Article: Evaluating the return in ecosystem services from investment in public land acquisitions

We evaluate the return on investment (ROI) from public land conservation in the state of Minnesota, USA. We use a spatially-explicit modeling tool, the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST), to estimate how changes in land use and land cover (LULC), including public land acquisitions for conservation, influence the joint provision and value of multiple ecosystem services. We calculate the ROI of a public conservation acquisition as the ratio of the present value of ecosystem services generated by the conservation to the cost of the conservation. For the land scenarios analyzed, carbon sequestration services generated the greatest benefits followed by water quality improvements and recreation opportunities. We found ROI values ranged from 0.21 to 5.28 depending on assumptions about future land use change, service values, and discount rate. Our study suggests conservation is a good investment as long as investments are targeted to areas with low land costs and high service values.

Citing Articles

Analysis of the Spatiotemporal Changes in Selected Ecosystem Services Caused by Free Trade Initiatives in Incheon, Korea.

Choi J, Lee S Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(5).

PMID: 36900820 PMC: 10001573. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20053812.

A Conceptual Framework to Integrate Biodiversity, Ecosystem Function, and Ecosystem Service Models.

Weiskopf S, Myers B, Arce-Plata M, Blanchard J, Ferrier S, Fulton E Bioscience. 2022; 72(11):1062-1073.

PMID: 36506699 PMC: 9718641. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biac074.

Exploring ecosystem carbon storage change and scenario simulation in the Qiantang River source region of China.

Cao L, Kong F, Xu C Sci Prog. 2022; 105(3):368504221113186.

PMID: 36062714 PMC: 10450464. DOI: 10.1177/00368504221113186.

Effects of human demand on conservation planning for biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Watson K, Galford G, Sonter L, Koh I, Ricketts T Conserv Biol. 2019; 33(4):942-952.

PMID: 30614054 PMC: 6850574. DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13276.

Market forces and technological substitutes cause fluctuations in the value of bat pest-control services for cotton.

Lopez-Hoffman L, Wiederholt R, Sansone C, Bagstad K, Cryan P, Diffendorfer J PLoS One. 2014; 9(2):e87912.

PMID: 24498400 PMC: 3912186. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087912.

References

1.

Murdoch W, Ranganathan J, Polasky S, Regetz J . Using return on investment to maximize conservation effectiveness in Argentine grasslands. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010; 107(49):20855-62. PMC: 3000263. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1011851107. View

2.

Dobson , Rodriguez , Roberts , Wilcove . Geographic Distribution of Endangered Species in the United States. Science. 1997; 275(5299):550-3. DOI: 10.1126/science.275.5299.550. View

3.

Lindenmayer D, Hobbs R, Montague-Drake R, Alexandra J, Bennett A, Burgman M . A checklist for ecological management of landscapes for conservation. Ecol Lett. 2007; 11(1):78-91. DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01114.x. View

4.

Nelson E, Polasky S, Lewis D, Plantinga A, Lonsdorf E, White D . Efficiency of incentives to jointly increase carbon sequestration and species conservation on a landscape. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008; 105(28):9471-6. PMC: 2474525. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0706178105. View

5.

Pressey R, Humphries C, Margules C, Vane-Wright R, Williams P . Beyond opportunism: Key principles for systematic reserve selection. Trends Ecol Evol. 2011; 8(4):124-8. DOI: 10.1016/0169-5347(93)90023-I. View

6.

Armsworth P, Daily G, Kareiva P, Sanchirico J . Land market feedbacks can undermine biodiversity conservation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006; 103(14):5403-8. PMC: 1459367. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0505278103. View

7.

Hill J, Polasky S, Nelson E, Tilman D, Huo H, Ludwig L . Climate change and health costs of air emissions from biofuels and gasoline. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009; 106(6):2077-82. PMC: 2634804. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0812835106. View

8.

Myers N, Mittermeier R, Mittermeier C, da Fonseca G, Kent J . Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature. 2000; 403(6772):853-8. DOI: 10.1038/35002501. View

9.

Withey J, Lawler J, Polasky S, Plantinga A, Nelson E, Kareiva P . Maximising return on conservation investment in the conterminous USA. Ecol Lett. 2012; 15(11):1249-1256. DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2012.01847.x. View

10.

Wilson K, Carwardine J, Possingham H . Setting conservation priorities. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009; 1162:237-64. DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04149.x. View

11.

Underwood E, Shaw M, Wilson K, Kareiva P, Klausmeyer K, McBride M . Protecting biodiversity when money matters: maximizing return on investment. PLoS One. 2008; 3(1):e1515. PMC: 2212107. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001515. View

12.

AnDo , Camm , Polasky , Solow . Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation . Science. 1998; 279(5359):2126-8. DOI: 10.1126/science.279.5359.2126. View

Evaluating the Return in Ecosystem Services from Investment in Public Land Acquisitions