The economic value of ecosystem goods and services: The case of Mogale’s Gate Biodiversity Centre, South Africa

Mudavanhu, Shepherd; Blignaut, James Nelson; Stegmann, Nerine; Barnes, Garth; Prinsloo, Willem; Tuckett, Alistair Sean

doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.06.005

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It directly provides the value of services from markets [46], [47]. For example, [48] calculated the value of grazing service based on the commercial value of the grass. In addition, four papers adopted the travel cost method to provide the value of recreational activities.…”

Section: Revealed Preference Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic valuation of ecosystem services in Africa

Jamouli

Allali

2020

E3S Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystems provide vital services that improve and support livelihoods and human well-being. Consequently, scientific research on ecosystem services (ES) has increased, over the past two decades globally, as well as in Africa. This study provides an overview of existing economic ES valuation methods in Africa using the Web of Science databases. The results highlighted that South Africa recorded the high number of ES valuation publications. The most evaluated ES category was provisioning then regulating services. In terms of economic valuation methods, the market price was the most popular, followed by the contingent valuation and the choice experiment methods. Recommendations are provided for future research in this filed.

show abstract

Section: Revealed Preference Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic valuation of ecosystem services in Africa

Jamouli

Allali

2020

E3S Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Blignaut and Aronson (2008) and Mudavanhu et al. (2017a) argue that the value of natural capital is the services derived from it discounted into perpetuity.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Restoration is therefore not merely an expenditure/cost item that has to be minimised, and that is all too often subject to cost-cutting processes. It is truly an investment in an asset and thus the future welfare of people and the planet (see also Mudavanhu et al., 2017a; Blignaut, 2019). It is therefore fundamental to consider restoration within the context of national security, where such is defined as: … the protection of a nation from attack or other danger by holding adequate armed forces and guarding state secrets.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investing in natural capital and national security: A comparative review of restoration projects in South Africa

Crookes

Blignaut

2019

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does restoration pay? We seek to answer this question by reviewing the benefits and costs of 37 economic values derived from five groups of actual restoration-related case studies in South Africa at various scales. The mean opportunity costs of not restoring are the following (a negative value implies an economic loss to society): i) local level single species studies concerned with clearing invasive alien plants (mean = -$27.24/ha/yr, sd = +/-22.93; n = 5); ii) local level multiple species studies concerned with clearing invasive alien plants (mean = -$289/ha/yr, sd = +/-550.6; n = 14); iii) national level studies concerned with clearing invasive alien plants (mean = -$40.2/ha/yr, sd = +/-17.2; n = 3); iv) non-clearing related restoration (mean = -$52/ha/yr, sd = +/-154.2; n = 10); and v) agricultural land rehabilitation (mean = -$428.1/ha/yr, sd = +/-352.7; n = 5). When these annual values are capitalised (i.e. discounted into perpetuity) to reflect the temporal impact of the foregone benefits of restoration, the losses amount to between 16 and 50 times greater than the annual values. Capitalisation of these values is an important step towards an asset-based approach in the management, restoration and conservation of natural capital. It is a step towards viewing the investment in restoration not merely as an expenditure item to be minimised, but as a truly worthwhile investment in the future wellbeing of both people and the planet – an investment in the national security of the country. More work, however, is required to transfer this value onto the balance sheets of companies in order to entice the private sector to invest more as well as to convert the implicit societal benefits of restoration to explicit company-wide value enhancement opportunities.

show abstract

“…Any restoration or improvement of natural capital is, therefore, seen as an investment and not merely an expense. A study using this approach found that a game farm had considerably more value to the company than they thought (Mudavanhu et al 2017a). Research is needed to evaluate its application to restoration (e.g.…”

Section: Financial and Economic Impacts Of Water Lost Through Invasionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of Plant Invasions on Terrestrial Water Flows in South Africa

Maitre

Blignaut

Clulow

et al. 2020

Biological Invasions in South Africa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considerable advances have been made since the first estimates of the impacts of invasive alien plants on water resources in the early 1990s. A large body of evidence shows that invasive alien plants can increase transpiration and evaporation losses and thus reduce river flows and mean annual runoff. Riparian invasions, and those in areas where groundwater is accessible, have 1.2-2 times the impact of invasions in dryland areas. The magnitude of the impacts is directly related to differences between the invading species and the dominant native species in size, rooting depth and leaf phenology. Information on the impacts has been successfully used to compare the water use of invasive plants and different land cover classes, to quantify the water resource benefits of control measures, and to prioritise areas for control operations. Nationally, the impacts of invasive alien plants on surface water runoff are estimated at 1.44-2.44 billion m 3 per year. The most affected primary catchments (>5% reduction in mean annual runoff) are located in the Western and Eastern Cape, and KwaZulu-Natal. If no remedial action is taken, reductions in surface water runoff could increase to 2.59-3.15 billion m 3 per year, about 50%

show abstract

The economic value of ecosystem goods and services: The case of Mogale’s Gate Biodiversity Centre, South Africa

Cited by 12 publications

References 8 publications

Economic valuation of ecosystem services in Africa

Economic valuation of ecosystem services in Africa

Investing in natural capital and national security: A comparative review of restoration projects in South Africa

Impacts of Plant Invasions on Terrestrial Water Flows in South Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About