Measuring MPA benefits

MPAs protect and generate a range of social, economic and environmental benefits at local, national and global levels. Some of these, like maintaining fish stocks, are tangible and lend themselves to measurement; others, like cultural values, are important but intangible and difficult to measure. Measuring the value of different kinds of benefits helps inform the design of sustainable financing strategies, particularly as funding sources expect to see measurable impacts.

Why do you measure benefits?

Concrete measurement of benefits can help to:

• Strengthen arguments to secure funding for an MPA

• Inform communications and social media content to shape people’s perception of value

• Reinforce local stakeholder buy-in and political support, strengthening the context for various financing solutions

• Demonstrate management impacts to justify non-market financial support such as government budget allocations or philanthropic donations

What benefits do you measure?

MPAs typically seek to deliver a diverse range of benefits. One way to think of these benefits is as elements of total economic value (TEV) (Figure 1). The TEV lens is useful because it differentiates between types of benefits that lend themselves to different methods to measure value.

Figure 1. Total economic value framework. Adapted from DEFRA, 2007 and Brander et al., 2010.

Within the TEV categories, direct use values of benefits such as harvesting of marine resources or recreational activities will be relevant to many MPAs, as will indirect uses such as blue carbon sequestration or shoreline protection. Non-use values, though an important motivation for some funding decisions, are difficult to measure in a rigorous way.

To use TEV to prioritize which benefits to measure, you should:

How do you measure benefits?

The starting point is a robust understanding of the ecosystem, based on resource and biodiversity inventories. This should enable you to identify the stocks and flows of resources and services that underpin the benefits to be measured, where stocks are measured at a single point in time and flows are measured as changes in stocks over time. With this understanding, the value of benefits can be measured through either primary study or “benefit-transfer” methods, explained below.

Primary study method

High-quality primary research provides the most accurate way to value benefits, using one of three categories of methodologies:

The main methodologies available within each of these approaches are presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Major methodologies to measure benefits through a primary study method. Adapted from Brander et al., 2010; Earth Economics, 2010; Ecosystem Valuation, 2000. 

Benefit transfer method

When primary research is prohibitively costly, a frequently used alternative is benefit transfer. This involves extrapolating from other sites where benefits have been measured previously. Simply taking a value from one site and assigning it to another is called point transfer; adjusting the original value to characteristics of the other site is called value or function transfer. Several online databases provide information for benefit-transfer studies (examples include Environmental Valuation Reference Inventory (Environment and Climate Change Canada) and the valuation studies library of the National Ocean Economics Program. Such databases can provide reference data to help with estimates and forecasting while saving the time and cost of conducting original research. For example, an MPAConnect and Wolfs Company project used data from the British Virgin Islands to help estimate the value of nature for tourism in the Turks and Caicos Islands.

Prebuilt models can facilitate value transfer analysis. Meta-analyses use sets of valuation studies to construct value functions; these have been developed for various ecosystem services, including the recreational value of coral reefs (Brander et al. 2007) and multiple services from wetlands (Brander et al., 2006). More complex spatial models are customizable to variations in site characteristics, spatial flow of ecosystem services and many other factors. Examples include:

• Integrated Valuation of Environmental Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST)

• Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES)

• Multiscale Integrated Models of Ecosystem Services (MIMES).

Which valuation method to use depends on the benefits to be measured

Financing approaches based on fees (entry fees, concession fees, access fees, etc.) are aided by benefit measurement to set appropriate rates. Relevant valuation methods will include travel cost analysis, willingness-to-pay surveys and benefit transfer (i.e. examining fees charged in comparable settings elsewhere), as well as direct market price methods to understand operator margins.

Payments for ecosystem services (PES), such as carbon sequestration or shoreline protection, need to be based on clear links between management activities, ecosystem stocks and flows, and the value of the resulting benefits. This typically involves more complex physical and benefit-transfer modelling, and can also involve replacement costs.

Conservation finance instruments including impact investment and bonds (e.g., Seychelles: Introducing the World’s First Sovereign Blue Bond) require measurement of benefits to demonstrate non-financial returns on investment as well as ability to repay. Direct market valuation supports cash-flow projections which will determine ability to repay; depending on the context, several of the methods in Table 1 (above) may help demonstrate further social and economic returns to impact investors.

Who benefits?

When measuring the benefits of an MPA, a key consideration is how those benefits are distributed among stakeholders. As an extreme example, even if an MPA generates enormous global benefits (e.g. carbon sequestration and biodiversity value) but none of this value reaches the local level, local stakeholders may be unwilling to incur the opportunity cost of foregoing unsustainable resource use.

A more localized example might involve an MPA developing its own tour guide service to capture visitor willingness to pay and generate revenue, but this could involve a redistribution of benefits away from existing tour operators or community-based enterprises. Measuring benefits and understanding how they are distributed helps incorporate incentives and drivers of behaviour change into your financing strategy. Equally, it’s important to consider equity and fairness in mechanisms that redistribute costs and benefits.

How do you go about this?

If you want to start measuring benefits for your MPA, you can begin by searching for valuation exercises done for comparable sites. Databases like those mentioned above can be a starting point, as well as online resources available through initiatives such as The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB).

One source of technical guidance on applying methods is Ecosystem Valuation. It’s rare, though, for MPA staff to conduct measurement of benefits on their own – most such work is done through partnerships that provide access to technical expertise, often with NGOs or academic researchers. NGOs that have been involved in ecosystem service valuation to document benefits include Conservation International, Fauna and Flora International, IUCN, The Nature Conservancy, Wildlife Conservation Society and WWF, among others.