could be sold on the voluntary or regulatory market (Defend- ers of Wildlife 2012).

MARKET SEGMENT FOR COMBINED ECOSYSTEM SERVICES: Bringing it all together

T

HE VALUE GIVEN to and associated with natural habitats by different stakeholder groups can vary widely.

For example, sea grass meadows may offer recreational op- portunities to the tourism industry (snorkelling and diving) but at the same time may represent a key source of income for both recreational and commercial fisheries (an essential habi- tat for lobster and snapper fisheries). Meanwhile, environ- mentalists may value the same sea grass meadows primarily as a critical resource for the conservation of endangered species (manatees and sea turtles). Ultimately, these values are related and connected through the need for a healthy environment. A combined PES scheme may be able to join several services and provide sufficient, robust and sustainable economic and conservation opportunities.

For the most part PES schemes have tended to focus on a single ecosystem service, whether it is connected with the conservation of a watershed, the restoration of a forest or the preservation of a wildlife area. Such an approach can be con- fusing – at odds with the basic idea that all things in the natu- ral world are interconnected. It is now becoming evident that in some cases integrating various ecosystem services could lead to more viable PES schemes.

While methodologies aimed at bringing together various eco- system services in PES are still being worked on, two catego- ries are being devised; ‘bundled’ and ‘stacked’.

A bundled PES scheme offers one payment for multiple serv- ices. Bundling would allow a landowner to combine multiple values from a piece of property under a single type of credit. For example, though the restoration of an acre of riparian forest results in improvements to more than one ecosystem service, these would be bundled into one type of credit, which

56 VITAL GRAPHICS ON PAYMENT FOR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

A stacked PES scheme offers multiple payments for different services, allowing landowners to sell different types of credits from a single location or receive multiple revenues from carry- ing out the same action. For example, if a landowner restores an acre of riparian forest, water quality credits, carbon cred- its, riparian habitat credits and conservation banking credits could be accumulated, all of which the landowner could sell in their respective markets (Defenders of Wildlife 2012).

A PES scheme incorporating multiple ecosystem services may be necessary to allow landowners to access multiple sources of revenue. A single ecosystem service may not, by itself, generate enough funds to support sustainable conservation.

Combined PES projects are supported by a variety of revenue sources which may also provide greater protection against market volatility and offer greater financial security than projects depending on a single revenue stream (fluctuations in the carbon credit process).

A combined PES scheme could result in linkages being made between multiple beneficiaries and providers and have the potential of increasing funding opportunities – and achieving broader based improvements in the natural environment. In turn this would deliver benefits to people at both local and national levels and – in relation to climate regulation and bio- diversity – at the international level, too. Greater cooperation between various local groups and a sharing of ecological val- ues would make implementing PES projects easier. Converse- ly, failing to recognise the interconnectedness of ecosystem services can lead to the degradation of one service in order to improve another, which may have the knock-on effect of creating local conflicts and threatening community support for PES (Willamette Partnership 2011).

Sustainable forestry practices can increase the ability of forests to sequester atmospheric carbon while enhancing other eco- system services, such as improved water quality and biodiver- sity protection. ‘Forest carbon’, or the sequestration of carbon in forest biomass as an ecosystem service, has much potential to drive combined PES schemes due to its current association with climate change mitigation.

However, the payment for forest carbon offsets involves a key issue pertinent to discussion of combining ecosystem services