Back to Top

 Skip navigation

Structure of Ecosystem Accounting

Open in Excel:
Open in Excel:

In ecosystem accounting, statisticians and ecologists measure the extent of different natural assets and their services. The focus is on ecosystems. Stocks of non-biological assets such as minerals, water, or air are outside the scope of ecosystem accounting. However, ecosystem services involved in the maintenance of the quality of soil, water and air are included.

 In the SEEA-EA framework, the biophysical environment is divided into three entities: ecosystem asset (EA), ecosystem type (ET), and ecosystem accounting area (EAA) (Figure 4.1). EAs are distinct spatial areas covered by a specific ecosystem type that will provide goods and services, e.g. an individual peatland. ETs represent the aggregation of all EAs of the same type of ecosystem, e.g. all peatlands. Finally, EAAs correspond to large administrative areas, e.g. counties or national territory. EAAs will contain several EAs and ETs (Figure 4.1).

Spatial Extent Units

Open in Excel:

The SEEA-EA is based on four main connected accounts (i.e. extent, condition, services and monetary accounts) along with thematic accounts focused on topics of interest in their own right and in direct relevance in the measurement of ecosystems.

Extent accounts

Extent accounts record the spatial extent of ecosystem assets and ecosystem types. The spatial information in terms of extent and geographical location is essential for the compilation of the other ecosystem accounts: condition, ecosystem services and monetary accounts.

The landscape can be divided into a patchwork of ecosystem assets and types (Figure 4.1). These spatial data provide information on aspects of the condition of an ecosystem, for example larger areas of woodland, or woodlands that are connected to each other, may be in better condition than smaller, isolated woodlands.

Knowing the geographical location of ecosystems is also extremely important for the monetary valuation of ecosystem services. The spatial proximity of beneficiaries will impact on the demand for and use of ecosystem services, which will affect their valuation.

Condition accounts

The SEEA-EA defines the condition of an ecosystem as its quality measured in terms of its abiotic (i.e. non-living physico-chemical factors such as soil pH, humidity, temperature) and biotic (i.e. living organisms of an ecosystem such as plants and animals) characteristics. Ecosystem condition is closely related to its capacity which refers to the ability of the ecosystem to sustainably provide ecosystem goods and services to future generations of beneficiaries. Ecosystems in poor condition will result in a poor production of goods and services, while ecosystems in good condition function well, are more resilient to change, and will provide a higher level of goods and services.

In summary, ecosystem condition accounts attempt to capture the state of functioning of an ecosystem in terms of both its overall quality and its capacity to supply goods and services.

Ecosystem services accounts

Ecosystem services are defined, in the SEEA-EA, as the contribution of ecosystems to the generation of benefits (i.e. final outputs of an ecosystem) used by the economy and society. The aim of ecosystem services accounts is to provide a coherent and integrated view of the contributions made by ecosystems to the economy and human well-being.

Ecosystem services accounts, as defined in the SEEA-EA, report only final services, that is services for which a contribution to a benefit used by economy and people is identified. Consequently, these accounts exclude ecosystem services which are necessary to the inherent functioning of ecosystems, also known as intermediate or supporting services (e.g. pollination, pest control, and habitat diversity). Intermediate services usually support the production of final services, and as such accounting for both could result in double counting. In the case of croplands for example, the amount of crop biomass production (e.g. cereals, vegetables, fruits) is reported as a final ecosystem service as society benefits from it in terms of food. The production of some crops, however, relies on pollination by insect pollinators such as bees. Pollination is considered as an intermediate service, supporting the production of the crop, and so is not reported as a final ecosystem service.

Final ecosystem services are reported under three different headings:

  • Provisioning services: corresponding to goods that can be harvested or extracted from an ecosystem (e.g. fish, timber, crops, peat);
  • Regulating services: encompassing all services involved in the regulation of climate, hydrological and biochemical processes (e.g. carbon sequestration, water filtration, flood regulation);
  • Cultural services: comprising all non-material benefits provided by ecosystems to people (e.g. recreation, education, research, archaeology).

Common international classifications have been developed to identify and classify final ecosystem services, such as CICES (Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services). No international consensus on a single classification system has yet been reached, however. In addition, direct correspondences between the existing international and national classifications of final ecosystem services is not always possible.

Monetary accounts

Extent, condition and ecosystem services accounts are reported in physical terms (e.g. spatial extent in hectares, timber in tonnes). The role of monetary accounts is to place a monetary value on ecosystem condition and services accounts. The strength of this approach relies in valuing a range of disparate goods and services in the same monetary unit which allows comparisons within and between ecosystem accounts. Putting a monetary value on ecosystem services is difficult. However, we know that the contribution of ecosystem services or lack of service has a direct economic cost which can be estimated in monetary terms.

Valuing ecosystems is highly complex as it requires a deep understanding of how the ecosystem functions and the services it provides. Moreover, the big challenge lies in the absence of markets for ecosystems. If alternative markets can be used, they may be difficult to find, and corrections have usually to be applied. To learn more about how to value ecosystems, refer to the SEEA-EA.

Thematic accounts

In addition to the four previous accounts, the SEEA-EA describes the compilation of thematic accounts. These accounts are standalone and focus on specific topics of interest such as biodiversity, carbon, water, or urban ecosystems. They can be developed in conjunction with specific environmental policies to monitor their effectiveness. 

 

Go to the next chapter: Ecosystem, Environmental, and Natural Capital Accounting