Agriculture / Agricultural policy; Biodiversity and ecosystem services
Question
Which question has been addressed in this step?
Appraising options: Which
adaptation option
should be taken?
Case step navigator: click any node to select the respective step
Why has this question been chosen?
Understanding direct and
opportunity costs of options is
important for designing
regional scale options, such as
incentive schemes, corridor
maintenance or translocation.
These costs can be calculated
through
combining BEM with market
data and other valuation
techniques.
Because monetary valuation of
biodiversity - while
developing as a practice -
remains controversial and with
limited application, it is
helpful to separate between the
costs (direct and opportunity
costs) of an option, and its
grassland biota conservation
outcomes about which there is
less conflict.
Monetary values are important
however as the costs of
options are likely born by
public actors.
Which methods have been applied?
Robust decision-making:
Cost-effectiveness analysis
of options is applied for all
scenarios and BEMs.
Only a general comparison
of options across scenarios
is possible, because
probabilities cannot be
assigned across the
different models and
climate scenarios.
Why have these methods been selected?
Future risks are
considered [Risk timehorizon:
future] and for
some of the adaptation
options considered a lead
time for implementation
are considered, and
therefore are not shortterm
options.
The fact that for CEA, the
benefits do not have to be
monetised is helpful;
monetary valuation of
biodiversity - whilst
developing as a practice -
remains controversial and
with limited application.
What results have been obtained?
Specially designed ecological
corridors would both increase
the amount of suitable habitats
and ease the dispersal of
species, but in practice their
construction was shown to be
unrealistically expensive.
Species translocations proved
to be a more potential and costeffective
adaptation measure
compared to ecological
corridors.
