2 June 2011

A Defra-funded study released today shows, for the first time, the economic value of a healthy natural environment. By applying a market value to ‘ecosystem services,’ such as clean air, carbon storage and pollinators, the report’s authors hope to secure greater consideration for nature in future policy decisions. image expired

The UK National Ecosystem Assessment (UK NEA) concludes that nature is worth billions of pounds to the UK economy. They say ‘ecosystem services’ are typically "ignored" and given a "value of zero" by political decision-makers, but hope the assessment can go some way towards changing this.

Professor Bob Watson, Chief Scientist at Defra, said of the report, “There is an urgent need to better manage our ecosystems and the natural resources they provide us with. But until now there has been no clear way of valuing the full range of benefits they provide beyond what we can buy and sell.”

Professor Watson explained the Assessment’s importance, “The UK NEA introduces groundbreaking approaches to measure the value of these services and how they will be affected in future if we do not make the right choices now. The NEA shows that we need a more integrated approach to ecosystem management, involving Government, the private sector, voluntary groups and the public working together to protect the services nature provides.”

Report documents changes to UK biodiversity since Second World War

Looking back over the past 60 years, the report concludes that, whereas 30% of services have been negatively affected, only 20% have begun to improve over the period. Among the services which did improve were crop production (more productive crop varieties and fertilisers saw yields of some cereals double between 1960 and 2010) and the diversity of woodlands species. However, use the biodiversity of farmland birds fell by a dramatic 43% between 1970 and 1998.

Furthermore, aquatic ecosystems were found to be among those most degraded in the report.  Pollution from agricultural fertilisers played a large role in this, according to Defra chief scientist Watson, who is also co-chair of the UK NEA. He said, "The water systems in general are still in bad shape. They are better than they were but the direction of travel is still not where we want it to be.”

NFU and NFU Cymru criticise Environmental Assessment

Although the UK NEA has been welcomed by politicians and policy makers, and appears to be widely replicable, having sparked interest in Germany as well as other European states where similar studies could be conducted, industry groups in the UK have criticised its findings. The groups have called suggestions made in the report, which was compiled by hundreds of UK scientists, “over simplistic” or written them off as “nonsense.”

NFU Cymru president Ed Bailey criticised the practicality of some suggestions made in the report. Bailey said, "The expectation that more money is going to be made [by farmers] from woodland than from stock is nonsense. I have no problem at all with people enjoying the scenery but why does it have to be woodland?”

Bailey claimed food production should always take precedence. He stressed that it is essential to recognise “the importance and value of food production alongside protecting the environment. When you have worked hard to establish a brand like Welsh lamb and beef you have to protect it."

The Welsh Government, which part-funded the report, said it would be integral in developing policies for protecting Wales' natural environment. A spokesperson countered the union’s reaction, "Our environment is central to our quality of life, as well as playing a vital role in our economy. It is very simplistic to pick one element of the report and suggest that it means one use of land is better than another."

The NFU’s chief environment adviser Dr Diane Mitchell also criticised the report, questioning the economic valuations assigned to ecosystem services. Dr Mitchell said, “The model used is far too simplistic and uncertain. Market prices are used to capture the value of agricultural produce, which is then compared against the value of non- market goods like biodiversity. Using such a crude technique does not take into account the fact that market power diminishes farm gate prices to a level below the value which consumers place on their food, as well as ignoring the likely increases in food prices expected over the next 50 years.”

Report will revolutionise the way policy makers view the environment

Professor Steve Albon, of The James Hutton Institute near Aberdeen, also a co-chair of the study, summed up the overall aims of the UK NEA, “The holistic approach we have taken to assessing the ways our well-being depends on the multitude of services delivered by UK ecosystems has reinforced the need to halt the degradation of our land, freshwater and seas. While we can now make more informed decisions to try to ensure the more sustainable use of natural resources we need to continue integrated research to understand how to adapt and mitigate the pressures of continuing population growth and climate change.”

He said the assessment “would make big changes to the way we manage the natural environment."

***