1. ‘Top Ten’ Screening Criteria
Assessing Opportunities for an Ecosystem Services Approach
Introduce ourselves
Today, here at ACES, I suspect we’re preaching to the converted – I assume we’re all excited about the potential of ecosystem services. And we probably know thousands of great ideas and hear hundreds of proposals every month for using ecosystem service approaches in conservation. But there are limited funds to support projects – these days extremely limited funds! - so how do we pick the ‘best bets’?
Today we are presenting a set of screening criteria that can help to do just this
developed as a heuristic tool for assessing whether opportunities to use an ecosystem services approach are likely to succeed in achieving conservation goals
based on enabling conditions observed through the literature, case studies and experiences of TNC, WWF and NatCap
developed as a collaboration – TNC ecosystem services team, the Natural Capital Project and WWF-US
Today, we’ll introduce you to the criteria: their scope, content, and plans for future development
Rather than giving a dry explanation of the criteria one-by-one, we’re going to make this session participatory:
Get you to use the criteria in practice to evaluate a real project – ideally we’d have time to present you with a whole panel of projects, and get you to deliberate them in groups
but given time constraints we’ll just use one, and do a simple vote.
Bruce McKenney, The Nature Conservancy
Belinda Morris, The Nature Conservancy
Emily McKenzie, Natural Capital Project & WWF-US

2. Ecosystem services approach
Integrating ecosystem services in decisions
Regulations
Payments
Markets
Increasing interest in ecosystem service approaches for conservation.
Why?
Means to an end or end in itself is debated
But very few people would doubt that integrating ecosystems services into public and private decisions has great potential to make conservation mainstream
New argument for relevance of conservation to wider group of interests
Create new sustainable sources of funding.
How?
using ecosystem service concepts to argue for conservation
using ecosystem service mapping and valuation tools to raise awareness of ES values and shape policies to sustain them
developing policies and incentives to maintain services
Regulations, payments, markets, subsidies & taxes
Fiscal incentives

3. Not equally viable in all contexts
More than geographic overlap
Now have science tools to find areas where multiple services and biodiversity are located.
But a promising opportunity requires more than geographic overlap of ecosystem service and biodiversity priorities.
The likelihood of effectively achieving outcomes for conservation depends on various enabling conditions e.g.
ecosystem services must have significant value to people i.e. there are beneficiaries who are willing to pay
actions to restore or sustain those services must be feasible, economically viable and more cost-effective than alternatives
Unless conservation practitioners reflect on the suitability of their sites using these – or other – criteria, scarce and valuable resources will be wasted.

4. ‘Top Ten’ Screening Criteria
Will the service & conservation be delivered?
Are legal, institutional, social & economic conditions supportive?
Top 10 + ? -
Service delivery
Measurability
Scale / replicable
Alternatives …
Hence, we developed screening criteria: Top Ten enabling conditions that influence likelihood of success
Prioritize opportunities
Design projects
Format: Criteria, ideal conditions / best case, questions to consider
- Practical tool - help prioritise, select and refine project opportunities
- Learning tool - interactive sessions to evaluate case studies…what we’re about to do now!
Strong
Weak
Information gap

5. You try out the criteria!
Is this a viable ES project that deserves investment of conservation funds?
Introduce voting exercise
Bruce’s pitch
Vote
Ask a ‘yay’ and ‘nay’ sayer to explain why. ? or

6. Conservation delivery Scale Alternatives Providers & beneficiaries
Top 10 + ? -
Service delivery
Service measurement
Conservation delivery
Scale
Alternatives
Providers & beneficiaries
Benefits & costs
Legal/institutional & capacity
Stakeholders, equity, viability
Economic context
Bruce explains evaluation of pitch

7. Refining the criteria Upper Yangtze Sierra Puget Sound Nevada Mexico
Mekong
Andes
Hawai’i
Amazon
Eastern
Arc Mtns
Borneo &
Sumatra
We are continuing to revise and refine the criteria
Using them with sites at TNC, WWF and he Natural Capital Project
Future research to:
determine which criteria matter most
how this varies across contexts
how the criteria interrelate
how different conditions affect the choice between alternative instruments for providing ecosystem services
also evaluate usefulness as a practical tool
Can find the criteria at this website, copies also available as hand-outs.
Feedback welcome
Website:
Contact: 7