Would we care more if there was a price attached to it? Conventional logic dictates that people assign more value to things when they need to pay for it. And it is this very logic that scientists and the government now plan to use this to save our dwindling forest resources.
On October 18, the Ministry of Mahaweli Development and Environment, together with the Sri Lanak UN-REDD Programme and Forest Department, will for the first time in Sri Lanka organise the ‘International Research Symposium on Valuation of Forest Ecosystems’ to understand the concept of such a model and to come up with a set of policies the government can later adopt.
The symposium to be held at BMICH, is part of the Sri Lanka NEXT: ‘A Blue-Green Era’ Conference and Exhibition.
Our ‘free lunch’
According to a World Bank Survey of forests done in 2011, Sri Lanka lost an average of 26,800 hectares of forests per year between 1990 and 2000. These losses were silent, unnoticed and un-valued.
This matters, as University of Peradeniya Emeritus Professor Nimal Gunatilleke in his research pointed out, “Global forests as a whole are estimated to contribute around US$ 468 billion or 1 percent to the World’s GDP.” The question now is how much does it contribute to our own GDP?
Our lack of knowledge on the subject is explained by Prof. Gunatilleke as the concept of a ‘free lunch’. “People having been benefiting from our forests without paying for it,” he said, addressing a media briefing last week at the Department of Forests.
“Indigenous people valued forests and certain forests were protected in ancient times. They might not have had a monetary value to it but they knew of its importance. But today we do not value it as much, given the pressures of development,” further explained Prof. Gunatilleke.
Hence to move away from the ‘free lunch’ mentality, it was important to understand that forests are not only biodiversity hotspots but they also provide us with important support services that are needed, for the very functioning of our civilization.
Forests perform the four main functions of: “Supply of provisions (goods like timber, food, etc..), act as Regulators (help in stopping flash floods, soil erosion, etc..), Supporting services (pollination, recycling of nutrients, etc..) and Cultural (aesthetic, historic, etc..),” said Prof. Gunatilleke.
The destruction of our forest ecosystems are thus closely interconnected to our own food chain and well-being. Much of our agricultural and other food produce is pollinated by bees and if the bees along with our ecosystems were to disappear, research shows that humans as a species would disappear in a matter of four years!
In Sri Lanka, the Conservator General of Forests, Anura Sathurusinghe explained that this year alone, approximately 4,300 acres of forests were destroyed by forest fires, “Three occurred in forest plantations and thus we had a method to add some value to it but the environmental value, the number of animals killed, erosion and loss of other services have not been incorporated into our losses, as we don’t have a proper method to calculate it,” he said.
Why a forest is more valuable than a golf course?
Apart from forest fires, one of the biggest threats to forests comes from development and it is here that forest valuations can be used to fight off developers.
“If an area with forest ecosystems are to be used for development, in this new system, we would add a value to that forest they propose to destroy. It would then be similar to any cost incurred due to the project. Thus one can argue whether the forest is of higher value standing or cut down?” explained Prof Gunatilleke.
Saving money and forests courtesy biggerpicture
Civil Society Representative, Hemantha Withanage who also spoke at the briefing has been fighting the ‘Environmental Cause’ for many decades and he pointed out that arguments for conservation can become stronger when we have economics to back it up with.
“Private property has always been given a monetary value but this has not been applied in the same way for common property,” explained Withanage.
“Many conservation projects face the challenge of how worth the conserving of a particular area is compared to the development benefits of a project. For example, is it worth cutting down a forest to put up a golf course or a mini hydro project?” he asked.
According to Withanage, close to 143 waterfalls have been destroyed so far in Sri Lanka as conservationists were not armed with the knowledge of its many hidden benefits and monetary value. “People kept saying that this development project would bring in so much of money and jobs, compared to the natural resource which in itself was not making them money,” he added.
Prof. Gunatilleke added to it saying, “During the time of the British, Singharaja was being cut to make tea boxes. Luckily we stopped that and we have seen that we have got more out of having that forest around than it being cut down to make tea boxes.”
He also explained that Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) only looked at forests being impacted in terms of endemic and threatened species and did very little to capture its full worth in terms of services.
Not for sale
The valuation of forests however, have not been welcome in all quarters. Prof. Gunatilleke explained that many who oppose it point out that it would not only commercialise our environment but also a developer could offer to pay the total value accounted for a forest and thereafter continue his development.
The other argument put forward by critics is that relating value of a forest to its biodiversity could mean that areas with lower biodiversity are easily cut down. This would be especially apparent between dry zone and wet zone forests where the latter has a greater biodiversity than the former.
“Research done in 85 forests in Sri Lanka however, has shown that there is a direct correlation between biodiversity and forest services. So if we take into account forest services into our accounting system, we cannot say that biodiversity would be less impacted,” said Prof. Gunatilleke.
Cutting down forests
“There are also 10 forest services which have been identified as most important to protect biodiversity in a forest,” he added.
When it comes to deciding between dry zone and wet zone forests, former Director of the Royal Botanical Gardens Peradeniya, Dr. Siril Wijesundara explained that each forest regardless of the area they are situated, play an important role in regulating the ecosystem in the area and thus cannot be compared. “The services they offer are equally important,” said Dr. Wijesundara.
How do we add value?
The method of adding a dollar or rupee value to our forests however, is not that simple as there are many services which cannot be valued. For example, the sacredness of a forest is hard to define. Thus it is here that the Symposium seeks to shed light into the process by bringing in ‘The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB, 2010) methodology to the forefront.
TEEB is a global initiative focused on “making nature’s values visible”. Its principal objective is to mainstream the values of biodiversity and ecosystem services into decision-making at all levels. It aims to achieve this goal by following a structured approach to valuation that helps decision-makers recognise the wide range of benefits provided by ecosystems and biodiversity, demonstrate their values in economic terms and, where appropriate, capture those values in decision-making.
To start off with, Prof. Gunatilleke explained that the Sri Lankan government would need to look into three main aspects; as quoted in his research:
“(1)Develop institutional arrangements to strengthen the implementation of natural capital accounting, (2)Develop science-based methodologies on an experimental basis for ecosystem accounting as a complement to GDP and (3) pilot and demonstrate the economic, social and environmental aspects of scaled up and integrated approaches to natural capital accounting.”
The panel at the briefing admitted that these models would take many years to implement in Sri Lanka and that the Symposium was a first step towards it.
Withanage meanwhile noted that any valuation methodology should also be adopted into legislation and government policy with laws amended for it be fully implemented.
“Adopting it to the legal and political decision making process however, may take years,” he said.
Implementation of various laws and regulations remain the biggest challenge facing many environmental government agencies and thus the practicality and usefulness of this accounting system would depend on how proactive our government agencies are.
“When the Coke factory polluted the Kelaniya River with an oil spill, they only had to pay for new water filters. No one took into account the damage they caused to our environment, our river and drinking water supply. If we have a system to account for all that, they would have had to pay much more and thus would be more careful in future,” said Withanage, adding that “We need bargaining power, at a time when development has been given top priority.”
Source: Daily News http://dailynews.lk/2016/10/14/features/95874
