Questions and Answers on Bateman and al. 2013
Q1) In your own words, highlight three important messages that stem from
Figure 3 in Bateman et al. (2013). ( 300 word limit)
-
For me the main outcome of this figure is to bring out the incapability of
national (or any large scale) policies to address an optimal gain in all values
(market and ecosystem services, monetary as well as non-monetary values). In fact
because of heterogeneity of natural situation (climate, soil, biophysical processes,
etc.) each specific area will have its own characteristic, its own path of change and
therefore the optimal strategy to maximize the overall gains could be very
different from one place to another. In other words each 2-km grid square will be
matched with its optimal scenario. Thus spatially targeted approach should be
promoted in decision-making in order to be the most efficient in improving
overall values.
-
Another important issue showed in this figure is that the overall gains of
changes will be higher in an approach where we take into account all monetary
values and not only market values and so even with the spatially targeted
approach (optimal scenario for each cell). So even if following a conventional line
(market-based) in the future where the main goal would be to maximize market
benefits (in this case agricultural profit) this analyze illustrates that the gains that
would be made won’t be such high as if policies would try to maximize all
monetary values.
-
Finally it is interesting to see that spatially targeted scenarios and the
overall benefits are nearly identical if biodiversity is taken into account in addition
to all monetary values or not. In fact as we can see in the figure only some areas
show a different “optimal scenario”. This could be explain by the fact that when
spatially targeted policies taking all monetary values into account are applied
biodiversity become a negligible constraint because environmental policies are
already in place and so biodiversity is already “protected” by those policies.
Q2) According to Bateman et al., would the use of the Ecosystem Service
approach for land use planning be beneficial to the country? (100 word limit )
According to Bateman et al. the country would feel different costs and benefits
when including ecosystem services in decision-making. First of all implementation
of different policies spatially would be difficult and more costly than national or
large scale policies. Furthermore the country would have to pay subsidies to
farmers in order to influence their practice in a way to “protect” ecosystem
services in their work. Despite those costs the state will “gain” at least from the
well-being of its citizens. In fact recreational services and urban green space for
example would increase the population happiness and thus public health.
Q3) According to Bateman et al., would the use of the Ecosystem Service
approach for land use planning be beneficial to the private individual? (100
word limit )
Any individuals would benefit (directly of indirectly) from policies including
ecosystem services. In fact, an approach based not only on market will improve
various services provided by nature as well as recreational, air and water quality
that would support all population well-being. In addition a targeted approach of
land use including market goods and ecosystem services would increase the value
of land (quality of soil, crops, etc.) for society by farm gross margins and so would
be redistributed in society.
Q4) To what extent are the methods and the results of this study applicable
to other parts of the world? (100 word limit )
In my opinion those methods could be apply in other part of the world although
not systematically the outcomes. As shown in this paper, the results shows this
trends because United Kingdom is a highly developed country with cheap and
“unlimited” food but with a lack of natural environment and recreational areas. In
this case the change of some “agricultural areas” to “recreational areas” (mainly
around cities) will improve a lot the overall values gains when in less developed
countries the trends could be different or even the opposite.
Q5) Choose a single sentence that captures the main message of the paper
(outside of title and abstract
“It is clear that considering market prices alone can drive decisions for land use
that would deprive society of many other benefits from the environment and
would risk leaving the United Kingdom worse, rather than better.”
Charline Daujat