TESSA (Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based Assessment)

Overview

Description:

The TESSA toolkit is an easy-to-use workbook that leads the user through the steps needed to assess the ecosystem services provided at a particular site. It is built around a comparison of the site in two alternative states, e.g. before and after restoration or conversion, and encourages a high level of stakeholder engagement. The toolkit was initially developed for conservation practitioners but can be used by anyone, including those with no prior knowledge of ecosystem services. It includes an introduction to the concepts of ecosystem services and natural capital, guidance on how to conduct a preliminary scoping appraisal to identify important services and beneficiaries, decision trees to identify the best methods to use for each service, and links to a set of simple low-cost methods for measuring ecosystem services either qualitatively or quantitatively. Worked examples are provided, as well as instructions for collecting site-specific data where appropriate (including field surveys and stakeholder input). There is also guidance on how to communicate results to decision-makers.

Input:

Data gathered by the user for the site being assessed.

Output:

Guidance

Quantitative data on ecosystem services

Tables / statistics / reports

Scale:

Site scale

Local scale

Cost of the tool (and guidance):

Open access (free)

Context:

Built around a comparison of two alternative states of the site, e.g. before and after restoration or degradation.

Resource requirement (software):

Adobe acrobat to read the interactive pdf, plus 184 MB storage space.

Level of technical expertise required:

Internet use skills

Types of ecosystem service included:

Regulating

Provisioning

Supporting

Cultural

Habitat type (UK NEA habitats):

Mountains, moors and heaths

Semi-natural grasslands

Enclosed farmland

Woodland

Freshwater, wetlands and floodplains

Urban

Coastal margins

How does it work?:

The toolkit is based on an interactive pdf document which leads the user through a simple step by step approach to assess the main ecosystem services provided by the site. Preliminary guidance helps the user to select a suitable site, define the exact questions to be addressed, engage the relevant stakeholders and find out about the local political and socio-economic context. The first step is then a scoping appraisal to identify which are the most important services for the site. For each of these services, there is a choice of several assessment methods, including manual calculations, stakeholder mapping, field surveys or modelling tools (options include use of the WaterWorld and Co$tingNature models). A decision tree helps the user to choose the most suitable method, given the available data and resources. Electronic links take the user to separate short pdfs which describe how to apply each method, and there are also links to additional guidance documents and case studies.

Where can I get it?:

http://tessa.tools/

Case Studies

Number of case studies in the uk:

Nine, mainly RSPB sites.

Examples of case studies in the uk :

Wicken Fen, Cambridgeshire

Wicken Fen is a small remnant of rare alkaline fen habitat. The National Trust is buying patches of the surrounding arable farmland and restoring it to a wetland mosaic, aiming to grow the fen from 170 ha to over 5000 ha by 2100. TESSA was used to evaluate the benefits of this initiative by comparing a block of restored wetland with adjacent unrestored arable land. Carbon storage and greenhouse gas fluxes were estimated using literature values for degraded and restored peat grasslands, and recreation value was estimated using travel cost and visitor expenditure, gathered through visitor surveys. The results suggest that restoration would provide net benefits worth $199 ha/y, for a one-off investment of $2320/ha. The estimated loss of arable production worth $2040/ha/y is offset by estimated gains of $671/ha/y in nature-based recreation, $120/ha/y from grazing, $48/ha/y from flood protection, and $72/ha/y from reduced greenhouse gas emissions, as well as a reduction of $1325/ha/y in management costs. [136].

Ouse Fen and Fen Drayton, Cambridgeshire

Ouse Fen and Fen Drayton Lakes are two RSPB wetland reserves created by restoration of gravel extraction pits, which are important for rare birds such as the Bittern. Ouse Fen was originally going to be restored for agriculture but is now being gradually restored to wetland through designing the topography and planting reeds. Fen Drayton Lakes has already been restored to wetland but contains a mix of non-intervention areas that were left to colonise naturally and intervention areas that were re-profiled and replanted. TESSA was used to compare the benefits of these sites under their current use and under alternative restoration scenarios: agricultural use (for Ouse Fen), and either 100% non-intervention or 100% intervention (for Fen Drayton Lakes) [130].

A preliminary scoping study involving stakeholder consultation identified the main ecosystem services provided by the sites as being carbon storage and sequestration, flood protection, nature-based recreation, agriculture (under the alternative scenario), grazing (used for managing the grassland areas) and fishing. Literature values were used for carbon stored in soils and vegetation and emissions from livestock and arable crop production, and the Farm Business Survey was used to estimate returns from agricultural use. Recreational value was determined using visitor questionnaires and then estimating travel cost and visitor expenditure. Flood mitigation was estimated as the water storage capacity above and below ground. At Ouse Fen, the wetland restoration increased the value for recreation. At Fen Drayton, recreational value was greater for the non-intervention state than the intervention state, though there was clear segmentation with some visitors preferring one state and other visitors preferring the other, suggesting a mix of restoration types would create greatest value. In both cases there were trade-offs between food production, recreation, greenhouse gas emissions and restoration costs.

Detailed information

Key data sources:

TESSA page on the Birdlife website http://www.birdlife.org/worldwide/science/assessing-ecosystem-services-tessa
Peh et al. (2013) article in Ecosystem Services journal [129]
Case study papers: Wicken Fen [136] and Ouse Fen / Fen Drayton [130]

Original purpose:

TESSA was initially developed for conservation practitioners but can also be used by natural resource managers, land use planners, development organisations, the private sector and others. It aims to provide a relatively affordable tool to support local decision-making, e.g. for land management, planning, assessing the impacts of future land-use change, or to provide evidence of the benefits of current or future protected areas. It can also support the development of natural capital accounts for business, NGOs, public bodies or other landowners.

User groups:

Conservation practitioners (main users)
Natural resource managers (e.g. forestry, fisheries, water managers)
Land-use planners
Development organisations (e.g. for poverty alleviation)
Private sector

Original geographic scope:

Global – can be applied in both developed and developing countries

Terrestrial, freshwater or marine focus?:

Terrestrial

Freshwater

Specific ecosystem services modelled:

cultivated goods
harvested wild goods
water provision
global climate regulation
flood protection
coastal protection
water quality improvement
pollination
nature-based recreation
cultural services

Datasets (required):

Habitat map of the site under current and alternative conditions
Other data requirements depend on the services being assessed and the methods being applied

Datasets (optional):

Field surveys of tree dbh and/or soil carbon or literature values for relevant habitats and soils
Visitor surveys to gather information on number of visits, travel cost, visitor expenditure and reason for visit
Farm production costs and returns
Hydrological data including flood protection capacity (volume of water stored)
Plant dependence on pollination, and maximum yields
Wave heights, tidal ranges, wind speeds and directions
Management or restoration costs

Time requirements:

Moderate

Estimated working days to complete a project:

Usually 20-60 days in the UK where data is readily available, but longer if field survey and/or socio-economic work (participatory workshops and surveys) is required. Additional training is recommended for use of the Co$ting Nature and WaterWorld models.

Tool accessibility:

Freely available from the website.

License information:

Not required.

Current version:

Version 2.0 was released in 2017.

Updates:

Version 1 (2013); Version 1.2 (2014); Version 2.0 (2017); Version 3.0 (anticipated 2020)

Technical support provided?:

A webinar is available and training workshops may be available from the Tropical Biology Association. Further support may be available from tessa@birdlife.org.

Developer (organisation):

BirdLife International, University of Cambridge, RSPB, UNEP-WCMC, Anglia Ruskin University, University of Southampton and the Tropical Biology Association.

Developer (organisation type):

Academic and NGO.

Developer (individuals):

Jenny Merriman (BirdLife International), Kelvin Peh (University of Cambridge) and others

Primary contact:

tessa@birdlife.org

Publications:

The website contains a list of publications http://www.birdlife.org/worldwide/science/tessa-publications and case studies http://www.birdlife.org/assessing-ecosystem-services-tessa/case-studies .

Number of case studies outside the uk:

Over 60 sites to date across temperate and tropical forest and wetland habitats worldwide.

Examples of case studies outside of uk:

Sierra de Bahoruco National Park, Dominican Republic

The mountainous forests of the Sierra de Bahoruco National Park are home to over 40 threatened species, but are under threat from expansion of agriculture including avocado plantations. TESSA was used to compare a vision of a well-conserved park (like the northern part of the park) against a degraded state (like the southern part). A stakeholder workshop identified 15 ecosystem services provided by the area, including cultivated products, water supply and erosion control, as well as identifying inequalities between the benefits received by smallholder farmers and large plantation owners. TESSA was then used to assess carbon storage (using a field survey), water quality (using sampling), and supply of water, honey and cultivated crops (all using surveys / interviews). The results showed that a degraded park would provide 34% less carbon storage and would result in an increase of 79% in the cost of water (due to decreased local water quality), as well as reducing the gathering of honey to zero. The value of cultivated goods would increase by 28% but this may not be sustainable due to decreased soil quality. The results were presented to local decision makers as part of a long-running campaign to get better management for the park.

Tool limitations:

It does not provide a full quantitative valuation for all ecosystem services
It must be adapted for each local situation