Valuation

December 7, 2012December 7, 2012

The value of Natura 2000

Speaking of return on conservation actions, which we sort of were a couple of days back:

A new study has produced the first indicative estimate of the overall economic benefits provided by the Natura 2000 network. It suggests that the value could be currently between €200 and €300 billion per year, or 2% to 3% of the EU’s Gross Domestic Product.

That’s from one item in a special Thematic Issue of the European Commission’s news alert organ Science for Environment Policy which focuses on “Management and Monitoring of the NATURA 2000 Network,” (pdf) a network of protected areas that is described in the editorial introducing the issue as the “cornerstone of EU biodiversity policy.”

Natura 2000 site at Bärwurzwiese, Belgium. Photo made available under a CC license by Frank Vassen via Flickr.

Here’s the table of contents the whet your appetite

What does ‘wilderness’ mean?
First EU-wide economic valuation of Natura 2000 network
Improved local management needed for the Natura 2000 network
Natura 2000 Case Study Hoge Kempen: from coal mining landscape to oasis of biodiversity
Improved communication about Natura 2000 may help resolve landowner conflicts
Ecotourism: protecting the nature of Natura 2000 in Latvia
Natura 2000 Case Study Slitere National Park: sustainable tourism in a Natura 2000 site
Natura 2000 Case Study Eurosite – Adaptive Management of Natura 2000 sites
Protected areas act as stepping stones for nature in the face of climate change
New Belgian approach to favourable conservation status for habitats and species of European interest
Sustaining the Natura 2000 network through LIFE

We’ve talked before about Natura 2000 in the context of conservation of crop wild relatives. I’m willing to bet that return on investment doesn’t take into account any species important in crop improvement that the network happens to be protecting. But if you know better, let us know.

December 6, 2012December 6, 2012

The value of ICARDA

ICARDA is deservedly getting much traction with the press at the Doha climate change meeting with the report “Strategies for Combating Climate Change in Drylands Agriculture,” which it has produced in collaboration with the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). A testament to great research over many years; and an open, active communications policy.

Particularly welcome to see the genebank’s role in climate change adaptation clearly highlighted in the report:

Releases of plant genetic materials from ICARDA’s gene banks, which host wild relatives of barley, wheat and legumes, has led to the development of crops with higher yields and greater resistance to a range of biotic stresses. Some varieties also offer large improvements in bread-making quality, nutritional value and other traits.

The document goes so far as to quantify the return on investment from breeding, which is something that you don’t see as often as you should:

That $850 million figure is not detailed further, but the suggestion is that it is built up from examples such as this, of which there are several more outlined in the report:

A drought tolerant variety of chick pea introduced in Turkey had such strong resistance that it was able to withstand the searing temperatures and rainfall scarcity of the 2007 drought. The ‘Gokce’ variety is now used for about 80% of the country’s chickpea production. With a yield advantage of 300 kg/ha over other varieties and world prices of over US$1000/t, this variety brought in an additional US$165 million for Turkish farmers in 2007 alone.

Obviously a significant achievement, and it seems churlish to ask whether it’s entirely a good thing for a country to rely on one variety for 80% of its production of a given crop. Anyway, it seems there are similar impact figures for livestock improvement too. It would be good eventually to see the breakdown by crop, and indeed livestock species, plus of course the level of investment that went into breeding efforts on each species to produce these new varieties and breeds. In the meantime, let’s remind ourselves of what a unique, vital resource the ICARDA genebank is by looking, courtesy of Genesys, at the geographic spread of the material it manages on behalf of the world under an agreement with the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (click to enbiggen), and that it, and the associated data, are, thankfully, safe.

November 7, 2012November 7, 2012

Nibbles: Biodiversity economics, ICARDA social network, Beyond food miles, Heirlooms on BBC, Cannabis, Research funding, Cacao diversity, Agriculture from the air, Sustainable intensification example, Research whine, Japanese botanic garden visit, European PGR network, Tribal Glycene, Youth in agriculture

Oxford Review of Economic Policy has special volume on biodiversity economics. Not much ag, though, settle down.
ICARDA announces on Twitter the existence of a new Facebook page which looks a bit like the old one.
It’s the fertilizer miles, stupid.
Great British Food Revival does heirloom carrots. Oh and beer.
Good news for a particular agricultural biodiversity subsector from Amsterdam and Colorado. The Dude unavailable for comment. For obvious reasons.
If you’re from Ghana, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda and are doing research on Neglected and Underutilized Species you’ll be interested in this call or research proposals from ISF.
Bioversity deconstructs that paper on the spatial analysis of Theobroma diversity. I still don’t quite get why they didn’t do the gap analysis.
Farming from the air. And more along the same lines. Or polygons, I suppose I should say. Can you estimate diversity from the air? I bet you can.
Sustainable intensification in (sort of) action.
Damn rice farmers not playing ball.
Oxford botany geeks visit Japan, identify wood of bench in noodle bar.
13th meeting ECPGR Steering Committee. All the documents you’ll need. And then some.
Soybean as a vegetable. Possibly an acquired taste.
How to keep young people on the farm? “Perhaps the first point to recognise is that the evidence base on which to build policy and programmes is frighteningly thin.”

October 19, 2012October 19, 2012

Nibbles: Tree diversity, Cacao strategy, IFPRI strategy, Caribbean strategy, Mango conservation strategy, Olive migrations, African cassava, African Striga, Ecosystem services, Model plant

Oh gosh, it was Tree Diversity Day and nobody told us.
Bioversity catch up with their own cacao strategy.
And IFPRI has a new one for you to comment on.
Caribbean agriculture gets another signed document to help it along. No word on whether agrobiodiversity featured.
Mango conservation gets organized. But not to the extent of an RSS feed, alas.
California owes Morocco for its olives.
Virus-resistant cassava imminent. Haven’t they been saying this for a while now? And is anyone thinking about what will happen to the virus-susceptible varieties?
Push-pull in the news.
The cost of everything, and the value of nothing, nature edition.
What’s the value of Arabidopsis, then?

September 28, 2012September 28, 2012

Nibbles: Innovative crops, twice, Seed saving, Jatropha, Cimmyt, Common ownership

Of course garlic and dill are innovative crops – if you live in the Pamirs.
So is Stevia, in Spain.
A big new book on saving your own seeds. Ignore the rhetoric, and don’t try this in Europe, folks.
Crops for the Future calls Jatropha a “debacle”. Hard to argue with that.
All about CIMMYT at an agro-biodiversity fair.
Put a price tag on natural resources, and you risk undermining common ownership.