It would also create a new pit lake fed by deep groundwater. Operating in this
expanded area will require pit dewatering.
Under the No-Action alternative, the mine site would not be expanded and would remain within
its current boundaries. To keep the example simple, conditions under the No-Action alternative
are assumed to be the same as current conditions. The main difference between the two action
alternatives is the destination of the water removed from the pit. To summarize, the three
alternatives are as follows:
Alternative 1 - No Action
• No mine expansion and no change from current conditions
Alternative 2 - Mining + Dewater deep groundwater and infiltrate excess to alluvium
• Treat and discharge water to alluvial aquifer via Rapid Injection Basins (RIBs) during
mining
Alternative 3 - Mining + Dewater deep groundwater and discharge to stream
• Treat and discharge water to ephemeral stream during mining
67
-------
LIST OF AFFECTED FINAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (FES)
Environment
End-product
Direct Use/Non-use
Direct User
Rivers and Streams
Fauna
Recreation/tourism; Extractive use
Households
Wetlands
Fauna
Non-use
Households
Wetlands
Composite
Non-use
Households
Wetlands
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; !n-situ use
Households
Scrubland/ Shrubland
Water
Support of human health and life or subsistence; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Fauna
Recreation/tourism; Extractive use
Households
Scrubland/ Shrubland
Fauna
Non-use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Soil
Transportation medium; In-situ use
Industry; Mining
Scrubland / Shrubland
Soil
Waste disposal/assimilation; In-situ use
Industry; Mining
Scrubland / Shrubland
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland/ Shrubland
Air
Protection or support of human health and life; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; in-situ use
Households
Environment
End-product
Direct Use/Non-use
Direct User
Wetlands
Fauna
Recreation; Extractive use
Households
Wetlands
Fauna
Non-use
Households
Wetlands
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ use
Households
Figure 5.7 Example 3: Conceptual model for Alternative 1 - Mining + Dewater deep groundwater and infiltrate excess to alluvium.
Components of ecosystems are represented in and human systems in . In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows represent flows,
and circles represent processes.
68
-------
LIST OF AFFECTED FINAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (FES)
Environment
End-product
Direct Use/Non-use
Direct User
Rivers and Streams
Fauna
Recreation/tourism; Extractive use
Households
Wetlands
Fauna
Non-use
Households
Wetlands
Composite
Non-use
Households
Wetlands
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland Water
Support of human health and life or subsistence; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Fauna
Recreation/tourism; Extractive use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Fauna
Non-use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland Soil
Transportation medium; In-situ use
Industry; Mining
Scrubland/ Shrubland
Soil
Waste disposal/assimilation; In-situ use
Industry; Mining
Scrubland / Shrubland Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland/ Shrubland
Air
Protection or support of human health and life; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ use
Households
f Jewelry
I Manufacturing]
Environment
End-product
Direct Use/Non-use
Direct User
Wetlands
Fauna
Recreation; Extractive use
Households
Wetlands
Fauna
Non-use
Households
Wetlands
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ use
Households
Figure 5.8 Example 3: Conceptual model for Alternative 2 - Mining + Dewater deep groundwater and discharge to stream. Components of
ecosystems are represented in and human systems in . In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows represent flows, and circles
represent processes.
69
-------
Figures 5.7 and 5.8 present diagrams and lists of FES affected by the two action alternatives
(relative to the no-action alternative). In both cases, the main action is the proposed mine
expansion, and in both cases, one result of this expansion is land disturbance for building access
roads. The main differences between the two diagrams are the types of disposal of excess
dewatering water linked to the mine expansion and the ecological processes and FES affected by
these alternative approaches.
For both action alternatives, the land disturbance caused by the mine expansion is linked through
pathways to 12 different FES. Three of these chains link directly to FES provided by the
Scrubland/shrubland Environmental class in which the mine is located. For two of these FES, the
Ecological End-Product is the soil provided by the shrubland, and the Direct User class for this
soil is the mining sector. In one case the Direct Use of this soil is as a medium of transportation
for mine vehicles, and in the other case it is used as a medium for mine waste disposal and
assimilation. In both cases, the soils in the mine expansion area would be altered to provide a
new ecosystem service, which did not previously exist at the site and therefore would not exist
under a no-action alternative. For the third FES, the Ecological End-Product is the Composite
class, which in this case refers to the overall landscape provided by the shrubland environment.
The Direct Users of this Ecological End-Product are households who use this shrubland
environment for aesthetic appreciation.
For the other nine FES affected by land disturbance, their pathways involve one or two
ecological production processes. In four cases, the soil disturbance increases the sediment runoff
process, which affects the nearby Wetland and River-and-Stream Environments. The pathways
for the other FES involve processes such as contaminant leaching to groundwater (under the
Scrubland/Shrubland Environment) that is potentially used for drinking water and dispersion of
particulate matter (PM) into the Atmosphere.
The difference between the two alternatives regarding their effects on FES stems from their
different dewatering processes. In Alternative 1, the water is discharged to groundwater, which
feeds nearby wetlands. The resulting increase level of water in these wetlands improves the
habitats for grasses and fish, which enhances the three types of FES for households shown in
Figure 6. In Alternative 2, the water is discharged to a stream which feeds a nearby river. The
increased water flow supports two FES. In one case it improves habitat for fish with non-use
value for households, and in the other it makes more water available for irrigated agriculture.
Figures 5.9 and 5.10 repeat the example 2 conceptual diagrams using the Beneficiary
classification. For all the FES in these diagrams that include Households as the Direct User class,
the chains connect directly to human welfare (i.e., welfare benefits are realized by individuals in
households). For the FES that include an industry as the Direct User, the chains include one or
more economic production processes. For example, when the mining sector is the Direct User
component of the FES, the corresponding Ecological End-Product component (i.e., soils) is
treated as an input to the gold mine production process. The output of this production process is
gold which, in this example, becomes an input into the jewelry production process.
70
-------
Streambed
Sediment
^ ^
LIST OF AFFECTED FINAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (FES)
Environment
End-product
Direct Use/Non-use
Direct User
Rivers and Streams
Fauna
Recreation/tourism; Extractive use
Households
Wetlands
Fauna
Non-use
Households
Wetlands
Composite
Non-use
Households
Wetlands
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Water
Support of human health and life or subsistence; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland Fauna
Recreation/tourism; Extractive use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland Fauna
Non-use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Soil
Transportation medium; In-situ use
Industry; Mining
,
Scrubland/ Shrubland
Soil
Waste disposal/assimilation; In-situ use
Industry; Mining
Scrubland/ Shrubland
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Air
Protection or support of human health and life; In-situ use
Households
Scrubland / Shrubland
Composite
Aesthetic appreciation; In-situ use
Households
Environment
End-product
Direct Use/Non-use
Direct User
Rivers and Streams
Fauna
Non-use
Households;
Rivers and Streams
Water
Support of plant or animal cultivation;
Industry; Agriculture, Forestry,
Extractive
Fishing and Hunting
Figure 5.9 Example 3: Second part of conceptual model for Alternative 1 - Mining + Dewater deep groundwater and infiltrate excess to alluvium.
Components of ecosystems are represented in and human systems in . In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows represent flows,
and circles represent processes.
71
-------
LIST OF AFFECTED FINAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES (FES)
Figure 5.10 Example Application 3: Second part of conceptual model for Alternative 2 - Mining + Dewater deep groundwater and discharge to
stream). Components of ecosystems are represented in and human systems in . In the flow diagram, boxes represent stocks, arrows
represent flows, and circles represent processes.
72
-------
5.4 Organizing final ES accounts
Once a list of potentially affected final ES has been identified with NESCS Plus (such as the one
in Figures 5.1-5.10) the list can be used to organize the process of quantifying and/or monetizing
changes in the identified final ES. Generating these types of estimates is particularly relevant for
cost-benefit analyses, such as the one described in the first example (NOx). The NESCS Plus
does not provide a system for quantifying or monetizing final ES, but it can serve as an
organizing structure.
First, the analyst can use the list of final ES to prioritize which final ES are most easily and cost-
effectively quantified and monetized. This process includes identifying and planning for which
of the listed final ES can be captured by different valuation methods. For example, travel cost
methods can potentially be used for all the final ES involving recreation as a Direct Use, whereas
hedonic methods could be used for final ES involving aesthetic appreciation as a Direct Use. One
can also use the list of final ES to evaluate which direct uses are likely to be competing against
each other (e.g., an ecosystem good can only be used in a consumptive fashion once, while it
might be used in a non-consumptive fashion by many users). In addition, the list can be
combined with other tools, such as USEPA's EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.eov/enviroatlas). to
investigate which final ES are most likely to occur in particular areas due to proximity of
populations or economic production capacity with available Ecological End-Products.
Importantly, using final ES to organize the quantification and monetization of final ES (e.g.,
accounts; Russell et al. 2020; Warnell et al. 2020) should not be interpreted to mean that the
value of each final ES in the list needs to be or can be measured separately. For example, stated
preference methods for valuing improvements in water quality may be used to estimate several F
final ES in a single value. In many cases, analyst judgment may be needed to determine which
final ES are or are not included in value estimates generated with different valuation methods.
Second, the analyst can use the NESCS Plus final ES categories to systematically combine and
aggregate the value estimates developed in the previous steps. These final ES categories are
designed to be as mutually exclusive as possible; therefore, the analyst should be able to add
benefits that are in different categories. For example, in the NOx application, the benefit
estimates for final ES involving agricultural users due to soil fertility changes could be added to
benefit estimates for final ES involving commercial fishing users due to increases in fish
abundance. However, as discussed above, not all value estimates can be separated in this way.
For example, a stated preference study could generate estimated values that overlap with
recreation value estimates from travel cost methods. In these cases, NESCS Plus can at least help
to identify where these types of overlaps may be occurring and to be explicit about which
specific final ES are potentially being double counted. In a similar way, NESCS Plus can be used
to identify and specify the final ES that are not being quantified or monetized in the benefits
analysis.
73
-------
5.5 Cataloguing and Retrieving Final ES Data
A third potential use of NESCS Plus is as an organizing structure for storing and retrieving final
ES-related information from existing studies and applications. In other words, it can be used as a
meta data system for organizing databases, libraries, or other collections of final ES-related
information.
For the NOx application, this NESCS Plus feature could be used in several ways. For example,
due to commonly encountered budgetary constraints for this type of analysis, it may require a
"benefit transfer" approach. To apply this type of secondary data approach, analysts adapt and
transfer benefit estimates from existing studies rather than developing new value estimates.
Thus, the first step in conducting a benefit transfer analysis is to identify studies that contain
relevant and transferable benefit estimates. The relevance of existing studies can be determined
in part by the specific types of final ES they address. If the features of existing studies were
systematically classified or coded using NESCS Plus, then the resulting metadata would make it
easier to conduct searches of the literature and to identify studies and final ES-related estimates
that are suitable for benefit transfer. For instance, the NESCS Plus classification components
could in principle be included in the contents and search criteria of existing benefit transfer
databases, such as the Environmental Valuation Resource Inventory (EVRI)
(https ://www. evri. ca/ en/hom e).
In addition to a benefit transfer approach, the analysis may require a process for searching and
identifying existing quantitative measures of final ecosystem goods or final ES (e.g., indicators
or metrics) or existing models of the ecological processes that generate final ES. Again, if
existing measures and models were systematically classified or coded using NESCS Plus, then
the resulting metadata could be used. For example, USEPA's EcoService Models Library
(ESML) (https://esml.epa.eov/). a searchable database of models for estimating the ecological
production of ecosystem goods and services, includes NESCS components among its search
criteria.
This metadata feature of NESCS Plus can also be used to store and catalogue the results of the
NOx analysis. For future applications, such as cost-benefit analyses of other proposed air or
water quality standards, this feature would allow analysts to more easily locate and make use of
the methods, lessons, and findings from this analysis.
74
-------
5.6 Key Issues and Considerations in Using NESCS Plus
When using NESCS Plus for this type of analysis, it is important to be aware of the inherent
limits of the system. These limits (some of which have been mentioned above) include the
following:
• NESCS Plus can help to organize and structure analyses of final ES, but it is not by itself
a final ES quantification or valuation tool. It must be paired with final ES measurement
or modeling methods to make it useful for further analysis.
• Using NESCS Plus to inform valuation does not imply that separate benefit estimates
must or always can be estimated for each individual final ES code. Value estimates may
often cover several final ES categories and disaggregation according to these categories
may not always be possible.
• Identifying the individual final ES categories that are captured or excluded by certain
benefit estimation methods is not always a straightforward process. Some interpretation
and judgment are often needed.
• Using NESCS Plus in analyses where final ES values will be totaled, one must also
recognize that different final ES categories may involve competing uses for the same
Ecological End-Products - in particular those involving extractive Direct Uses - in which
case increases extractive flows of final ES (picking all the flowers) may reduce other
flows of FES, both extractive and non-extractive (no flowers left for picking or for
viewing or painting).
• The spatial boundaries of the Direct Users or Beneficiaries may be different from the
spatial boundaries of the Environments or Ecological End-Products considered. For
example, the recreational Users of a specific lake may come from a long distance or
through non-use would not need to visit the lake at all to value it. Therefore, the spatial
extent of the lake environment and its Ecological End-Products is smaller than the spatial
extent of households who are the Users of the lake. These potential types of spatial
differences must be recognized and considered when applying NESCS Plus.
75
-------
6.0 Frequently Asked Questions
6.1 Do human-managed ecosystems produce Ecological End-Products or economic goods?
One important feature of the system is the need to isolate the ecosystem products from
products that combine ecosystem and non-ecosystem inputs (such as capital and labor). Thus,
putting the concept of final ES and Ecological End-Products (i.e., FEGs) into practice requires
drawing a line between what ecosystems produce (ecological production) and what humans
produce (economic production). This line establishes where the "final" link from ecosystems to
humans occurs. However, this line is often blurred, particularly when natural systems are heavily
managed by humans but not intended for sale in markets. For example, publicly owned and
managed natural systems such as reservoirs and renourished beaches can provide Ecological
End-Products despite the human contribution to their existence or condition. Drawing the line
between natural and human systems will therefore often require subjective judgment on the part
of the user of NESCS Plus that should be clearly stated. The following principles are some
examples that we have used and can help to clarify some of these issues in identifying Ecological
End-Products and final ES.
1. If something is produced by humans for sale in a market, it is an economic good or service,
not an Ecological End-Product. For example, agricultural crops, commercially produced
Christmas trees, and maintained trails in a privately-owned nature park that charges an
entrance fee are not Ecological End-Products. However, the soils and water necessary to
grow the trees and the vistas enjoyed by trail users are Ecological End-Products.
2. If a natural feature is created by humans, but it is not connected to the lithosphere or
hydrosphere and is isolated from more natural systems, then it is not an Ecological End-
Product. For example, aquariums and indoor botanical gardens do not qualify as Ecological
End-Products.
3. If human production of an economic good or service incidentally creates natural features that
are non-marketed "public goods," than these by-products may be Ecological End-Products.
For example, if a farm creates an appealing vista than the resulting landscape can be
considered an Ecological End-Product. If a tree plantation provides habitat for birds that are
then enjoyed by birdwatchers, then the birds can be considered Ecological End-Products.
76
-------
6.2 Why is there no EEP class for water quality, air quality, or other types of
environmental quality?
Although environmental quality characteristics affect the level of ecosystem services
provided by Ecological End-Products, they are not categories of Ecological End-Products. This
same principle is applied when classifying economic goods and services. For example, safety
and gas mileage are quality characteristics of motor vehicles, but they are not categories of
motor vehicles. For this reason, NESCS Plus categorizes Environments and Ecological End-
Products, but it does not treat quality as a type of Ecological End-Product. Arguably, the best
way to address quality differences would be through the quantification (i.e., with indicators and
metrics) and valuation of ecosystem services rather than through the classification system itself.
For example, safety ratings and other scores (e.g., stars used for rating movies or restaurants)
describe differences in quality of economic goods and services. Likewise for Ecological End-
Products, metrics and indicators (e.g., Secchi disk depth for water clarity) can describe
differences in Ecological End-Product quality (Ringold et al. 2020).15 Similarly, just as the
quality of marketed goods and services is often reflected in their market prices, quality
differences in Ecological End-Products can be captured through differences in their estimated
values (i.e., using non-market valuation methods).
6.3 Why is carbon sequestration not listed as a class of ecosystem service in NESCS Plus?
By providing a sink for greenhouse gasses and thus helping to limit climate change,
carbon sequestration can be very beneficial to society. However, it is also a clear example of an
"intermediate" ecological process that is several steps removed (along a pathway) from several
Ecological End-Products and Direct Uses that define final ES. For example, it reduces acidifying
deposition to oceans, which then reduces damage to coral reefs, which then improves habitat for
fish, which are then "directly used" in recreational diving and commercial fishing. The relevant
Ecological End-Product class in this case is fish (fauna) in the ocean environment, and the direct
uses are for recreation by households and for extraction and distribution by commercial fishers.
Although the act of sequestering carbon (or purchasing carbon offsets) may provide an
individual with direct benefit, the ultimate final ES provided by the action is several steps
"upstream." Reports on the social cost of carbon do implicitly use final ES concepts. They
develop a value for carbon on the basis of the value of final ES and the link between different
levels of carbon sequestration and those final ES.
15 Some environmental quality characteristics, such as water clarity and air visibility, can also modify or be
indicators of ecosystem services from other EEPs (e.g., aesthetic enjoyment of aquatic life or landscapes).
77
-------
Nonetheless, a substantial portion of the ecosystem services community wants some
version of carbon sequestration (or carbon stocks held in an ecosystem, or carbon retention) to be
counted as an FES in cost-benefit analysis or ecosystem accounting. As a tool, if NESCS Plus
has a large number of potential system users informing it that a particular EEP correlates with a
final ES, then NESCS Plus - being an exhaustive and comprehensive classification for flows of
final ES - must have a path and code for it. In this case, the EEP for carbon sequestration/carbon
stocks/carbon retention would be under EEP = 7XX, Other Biotic and Natural Components.
Single or multiple Environments may be on the left side of the NESCS Plus code, Direct Use
would be "support or protection of human health or life" or "protection of property" (separate
from "support of... cultivation," which is a separate FES), and the User choice would be at the
tool user's discretion, where the area of benefit may be much larger than the particular
Environment, because global climate is not bounded by land cover types. In such applications,
NESCS Plus does not recommend naive adding of "carbon" FES value with other FES values, to
avoid double counting intermediate ES with final ES.
6.4 Why is biodiversity not listed as an Ecological End-Product class in NESCS Plus?
Protecting or increasing biodiversity can increase human well-being in several ways,
including by providing more broad-based sources of nutrition and by contributing to the
existence values held by some individuals. However, rather than being a type of Ecological End-
Product, biodiversity is better described as a characteristic (similar to an environmental quality
indicator) of an environment class (e.g., forests) or an Ecological End-Product (e.g., flora or
fauna).
6.5 How are the spatial and temporal scales of final ES addressed in NESCS Plus?
NESCS Plus is intended to provide a system that is flexible and adaptable enough to
classify any type of final ES, regardless of its spatial or temporal scale. For this reason, the
classification structure does not specify or limit the spatial or temporal scale of any the final ES
components (i.e., environments, Ecological End-Products, direct uses, etc.). Instead, it allows the
system user to specify these dimensions, based on their own needs and context. For example, the
NESCS Plus Environment classification divides the earth's surface into areas with similar
characteristics, such as Deciduous Forest, but it does not classify them according to the size or
spatial extent of the areas covered. It is left to the system user to specify the Deciduous Forest
areas that are of interest to him or her as a source of final ES.
78
-------
6.6 How does NESCS Plus handle regulation of extreme events?
Extreme events are rare and can cause loss of life, injuries, significant property damage,
and/or disruption to commerce. Monier and Gao (2015) provide examples of values for extreme
precipitation and temperatures across the United States. Ecological regulation offering some
protection against extreme events such as flooding, fire, and extreme weather events are included
under the Composite Ecological End-Product class. The extreme events Ecological End-Product
class should be used, just as for any other Ecological End-Product, whenever humans directly
experience or perceive the extreme event. In NESCS Plus, if a landowner directly perceives or
experiences flooding the Ecological End-Product would be coded as Composite and not coded as
water. As for other Ecological End-Products, factors that modify the frequency, duration,
intensity, or distribution of extreme events are considered to be of great importance. However,
they are intermediate goods and services and are not directly covered by NESCS Plus. One
would expect them to be of great interest in research, monitoring, and assessment for many
reasons, not the least of which would be for their inclusion on EPFs that predict the extreme
event.
79
-------
7.0 Summary
To summarize, NESCS Plus has been developed to standardize the identification of the
flows of ecosystem services that are directly used or appreciated by human beings. It has been
designed to meet the needs of a multidisciplinary community, including government agencies
and private business for decision making. The NESCS Plus provides two tools to support
identification. First, it provides a conceptual framework for systematically identifying and
tracing unique pathways between ecological systems that supply final ecosystem services and
human systems that benefit from them. Second, NESCS Plus applies best practices of
classification systems to define categories and numeric codes that help analysts identify and
reference flows from ecosystems to human beings in a consistent way. Specifically, NESCS Plus
is designed to provide a flexible, modular structure that allows for comprehensive identification
of flows of final ecosystem services, while minimizing the risk of double counting. The NESCS
Plus codes also allow analysts to link flows of ecosystem services to long-established national
accounting categories that are used by policy makers to track economy-wide effects.
The NESCS Plus addresses a main area of disagreement in classification systems such as
MA, CICES, and IPBES - where do "ecosystem services" occur along the continuum between
ecosystems and human welfare? These classification approaches differ in whether natural
processes or functions should themselves be considered services and whether services and
benefits should be treated as synonymous. They also differ in whether ecosystem services should
include items that involve input from humans (e.g., food production that requires human labor
inputs) or whether these services must inherently be delivered from natural processes or
components prior to human involvement (e.g., unmanaged pollination). Therefore, even though a
consensus has emerged in the literature about the importance of differentiating "final" ecosystem
services from the "intermediate" processes that contribute to them, there is less agreement about
what constitutes a final service. For purposes of environmental accounting, not making these
distinctions can result in double-counting of values.
The predecessors to NESCS Plus (NESCS and FEGS-CS) were designed to avoid such
issues by: (a) distinguishing between intermediate ecological production functions/processes and
final ecosystem services; (b) striving to define mutually exclusive use categories; and (c)
distinguishing between direct (e.g., fruit growers) and indirect users (e.g., households that
consume fruit from growers). The NESCS Plus leverages the most desirable features of these
two systems. The modular four-component structure of NESCS Plus, is also designed to prevent
undercounting of services by enabling users to develop a complete list of the ways in which
people benefit from ecosystems.
80
-------
The next steps for NESCS Plus will depend importantly on users' experience with and
feedback on the system. As with almost any classification system, user experience will highlight
areas where future changes to the classification structure are most needed or important. These
changes may include adding classes or subclasses within the exi sting structure, to better identify
categories that have either been overlooked or not adequately differentiated from existing
categories in the system. It may also involve deleting classes or subclasses that are found to be
unnecessary. The changes may also involve more substantial reorganizations of the structure,
including adding or deleting entire subclass levels.
Moving forward, the USEPA plans to use NESCS Plus as a tool for organizing and
connecting different ecosystem services research efforts and related projects. For example,
NESCS Plus provides a common language, structure, and coding system that can be used to link
USEPA tools (Figure 7), such as the FEGS Community Scoping Tool (Sharpe and Jenkins,
2018; Sharpe et al.„ 2020), EcoService Models Library (ESML; https://www.epa.gov/eco-
research/ecoservice-model s-library). and the EnviroAtlas (https://www.epa.gov/enviroatlas). and
to support ongoing efforts to develop metrics and indicators for final ecosystem goods and
services (USEPA, 2017).
Figure 7 Example USEPA Tools that can used together with components of NESCS Plus.
FEGS Scoping Tool
• Project Scoping
• Stakeholder Engagement
EnviroAtlas
• Spatial datasets
• Visualizations
NESCS Plus
• Classification System
• Library for Coding & Searching FEGS
• Webtool
EBM Textbook
Ecosystem Based
Management,
[(osyitem Services
and Aquatic
Biodiversity
• International
textbook
• Multiple case
studies
demonstrating
ORD tools
FEGS Metric Report
I ^
I "fe
• What to measure?
• FEGS Units
EcoService Models Library
• Published models for estimating ES
81
-------
References
Angradi, T.R., K.C. Williams, J.C. Hoffman, and D.W. Bolgrien. (2019). Goals, beneficiaries,
and indicators of waterfront revitalization in Great Lakes Areas of Concern and coastal
communities. Journal of Great Lakes Research. 45(5):851-863.
Bell, M.D., J. Phelan, T.F. Blett, D. Landers, A.M. Nahlik, G. Van Houtven, C. Davis, C.M.
Clark, and J. Hewitt. (2017). A framework to quantify the strength of ecological links
between an environmental stressor and final ecosystem services. Ecosphere. 8(5).
Bolgrien, D.W., T.R. Angradi, J. Bousquin, T.J. Canfield, T.H. Dewitt, R.S. Fulford, M.C.
Harwell, J.C. Hoffman, T P. Hollenhorst, J.M. Johnston, J.J. Launspach, J. Lovette, R.B.
McKane, T.A. N ewcom er-J oh n son, M.J. Russell, L.S. Sharpe, A. Tashie, K. Williams, and
S.H. Yee. (2018). Ecosystem Goods and Services Case Studies and Models Support
Community Decision Making using the EnviroAtlas and the Eco-Health Relationship
Browser. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-18/167.
https://doi.org/10 I '< I i0/RG.2 : .'.III :9286.
Boyd, J., P. Ringold, A. Krupnick, R.J. Johnston, M.A. Weber, and K. Hall. (2016). Ecosystem
services indicators: Improving the linkage between biophysical and economic analyses.
International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics. 8:359-443.
Boyd, J.W. and S. Banzhaf. (2007). What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized
environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics. 63:616-626.
Bruno, D. and H. Richmond. (2003). The truth about taxonomies. Information Management.
37(2):44.
Chestnut, L.G. and D.M. Mills. (2005). A fresh look at the benefits and costs of the US acid rain
program. Journal of Environmental Management. 77(3): 252.
Christie, M., B. Martin-Lopez, A. Church, E. Siwicka, P. Szymonczyk, and J.N. Sauterel. (2019).
Understanding the diversity of values of "Nature's contributions to people": insights from the
IPBES Assessment of Europe and Central Asia. Sustain Science. 14:1267-1282.
https://doi.Org/l 0.1007/sl 1625-019-00716-6
Clark, C.M., M.D. Bell, J.W. Boyd, J.E. Compton, E.A. Davidson, C. Davis, M.E. Fenn, L.
Geiser, L. Jones, and T.F, Blett. (2017). Nitrogen-induced terrestrial eutrophication:
cascading effects and impacts on ecosystem services. Ecosphere. 8(7).
DeWitt, T.H., J.W. Berry, T.J. Canfield, R.S. Fulford, M.C. Harwell, J.C. Hoffman, J.M.
Johnston, T.A Newcomer-Johnson, P.J. Ringold, M.J. Russell, L.A. Sharpe. and S.J. Yee.
(2020). The final ecosystem goods and services (FEGS) approach: A beneficiary centric
method to support. In T. O'Higgins, M. Lago, and T.H. DeWitt (Eds.), Ecosystem-based
management, ecosystem services and aquatic biodiversity: Theory, tools and applications
(pp. 127-148). Amsterdam: Springer.
Finisdore, J., C. Rhodes, R. Haines-Young, S. Maynard, J. Wielgus, A. Dvarskas, J. Houdet, F.
Quetier, K.A. Lamothe, H. Ding, F. Soulard, G. Van Houtven, P. Rowcroft. (2020). The 18
82
-------
benefits of using ecosystem services classification systems. Ecosystem Services. 45:101160.
https://doi.org/l /i.ecoser.2020.101160
Flood, S., T.G. O'Higgins, and M. Lago. (2020). The promise and pitfalls of ecosystem services
classification and valuation. In T. O'Higgins, M. Lago, and T.H. DeWitt (Eds.), Ecosystem-
based management, ecosystem services and aquatic biodiversity: Theory, tools and practice
(pp.87-104). Amsterdam: Springer.
Fu, B.J., C.H. Su, Y.P. Wei, I.R. Willett, Y.H. Lii, and G.H. Liu. (2011). Double counting in
ecosystem services valuation: causes and countermeasures. Ecological Research. 26(1): 1-14.
Haines-Young, R. and M.B. Potschin (2018). Common International Classification of Ecosystem
Services (CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the Application of the Revised Structure. European
Environment Agency, 53.
Haines-Young, R., and M.B. Potschin. (2013). Common International Classification of
Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December 2012. Report to
the European Environment Agency. EEA Framework Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003.
Harwell, M.C, and C. Jackson. (2018). FY 17 Output SHC 2.61.3 Practical Strategies for
Assessing Final Ecosystem Goods and Services in Community Decision Making. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-18/083.
Harwell, M.C., and C. Jackson. (2019). FY18 Output—SHC 2.61.3—Incorporation of
Ecosystem Goods and Services into Community-Level Decision Support Using EnviroAtlas
and Other Tools. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-19/087.
Harwell, M.C, and C. Jackson. (2018). FY 17 Output SHC 2.61.3 Practical Strategies for
Assessing Final Ecosystem Goods and Services in Community Decision Making. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R-18/083.
IPBES (2018) The IPBES regional assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for
Europe and Central Asia. Rounsevell, M., M. Fischer, A. Torre-Marin Rando, and A. Mader.
(Eds.). Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany. 892 pages.
Irvine, I.C., Greaver, T., Phelan, J., Sabo, R.D., Van Houtven, G., 2017. Terrestrial acidification
and ecosystem services: effects of acid rain on bunnies, baseball, and Christmas trees.
Ecosphere 8. https://doi.ore/10.1002/ecs2.1857
Johnston, R.J., J. Rolfe, R.S. Rosenberger, and R. Brouwer. (2015). Benefit transfer of
environmental and resource values (Vol. 14). New York: Springer.
Landers, D.H., and A.M. Nahlik. (2013). Final Ecosystem Goods and Services Classification
System (FEGS-CS). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/R-13/ORD-004914.
Littles, C.J., C.A. Jackson, T.H. DeWitt, and M.C. Harwell. (2018). Linking people to coastal
habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coast. Ocean and
Coastal Management. 165:356-369. https://doi.oiv 10 101 /].ocecoarnan.z. 01 "n 0° 009.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). (2003). Ecosystems and human well-being: a
framework for assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
83
-------
Monier, E. and X. Gao. (2015) Climate change impacts on extreme events in the United States:
an uncertainty analysis. Climatic Change. 131:67-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/slQ584-013-
1048-1.
Nahlik A.M., M.E. Kentula, M.S. Fennessy, and D.H. Landers (2012). Where is the consensus?
A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice. Ecological
Economics. 77:27-35.
Olander, L., R.J. Johnston, H. Tallis, J, Kagan, L. Maquire, J. Boyd, S. Polasky, and L. Wainger.
(2015). Best Practices for Integrating Ecosystem Services into Federal Decision Making.
Duke University, National Ecosystem Services Partnership.
https://doi.org/10.13016/M2CH07
Ojea, E., J. Martin-Ortega, and A. Chiabai. (2012). Defining and classifying ecosystem services
for economic valuation: the case of forest water services. Environmental Science and Policy.
19:1-15.
Pearce, D.W. and J.N. Pretty. (1993). Economic values and the natural world. Earthscan.
Rhodes, C., Bingham, A., Heard, A.M., Hewitt, J., Lynch, J., Waite, R., Bell, M.D. (2017).
Diatoms to human uses: linking nitrogen deposition, aquatic eutrophication, and ecosystem
services. Ecosphere. 8(7): eO 1858. https://doi.ore/10.1002/ecs2.1858.
Ringold, P.L., J. Boyd, D. Landers, and M. Weber. (2009). Report from the Workshop on
Indicators of Final Ecosystem Services for Streams. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA/600/R-09/137.
Ringold, P., J. Boyd, D. Landers, and M. Weber. 2013. What data should we collect? A
framework for identifying indicators of ecosystem contributions to human well-being
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 11:98-105.
Ringold, P., C. Phifer, F. Andrews, T. Angradi, W. Berry, T. Canfield, A. Gray, C. Horstmann, J.
Latimer, A. Nahlik, D. Peck, D. Santavy, L. Sharpe, and K. Schuerger (2020). Metrics for
national and regional assessment of aquatic, marine, and terrestrial final ecosystem goods and
services. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 645/R-20-002.
Rolfe J., Johnston R.J., Rosenberger R.S., Brouwer R. (2015) Introduction: Benefit Transfer of
Environmental and Resource Values. In: Johnston R., Rolfe J., Rosenberger R., Brouwer R.
(eds) Benefit Transfer of Environmental and Resource Values. The Economics of Non-
Market Goods and Resources, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-
017-9930-0_l
Russell, M.J., C. Rhodes, R.K. Sinha, G. Van Houtven, K. Warnell, and M.C. Harwell. (2020).
Ecosystem-based management and natural capital accounting. In T. O'Higgins, M. Lago, and
T.H. DeWitt (Eds.) Ecosystem-based management, ecosystem services and aquatic
biodiversity: Theory, tools and applications (pp. 149-164). Amsterdam: Springer.
Sharpe, L., and S. Jenkins. (2018). FEGS scoping tool user manual. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. EPA/600/R-18/288.
Sharpe, L., C. Hernandez, and C. Jackson. (2020). Prioritizing stakeholders, beneficiaries and
environmental attributes: A tool for ecosystem-based management. In T. O'Higgins, M.
Lago, and T.H. DeWitt (Eds.), Ecosystem-based management, ecosystem services and
84
-------
aquatic biodiversity: Theory, tools and applications (pp. 189-212). Amsterdam: Springer.
https://link.sprineer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-03Q-45843-0 10
Sinha, P., P. Ringold, G. Van Houtven, and A. Krupnick. (2018). Using a final ecosystem goods
and services approach to support policy analysis. Ecosphere. 9(9):e02382.
https://dx.doi.ore/10.1002/ecs2.2382
Sokal, R.R., 1974. Classification: purposes, principles, progress, prospects. Science.
185(4157): 1115-1123.
Tashie, A., and P. Ringold. (2019). A critical assessment of available ecosystem services data
according to the Final Ecosystem Goods and Services framework. Ecosphere. 10(3):e02665.
UNSD. 2012. Technical Recommendations in support of the System of Environmental-
Economic Accounting 2012; Experimental Ecosystem Accounting; White cover publication,
pre-edited text subject to official editing (Sections 1.18 and 1.71). United Nations (UN,
Statistics Division, UNSD) System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA)
Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (EEA), New York, New York, USA.
https://seea.iin.ore/sites/seea.iin.ore/files/technicat recommendations in support, of the see
a eea final white cover.pdf
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2015). National Ecosystem Services
Classification System (NESCS): Framework Design and Policy Application. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-800-R-15-002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2017). National and Regional FEGS Metrics
and Indicators 2016 Workshop Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/R-
17/189.
Wainger, L.A., and M.J. Mazzotta. (2011). Realizing the potential of ecosystem services: A
framework for relating ecological changes to economic benefits. Environmental
Management. 48:710-73 3.
Warnell, K., M. Russell, C. Rhodes, K. Bagstad, L. Olander, D. Nowak, R. Poudel, P. Glynn, J.
Hass, S. Hirabayashi, J. Ingram, J. Matuszak, K. Oleson, S. Posner, and P. Villa. (2020).
Testing ecosystem accounting in the United States: A case study for the Southeast.
Ecosystem Services. 43:101099.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S221204162030Q4137via%3Dihiib
Yee, S., A. Sullivan, K. Williams, and K. Winters. (2019). Who benefits from national estuaries9
Applying the FEGS Classification System to identify ecosystem services and their
beneficiaries. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 16:235 1.
85
-------
Additional Acknowledgments
The NESCS Plus is the culmination of tremendous effort by many individuals. The foundational
pieces of the FEGS-CS involved invaluable contributions by Dixon Landers, Amanda Nahlik,
and many others. The foundational pieces of the NESCS involved invaluable contributions by
Paramita Sinha, George Van Houtven, Charles R. Rhodes, Joel Corona, Dixon Landers, and
many others. Below are excerpts that have been reprinted from the two earlier classification
systems to help acknowledge the large team of contributors. Please note that acknowledgment of
intellectual contribution to idea development or editorial quality of this document does not imply
absolute conceptual agreement on behalf of those acknowledged.
FEGS-CS Acknowledgments - Excerpt taken from Landers and Nahlik (2013):
Rick Linthurst was the National Program Director for EPA's Ecosystem Services Research
Project as well as the director for the Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program
under which the FEGS-CS work was performed. We thank him for the support we received and
his vision in recognizing the importance of building a solid foundation for incorporating
ecological benefits in decision making. The authors also thank Marc Russell (US EPA-ORD
Gulf Ecology Division), Paul Ringold (USEPA-ORD-WED), Matt Weber (US EPA-ORD-
WED), Mike Papenfus (US EPA-ORD-WED), Randall Bruins (US EPA Ecological Exposure
Research Division), Bob Ozretich (US EPA-ORD-WED), John Powers (Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board), Charles Rhodes (Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education
Fellow), Kenneth Bagstad (US Geological Survey), Rudolf de Groot (Wageningen University
and Research Centre, Netherlands), and Jonathan Kochmer (Earth Economics) for their insight
and comments on earlier drafts of this report. Roy Haines-Young (University of Nottingham,
United Kingdom), Daniel Clarke (United Nations), and Tim Sullivan (E&S Environmental
Chemistry, Inc.) provided reviews and comments that improved the quality of this document. We
would like to acknowledge Ellen Cooter (US EPA-ORD Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis
Devision (AMAD)) and Robin Dennis (US EPA-ORD-AMAD) for providing us their expertise
in atmospheric science and Jim Weaver (US EPA-ORD-Ecosystems Research Division) for
providing us his expertise in groundwater science. Many of the ideas presented in this document
were developed over years discussions, chiefly among Paul Ringold (US EPA-ORD-WED),
James Boyd (Resources for the Future (RFF)), and Matt Weber (US EPA-ORD-WED), and
workshops, including those held by the US EPA in Denver, Colorado (Ringold et al. 2009) and
in Corvallis, Oregon in 2012, which included Richard Adams (Oregon State University, USA),
Allen Brooks (US EPA-ORD-WED), Treg Christopher (Oregon State University, USA), Jana
Compton (US EPA-ORD-WED), Robert Deal (United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Forest Service), Ted DeWitt (US EPA-ORD-WED), Sally Duncan (Oregon State University,
USA), Mary Kentula (US EPA-ORD-WED), Jeff Kline (USDA Forest Service), Steve Kline (US
EPA-ORD-WED), Bob McKane (US EPA-ORD-WED), Tony Olsen (US EPA-ORD-WED),
Mike Papenfus (US EPA-ORD-WED), Matt Weber (US EPA-ORD-WED), and Jerry Whittaker
(USDA Agricultural Research Service). A teleconference held in July 2012 in which Jim Boyd
86
-------
(RFF), Paul Ringold (US EPA-ORD-WED), Matt Weber (US EPA-ORD-WED), Alan Krupnick
(RFF), Jenn Richkus (Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International), and Mary Barber (RTI
International) participated, resulted in ideas from which the FEGS boundaries in this document
were created. Please note that acknowledgement of intellectual contribution to idea development
or editorial quality of this document does not imply absolute conceptual agreement on behalf of
those acknowledged.
Citation: DH Landers and Nahlik AM. 2013. Final Ecosystem Goods and Services
Classification System (FEGS-CS). EPA/600/R-13/ORD-004914. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.
National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS) Acknowledgments - Excerpts
taken from USEPA (2015):
The authors thank Jennifer Richkus, Jennifer Phelan, Robert Truesdale, Mary Barber, David
Bellard, and others from RTI International for providing feedback and research support during
the development of this report. The early leadership of former EPA employee John Powers
proved instrumental in launching this effort. The authors thank Amanda Nahlik, Tony Olsen,
Kevin Summers, Kathryn Saterson, Randy Bruins, Christine Davis, Bryan Hubbell, Julie Hewitt,
Ashley Allen, Todd Doley, Karen Milam, David Simpson, and others at EPA for their discussion
and feedback on earlier versions of this document. In addition, the authors thank V. Kerry Smith,
Neville D. Crossman, and Brendan Fisher for review comments. Finally, the authors would like
to thank participants of the two NESCS Workshops held in 2012 and 2013, as well as
participants of an ACES session in 2014. Any factual or attribution errors are the responsibility
of the authors alone.
The USEPA (2015) document was developed under U.S. EPA Contract EP-W-11-029 with RTI
International (Paramita Sinha and George Van Houtven), in collaboration with the ORISE
Participant Program between U.S. EPA and U.S. DOE (Charles R. Rhodes), under the direction
of Joel Corona and Dixon Landers, U.S. EPA, Office of Water and Office of Research and
Development, respectively. Peer review for this report was conducted under U.S. EPA Contract
EP-C-12-045 with Versar, Inc. (David Bottimore).
Citation: United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2015. National Ecosystem
Services Classification System (NESCS): Framework Design and Policy Application.
EPA-800-R-15-002. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
87
-------
Appendix A. Glossary of Key Terms
Term
Definitions
Beneficiary
The interests of individuals, groups of people, or organizations that
drive their direct use or appreciation of an Ecological End-Product,
resulting in an impact (positive or negative) on their welfare. In this
way a Beneficiary differs from a User where Users are the individuals
or groups, and not their "interests." [Note the departure from common
usage, in which a beneficiary is "a person who receives benefits, " to
focus instead on the person's awareness and interests, relative to final
ecosystem services, rather than to the persons themselves, because a
single person with multiple interests can benefit from ecosystems in
multiple and distinct ways.]
Example: A farmer relies on their land (space and soil) for producing
crops and uses water from a nearby stream to irrigate in the summer.
Beneficiary
Classification
Definition: Classification of the different tvpes of interests individuals,
groups of people, or organizations that drive direct use and/or
appreciation of one or more Ecological End-Products, resulting in an
impact on their welfare.
Context: This NESCS Plus classification component iointlv addresses
questions about how Ecological End-Products are used, enjoyed or
appreciated and who uses, enjoys, or appreciates them.
Ex am ole: Agricultural, recreational, subsistence, and non-use
beneficiaries are all examples of Beneficiary classes.
Benefit transfers
"[T]he use of research results from pre-existing primary studies at one
or more sites or policy contexts (often called study sites) to predict
[human] welfare estimates or related information for other, typically
unstudied sites or policy contexts (often called policy sites)" (Rolfe,
Johnston, et al. 2015).
Bequest Value
A type of non-use value for a good or service. It is derived from the
benefits an individual receives solely from the knowledge that the good
or service will continue to be present for the benefit and/or enjoyment
of future generations
Biophysical
Pertaining to the biological, chemical, and physical attributes of an
ecosystem or environment.
Class
A main subdivision of a classification component, located within the
top level of the component's hierarchical structure.
Classification
Component
The NESCS Plus uses five dimensions to classify final ecosystem
services - Environment, Ecological End-Product, Direct Use, and
Direct User, or Beneficiary instead of Direct Use and User - where
each dimension is referred to as a classification component.
88
-------
Term
Dcrinilions
Classification system
1. An organized (and often hierarchical) structure that, through well-
defined categories, allows one to group similar elements together and to
separate others. Pre-determined criteria define what should be
considered similar or different, and these criteria are driven by the
specific purpose for developing the classification system.
2. A method to group individual elements or features into collections
similar in type, function, affiliation, behavior, response, or ontogeny.
3. An organized structure for identifying and organizing ecosystem
services into a coherent scheme.
Cultural Services
The nonmaterial benefits people obtain from ecosystems through
spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, and aesthetic
experience, including, for example, knowledge systems, social
relations, and aesthetic values.
Demand
Definition: As an economic concent, the amount of a economic good or
service that potential buyers would be willing and able to purchase at
any given price. The level of demand for a good or service is also
determined by many other factors, such as the availability and price of
substitute and complementary goods and services and the income of the
potential buyers. Demand is not the same as economic value, but it is a
key determinant of the economic value of a good or service. Although
most ecosystem services are not bought and sold in markets - so, there
are no market prices - the economic demand for an ecosystem service
can nonetheless be thought of as the amount that people would be
willing and able to buy of the service if they could acquire it through a
market transaction.
Context: As an economic concent demand can be influenced bv, but is
not the same thing as, a need, requirement, or desire. Like economic
values, the demand for economic or ecosystem goods or services is a
reflection of individuals' preferences for them.
Direct Use
Direct Use means that the User or Beneficiary is using or appreciating
an Ecological End-Product in its Environment. Direct Use does not
include ecosystem characteristics or processes that precede or help
produce the Ecological End-Product. Direct Uses include extractive and
consumptive uses (e.g., harvesting goods), non-consumptive uses (e.g.,
enjoyment of scenic beauty) and non-use classes where a User
appreciates or values an Ecological End-Product without direct
interaction. The boundary between Use and Non-use within Direct Use
can be fuzzy, and their distinct values may be hard to disentangle.
Direct Use
Classification
Definition: Classification of the different wavs in which Ecological
End-Products are directly used or appreciated by humans. Direct Uses
may be either extractive or in-situ. Note that direct users may derive an
increase in well-being from using Ecological End-Products as well as
89
-------
Term
Dcrinilions
from non-use (i.e., direct users such as households may appreciate end-
products even if they do not see or use them).
Context: This NESCS Plus classification comDonent addresses the
question about how Ecological End-Products are used or appreciated.
Ex am ole: Direct Uses include extraction of natural resources for
transformation into economic products, or non-extractive use associated
with outdoor recreation.
Direct User
A direct user of an Ecological End-Product is a person or institution
that directly extracts the Ecological End-Product or interacts with or
physically senses the Ecological End-Product in its environment, or it is
a person who holds a non-use value for the Ecological End-Product.
Direct User
Classification
Definition: Classification of the people or institutions that directlv use
or appreciate Ecological End-Products.
Context: This NESCS Plus classification component addresses who
uses, enjoys, or appreciates the Ecological End-Products. Following
established classification structures adopted by the U.S. Census Bureau
and United Nations, the first level includes broad sectors of the
economy: Industry, Households, and Government. To further subdivide
the industry class, the existing North American Industrial Classification
System (NAICS) and coding system was adopted, which is the standard
used by U.S. federal statistical agencies in classifying business
establishments.
Example: An example is the Manufacturing Industry sector which
would have a 3-digit code, one digit for industry and two digits for the
sector. Unlike commercial establishments, which tend to specialize in
certain productive activities and can therefore be assigned to individual
NAICS categories, households and governments do not specialize in the
same way as industries and are therefore not divided into sub-classes by
NAICS categories. They currently are presented as lst-level
hierarchical classes with further designation to subclasses remaining
open to be filled out. One way to differentiate the many ways
households and governments interact with nature is through the
combination of the Household or Government Direct User class with
different Direct Uses.
Ecological End-
Product
The relevant biophysical components of nature that are directly used or
appreciated by humans in Final Ecosystem Services.
Example: The Fauna present in forests, such as deer, are an example of
an Ecological End-Product that provides Final Ecosystem Services to
commercial and recreational hunters who harvest them, as well as to
recreational wildlife viewers who enjoy them in a non-consumptive
way. The forest ecosystem's production of the forage that supports the
deer populations is an example of an intermediate ecosystem service
90
-------
Term
Dcrinilions
that contributes (as an input) to the deer, which is the Ecological End-
Product used in the Final Ecosystem Service.
Ecological End-
Product Classification
Definition: Classification of the biophvsical components of nature that
are directly used by humans to produce goods and services or directly
enjoyed. They can also be referred to as Final Ecosystem Goods.
Context: This NESCS Plus classification comDonent addresses what in
nature is directly used or appreciated by humans. All flows of final
ecosystems services originate from an Ecological End-Product. One
might use biophysical metrics or indicators to quantify an Ecological
End-Product.
Example: Different tvpes of Flora and Fauna, such as maple trees and
chinook salmon, are examples of Ecological End-Products that are
directly used and appreciated by individuals.
Ecological production
functions
Definition: Usable expressions (i.e., models) of the processes bv which
ecosystems produce Ecological End-Products, often including external
influences on those processes.
Context: The definition and specification of ecological production
functions are used in modeling approaches to quantify how changes in
one part of a natural system affect changes in another.
Example: The relationship between a plant's uptake of soil nutrients
(as an input) and its rate of biomass growth (as an output) can be
represented by an ecological production function that can include one
or more factors (e.g., soil nutrients, precipitation, altitude, etc.).
Economic production
functions
A representation (often mathematical) of the input-output relationship
involved in the production of an economic good or service by
commercial/industrial establishments (i.e., firms) or non-commercial
entities (e.g., households or individuals). Inputs typically include labor,
physical capital (e.g., machinery), land, other natural resources (e.g.,
water) and raw materials, and other material supplies. Outputs are the
goods or services produced by the process. The function also represents
the technology, skill level, and methods that are embedded within the
production process.
Economic valuation
Quantification of the benefits and increase in well-being experienced by
individuals or society as a result of a change - typically measured and
expressed in monetary terms. In the context of ecosystem services, it is
the quantification of benefits derived from an increase in ecosystem
services. In a monetized economic analysis, it is often the practice of
measuring individuals', households', or firms' maximum willingness
and ability to pay for the change.
91
-------
Term
Definitions
Ecosystem Attributes
Definition: A biological, physical, or chemical characteristic or feature
inherent to an ecosystem.
Context: In economic valuation studies, ecosvstem attributes refer to
the set of ecological features that individually or as a group contribute
to the enjoyment of a valued experience, such as a recreational or
aesthetic experience (e.g., a day of fishing).
Example: Surface water clarity (e.g., as measured by Secchi disk
depth) is an attribute of water in its natural environment, which can
affect recreational users' enjoyment of the environment. Surface water
clarity is an example of a water quality attribute of the Water
Ecological End-Product class.
Environment
Classification
Definition: Classification of spatial units, with similar biophysical
characteristics, that are located on or near the Earth's surface and that
contain Ecological End-Products. Environment classes spatially divide
the Earth into qualitative non-overlapping areas with similar
biophysical characteristics that, when taken together, can completely
cover the surface of the Earth. The Environment is where the
Ecological End-Product is located when it is used, enjoyed, or
appreciated. Note, an "Environment class" is not synonymous with an
"ecosystem."
Context: This NESCS Plus classification component addresses where
Ecological End-Products are located when they are used, enjoyed, or
appreciated.
Example: In its most highly aggregated form, the Earth can be
separated into two mutually exclusive Environment classes
corresponding to Terrestrial and Aquatic areas.
Existence Value
Definition: The eniovment people may experience simply by knowing
that a resource exists even if they never expect to use that resource
directly themselves.
Context: This is a component of "non-use value" from early literature
in environmental economics.
Final Ecosystem
Good (FEG)
Components of nature, directly enjoyed, consumed, or used to yield
human well-being. The final ecosystem good (i.e., ecological end-product)
is a biophysical quality or feature and needs minimal translation for
relevance to human well-being. Furthermore, a final ecosystem good is
the last step in an ecological production function before the user
interacts with the ecosystem, either by enjoying, consuming, or using
the good, or using it as an input in the human economy.
Final Ecosystem
Service (FES)
The services from nature that are "directly [emphasis added] enjoyed,
consumed, or used to yield human well-being" (Boyd and Banzhaf,
2007).
92
-------
Term
Dcrinilions
Flow
Definition: A variable measured over an interval of time. Flow
measures are typically expressed as a rate per unit of time—e.g., annual
income (dollars/year), daily nutrient load to surface water (pounds/day).
Context: The distinction between "stocks" and "flows" is an essential
concept for measuring natural capital (which is a stock concept) and the
contributions of natural capital to human well-being (which is a flow
concept).
Goods
Definition: Tangible items that are created through a production
process and that may be acquired, used, or consumed by people for use
as inputs in another production process or to satisfy other needs or
wants. Goods can be represented and measured as "flows," such as the
amount sold and transferred to new owners over the course of the year,
or as "stocks," such as the amount stored in an inventory at the end of
the year.
Context: Two important features that distinguish goods from services
are: (1) their tangible nature; and (2) their ability to be treated as stocks
in certain contexts.
Hedonic Analysis
An economic valuation method that uses statistical methods to
decompose the price of an asset by: (1) identifying a set of distinct and
measurable attributes of the asset, each of which contributes to its
value; and (2) estimating the portion of the total asset value that is
attributable to each attribute (i.e., the implicit price of each attribute).
Hedonic analysis of housing prices is often used to isolate and infer the
economic value of ecosystem services provided by specific local
environmental amenities to residents (e.g., from open space or good air
quality). These amenities are treated as distinct attributes of the homes
and separately priced using this method.
Household production
functions
A representation of the various processes through which members of a
household produce goods and services for their own consumption,
using their own unpaid labor, capital, and other acquired goods or
services. It is a type of economic production function, specifically
involving households rather than commercial/industrial establishments.
Human well-being
A multidimensional description of the state of people's lives, which
encompasses personal relationships, strong and inclusive communities,
meeting basic human needs, good health, financial and personal
security, access to education, adequate free time, connectedness to the
natural environment, rewarding employment, and the ability to achieve
personal goals.
Indicator
1. An interpretable value or category describing trends in some
measurable aspect, often used singularly or in combination to generate
an index.
93
-------
Term
Dcrinilions
2. A sign or signal that relays a complex message, potentially from
numerous sources, in a simplified and useful manner.
3. An interpretable summary value that reflects the state of, or change
in, a system or point of interest that is being evaluated. Indicators are
derived from measures or metrics that correspond to components of
well-being. Example indicators are perceived safety, lifestyle and
behavior, and wealth.
4. A summary measure that provides information on the state of, or
change in, the system that is being measured. Information based on
measured data used to represent a particular attribute, characteristic, or
property of a system.
Intermediate
ecosystem service
Definition: Attributes of ecological structure or ecosystem
characteristics, processes, or functions that influence the quantity and/or
quality of ecosystem services but do not themselves qualify as final
ecosystem goods or services (because they are not directly enjoyed,
consumed, or used).
Context: A good or service can be an intermediate good and service in
one situation and a final good or service in another situation.
Example: Water in a river is an EEP used in a final ecosystem service
by a kayaker, but the same river water is an intermediate good or
service to a hiker who appreciates a deer that drinks from that water.
Metrics and indicators
Direct or indirect measurements of an ecological end-product or
attributes. If a metric can be consistently and reliably related to an end-
product and a beneficiary, it can potentially serve as an indicator of
final ecosystem goods or services.
National accounting
A compilation of methods for tracking and measuring the level of
economic activity, including total flows of goods and services, in a
region or country, as well as the level of wealth and assets present. It
included national income accounting, which focuses on the level of
production and income generation within a country.
Natural Capital
An extension of the economic concept of physical capital - produced
assets such as buildings, machinery, and equipment that are used in the
production of economic goods and services - to ecosystem goods and
services. Natural capital is the stock of natural ecosystems that yields a
flow of valuable ecosystem goods or services into the future.
Non-use values
Definition: Human preferences for goods or services that are not
associated with or derived from direct use or contact with them. For
instance, individuals may care about or appreciate Ecological End-
Products, even if they never directly use or see them - i.e., they may
have non-use values for the existence of things like tropical forests or
pristine lakes, even if they never visit them. Sometimes referred to as
"passive use value," non-use values are theoretically distinct from "use
values," although the boundary between use and non-use values is not
94
-------
Term
Dcrinilions
always definitive. Different types of non-use value include existence
value, option value, and bequest value.
Context: The recognition that humans eniov and benefit from
ecosystems in ways that do not involve direct use is essential for
developing a comprehensive accounting (e.g., economic valuation) of
the total benefits provided by nature.
Example: Individuals often value the assurance that threatened and
endangered species are being protected, even if they will never see
them in the wild, reflecting a preference (benefit) from knowing that the
species continues to exist.
Option value
The value for sustaining the existence of a good or service into the
future so that one has the option to use it if needed or desired at a later
date. Although option value is sometimes characterized as a non-use
value, because it does not involve current use, it is more accurately
described as a value associated with expected/uncertain future use.
Services
Actions or processes performed by people or nature that benefit people.
Services are typically intangible and non-storable. In contrast to goods,
which can be treated as "stocks" and measured at a specific point in
time, services are "flows" from the service provider to the service
consumer and are measured over a period of time (e.g., hourly access to
and use of a gym facility). Unlike a good, which can exist (e.g., as part
of an inventory) without being transferred to a consumer, the existence
of a service requires that it be received by a human. The wants and
needs of people are met through items (i.e., goods) and delivery of
assistance (i.e., services). Economic, environmental, and social services
reflect the three pillars of sustainability.
Stock
Definition: A quantity existing at a point in time, which may have
accumulated or been produced in the past. Units of measurement are
typically expressed in levels - e.g., wealth (dollars), physical assets
(number of machines), and nutrient concentration (milligrams per liter)
- that are present in or over a period of time. Economic goods can be
represented as a stock when they are accumulated, stored, or stockpiled
- e.g., the stock of produce in a grocery store's inventory at the
beginning of the year. Natural capital is partially a stock concept,
representing the level of wealth (productive natural capacity through
ecosystem characteristics and processes, as well as the ecosystem
goods) embodied within Environments at a point in or span of time.
Context: The distinction between "stocks" and "flows" is an essential
concept for measuring natural capital (which is a stock and capacity
concept) and the contributions of natural capital to human well-being
(which is a flow concept).
95
-------
Term
Dcrinilions
Use values
Definition: The value received by individuals from goods or services,
which is derived from direct contact with, use of, or enjoyment from the
goods or services (as opposed to non-use values which do not involve
or require direct contact, use, or enjoyment). Use values for ecosystem
services can be derived from consumptive uses of the ecosystem, such
as catch-and-keep fishing, as well as from non-consumptive uses such
as birdwatching.
Context: For completeness in defining preferences for ecosvstem
services, use value must be distinguished from non-use value, where
non-use value recognizes that humans can enjoy and benefit from
ecosystems in ways that do not involve direct use.
96
-------
Appendix B. Definitions of Environment Classes and Subclasses
Environment
Class
Environment
Subclass I
Environment
Subclass II
Definition
1. Aquatic
Lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, estuaries and the open ocean. These ecosystems
may be covered with ice either permanently or seasonally.
11. Open Water
Areas of open water, including areas that are intertidal, and including habitats
dominated by rooted or attached vegetation that extends into subtidal or
permanently submerged aquatic habitats (such as seagrasses, submerged aquatic
vegetation, kelp beds).
111. Rivers and
Streams
All streams and rivers that have flowing water during the summer excluding tidal
rivers with salinity greater than 0.5ppt. Run-of-the-river ponds and pools are
included while reservoirs are excluded. Includes areas with submerged aquatic
vegetation. Source: Adapted from USEPA National Aquatic Resource Surveys
(NARS).
112. Lakes and Ponds
All lakes, reservoirs, and ponds that are permanent water bodies. Lakes that are
saline are excluded as are those used for aquaculture, disposal-tailings, sewage
treatment, evaporation, or other unspecified disposal use. Includes areas with
submerged aquatic vegetation. Source: Adapted from USEPA National Aquatic
Resource Surveys (NARS).
113. Near Coastal
Marine/Estuarine
All coastal waters of the conterminous United States with salinity greater than
0.5ppt to confluence with the ocean, including inland waterways tidal rivers and
creeks, lagoons, fjords, bays, and major embayments. The seaward boundary
extends out to where an imaginary straight-line intersecting two land features
would fully enclose a body of coastal water. All waters within the enclosed area
are defined as estuarine, regardless of depth or salinity. Includes areas with
submerged aquatic vegetation, such as seagrass beds, kelp beds, and algal mats.
Source: Adapted from USEPA National Aquatic Resource Surveys (NARS).
114. Open Oceans
and Seas
All saline waters seaward of near coastal marine systems. These are generally
deeper waters than the photic zone that supports submerged aquatic vegetation.
Source: Adapted from USEPA National Aquatic Resource Surveys (NARS).
12. Wetlands
Tidal and nontidal wetlands have rooted vegetation and, when present, open
water less than 1 meter deep. Source: Adapted from USEPA National Aquatic
Resource Surveys (NARS).
97
-------
Environment
Class
Environment
Subclass I
Environment
Subclass II
Definition
121. Woody Wetlands
Areas where forest or shrubland vegetation accounts for greater than 20% of
vegetative cover and the soil or substrate is periodically saturated with or covered
with water.
122. Emergent
Herbaceous Wetlands
Areas where perennial herbaceous vegetation accounts for greater than 80% of
vegetative cover and the soil or substrate is periodically saturated with or covered
with water.
2. Terrestrial
Areas of the Earth's surface that are not Aquatic.
21. Forests
Land that is at least 10 percent stocked by forest trees of any size, or land
formerly having such tree cover, and is not currently developed for a nonforest
use. The minimum area for classification as forest land is 1 acre (0.4 hectares).
Roadside, streamside, and shelterbelt strips of timber must be at least 120 feet (37
meters) wide to qualify as forest land. Unimproved roads and trails, streams and
other bodies of water, or natural clearings in forested areas shall be classified as
forest, if <120 feet (37 meters) in width or 1.0 acre (0.4 hectares) in size.
211. Deciduous
Forest
Areas dominated by trees generally greater than 5 meters tall, and greater than
20% of total vegetation cover. More than 75% of the tree species shed foliage
simultaneously in response to seasonal change. This is a subclass of Forests.
212. Evergreen Forest
Areas dominated by trees generally greater than 5 meters tall, and greater than
20% of total vegetation cover. More than 75% of the tree species maintain their
leaves all year. Canopy is never without green foliage. This is a subclass of
Forests.
213. Mixed Forest
Areas dominated by trees generally greater than 5 meters tall, and greater than
20% of total vegetation cover. Neither deciduous nor evergreen species are
greater than 75% of total tree cover. This is a subclass of Forests.
22. Agroecosystems
The subset of Terrestrial Environments managed to grow crops. This includes
Pasture/Hay and Cultivated Crops, but excludes areas managed to grow trees
(those are included under "forests.")
221. Pasture/Hay
Areas of grasses, legumes, or grass4egume mixtures planted for livestock grazing
or the production of seed or hay crops, typically on a perennial cycle. Pasture/hay
98
-------
Environment
Class
Environment
Subclass I
Environment
Subclass II
Definition
vegetation accounts for greater than 20% of total vegetation. This is a subclass of
Agroecosystems.
222. Cultivated Crops
Areas used for the production of annual crops, such as corn, soybeans,
vegetables, tobacco, and cotton, and also perennial woody crops such as orchards
and vineyards. Crop vegetation accounts for greater than 20% of total vegetation.
This class also includes all land being actively tilled. This is a subclass of
Agroecosystems.
23. Grasslands
Areas dominated by graminoid or herbaceous vegetation, generally greater than
80% of total vegetation. These areas are not subject to intensive management
such as tilling but can be utilized for grazing. This is a Terrestrial Environment.
231. Grassland/
Herbaceous
Areas dominated by graminoid or herbaceous vegetation, generally greater than
80% of total vegetation. These areas are not subject to intensive management
such as tilling but can be utilized for grazing. This is a Terrestrial Environment.
24. Scrubland/
Shrubland
Areas dominated by shrubs; less than 5 meters tall with shrub canopy typically
greater than 20% of total vegetation. This class includes true shrubs, young trees
in an early successional stage or trees stunted from environmental conditions.
241. Shrub/Scrub
Areas dominated by shrubs; less than 5 meters tall with shrub canopy typically
greater than 20% of total vegetation. This class includes true shrubs, young trees
in an early successional stage or trees stunted from environmental conditions.
25. Tundra
Treeless regions in which the subsoil is permanently frozen.
251. Lichens
Areas dominated by fruticose or foliose lichens generally greater than 80% of
total vegetation. In the United States, this Terrestrial Environment only occurs in
Alaska.
252. Moss
Areas dominated by mosses, generally greater than 80% of total vegetation. In
the United States, this Terrestrial Environment only occurs in Alaska.
253. Dwarf Scrub
Areas dominated by shrubs less than 20 centimeters tall with shrub canopy
typically greater than 20% of total vegetation. This type is often co-associated
with grasses, sedges, herbs, and non-vascular vegetation. In the United States,
this Terrestrial Environment only occurs in Alaska.
99
-------
Environment
Class
Environment
Subclass I
Environment
Subclass II
Definition
254. Sedge/
Herbaceous
Areas dominated by sedges and forbs, generally greater than 80% of total
vegetation. This type can occur with significant other grasses or other grass like
plants, and includes sedge tundra, and sedge tussock tundra. In the United States,
this Terrestrial Environment only occurs in Alaska.
26. Ice and snow
Areas characterized by a perennial cover of ice and/or snow, generally greater
than 25% of total cover.
261. Perennial
Ice/Snow
Areas characterized by a perennial cover of ice and/or snow, generally greater
than 25% of total cover.
27. Urban/suburban
Areas of intensive human use with much of the land covered by structures.
Included in this class are cities, towns, villages, strip developments along
highways, transportation, power, and communications facilities, and areas such as
those occupied by mills, shopping centers, industrial and commercial complexes,
and institutions that may, in some instances, be isolated from urban areas.
271. Developed Open
Space
Areas with a mixture of some constructed materials, but mostly vegetation in the
form of lawn grasses. Impervious surfaces account for less than 20% of total
cover. These areas most commonly include large-lot single-family housing units,
parks, golf courses, and vegetation planted in developed settings for recreation,
erosion control, or aesthetic purposes. This is a Terrestrial Urban/Suburban
Environment.
272. Developed Low
Intensity
Areas with a mixture of constructed materials and vegetation. Impervious
surfaces account for 20% to 49% percent of total cover. These areas most
commonly include single-family housing units. This is a Terrestrial
Urban/Suburban Environment.
273. Developed
Medium Intensity
Areas with a mixture of constructed materials and vegetation. Impervious
surfaces account for 50% to 79% of the total cover. These areas most commonly
include single-family housing units. This is a Terrestrial Urban/Suburban
Environment.
274. Developed High
Intensity
Highly developed areas where people reside or work in high numbers. Examples
include apartment complexes, row houses and commercial/industrial. Impervious
100
-------
Environment
Class
Environment
Subclass I
Environment
Subclass II
Definition
surfaces account for 80% to 100% of the total cover. This is a Terrestrial
Urban/Suburban Environment.
28. Barren/rock and
sand
Areas of bedrock, desert pavement, scarps, talus, slides, volcanic material, glacial
debris, sand dunes, strip mines, gravel pits and other accumulations of earthen
material. Generally, vegetation accounts for less than 15% of total cover.
281. Barren Land
(Rock/S and/Cl ay)
Areas of bedrock, desert pavement, scarps, talus, slides, volcanic material, glacial
debris, sand dunes, strip mines, gravel pits and other accumulations of earthen
material. Generally, vegetation accounts for less than 15% of total cover.
101
-------
Appendix C. Ecosystem Attributes for Ecological End-Product Metrics and Indicators
Though not part of the formal classification system, a prioritized attributes table has been created
to support identification of metrics and indicators. These attributes can be loosely associated with
Ecological End-Product classes and have been integrated into the FEGS Community Scoping
Tool (Sharpe et al. 2020) and the Metrics Report (Ringold et al. 2020). Attributes do not
represent Ecological End-Product subclasses and have no associated NESCS code. While living
things can be classified within the NESCS Ecological End-Product Classes of Fauna, Flora, and
Fungi using Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS; https://www.itis.gov/). Ecological
End-Product subclasses for the other 5 Ecological End-Product Classes are not yet available.
Ideological Kntl-
I'roduct Class
Kcosvslem .\llrihule
Definition
1. Atmosphere
Air quality
The degree to which air is clean, clear,
and pollution-free.
Wind strength/speed
The speed and force of the wind.
Precipitation
Weather in which something,
including rain, snow, sleet, and/or
hail, is falling from the sky.
Sunlight
Light from the sun.
Temperature
A measure of the warmth or coldness
of the weather or climate.
2. Soil
Soil quantity
The amount of soil present, could be
measured in terms of volume, depth,
and/or extent.
Soil quality
The suitability of soil for use based on
physical, chemical, and/or biological
characteristics.
Substrate quantity
The amount of substrate present,
could be measured in terms of
volume, depth, and/or extent.
Substrate quality
The suitability of substrate for use
based on physical, chemical, and/or
biological characteristics.
3. Water
Water quality
The suitability of water for use based
on physical, chemical, and/or
biological characteristics.
Water quantity
The amount of water present, could be
measured in terms of volume, depth,
total yield, and/or peak flow.
Water movement
The amount of water flowing per unit
of time, includes aspects such as
surface water movement through
watersheds, wave action, etc.
102
-------
r.cologic;il Kntl-
Producl ( hiss
KcosvsU'in Allrihiilc
Dd'inhion
4. Fauna
Fauna community
The interacting animal life present in
the area.
Edible fauna
Fauna fit to be eaten by humans.
Medicinal fauna
Fauna that has healing properties as is
or after processing.
Keystone fauna
Fauna on which other species depend,
its absence would significantly alter
the ecosystem.
Charismatic fauna
Fauna with symbolic value or
widespread popular appeal.
Rare fauna
Fauna that are uncommon or
infrequently encountered.
Pollinating fauna
Fauna that moves pollen from plant to
plant.
Pest predator/depredator fauna
Fauna that prey upon pest species.
Commercially important fauna
Fauna that has importance for
commerce.
Spiritually/culturally important
fauna
Fauna that has importance for spiritual
or cultural practices or beliefs.
5. Flora
Flora community
The interacting plant life present in
the area.
Edible flora
Flora fit to be eaten by humans.
Medicinal flora
Flora that has healing properties as is
or after processing.
Keystone flora
Flora on which other species depend,
its absence would significantly alter
the ecosystem.
Charismatic flora
Flora with symbolic value or
widespread popular appeal.
Rare flora
Flora that are uncommon or
infrequently encountered.
Commercially important flora
Flora that has importance for
commerce.
Spiritually/culturally important
flora
Flora that has importance for spiritual
or cultural practices or beliefs.
6. Fungi
Fungal community
The interacting fungal life present in
the area.
Edible fungi
Fungi fit to be eaten by humans.
Medicinal fungi
Fungi that has healing properties as is
or after processing.
Rare fungi
Fungi that are uncommon or
infrequently encountered.
103
-------
r.cologic;il Kntl-
Producl ( hiss
KcosvsU'in Allrihiilc
Dd'inhion
6. Fungi
Commercially important fungi
Fungi that has importance for
commerce.
Spiritually/culturally important
fungi
Fungi that has importance for spiritual
or cultural practices or beliefs.
7. Other
Natural
Components
Fuel quality
The suitability of material, based on
physical, chemical, and/or biological
characteristics, to produce heat or
power through burning or other
methods.
Fuel quantity
The amount of fuel present, could be
measured in terms of volume, mass,
and/or extent.
Fiber material quantity
The suitability of material, based on
physical, chemical, and/or biological
characteristics, to be used in
production of textiles.
Fiber material quality
The amount of fiber material present,
could be measured in terms of
volume, mass, and/or extent.
Mineral/chemical quantity
The amount of material present, could
be measured in terms of volume,
mass, and/or extent.
Mineral/chemical quality
The suitability of material for use
based on physical, chemical, and/or
biological characteristics.
Presence of other natural
materials for artistic use or
consumption (e.g. shells,
acorns, honey)
The presence and/or extent of
materials suitable for artistic use or
consumption.
8. Composite
Site Appeal
Sounds
The sounds or combination of sounds
arising from the area.
Scents
The scents or combination of scents
arising from the area.
Viewscapes
The views and vistas available in the
area.
Phenomena
(e.g. sunsets,
northern
lights, etc)
Natural phenomena arising from a
combination of environmental
attributes.
Ecological condition
The overall quality of the ecological
system based on physical, chemical,
and biological characteristics.
104
-------
r.cologic;il Kntl-
Producl ( hiss
KcosvsU'in Allrihiilc
Dd'inhion
8. Composite
Open Space
Land that is undeveloped, but may be
landscaped or otherwise in use, and is
available for use.
Extreme
Events
Flooding
The likelihood the area will
experience flooding and the likely
severity of the flooding.
Wildfire
The likelihood the area will
experience wildfire and the likely
severity of the fire.
Extreme
weather
events
The likelihood the area will
experience extreme weather events
and the likely severity of the events.
Earthquakes
The likelihood the area will
experience earthquakes and the likely
severity of the earthquakes.
105
-------
Appendix D. Definitions of Direct Use Classes and Subclasses
Direct Use Class
Definition
1. Direct Use
Direct Use of Ecological End-Product means that the Direct User or Beneficiary directly extracts,
interacts with, or physically senses the Ecological End-Product in its Environment.
2. Non-use
Ecological End-Product is appreciated or valued by humans in a way that does not involve or require
direct use or contact with the Ecological End-Product.
Direct Use Subclass I
Definition
101.Raw material for
transformation
Ecological End-Product is extracted or harvested and transformed into other commercial products.
102.Distribution to other
users
Ecological End-Product is extracted or harvested for distribution to other users.
103.Industrial processing
Ecological End-Product is extracted or harvested and directly used in other ways as a material in
industrial processing.
104.Transportation medium
Ecological End-Product is used in situ as a medium for transporting goods or humans.
105. Waste
disposal/assimilation
Ecological End-Product is used in situ as a sink for assimilating and disposing of waste.
106. Aesthetic appreciation
Ecological End-Product is used in situ for aesthetic (visual and other senses) appreciation, separate
from outdoor/nature recreational, tourist, cultural or spiritual activities.
107. Fuel/energy
Ecological End-Product is directly used as an energy source for commercial production.
108. Support of plant or
animal cultivation
Ecological End-Product is directly used to support human cultivation of plant or animal life.
109. Support or protection of
human health and life or
subsistence
Ecological End-Product is directly used by humans for subsistence, health, or other life support.
106
-------
Direct Use Subclass I
Definition
110. Support for protection of
human property
Ecological End-Product is directly used to protect human property from being damaged.
111. Recreation/tourism
Ecological End-Product is directly used as part of an outdoor recreational or nature tourist activity.
112. Cultural/spiritual
activities
Ecological End-Product is directly used as part of a non-recreational cultural or spiritual activity.
113. Information, science,
education, and research
Ecological End-Product is directly used to support scientific research or education.
114. Other direct use
Ecological End-Product is directly used for other purposes.
201. Existence
Ecological End-Product is of value to people simply because it exists. It is neither used nor directly
experienced. People simply value the knowledge that it exists.
202. Bequest
Ecological End-Product is of value to people now, not because they use or experience it, but rather
because of the value they place on ensuring that the resource can be used, enjoyed, or appreciated
by future generations.
203. Other non-use
Ecological End-Product is appreciated or valued by humans for other reasons (without direct use or
contact).
107
-------
Appendix E. Definitions of Direct User Classes and Subclasses
Direct I ser Class
Definition
1 Industry
Establishments in\ol\ed in the production of goods and scr\iccs.
2 1 louseholds
1 louseholds are social units, such as families, composed of indi\ iduals who share a dwelling
(io\ eminent
Public sector establishments conducting acti\ ities that are not performed In pri\ ale establishments
Direct liser Subclass 1
Definition (from NAICS: )
111. Agriculture,
Forestry, Fishing and
Hunting
The Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting sector comprises establishments primarily engaged in
growing crops, raising animals, harvesting timber, and harvesting fish and other animals from a farm,
ranch, or their natural habitats.
121. Mining, Quarrying,
and Oil and Gas
Extraction
The Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction sector comprises establishments that extract
naturally occurring mineral solids, such as coal and ores; liquid minerals, such as crude petroleum; and
gases, such as natural gas. The term mining is used in the broad sense to include quarrying, well
operations, beneficiating (e.g., crushing, screening, washing, and flotation), and other preparation
customarily performed at the mine site, or as a part of mining activity.
122. Utilities
The Utilities sector comprises establishments engaged in the provision of the following utility services:
electric power, natural gas, steam supply, water supply, and sewage removal.
123. Construction
The Construction sector comprises establishments primarily engaged in the construction of buildings or
engineering projects (e.g., highways and utility systems). Establishments primarily engaged in the
preparation of sites for new construction and establishments primarily engaged in subdividing land for
sale as building sites also are included in this sector.
131. Manufacturing-3 1
The Manufacturing sector comprises establishments engaged in the mechanical, physical, or chemical
transformation of materials, substances, or components into new products. This Direct User Subclass
only includes manufacturing establishments that are classified in NAICS under the 2-digit
Manufacturing code equal to 3 1.
132. Manufacturing-32
The Manufacturing sector comprises establishments engaged in the mechanical, physical, or chemical
transformation of materials, substances, or components into new products. This Direct User Subclass
108
-------
Direct User Subclass I
Definition (from NAICS: https://www.census.sov/eos/www/naics/)
only includes manufacturing establishments that are classified in NAICS under the 2-digit
Manufacturing code equal to 32.
133. Manufacturing-33
The Manufacturing sector comprises establishments engaged in the mechanical, physical, or chemical
transformation of materials, substances, or components into new products. This Direct User Subclass
only includes manufacturing establishments that are classified in NAICS under the 2-digit
Manufacturing code equal to 33.
142. Wholesale Trade
The Wholesale Trade sector comprises establishments engaged in wholesaling merchandise, generally
without transformation, and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise. The merchandise
described in this sector includes the outputs of agriculture, mining, manufacturing, and certain
information industries, such as publishing.
144. Retail Trade-44
The Retail Trade sector comprises establishments engaged in retailing merchandise, generally without
transformation, and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise. This Direct User Subclass
only includes retail trade establishments that are classified in NAICS under the 2-digit Retail Trade
code equal to 45.
145. Retail Trade-45
The Retail Trade sector comprises establishments engaged in retailing merchandise, generally without
transformation, and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise. This Direct User Subclass
only includes retail trade establishments that are classified in NAICS under the 2-digit Retail Trade
code equal to 44.
148. Transportation and
Warehousing-48
The Transportation and Warehousing sector includes industries providing transportation of passengers
and cargo, warehousing and storage for goods, scenic and sightseeing transportation, and support
activities related to modes of transportation. Establishments in these industries use transportation
equipment or transportation related facilities as a productive asset. This Direct User Subclass only
includes transportation and warehousing establishments that are classified in NAICS under the 2-digit
Transportation and Warehousing code equal to 49.
149. Transportation and
Warehousing-49
The Transportation and Warehousing sector includes industries providing transportation of passengers
and cargo, warehousing and storage for goods, scenic and sightseeing transportation, and support
activities related to modes of transportation. Establishments in these industries use transportation
equipment or transportation related facilities as a productive asset. This Direct User Subclass only
includes transportation and warehousing establishments that are classified in NAICS under the 2-digit
Transportation and Warehousing code equal to 48.
109
-------
Direct User Subclass I
Definition (from NAICS: https://www.census.sov/eos/www/naics/)
151. Information
The Information sector comprises establishments engaged in the following processes: (a) producing
and distributing information and cultural products; (b) providing the means to transmit or distribute
these products as well as data or communications; and (c) processing data.
152. Finance and
Insurance
The Finance and Insurance sector comprises establishments primarily engaged in financial transactions
(transactions involving the creation, liquidation, or change in ownership of financial assets) and/or in
facilitating financial transactions.
153. Real Estate and
Rental and Leasing
The Real Estate and Rental and Leasing sector comprises establishments primarily engaged in renting,
leasing, or otherwise allowing the use of tangible or intangible assets, and establishments providing
related services. The major portion of this sector comprises establishments that rent, lease, or otherwise
allow the use of their own assets by others. The assets may be tangible, as is the case of real estate and
equipment, or intangible, as is the case with patents and trademarks.
154. Professional,
Scientific, and Technical
Services
The Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services sector comprises establishments that specialize in
performing professional, scientific, and technical activities for others. These activities require a high
degree of expertise and training. The establishments in this sector specialize according to expertise and
provide these services to clients in a variety of industries and, in some cases, to households.
155. Management of
Companies and
Enterprises
The Management of Companies and Enterprises sector comprises: (1) establishments that hold the
securities of (or other equity interests in) companies and enterprises for the purpose of owning a
controlling interest or influencing management decisions; or (2) establishments (except government
establishments) that administer, oversee, and manage establishments of the company or enterprise and
that normally undertake the strategic or organizational planning and decision-making role of the
company or enterprise.
156. Administrative and
Support and Waste
Management and
Remediation Services
The Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services sector comprises
establishments performing routine support activities for the day-to-day operations of other
organizations. These essential activities are often undertaken in-house by establishments in many
sectors of the economy.
161. Educational Services
The Educational Services sector comprises establishments that provide instruction and training in a
wide variety of subjects. This instruction and training are provided by specialized establishments, such
as schools, colleges, universities, and training centers. These establishments may be privately owned
and operated for profit or not for profit, or they may be publicly owned and operated.
110
-------
Direct User Subclass I
Definition (from NAICS: https://www.census.sov/eos/www/naics/)
162. Health Care and
Social Assistance
The Health Care and Social Assistance sector comprises establishments providing health care and
social assistance for individuals. The sector includes both health care and social assistance because it is
sometimes difficult to distinguish between the boundaries of these two activities.
171. Arts, Entertainment,
and Recreation
The Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation sector includes a wide range of establishments that operate
facilities or provide services to meet varied cultural, entertainment, and recreational interests of their
patrons. This sector comprises: (1) establishments that are involved in producing, promoting, or
participating in live performances, events, or exhibits intended for public viewing; (2) establishments
that preserve and exhibit objects and sites of historical, cultural, or educational interest; and (3)
establishments that operate facilities or provide services that enable patrons to participate in
recreational activities or pursue amusement, hobby, and leisure-time interests.
172. Accommodation and
Food Services
The Accommodation and Food Services sector comprises establishments providing customers with
lodging and/or preparing meals, snacks, and beverages for immediate consumption.
181. Other Services
(except Public
Administration)
The Other Services (except Public Administration) sector comprises establishments engaged in
providing services not specifically provided for elsewhere in the classification system. Establishments
in this sector are primarily engaged in activities such as equipment and machinery repairing, promoting
or administering religious activities, grantmaking, advocacy, and providing drycleaning and laundry
services, personal care services, death care services, pet care services, photofinishing services,
temporary parking services, and dating services.
392. Public
Administration
The Public Administration sector consists of establishments of federal, state, and local government
agencies that administer, oversee, and manage public programs and have executive, legislative, or
judicial authority over other institutions within a given area. These agencies also set policy, create
laws, adjudicate civil and criminal legal cases, and provide for public safety and for national defense.
In general, government establishments in the Public Administration sector oversee governmental
programs and activities that are not performed by private establishments. ... [Government
establishments engaged in the production of private-sector-like goods and services should be classified
in the same industry as private-sector establishments engaged in similar activities.
399. Other Government
Other Government includes public sector establishments not included in the other NAICS categories.
Ill
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
1111. Crop Production
NAICS 3 digit code: 111 - Industries in the Crop Production subsector grow crops mainly for food
and fiber. The subsector comprises establishments, such as farms, orchards, groves, greenhouses,
and nurseries, primarily engaged in growing crops, plants, vines, or trees and their seeds.
1112. Animal Production and
Aquaculture
NAICS 3 digit code: 112 - Industries in the Animal Production and Aquaculture subsector raise or
fatten animals for the sale of animals or animal products and/or raise aquatic plants and animals in
controlled or selected aquatic environments for the sale of aquatic plants, animals, or their products.
The subsector includes establishments, such as ranches, farms, and feedlots, primarily engaged in
keeping, grazing, breeding, or feeding animals. These animals are kept for the products they produce
or for eventual sale. The animals are generally raised in various environments, from total
confinement or captivity to feeding on an open range pasture.
1113. Forestry and Logging
NAICS 3 digit code: 113 - Industries in the Forestry and Logging subsector grow and harvest timber
on a long production cycle (i.e., of 10 years or more). Long production cycles use different
production processes than short production cycles, which require more horticultural interventions
prior to harvest, resulting in processes more similar to those found in the Crop Production subsector.
Consequently, Christmas tree production and other production involving production cycles of less
than 10 years, are classified in the Crop Production subsector.
1114. Fishing, Hunting and
Trapping
NAICS 3 digit code: 114 - Industries in the Fishing, Hunting and Trapping subsector harvest fish
and other wild animals from their natural habitats and are dependent upon a continued supply of the
natural resource. The harvesting of fish is the predominant economic activity of this subsector and it
usually requires specialized vessels that, by the nature of their size, configuration and equipment,
are not suitable for any other type of production, such as transportation.
1115. Support Activities for
Agriculture and Forestry
NAICS 3 digit code: 115 - Industries in the Support Activities for Agriculture and Forestry
subsector provide support services that are an essential part of agricultural and forestry production.
These support activities may be performed by the agriculture or forestry producing establishment or
conducted independently as an alternative source of inputs required for the production process for a
given crop, animal, or forestry industry. Establishments that primarily perform these activities
independent of the agriculture or forestry producing establishment are in this subsector.
1211. Oil and Gas Extraction
NAICS 3 digit code: 211 - Industries in the Oil and Gas Extraction subsector operate and/or develop
oil and gas field properties.
112
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
1212. Mining (except Oil
and Gas)
NAICS 3 digit code: 212 - Industries in the Mining (except Oil and Gas) subsector primarily engage
in mining, mine site development, and beneficiating (i.e., preparing) metallic minerals and
nonmetallic minerals, including coal.
1213. Support Activities for
Mining
NAICS 3 digit code: 213 - Industries in the Support Activities for Mining subsector group
establishments primarily providing support services, on a contract or fee basis, required for the
mining and quarrying of minerals and for the extraction of oil and gas.
1221. Utilities
NAICS 3 digit code: 221 - Industries in the Utilities subsector provide electric power, natural gas,
steam supply, water supply, and sewage removal through a permanent infrastructure of lines, mains,
and pipes. Establishments are grouped together based on the utility service provided and the
particular system or facilities required to perform the service.
1236. Construction of
Buildings
NAICS 3 digit code: 236 - The Construction of Buildings subsector comprises establishments
primarily responsible for the construction of buildings. The work performed may include new work,
additions, alterations, or maintenance and repairs.
1237. Heavy and Civil
Engineering Construction
NAICS 3 digit code: 237 - The Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction subsector comprises
establishments whose primary activity is the construction of entire engineering projects (e.g.,
highways and dams), and specialty trade contractors, whose primary activity is the production of a
specific component for such projects.
1238. Specialty Trade
Contractors
NAICS 3 digit code: 238 - The Specialty Trade Contractors subsector comprises establishments
whose primary activity is performing specific activities (e.g., pouring concrete, site preparation,
plumbing, painting, and electrical work) involved in building construction or other activities that are
similar for all types of construction, but that are not responsible for the entire project.
1311. Food Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 311 - Industries in the Food Manufacturing subsector transform livestock and
agricultural products into products for intermediate or final consumption. The industry groups are
distinguished by the raw materials (generally of animal or vegetable origin) processed into food
products.
1312. Beverage and Tobacco
Product Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 312 - Industries in the Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing subsector
manufacture beverages and tobacco products. The Beverage Manufacturing industry group includes
three types of establishments: (1) those that manufacture nonalcoholic beverages; (2) those that
manufacture alcoholic beverages through the fermentation process; and (3) those that produce
113
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
distilled alcoholic beverages. Ice manufacturing, while not a beverage, is included with nonalcoholic
beverage manufacturing because it uses the same production process as water purification.
1313. Textile Mills
NAICS 3 digit code: 313 - Industries in the Textile Mills subsector group establishments that
transform a basic fiber (natural or synthetic) into a product, such as yarn or fabric that is further
manufactured into usable items, such as apparel, sheets, towels, and textile bags for individual or
industrial consumption. The further manufacturing may be performed in the same establishment and
classified in this subsector, or it may be performed at a separate establishment and be classified
elsewhere in manufacturing.
1314. Textile Product Mills
NAICS 3 digit code: 314 - Industries in the Textile Product Mills subsector group establishments
that make textile products (except apparel). With a few exceptions, processes used by these
establishments are generally cut and sew (i.e., purchasing fabric and cutting and sewing to make
nonapparel textile products, such as sheets and towels).
1315. Apparel
Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 315 - Industries in the Apparel Manufacturing subsector group establishments
with two distinct manufacturing processes: (1) cut and sew (i.e., purchasing fabric and cutting and
sewing to make a garment); and (2) the manufacture of garments in establishments that first knit
fabric and then cut and sew the fabric into a garment.
1316. Leather and Allied
Product Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 316 - Establishments in the Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing
subsector transform hides into leather by tanning or curing and fabricating the leather into products
for final consumption. This subsector also includes the manufacture of similar products from other
materials, including products (except apparel) made from "leather substitutes," such as rubber,
plastics, or textiles.
1321. Wood Product
Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 321 - Establishments in the Wood Product Manufacturing subsector
manufacture wood products, such as lumber, plywood, veneers, wood containers, wood flooring,
wood trusses, manufactured homes (i.e., mobile homes), and prefabricated wood buildings.
1322. Paper Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 322 - Industries in the Paper Manufacturing subsector make pulp, paper, or
converted paper products. The manufacturing of these products is grouped together because they
constitute a series of vertically connected processes. More than one is often carried out in a single
establishment.
1323. Printing and Related
Support Activities
NAICS 3 digit code: 323 - Industries in the Printing and Related Support Activities subsector print
products, such as newspapers, books, labels, business cards, stationery, business forms, and other
114
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
materials, and perform support activities, such as data imaging, platemaking services, and
bookbinding.
1324. Petroleum and Coal
Products Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 324 - The Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing subsector is based on
the transformation of crude petroleum and coal into usable products. The dominant process is
petroleum refining that involves the separation of crude petroleum into component products through
such techniques as cracking and distillation.
1325. Chemical
Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 325 - The Chemical Manufacturing subsector is based on the transformation of
organic and inorganic raw materials by a chemical process and the formulation of products.
1326. Plastics and Rubber
Products Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 326 - Industries in the Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing subsector
make goods by processing plastics materials and raw rubber.
1327. Nonmetallic Mineral
Product Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 327 - The Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing subsector transforms
mined or quarried nonmetallic minerals, such as sand, gravel, stone, clay, and refractory materials,
into products for intermediate or final consumption
1331. Primary Metal
Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 331 - Industries in the Primary Metal Manufacturing subsector smelt and/or
refine ferrous and nonferrous metals from ore, pig or scrap, using electrometallurgical and other
process metallurgical techniques. Establishments in this subsector also manufacture metal alloys and
superalloys by introducing other chemical elements to pure metals.
1332. Fabricated Metal
Product Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 332 - Industries in the Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing subsector
transform metal into intermediate or end products, other than machinery, computers and electronics,
and metal furniture, or treat metals and metal formed products fabricated elsewhere.
1333. Machinery
Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 333 - Industries in the Machinery Manufacturing subsector create end products
that apply mechanical force, for example, the application of gears and levers, to perform work.
1334. Computer and
Electronic Product
Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 334 - Industries in the Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
subsector group establishments that manufacture computers, computer peripherals, communications
equipment, and similar electronic products, and establishments that manufacture components for
such products.
1335. Electrical Equipment,
Appliance, and Component
Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 335 - Industries in the Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component
Manufacturing subsector manufacture products that generate, distribute and use electrical power.
115
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
1336. Transportation
Equipment Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 336 - Industries in the Transportation Equipment Manufacturing subsector
produce equipment for transporting people and goods. Transportation equipment is a type of
machinery. An entire subsector is devoted to this activity because of the significance of its economic
size in all three North American countries.
1337. Furniture and Related
Product Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 337 - Industries in the Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing subsector
make furniture and related articles, such as mattresses, window blinds, cabinets, and fixtures. The
processes used in the manufacture of furniture include the cutting, bending, molding, laminating,
and assembly of such materials as wood, metal, glass, plastics, and rattan.
1339. Miscellaneous
Manufacturing
NAICS 3 digit code: 339 - Industries in the Miscellaneous Manufacturing subsector make a wide
range of products that cannot readily be classified in specific NAICS subsectors in manufacturing.
1423. Merchant Wholesalers,
Durable Goods
NAICS 3 digit code: 423 - Industries in the Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods subsector sell
capital or durable goods to other businesses. Merchant wholesalers generally take title to the goods
that they sell; in other words, they buy and sell goods on their own account.
1424. Merchant Wholesalers,
Nondurable Goods
NAICS 3 digit code: 424 - Industries in the Merchant Wholesalers, Nondurable Goods subsector sell
nondurable goods to other businesses. Nondurable goods are items generally with a normal life
expectancy of less than three years.
1425. Wholesale Electronic
Markets and Agents and
Brokers
NAICS 3 digit code: 425 - Industries in the Wholesale Electronic Markets and Agents and Brokers
subsector arrange for the sale of goods owned by others, generally on a fee or commission basis.
They act on behalf of the buyers and sellers of goods. This subsector contains agents and brokers as
well as business-to-business electronic markets that facilitate wholesale trade.
1441. Motor Vehicle and
Parts Dealers
NAICS 3 digit code: 441 - Industries in the Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers subsector retail motor
vehicles and parts from fixed point-of-sale locations. Establishments in this subsector typically
operate from a showroom and/or an open lot where the vehicles are on display.
1442. Furniture and Home
Furnishings Stores
NAICS 3 digit code: 442 - Industries in the Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores subsector retail
new furniture and home furnishings from fixed point-of-sale locations. Establishments in this
subsector usually operate from showrooms and have substantial areas for the presentation of their
products. Many offer interior decorating services in addition to the sale of products.
1443. Electronics and
Appliance Stores
NAICS 3 digit code: 443 - Industries in the Electronics and Appliance Stores subsector retail new
electronics and appliances from point-of-sale locations.
116
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
1444. Building Material and
Garden Equipment and
Supplies Dealers
NAICS 3 digit code: 444 - Industries in the Building Material and Garden Equipment and Supplies
Dealers subsector retail new building material and garden equipment and supplies from fixed point-
of-sale locations.
1445. Food and Beverage
Stores
NAICS 3 digit code: 445 - Industries in the Food and Beverage Stores subsector usually retail food
and beverage merchandise from fixed point-of-sale locations.
1446. Health and Personal
Care Stores
NAICS 3 digit code: 446 - Industries in the Health and Personal Care Stores subsector retail health
and personal care merchandise from fixed point-of-sale locations.
1447. Gasoline Stations
NAICS 3 digit code: 447 - Industries in the Gasoline Stations subsector retail automotive fuels (e.g.,
gasoline, diesel fuel, gasohol, alternative fuels) and automotive oils or retail these products in
combination with convenience store items. These establishments have specialized equipment for
storing and dispensing automotive fuels.
1448. Clothing and Clothing
Accessories Stores
NAICS 3 digit code: 448 - Industries in the Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores subsector
retail new clothing and clothing accessories from fixed point-of-sale locations. Establishments in
this subsector have similar display equipment and staff that is knowledgeable regarding fashion
trends and the proper match of styles, colors, and combinations of clothing and accessories to the
characteristics and tastes of the customer.
1451. Sporting Goods,
Hobby, Musical Instrument,
and Book Stores
NAICS 3 digit code: 451 - Industries in the Sporting Goods, Hobby, Musical Instrument, and Book
Stores subsector are engaged in retailing and providing expertise on the use of sporting equipment
or supplies for other specific leisure activities, such as needlework and musical instruments. Book
stores are also included in this subsector.
1452. General Merchandise
Stores
NAICS 3 digit code: 452 - Industries in the General Merchandise Stores subsector retail new general
merchandise from fixed point-of-sale locations.
1453. Miscellaneous Store
Retailers
NAICS 3 digit code: 453 - Industries in the Miscellaneous Store Retailers subsector retail
merchandise from fixed point-of-sale locations (except new or used motor vehicles and parts; new
furniture and home furnishings; new appliances and electronic products; new building materials and
garden equipment and supplies; food and beverages; health and personal care goods; gasoline; new
clothing and accessories; and new sporting goods, hobby goods, books, and music).
1454. Nonstore Retailers
NAICS 3 digit code: 454 - Industries in the Nonstore Retailers subsector retail merchandise using
methods, such as the broadcasting of infomercials, the broadcasting and publishing of direct-
117
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
response advertising, the publishing of paper and electronic catalogs, door-to-door solicitation, in-
home demonstration, selling from portable stalls, and distribution through vending machines.
1481. Air Transportation
NAICS 3 digit code: 481 - Industries in the Air Transportation subsector provide air transportation
of passengers and/or cargo using aircraft, such as airplanes and helicopters. The subsector
distinguishes scheduled from nonscheduled air transportation.
1482. Rail Transportation
NAICS 3 digit code: 482 - Industries in the Rail Transportation subsector provide rail transportation
of passengers and/or cargo using railroad rolling stock. The railroads in this subsector primarily
either operate on networks, with physical facilities, labor force, and equipment spread over an
extensive geographic area, or operate over a short distance on a local rail line.
1483. Water Transportation
NAICS 3 digit code: 483 - Industries in the Water Transportation subsector provide water
transportation of passengers and cargo using watercraft, such as ships, barges, and boats.
1484. Truck Transportation
NAICS 3 digit code: 484 - Industries in the Truck Transportation subsector provide over-the-road
transportation of cargo using motor vehicles, such as trucks and tractor trailers.
1485. Transit and Ground
Passenger Transportation
NAICS 3 digit code: 485 - Industries in the Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation subsector
include a variety of passenger transportation activities, such as urban transit systems; chartered bus,
school bus, and interurban bus transportation; and taxis.
1486. Pipeline
Transportation
NAICS 3 digit code: 486 - Industries in the Pipeline Transportation subsector use transmission
pipelines to transport products, such as crude oil, natural gas, refined petroleum products, and slurry.
Industries are identified based on the products transported (i.e., pipeline transportation of crude oil,
natural gas, refined petroleum products, and other products).
1487. Scenic and Sightseeing
Transportation
NAICS 3 digit code: 487 - Industries in the Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation subsector utilize
transportation equipment to provide recreation and entertainment. These activities have a production
process distinct from passenger transportation carried out for the purpose of other types of for-hire
transportation.
1488. Support Activities for
Transportation
NAICS 3 digit code: 488 - Industries in the Support Activities for Transportation subsector provide
services which support transportation. These services may be provided to transportation carrier
establishments or to the general public. This subsector includes a wide array of establishments,
including air traffic control services, marine cargo handling, and motor vehicle towing.
118
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
1491. Postal Service
NAICS 3 digit code: 491 - The Postal Service subsector includes the activities of the National Post
Office and its subcontractors operating under a universal service obligation to provide mail services,
and using the infrastructure required to fulfill that obligation.
1492. Couriers and
Messengers
NAICS 3 digit code: 492 - Industries in the Couriers and Messengers subsector provide intercity,
local, and/or international delivery of parcels and documents (including express delivery services)
without operating under a universal service obligation.
1493. Warehousing and
Storage
NAICS 3 digit code: 493 - Industries in the Warehousing and Storage subsector are primarily
engaged in operating warehousing and storage facilities for general merchandise, refrigerated goods,
and other warehouse products. These establishments provide facilities to store goods.
1511. Publishing Industries
(except Internet)
NAICS 3 digit code: 511 - Industries in the Publishing Industries (except Internet) subsector group
establishments engaged in the publishing of newspapers, magazines, other periodicals, and books, as
well as directory and mailing list and software publishing. In general, these establishments, which
are known as publishers, issue copies of works for which they usually possess copyright.
1512. Motion Picture and
Sound Recording Industries
NAICS 3 digit code: 512 - Industries in the Motion Picture and Sound Recording Industries
subsector group establishments involved in the production and distribution of motion pictures and
sound recordings.
1515. Broadcasting (except
Internet)
NAICS 3 digit code: 515 - Industries in the Broadcasting (except Internet) subsector include
establishments that create content or acquire the right to distribute content and subsequently
broadcast the content.
1517. Telecommunications
NAICS 3 digit code: 517 - Industries in the Telecommunications subsector group establishments
that provide telecommunications and the services related to that activity (e.g., telephony, including
Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP); cable and satellite television distribution services; Internet
access; telecommunications reselling services). The Telecommunications subsector is primarily
engaged in operating and/or providing access to facilities for the transmission of voice, data, text,
sound, and video.
1518. Data Processing,
Hosting, and Related
Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 518 - Industries in the Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services
subsector group establishments that provide the infrastructure for hosting and/or data processing
services.
1519. Other Information
Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 519 - Industries in the Other Information Services subsector group
establishments supplying information, storing and providing access to information, searching and
119
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
retrieving information, operating Web sites that use search engines to allow for searching
information on the Internet, or publishing and/or broadcasting content exclusively on the Internet.
The main components of the subsector are news syndicates, libraries, archives, exclusive Internet
publishing and/or broadcasting, and Web search portals.
1521. Monetary Authorities-
Central Bank
NAICS 3 digit code: 521 - The Monetary Authorities-Central Bank subsector groups establishments
that engage in performing central banking functions, such as issuing currency, managing the
Nation's money supply and international reserves, holding deposits that represent the reserves of
other banks and other central banks, and acting as a fiscal agent for the central government.
1522. Credit Intermediation
and Related Activities
NAICS 3 digit code: 522 - Industries in the Credit Intermediation and Related Activities subsector
group establishments that: (1) lend funds raised from depositors; (2) lend funds raised from credit
market borrowing; or (3) facilitate the lending of funds or issuance of credit by engaging in such
activities as mortgage and loan brokerage, clearinghouse and reserve services, and check cashing
services.
1523. Securities, Commodity
Contracts, and Other
Financial Investments and
Related Activities
NAICS 3 digit code: 523 - Industries in the Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other Financial
Investments and Related Activities subsector group establishments that are primarily engaged in one
of the following: (1) underwriting securities issues and/or making markets for securities and
commodities; (2) acting as agents (i.e., brokers) between buyers and sellers of securities and
commodities; (3) providing securities and commodity exchange services; and (4) providing other
services, such as managing portfolios of assets; providing investment advice; and trust, fiduciary,
and custody services.
1524. Insurance Carriers and
Related Activities
NAICS 3 digit code: 524 - Industries in the Insurance Carriers and Related Activities subsector
group establishments that are primarily engaged in one of the following: (1) underwriting (assuming
the risk, assigning premiums, and so forth) annuities and insurance policies; or (2) facilitating such
underwriting by selling insurance policies and by providing other insurance and employee benefit
related services.
1525. Funds, Trusts, and
Other Financial Vehicles
NAICS 3 digit code: 525 - Industries in the Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles subsector
group legal entities (i.e., funds, plans, and/or programs) organized to pool securities or other assets
on behalf of shareholders or beneficiaries of employee benefit or other trust funds.
1531. Real Estate
NAICS 3 digit code: 531 - Industries in the Real Estate subsector group establishments primarily
engaged in renting or leasing real estate to others; managing real estate for others; selling, buying, or
120
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
renting real estate for others; and providing other real estate related services, such as appraisal
services.
1532. Rental and Leasing
Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 532 - Industries in the Rental and Leasing Services subsector include
establishments that provide a wide array of tangible goods, such as automobiles, computers,
consumer goods, and industrial machinery and equipment, to customers in return for a periodic
rental or lease payment.
1533. Lessors of
Nonfinancial Intangible
Assets (except Copyrighted
Works)
NAICS 3 digit code: 533 - Industries in the Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except
Copyrighted Works) subsector include establishments primarily engaged in assigning rights to
assets, such as patents, trademarks, brand names, and/or franchise agreements, for which a royalty
payment or licensing fee is paid to the asset holder. Establishments in this subsector own the
patents, trademarks, and/or franchise agreements that they allow others to use or reproduce for a fee
and may or may not have created those assets.
1541. Professional,
Scientific, and Technical
Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 541 - Industries in the Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
subsector group establishments engaged in processes where human capital is the major input. These
establishments make available the knowledge and skills of their employees, often on an assignment
basis, where an individual or team is responsible for the delivery of services to the client. The
individual industries of this subsector are defined on the basis of the particular expertise and training
of the services provider.
1551. Management of
Companies and Enterprises
NAICS 3 digit code: 551 - Industries in the Management of Companies and Enterprises subsector
include three main types of establishments: (1) those that hold the securities of (or other equity
interests in) companies and enterprises; (2) those (except government establishments) that
administer, oversee, and manage other establishments of the company or enterprise but do not hold
the securities of these establishments; and (3) those that both administer, oversee, and manage other
establishments of the company or enterprise and hold the securities of (or other equity interests in)
these establishments. Those establishments that administer, oversee, and manage normally
undertake the strategic or organizational planning and decision-making role of the company or
enterprise.
1561. Administrative and
Support Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 561 - Industries in the Administrative and Support Services subsector group
establishments engaged in activities that support the day-to-day operations of other organizations.
The processes employed in this sector (e.g., general management, personnel administration, clerical
121
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
activities, cleaning activities) are often integral parts of the activities of establishments found in all
sectors of the economy.
1562. Waste Management
and Remediation Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 562 - Industries in the Waste Management and Remediation Services subsector
group establishments engaged in the collection, treatment, and disposal of waste materials. This
includes establishments engaged in local hauling of waste materials; operating materials recovery
facilities (i.e., those that sort recyclable materials from the trash stream); providing remediation
services (i.e., those that provide for the cleanup of contaminated buildings, mine sites, soil, or
ground water); and providing septic pumping and other miscellaneous waste management services.
1611. Educational Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 611 - Industries in the Educational Services subsector provide instruction and
training in a wide variety of subjects. The instruction and training are provided by specialized
establishments, such as schools, colleges, universities, and training centers.
1621. Ambulatory Health
Care Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 621 - Industries in the Ambulatory Health Care Services subsector provide
health care services directly or indirectly to ambulatory patients and do not usually provide inpatient
services. Health practitioners in this subsector provide outpatient services, with the facilities and
equipment not usually being the most significant part of the production process.
1622. Hospitals
NAICS 3 digit code: 622 - Industries in the Hospitals subsector provide medical, diagnostic, and
treatment services that include physician, nursing, and other health services to inpatients and the
specialized accommodation services required by inpatients. Hospitals may also provide outpatient
services as a secondary activity. Establishments in the Hospitals subsector provide inpatient health
services, many of which can only be provided using the specialized facilities and equipment that
form a significant and integral part of the production process.
1623. Nursing and
Residential Care Facilities
NAICS 3 digit code: 623 - Industries in the Nursing and Residential Care Facilities subsector
provide residential care combined with either nursing, supervisory, or other types of care as required
by the residents. In this subsector, the facilities are a significant part of the production process, and
the care provided is a mix of health and social services with the health services being largely some
level of nursing services.
1624. Social Assistance
NAICS 3 digit code: 624 - Industries in the Social Assistance subsector provide a wide variety of
social assistance services directly to their clients. These services do not include residential or
accommodation services, except on a short-stay basis.
122
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
1711. Performing Arts,
Spectator Sports, and Related
Industries
NAICS 3 digit code: 711 - Industries in the Performing Arts, Spectator Sports, and Related
Industries subsector group establishments that produce or organize and promote live presentations
involving the performances of actors and actresses, singers, dancers, musical groups and artists,
athletes, and other entertainers, including independent (i.e., freelance) entertainers and the
establishments that manage their careers
1712. Museums, Historical
Sites, and Similar
Institutions
NAICS 3 digit code: 712 - Industries in the Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
subsector engage in the preservation and exhibition of objects, sites, and natural wonders of
historical, cultural, and/or educational value.
1713. Amusement,
Gambling, and Recreation
Industries
NAICS 3 digit code: 713 - Industries in the Amusement, Gambling, and Recreation Industries
subsector: (1) operate facilities where patrons can primarily engage in sports, recreation,
amusement, or gambling activities; and/or (2) provide other amusement and recreation services,
such as supplying and servicing amusement devices in places of business operated by others;
operating sports teams, clubs, or leagues engaged in playing games for recreational purposes; and
guiding tours without using transportation equipment.
1721. Accommodation and
Food Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 721 - Industries in the Accommodation subsector provide lodging or short-
term accommodations for travelers, vacationers, and others. There is a wide range of establishments
in these industries. Some provide lodging only, while others provide meals, laundry services, and
recreational facilities, as well as lodging. Lodging establishments are classified in this subsector
even if the provision of complementary services generates more revenue. The types of
complementary services provided vary from establishment to establishment.
1722. Food Services and
Drinking Places
NAICS 3 digit code: 722 - Industries in the Food Services and Drinking Places subsector prepare
meals, snacks, and beverages to customer order for immediate on-premises and off-premises
consumption. There is a wide range of establishments in these industries. Some provide food and
drink only, while others provide various combinations of seating space, waiter/waitress services, and
incidental amenities, such as limited entertainment.
1811. Repair and
Maintenance
NAICS 3 digit code: 811 - Industries in the Repair and Maintenance subsector restore machinery,
equipment, and other products to working order. These establishments also typically provide general
or routine maintenance (i.e., servicing) on such products to ensure they work efficiently and to
prevent breakdown and unnecessary repairs.
123
-------
Direct User Subclass II
Definition (fromNAICS: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/)
1812. Personal and Laundry
Services
NAICS 3 digit code: 812 - Industries in the Personal and Laundry Services subsector group
establishments that provide personal and laundry services to individuals, households, and
businesses. Services performed include: personal care services; death care services; laundry and
drycleaning services; and a wide range of other personal services, such as pet care (except
veterinary) services, photofinishing services, temporary parking services, and dating services.
1813. Religious,
Grantmaking, Civic,
Professional, and Similar
Organizations
NAICS 3 digit code: 813 - Industries in the Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and
Similar Organizations subsector group establishments that organize and promote religious activities;
support various causes through grantmaking; advocate various social and political causes; and
promote and defend the interests of their members.
3921. Executive, Legislative,
and Other General
Government Support
NAICS 3 digit code: 921 - The Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support
subsector groups offices of government executives, legislative bodies, public finance, and general
government support.
3922. Justice, Public Order,
and Safety Activities
NAICS 3 digit code: 922 - The Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities subsector groups
government establishments engaged in the administration of justice, public order, and safety
programs.
3923. Administration of
Human Resource Programs
NAICS 3 digit code: 923 - The Administration of Human Resource Programs subsector groups
government establishments primarily engaged in the administration of human resource programs.
3924. Administration of
Environmental Quality
Programs
NAICS 3 digit code: 924 - The Administration of Environmental Quality Programs subsector groups
government establishments primarily engaged in the administration of environmental quality.
3925. Administration of
Housing Programs, Urban
Planning, and Community
Development
NAICS 3 digit code: 925 - The Administration of Housing Programs, Urban Planning, and
Community Development subsector groups government establishments primarily engaged in the
administration of housing, urban planning, and community development.
3926. Administration of
Economic Programs
NAICS 3 digit code: 926 - This subsector comprises government establishments primarily engaged
in the administration of economic programs.
3927. Space Research and
Technology
NAICS 3 digit code: 927 - This subsector comprises government establishments that conduct space
research.
3928. National Security and
International Affairs
NAICS 3 digit code: 928 - This subsector comprises government establishments primarily engaged
in national security and international affairs.
124
-------
Appendix F. Definitions of Beneficiary Classes and Subclasses
Beneficiary Class
Definition
01. Agricultural
This class includes Beneficiaries who use Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for
agricultural or forest production activities.
02.
C ommerci al/Industri al
This class includes Beneficiaries who use Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for industrial
or commercial production activities not included in the other classes or subclasses.
03. Government,
Municipal, and
Residential
This class includes governmental, military, and residential Beneficiaries who use Ecological End-
Products (also known as FEGs) in ways not included in the other classes or subclasses.
04. Commercial/Military
Transportation
This class includes military and commercial Beneficiaries who use Ecological End-Products (also
known as FEGs) as a media to transport goods or people.
05. Subsistence
This class includes Beneficiaries who use Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) to support
subsistence activities.
06. Recreational
This class includes Beneficiaries who use Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) to support
recreational activities.
07. Inspirational
This class includes Beneficiaries who use or appreciate Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs)
as a source of inspiration.
08. Learning
This class includes Beneficiaries who use Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for
educational or scientific research activities.
09. Non-Use
This class includes Beneficiaries who benefit from Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) in
ways that do not require or are not associated with direct use of or contact.
10. Humanity
This class includes everyone, regardless of whether they actively recognize or appreciate the Ecological
End-Products (also known as FEGs), because the FEGs are available to everyone and used by everyone
to live (e.g., air for breathing).
Beneficiary Subclass I
Definition
011. Livestock Grazers
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) to graze livestock.
012. Agricultural
Processors
This Beneficiary primarily consumes Water for washing edible products.
125
-------
Beneficiary Subclass I
Definition
013. Aquaculturists
This Beneficiary farms aquatic Fauna, such as fish, shrimp, oysters, etc. Those who cultivate aquatic
Flora are accounted for under the Farmer Beneficiary subclass.
014. Farmers
This Beneficiary may plant annual crops (e.g., corn, soybeans, rice) or introduce cultivars that produce
perennial, long-term crops (e.g., hay, grapes, cranberries, watercress).
015. Foresters
This Beneficiary introduces tree cultivars and nurtures those cultivars as they grow into trees, which are
harvested. The rotation for the tree crops may be as short as 10 years or many decades.
016. Other Agricultural
Beneficiaries
Agricultural Beneficiaries not captured in the other agricultural subclasses.
021. Food Extractors
This Beneficiary utilizes the wild abundance of edible organisms (i.e., non-cultivated or bred) for
commercial use or sale. Includes commercial fishing and hunting (if legal) but excludes subsistence
beneficiaries.
022. Timber, Fiber, and
Ornamental Extractors
This Beneficiary relies on Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for products used or sold
commercially.
023. Industrial
Processors
This Beneficiary primarily consumes Water for cooling, producing pulp, etc. Except for agricultural
processing which is a separate subclass.
024. Private Energy
Generators
This Beneficiary relies on Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for energy or placement of
power generation structures, including dams, wind, water, or wave turbines, solar panels, geothermal
systems, etc.
025. Pharmaceutical and
Food Supplement
Suppliers
This Beneficiary collects organisms or wild products from organisms that are used as or for the basis of
pharmaceuticals or food supplements for commercial sale.
026. Fur / Hide Trappers
and Hunters
This Beneficiary captures wild Fauna (i.e., not farm-raised or domesticated animals) for fur or hides for
commercial use or sale.
027. Private Drinking
Water Plant Operators
This Beneficiary provides drinking water to a community and may do so by collecting Water from
rivers, reservoirs, lakes, wells, bays, or estuaries. Water is treated and distributed
028.
C ommerci al/Industri al
Property Owner
This Beneficiary uses or benefits from Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) as an owner of
commercial/industrial property and in a way not specified in other commercial/industrial subclasses.
029. Other
C ommerci al/Industri al
Commercial/Industrial beneficiaries not captured in the other commercial/industrial subclasses.
126
-------
Beneficiary Subclass I
Definition
031. Municipal Drinking
Water Plant Operators
This beneficiary provides drinking water to a community and may do so by collecting water from rivers,
reservoirs, lakes, wells, bays, or estuaries. Water is treated and distributed.
032. Residential Property
Owners
This Beneficiary uses or benefits from Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) as an owner of
residential property and in a way not specified in other beneficiary subclasses.
033. Public Sector
Property Owners
This Beneficiary uses or benefits from Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) as an owner of
property and in a way not specified in other government, municipal, and residential subclasses.
034. Military / Coast
Guard
This Beneficiary relies on Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for the placement of
infrastructure (e.g., ports, bases, etc.) or conditions for training activities.
035. Public Energy
Generators
This Beneficiary relies on Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for energy or placement of
power generation structures, including dams, wind, water, or wave turbines, solar panels, geothermal
systems, etc.
036. Other Government,
Municipal, and
Residential
Government, Municipal, and Residential Beneficiaries not captured in the other government, municipal,
and residential subclasses.
041. Transporters of
Goods
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) as a media to transport goods -
specifically, via boats (e.g., barges), and overland/off-road vehicles (e.g., quads). It does not include
railroads (which are covered under other property owners) or cars and trucks on public or private roads
as the roads are covered under other property owners.
042. Transporters of
People
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) as a media to transport people -
specifically, via boats (e.g., barges), and overland/off-road vehicles (e.g., quads). It does not include
railroads (which are covered under property owners) or cars and trucks on public or private roads as the
roads are covered under property owners.
043. Other
Commercial/Military
Transportation
Commercial/Military Transportational Beneficiaries not captured in the other transportation subclasses.
051. Water Subsisters
This Beneficiary relies on a wild source for drinking water and may use wells or cisterns for storage
(i.e., they do not receive municipal drinking water).
052. Food and Medical
Subsisters
This Beneficiary use the abundance of [edible] Flora, Fungi, and Fauna whether collecting, hunting, or
fishing as a major supplement to their existence.
127
-------
Beneficiary Subclass I
Definition
053. Timber, Fiber, and
Fur / Hide Subsisters
This Beneficiary relies on the wild abundance of timber, fiber, and Fauna for fur and hides for survival.
Timber, fiber, and fur and hides used for building material are accounted for in this class.
054. Building Material
Subsisters
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) to provide renewable, non-
cellular material (primarily snow and ice) used for infrastructure and housing for personal use (i.e., not
for commercial sale).
055. Other Subsistence
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for subsistence activities not
covered by the other subsistence subclasses.
061. Experiences and
Viewers
This Beneficiary views and appreciates Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) views and
experiences the Environment.
062. Food Pickers and
Gatherers
This Beneficiary recreationally picks or gathers from the wild abundance of [edible] flora, fungi, and
some fauna (as long as it is not fished or hunted). This Beneficiary has potential contact with water.
063. Hunters
This Beneficiary is primarily interested in hunting mammals and fowl (not flora or fungi) recreationally
(i.e., not for survival or subsistence).
064. Anglers
This Beneficiary fishes recreationally (i.e., not for survival) and includes catch-and-release or catch-
and-consume activities.
065. Waders, Swimmers,
and Divers
This Beneficiary recreates in or under the water by either wading, swimming, or diving (i.e., snorkeling,
SCUBA diving).
066. Boaters
This Beneficiary may use motorized (i.e., motor boats) or non-motorized boats (i.e., canoes, kayaks,
rafts) to recreate.
067. Other Recreational
This Beneficiary engages in nature-based recreational activities not covered by the other recreational
subclasses.
071. Spiritual and
Ceremonial Participants
and Participants of
Celebration
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for spiritual, ceremonial, or
celebratory purposes, such as harvest festivals, seafood festivals, Native American observances,
religious rites (i.e., baptisms, weddings), personal growth, etc.
072. Artists
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for materials and inspiration to
produce art. This class may include writers, cinematographers, and recording artist among others.
073. Other Inspirational
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) as a source of inspiration but in a
way not covered by the other inspirational subclasses
128
-------
Beneficiary Subclass I
Definition
081. Educators and
Students
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) includes both formal and self-
taught educators and students. All parts of the environment are of interest.
082. Researchers
This Beneficiary uses Ecological End-Products (also known as FEGs) for academic and applied
purposes.
083. Other Learning
Learning Beneficiaries not captured in the other learning subclasses
091. People Who Care
(Existence)
Ecological End-Product is of value these Beneficiaries simply because it exists. It is neither used nor
directly experienced. People simply value the knowledge that it exists.
092. People Who Care
(Option /Bequest)
Ecological End-Product is of value to these Beneficiaries now, not because they use or experience it, but
rather because of the value they place on ensuring that the resource can be used, enjoyed, or appreciated
by future generations.
093. Other Non-Use
Non-use beneficiaries not captured in the other non-use subclasses.
101. All Humans
This class includes everyone, regardless of whether they actively recognize or appreciate Ecological
End-Products (also known as FEGs), because the FEGs are available to everyone and used by everyone
to live (e.g., air for breathing).
129
-------
Office of Research
and Development
(8101R)
Washington, DC
20460
EPA/600/R-20/267
127
------- |