G Model

ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10

ARTICLE IN PRESS
Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Indicators
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolind

A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy)
Elisa Morri a, , Fabio Pruscini a,1 , Rocco Scolozzi b , Riccardo Santolini a
a b

Department of Earth, Life and Environment (DISTEVA), Carlo Bo University of Urbino, campus scientico Enrico Mattei, 61029 Urbino, Italy Centre of Molecular and Environmental Biology, Minho University, Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
Many coastal communities benet from a lively and protable economy based on tourism but, simultaneously, cannot rely on the ecosystem services (ESs) provided locally, which have become insufcient because of increasing demand. In the Apennines, a mountain range in central Italy, coastal areas are characterised by growing population and tourist demands and upstream lands mainly supply ecosystem goods and services. Mechanisms to re-distribute resources or payments for ESs would be helpful to foster the sustainability of regional systems. However, currently, there is neither an appreciation for such services nor institutions responsible for addressing this problem. In this paper, we analyse and rank the ecosystem services provided by the forests of two river basins to assign economic values to four ecosystem services relevant for distinguishing provision and benet areas: soil protection, water retention, drinking water supply and CO2 sequestration. A simplied methodology was developed for contexts with poor environmental datasets. The aim was to provide ecological information to recognise ESs and encourage effective governance of ESs at a regional level. The results showed that the indirect value of the considered ecosystem services was three times higher than the direct value, and a spatial mismatch emphasised a debt in coastal areas from upstream areas for selected ecosystem services. 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 18 May 2012 Received in revised form 31 July 2013 Accepted 20 August 2013

1. Introduction Ecosystem functions are recognised as services when there are human beneciaries (Fisher et al., 2008), and their supply affects stakeholders at all institutional levels (Hein et al., 2006). Although the ecological understanding of ecosystem services (ESs) remains limited (Kremen, 2005), policy makers are quickly becoming aware of their connection to well-being and local economies. Several international institutions and academics are involved in worldwide initiatives (e.g., IPBES) and research projects (e.g., TEEB, 2008; MEA, 2005). According to the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 (COM 2011/244), local administrations (regional and municipal) must acknowledge the importance of ESs, and associated values should be integrated into environmental accounting and report systems. Particularly at the local level, many processes threaten ecosystem functioning, and decision makers may be effective in impact prevention and ecological value maintenance.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 0721304303; fax: +39 0541392935. E-mail address: elisa.morri@uniurb.it (E. Morri). 1 Tel.: +390721304303. 1470-160X/$ see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

The main obstacle is often that the ES value is not recognised and the data do not specically support local environmental decisions. ESs are not equally distributed in space (Costanza, 2008) and do not ow at identical rates, which causes a common spatial and temporal mismatch between ecosystems services and their beneciaries (Ruhl et al., 2007; Fisher et al., 2008). The relative positions of local populations in the landscape determines the benets from several services, e.g., communities residing at the bottom of a river basin depend on upland areas for a water supply (Hein et al., 2006; Brauman et al., 2007). Several evaluations of ecosystem services on the river basin scale have been applied to ecosystem management and planning (Pires, 2004) according to the desired set of ecosystem services and involving the concept of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) (e.g., Borsuk et al., 2001; Jewitt, 2002; Cavatassi, 2004; Van der Keur et al., 2008; Cosman et al., 2012). Indirect and direct drivers of ecosystem change may impair ES provision from upstream to downstream areas. The driving forces may be demographic, economic, socio-political, technological, physical or biological (Nelson et al., 2006). The main physical driver is land conversion, but in many cases, decision makers responsible for such changes may be unaware of its effects on ES provisioning. Land use conversion always affects the mix of services provided by ecosystems;

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

G Model
ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10 2

ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Morri et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx

ecosystem service trade-offs may occur without premeditation or even understanding that they are occurring (Rodrguez et al., 2006). Although the IWRMs denitions and concepts focus on and inuence thinking about sustainability, it does not appear to indicate how this proposed co-ordination, balance and integration is achievable in practice (Gooch and Stlnacke, 2006). The perspective of ecosystem services, wherein ES providers, beneciaries and ows are identied and recognised in environmental policies (Syrbe and Walz, 2012; Palomo et al., 2013), may facilitate a spatial redistribution of resources, considering that the effects of the decision to alter the landscape become much more tangible because service values or degradation can be attributed to specic landowners or land managers (Villa et al., 2012). This process is particularly relevant for coastal areas, typically where richer areas on shorelines may benet from a ourishing economy (e.g., tourism), and ecosystem services provided by the entire river basin. Monetary evaluation, although controversial (Kelman, 1982) but always approximate (Costanza et al., 1997; Fisher et al., 2008), may help decision makers and the community of ES users focus on ecosystem functions (Gret-Regamey and Kytzia, 2007). The monetary values associated with ecosystem providing services may be pivotal in the formulation and evaluation of environmental policies (de Groot et al., 2010; Howarth and Farber, 2002). The valuation of ESs can support the involvement of all ES stakeholders (users and providers), which is crucial in maintaining ecosystem services for an equitable distribution of costs and benets (Costanza et al., 1998; Farber et al., 2002) and to perform a supply/demand budget (Burkhard et al., 2012). On a river basin scale, the forest ecosystems are often the main providers of a range of ESs (Quine et al., 2011), such as water regulation, soil retention and formation, climate regulation, supply of habitat, food production and recreational services. Previous studies (Bosch and Hewlett, 1982; Zhao et al., 2009) have shown that increased stream ow is correlated with deforestation or forest conversion in small-scale river basins (<1 km2 ) and larger catchments (>700 km2 ), and downstream water users should compensate upstream landowners for maintaining their forested areas for water regulation goals. Important quantitative relationships have been shown between drinking water treatment costs and the amount of forest cover: a portion of the variation in operating treatment costs could be explained by a percentage of the forest cover in the water source area, and the increase in cost for water treatment was based on a decrease in forest cover (Ernst, 2004; Abildtrup et al., 2011). River basins with a high proportion of land covered by forests and wetlands are particularly effective at decreasing and delaying runoff (Bosch and Hewlett, 1982; Schuler, 2006) and purifying water supplies (Postel and Thompson, 2005). Several studies about forest ecosystem services were conducted worldwide at dif et al., 2008; Reyes and Mates, ferent scales (Chiabai et al., 2009; Pina 2004), but only a few were developed in Italy (Gatto et al., 2009; Goio et al., 2008; Scolozzi et al., 2012) or other Mediterranean areas (Merlo and Croitoru, 2005). In this paper, we focused on relatively small river basins on the eastern side of the Apennine Mountains in Italy. Precisely, we estimated the value of ecosystem services, such as water retention, drinking water supply, soil protection and carbon sequestration, and compared indirect to direct use values (e.g., timber, rewood, etc.). We then identied the associated local beneciaries and quantied the related demand. The general objective was to understand whether and how much the coastal areas depended on the upstream ecosystem to understand the spatial mismatch between source areas and beneciaries of ecosystem services. Water retention is particularly relevant in Mediterranean regions because of the signicant temporal difference between the recharging ground water period (spring, autumn) and maximum water consumption level in the summer used for drinking water by tourists and in

agriculture. Simultaneously, runoff and associated soil erosion, particularly along the Apennine range, frequently damages residential areas and agriculture in regard to solid transport accumulation at the bottom of the basin catchment (Nittrouer et al., 2004). We also considered CO2 sequestration because, although this service benets the global community and demand was not spatially variable (Luck et al., 2012), we sketched the current balance within the river basin between emissions by local communities and sequestration by local forest ecosystems. 2. Materials and methods Four ecosystem services provided by the forests (Table 1) in the selected river basins were valued using economic techniques, such as indirect market pricing, avoided cost (Kremen et al., 2000; Merlo and Croitoru, 2005) and replacement cost (Brauer and Marggraf, 2004; Gunatilake and Vieth, 2000; Ming et al., 2007), as suggested by de Groot et al. (2002) and Farber et al. (2006) for regulating ecosystem service. The economic values were calculated for three areas within each river basin according to the National Institute for Statistics (ISTAT, 1958): coastal hill or plain (0300 m) as a Low region (L); inland hill (300600 m) as a Medium region (M); Inland mountain (>600 m) as a High region (H) (Fig. 1). The objective of this breakdown was to study the supply and demand distribution of ecosystem services in different areas of the river basins. Because economic data are available at a municipality level, the basin sections were drawn according to municipality territories included in each elevation zone. Further methodological details are specied below following the description of the study area. 2.1. The study area and current problems The study area is located in the northern region of the Apennine Mountains in Italy and included the Foglia River Basin situated in the northern Marche Region and the Marecchia River Basin in the southern Emilia Romagna Region (Fig. 1). These river basins are representative of many others reaching the Adriatic Sea in terms of geo-morphology and socio-economic dynamics. The two rivers have a torrential regime with drought periods in summer and two precipitation peaks in spring and autumn. The Foglia River is 90 km long, and its basin is 700 km2 , of which 28% is forested (20,542 ha) with 22 small municipalities and 204,800 inhabitants (ISTAT, 2001). The Marecchia River is 70 km long, and the basin is approximately 610 km2 , of which 33% is forested (18,697 ha) with approximately 200,000 inhabitants (ISTAT, 2001) and 12 municipalities. Forests are common in the High regions and characterised by xerole mesic deciduous forests. In the middle section of the river basins, the landscape is more heterogeneous and is characterised by a combination of agricultural areas, natural and semi-natural grasslands and patches of European hop hornbeam woodlands (Ostrya carpinifolia) or (Salix spp.) gallery forest along the rivers. The lower section of both basins is characterised by settlements and intensive cropland. The remnant forest areas in this section are mainly located along the rivers. The relatively high concentration of settlements, roads and industrial and zoo-technical activities with 48 sewage treatment systems (urban and industrial), two landlls and eight quarries cause qualitative degradation of underground and runoff water. In the middle and lower regions, particularly close to the coast, there are irrigation, drinking and industry demands and water quality problems (namely, pollution by nitrates and eutrophication).

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

G Model
ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10

ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Morri et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx 3 Indicator Annual water retained by woodland in regulating runoff Water price Variables Water retention of forest (% of runoff) Cost for unit volume of water (D /m3 ) Forest area (ha) Water retention of forest (% of runoff) Cost of drinking water (D /m3 ) Forest area (ha) Erosion difference between forest land and non-forest land (ha) Cost for transporting and restoring a unit volume of soil (D /m3 ) Forest area (ha) Soil density (g/cm3 ) Biomass average growth (m3 /ha) Wood density of trees (t/m3 ) The ratio of total above-ground dry biomass to dry biomass of inventoried volume (BEF) Ratio of elemental carbon from mass to dry biomass (CF) Root/shoot parameter (R) woodland area (ha) CO2 tradable emission permit value (D /tCO2 ) References Xue and Tisdell (2001), Hao et al. (2008), Hmann et al. (2011) Hao et al. (2008)

Table 1 Forest ecosystem services, evaluation method and the variables considered. Ecosystem services Water retention Evaluation method Avoided cost

Drinking water supply

Direct market price

Soil protection

Replacement cost

Annual soil protection by erosion

Hao et al. (2008)

CO2 sequestration

Market value

Annual rate of atmospheric carbon added to existing biomass carbon pools

Goio et al. (2008), Guo et al. (2001), Xue and Tisdell (2001)

Since the 1980s, progressive deterioration in groundwater quality and increasing demand has generated a greater use of surface water, thus requiring physical and chemical treatments. However, in the upper regions, drinking water is obtained from groundwater with fewer treatments. In the Marecchia River Basin, approximately 62% of the consumed water is derived from groundwater and distributed for different uses: approximately 10 Mm3 /yr for domestic drinking water, 4 Mm3 /yr for agriculture and 120 Mm3 /yr for the industrial sector (generated from the River Basin Authority of Marecchia). Approximately 30% of the consumed water is imported from other areas (articial basins or reservoirs), whereas 8% derives from surface and spring water (ATO, 2007). In the Foglia River Basin, surface water is the main source (56%), groundwater accounts for approximately 23 and 21% derives from other sources (Marche Multiservizi, 2011). The selected study areas have interlinked problems that are common not only in Italy: the question of water quantity and quality and its distribution for different uses. The timing of water demands and water availability critically depend on forests in the upper regions of the basins. Water demand in the

Marecchia River Basin reaches approximately 17.5 million m3 during JuneSeptember with approximately 5.7 million tourists, in addition to the approximately 200,000 residents. However, the main precipitation occurs in April and SeptemberDecember at 100150 mm/month (the average for 19902001) (ARPA, 2007). In addition to these problems, a high percentage of the two basins risk soil erosion: 33 and 28% of land use types in the Foglia and Marecchia river basins are at a relatively high erosion risk (520 t/ha/yr, Rusco et al., 2009). Regarding the CO2 balance, the Foglia and Marecchia river basin areas contribute approximately 10 and 3% of the total regional emissions, respectively, and the largest contribution of emissions is because of road transportation (Regione Marche, 2009; Regione Emilia Romagna and ARPA, 2007). 2.2. The valuation of selected forest ecosystem services 2.2.1. Water retention The value of water retention services was estimated as the volume of water retained from runoff (Table 1), and it was approximated by the difference between precipitation input and potential

Fig. 1. The location of the Marecchia and Foglia river basins among similar others (the 1st and 2nd orders refer to river Strahler order). The grey patches represent forest cover in the High, Medium and Low regions (right).

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

G Model
ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10 4

ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Morri et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx

evapotranspiration (Bonan, 2008). The precipitation and evapotranspiration calculation (by the Turc formula) considered 16 measurement stations (Didero et al., 1990) located in the study area. Precisely, we interpolated the precipitation data by an inverse distance weighting (IDW) method (Bartier and Keller, 1996) using ArcGIS 9.3 software. We then calculated the potential runoff for each pixel by subtracting the relative potential evapotranspiration. The runoff portion withheld by the forest was estimated using efciency of water conservation coefcients for different forest typologies derived from Hmann et al. (2011) (Table 2). Forest extensions in the study area were extracted from land use maps (Morri, 2012; Regione Emilia Romagna, 2010) and forest management maps (IPLA, 2000). Such forested areas were overlapped with the retained portion of runoff (Rc) per pixel to obtain the amount of water retained by forest ecosystems in the Marecchia and Foglia river basins (Table 2). The economic value of water retention was calculated similarly to Hao et al. (2008) and Xue and Tisdell (2001) using the cost of new articial detention basins (currently in the planning stage in the study area) as the avoided cost of detention of a unit of water. Thus, the average price of a unit of retained water was estimated at D 9.8/m3 considering a cost of more than D 14.2 million for the project with a potential retention volume of approximately 1.5 million m3 (PesaroUrbino Province, pers. comm.). The above-described procedure was determined using the following equation: WR = CRW
j i

benet of the forest ecosystem, as described in Hao et al. (2008). Such a contribution was multiplied by the average cost for transporting and restoring a unit volume of soil and divided by the average soil density, as expressed in Eq. (3): Sp = CS Ai (SEnon-F,i SEF,i ) SD (3)

where A is the forest area (m2 ) with i-slope category; CS is the cost for transporting and locating a unit volume of soil (41 D /m3 ) (Regione Marche, 2010); SEnon-F,i and SEF,i are the soil erosion risk (t/ha/yr) provided by non-forest (non-F) and forests (F), respectively, within the i-slope category and SD is the soil density (1.4 t/m3 ) of the study area. 2.2.4. CO2 sequestration Vegetation accumulates carbon into the biomass through the absorption of atmospheric CO2 . The value of a sequestered ton of carbon can be approximated by the value of tradable emission permits (Stern, 2007), such as emission market-based policy, reects social costs and controls the total emissions (Tol, 2008). Carbon is stored in various pools in an ecosystem, including the living biomass (above- and belowground biomass), dead organic matter and soil organic matter (IPCC, 2003). The annual CO2 sequestration of aboveground biomass was calculated by Eq. (4) (Federici et al., 2007; modied) considering different forest typologies: above CO2 = CF 44 12
i

Rc Runoffi,j j

(1)

GSi BEFi WBDi Ai

(4)

where WR is the water retention services (expressed in D ); CRW is the cost of a unit of retained water (D /m3 ); Rcj is the retaining coefcient for j-forest typology and Runoffi,j is runoff over i-pixel with j-forest typology (m). 2.2.2. Drinking water supply Similar to Hao et al. (2008), the value of the drinking water supply service (DW) to households, commerce and industry was derived using the above-described water retention capacity provided by the forests multiplied (Eq. (2)) by the price of a unit of drinkable water (CDW, 0.4 D /m3 ) dened by a local water service company (Marche Multiservizi, 2008 for Foglia River Basin and HERA for Marecchia River Basin). DW = CDW
j i

where GS is the volume of growing stock by a specic i-forest typology (m3 /ha); BEF is the biomass expansion factor for i-forest typology, which expands growing stock volume to the volume of aboveground woody biomass; WBD is the wood basic density of iforest typology (t of dry biomass m3 ); A is the forest area occupied by i-forest typology (ha); CF is the ratio of elemental carbon from mass to woody dry biomass (average value of 0.5; IPCC, 2007) and 44/12 is the ratio of molecular weight of CO2 to carbon (tCO2 tC1 ). The GS values were derived from local data (INFC, 2005), the BEF and WBD coefcients were obtained from Vitullo et al. (2007) and the forest typologies were elaborated from the vegetation map (Catorci et al., 2007) at a scale of 1:50,000 (Table 3). Analogously, the tree belowground biomass was calculated using Eq. (5): below CO2 = CF 44 12
i

Rc Runoffi,j j

(2)

GSi Ri WBDi Ai

(5)

2.2.3. Soil protection The soil protection services provided by the forests emerge as a decrease in soil erosion (Bini et al., 2006; Mahmoudzadeh et al., 2002) for forest land respect to croplands or other land use types. Thus, the economic value of soil protection was estimated as the avoided cost of restoring soil where erosion might occur. Because forest ecosystems are the most effective in soil protection, this value was estimated by the difference in the potential erosion between wooded and non-wooded land (Xue and Tisdell, 2001). In our study, non-forest (non-F) mainly consisted of agricultural areas, scrub and/or herbaceous vegetation associations. We distinguished potential erosion levels between forests (F) and non-forests (non-F) in terms of slope using the following thematic maps: soil erosion risk (20 m pixel size, Rusco et al., 2009); land use (Morri, 2012; Regione Emilia Romagna, 2010) and slope. The slope was calculated by DTM with 20 m of resolution and divided into ve categories: <5, 510, 1020, 2050 and >50%. The results corresponded to the average value of potential erosion for F and non-F in the ve slope classes. The difference of soil loss, expressed as t/ha/yr, from F and non-F areas with identical slopes approximated the contribution to erosion reduction and was expressed as a

where R is the root/shoot ratio, which converts growing stock biomass (Table 3). The above- and belowground biomass, i.e., the total living biomass as calculated by Eqs. (4) and (5), only represented 43% of the total CO2 sequestered (TOTCO2 ) by the forest according to the Italian Greenhouse Gas Inventory 19902007 (Romano et al., 2009). Other pools included soil (SCO2 ) and dead organic matter (DOMCO2 ), in which CO2 sequestration represented 48 and 9%, respectively. Hence, CO2 sequestration of soil and dead organic matter was derived considering the distribution of CO2 sequestration in different pools in the study areas using Eqs. (6) and (7). SCO2 = TOTCO2 100 48 (6)

DOMCO2 =

TOTCO2 100

(7)

As indicated by some authors (ENCAP, 2005; Fankhauser, 1995; Goio et al., 2008), we used a carbon market price expressed as the emission permit price of 20 D /t CO2 , which corresponds to the average CO2 price in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (Duong, 2009).

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

G Model
ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10

ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Morri et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx 5

Table 2 The water retained (m3 106 ) by forests in the Marecchia and Foglia river basins using retaining coefcients of water for different forest management typologies (elaborated from Hmann et al., 2011). Forest management Coppiced woodland Mature woodland Young woodland Unmanged woodland Reforestation Total Efciency of water conservation (% of runoff) 88.4 83.5 80.0 83.1 89.6 Water retained Marecchia river basin (m3 106 ) 5.93 0.44 0.27 0.13 0.57 7.35 Water retained Foglia river basin (m3 106 ) 6.47 0.41 0.27 0.13 0.62 7.91

2.3. Local demands for forest ecosystem services The local population, including private citizens, public institutions and productive sectors (tourism, agriculture and industry) is the main beneciary of the valued ecosystem services. Thus, the associated consumption of natural resources can be considered as proxy indicator of the current ESs demand. To differentiate the distribution of ES supplies and related beneciaries, we considered three regions (Fig. 1) according to the relative elevation in each basin and collected information from local statistics. The water retention demand was estimated as the annual consumption in the civil, industrial and agricultural sectors. Such an amount was reduced by 30%, which corresponded to water derived from sources external to the basin (articial reservoirs), to only consider water demand and supply provided within the basin. For the drinking water supply, we considered domestic use (by citizens and tourists), not reduced by 30%, considering that all water distributed to networks must be treated to be drinkable. For CO2 sequestration, we considered the CO2 emissions, expressed in t/yr (2007), from the residential, industrial and agricultural sectors, waste and energy production, as indicated in the national air emission inventory (INEMAR Project, 2009). The direct use value for our study area mainly consisted of the production of timber or rewood. Approximately 70% of the forests in the study area were managed as coppice, which is considered an important revenue for the administrative region. To compare the indirect and direct use values, we considered a production of 70 t/ha (INFC, 2009) with a price of 30 D /t (generated from Regione Marche, 2010). This value price was net and did not consider the cost for capital and labour, which was responsible for an increase of approximately 80% of the value on a local level. 3. Results 3.1. The value of water retention The amount of water retained was approximately 7.35 106 m3 and 7.91 106 m3 for the Marecchia and Foglia river basins, respectively (Table 2). The coppiced forest was the most extensive typology and retained most of the total water in the basins. Using the price of a retained volume of water, 9.8 D /m3 , derived from the avoided cost of avoiding articial water reservoir, the water retention values (1) were estimated at 72.2 106 D /yr and
Table 3 The forest typologies and parameters used to assess CO2 sequestration. Woodland typologies Beechwood Oak wood Oak wood 2 (Turkey oaks) Hornbeam Hygrophilous wood Other deciduous wood Coniferous wood Woodland area (ha) 1081.51 12,746.76 5988.69 6692.57 2426.85 10,535.16 232.91

77.7 106 D /yr for the Marecchia and Foglia river basins, respectively (Table 7). Considering the demand/supply for the Marecchia River Basin, the results were (Fig. 2) strongly unbalanced in favour of demand in the Low region, where most of the population and a high concentration of tourist activities were located. In this region, the civil sector (tourism and citizens) was responsible for 70% of the water demand, whereas in the Medium region, industrial activities were responsible for 17% of the total water demand. The identical trend also characterised the High region but with lower demand values, of which 10% of the total demand was required by industrial activities. The supply showed a decreasing gradient from high to low zone, supporting only 1.2, 0.5 and 0.05% of the total demand in the High, Medium and Low regions, respectively, according to a decreasing extension of forested areas. 3.1.1. The value of the drinking water supply The total value for the drinking water supply was estimated at approximately 2.9 106 D /yr and 3.1 106 D /yr for the Marecchia and Foglia river basins, respectively (Table 7). The data from the demand supply balance at the Marecchia River Basin (Fig. 2) emphasised forest support, and only 2% of the total demand of the drinking water supply showed an increasing downstream gradient, whereas an opposite gradient emerged in the supply trend. Only the water conservation of forests in the High region could support drinking water treatment demand. 3.1.2. The value of soil protection The total amount of soil loss [2] was estimated for forest (F) and non-forest (non-F) for the ve slope classes (Table 4). The total value for soil protection services was approximately 1.79 106 D /yr for the Marecchia River Basin and approximately 1.72 million D /yr for the Foglia River Basin. The data showed that the greater forest performance (a higher difference between non-F and F) in soil protection mainly occurred in higher slope classes (2050 and >50%). Accordingly, the main contributor (80%) to soil protection was provided by steeper forests, which were also the most extensive. 3.1.3. The value of CO2 sequestration The values of CO2 sequestration in the living biomass are presented in Table 5. The higher values of CO2 sequestration in

GS (m3 /ha yr) 4.5 2.6 4.2 3 7.1 5.3 4.3

WBD 0.60 0.67 0.69 0.53 0.41 0.53 0.43

BEF 1.36 1.42 1.45 1.47 1.39 1.47 1.37

R 0.2 0.2 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.24 0.29

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

G Model
ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10 6

ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Morri et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx

Fig. 2. The supply/demand values for the Marecchia and Foglia river basins.

Table 4 The soil protection values in the slope classes for the Marecchia and Foglia river basins. River basin Marecchia Slope (%) <5 510 1020 2050 >50 Erosion F (t/ha/yr) 9.88 3.29 4.50 5.93 5.37 Erosion non-F (t/ha/yr) 2.78 4.94 6.92 8.89 11.22 Soil erosion non-F-F (t/ha/yr) 7.10 1.65 2.43 2.96 5.86 F area (ha) 506.92 1268.12 3505.72 8429.72 4976.72 18,687 <5 510 1020 2050 >50 2.54 4.95 7.27 8.86 8.01 1.83 5.09 8.88 12.72 14.24 0.71 0.13 1.61 3.86 6.23 907.2 1690.6 5640 11,247.84 1056.56 20,542 Soil protection value 106 D /yr 0.11 0.06 0.25 0.73 0.85 1.79 0.02 0.01 0.27 1.27 0.19 1.72

Total Foglia

Total

below- and aboveground biomasses were linked to Turkey oaks, other deciduous and hygrophilous wood that corresponded to 61% of the total value of CO2 sequestration in the living biomass. Coniferous and beech wood with lower extensions represented less than

3% of the total value. The average belowground CO2 sequestration value (tCO2 /ha yr) was 14% (average value) with respect to living biomass. In the Marecchia and Foglia river basins, forests were responsible for the sequestration of 277 103 t/yr of CO2 .

Table 5 The total CO2 sequestration and its economic value for living biomass in the Marecchia and Foglia river basins. Forest typologies Forest area (ha) Amount of CO2 sequestration in aboveground biomass (t CO2 /ha yr) 6.74 4.54 7.71 4.29 7.42 7.58 4.65 Amount of CO2 sequestration in belowground biomass (t CO2 /ha yr) 0.99 0.64 1.28 0.70 1.23 1.24 0.98 Amount of CO2 sequestration in living biomass (t/yr) 8359.02 66,008.36 53,821.13 33,390.44 21,000.85 92,859.20 1311.82 276,750.82 Value of CO2 sequestration in living biomass (106 D /yr) 0.17 1.32 1.08 0.67 0.42 1.86 0.03 5.54

Beechwood Oak wood Oak wood 2 (Turkey oaks) Hornbeam Hygrophilous wood Other deciduous wood Coniferous wood Total

1081.51 12,746.76 5988.69 6692.57 2426.85 10,535.16 232.91

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

G Model
ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10

ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Morri et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx 7 Value in SCO2 (106 D /yr) 3.50 3.56 Value in DOMCO2 (106 D /yr) 0.66 0.66 Value in living biomass (106 D /yr) 3.16 2.38

Table 6 The CO2 sequestration values of different pools. River basin Marecchia Foglia Value of TOTCO2 (106 D /yr) 7.32 6.60

Table 7 The economic values of the forest ecosystem services of the Marecchia and Foglia river basins. Type Ecosystem services Marecchia river basin Value (106 D /yr) Direct value Indirect value Firewood Water retention Drinking water supply Soil protection CO2 sequestration 27.3 72.2 2.9 1.8 7.3 84.2 Value (D /ha yr) 2085 3866 157 96 358 4477 Foglia river basin Value (106 D /yr) 31.1 77.7 3.1 1.7 6.6 89.1 Value (D /ha yr) 2379 3782 154 84 342 4362

Total indirect value

Table 8 The forest ecosystem services value in High, Medium and Low regions of the Marecchia and Foglia river basins. Physiographic regions Marecchia river basin Extent (ha) 14,179 20,758 26,078 Forest (%) 4 24 50 Forest extent (ha) 540 5024 13,123 Forest indirect use values (106 D /yr) 2.30 22.6 59.3 Foglia river basin Extent (ha) 17,836.7 41,439.6 10,578.8 Forest (%) 11 34 44 Forest extent (ha) 1929 13,928 4685 Forest indirect use values (106 D /yr) 8.4 60.4 20.3

Low Medium High

Using a tradable permit price of 20 D /t CO2 , the total value of CO2 sequestration for the living biomass was approximately 5.54 106 D /yr. According to the Italian Greenhouse Gas Inventory, regarding the CO2 sequestration of dead organic matter and soil (Eqs. (6) and (7)), the total value of CO2 sequestration was contributed by different pools (Table 6) and was estimated at 7.32 106 and 6.60 106 D /yr for the Marecchia and Foglia river basins, respectively. Soil and living biomass were the two main pools. According to the distribution of forests and urban settlements, CO2 sequestration demand showed an increasing downstream gradient for both river basins (Fig. 2). Nearly 25% of the total CO2 sequestration demand of the Marecchia River Basin and over 30% in the Foglia River Basin was satised by the forest ecosystem. Regarding the Foglia River Basin, supply was greater in the Medium region with a larger extension compared to the High region and contained 66% of the total forests. Compared to the Marecchia River Basin, the demand was lower in the low zone of the Foglia River Basin because of less frequent road trafc, mainly in the tourist season, which is commonly responsible for higher CO2 emissions. 3.1.4. The values of forest ecosystem services The indirect values of forest ecosystem services of the Foglia and Marecchia river basins are presented in Table 7. The economic values of water retention, drinking water supply, soil protection and carbon sequestration were estimated at 84.2 106 and 89.1 106 D /yr for the Marecchia and Foglia river basins, respectively. Water retention of the forests provided the highest values for both river basins with values exceeding 3700 D /ha yr. We distinguished direct and indirect use values for the ecosystem services presented in Table 7. Based on the National Forestry Inventory (INFC, 2009) and Marche Region data (2010), the timber production value was estimated at 27.3 106 and 31.1 106 D /yr for the Marecchia and Foglia river basins, respectively, and were three times lower than the indirect values. The forest ecosystem service values distributed in the High, Medium and Low river basin regions are presented in Table 8, in

which the forests (%) represented the proportions of forest and each region. The ES values showed a gradient according to forest coverage. In the Marecchia River Basin, the High region contained 70% of the total indirect use values. In the Foglia River Basin, the Medium region provided a higher indirect use value. In all three regions, water retention was the most important ecosystem service provided by the forest. 4. Discussion In this study, we combined several methods to evaluate the indirect use of forests at the watershed level, considering their provision of ecosystem services for comparison with current demand, approximated by consumption rates or use. Essentially, we calculated the value of water retention, drinking water supply, carbon sequestration and soil protection using monetary values derived from replacement costs or (surrogate) market prices. These forest ESs were selected because they are among the most important and can be easily valued with available data. This selection was also guided by the expected (but not quantied) differences between up- and downstream (coastal) areas in ES provisioning and demand. Therefore, we distinguished ES values for the river basin sections according to elevation breaks with the purpose of emphasising the spatial mismatch in ES provisioning and demand and investigated the reliance of the coastal economy on the ecosystem services supplied in the upstream areas. It should be noted that water retention and drinking water supply overlapped in the provisioning area but their economic value was distinct and did not involve double accounting. The water retention value was estimated by considering the avoided costs of articially replacing natural function (i.e., articial water basins instead of forest water retention capacity). Drinking water supply was evaluated by the actual price of drinkable water for the nal consumers and was considered a proxy for the linked values generated by water availability. For soil protection, it was not possible to compare supply and demand because of the intrinsic difculty in dening a possible demand for services rarely considered and paid for by lay people (e.g., stability of soil). Soil protection can only be

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

G Model
ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10 8

ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Morri et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx

perceived by specic land users (i.e., farmers) when this service is absent. The carbon sequestration service was likely to be overestimated as CO2 release because mortality, cutting, and re were neglected. Simultaneously, some underestimation may be because of different CO2 sequestration by forest typologies, i.e., coppice is more efcient than a natural mixed-age forest. The nal results, similar to many cases in the literature (Merlo and Croitoru, 2005), showed that the indirect use values exceeded those related to direct use. The greatest values were related to the water retention service, which represented approximately 86% of the total indirect value for both study areas. Within a hypothetical scenario in which the forest was not present, we estimated that it would be necessary to build at least ve articial reservoirs (similar to the one mentioned in Section 2.2) to have the identical water retention. The main contribution to the soil protection value was provided by forests located in higher slope classes. The economic assessments relied on avoided cost and replacement cost methods, as suggested in previous studies (de Groot et al., 2002; Farber et al., 2006), because they provided comparable values to real market prices, which were not dependent on the respondents perceptions or surveys (as opposed to contingent valuations) and were more easily replicable in other contexts. Moreover, avoided costs were particularly notable to local administrators who must use public funds to repair ecosystem damages resulting from development. In this perspective, the use of replacement costs or market prices related to the specic regional context better supported the assessment reliability with respect to the benet transfer approach (as in Scolozzi et al., 2012). Notwithstanding the methodological limitations and result uncertainties linked to the needed simplication of ecological processes, this study provided useful insights suitable for fostering informed debate concerning the denition of regional policies. The uncertainty of value-based information could be considered acceptable for scoping a strategic spatial plan at the river basin scale. At this stage of decision-making, mapping the ES supply and demand and representing the spatial mismatch along the three sections of watershed helped identify providers and beneciaries. This study was useful for grounding the criteria for a priority denition in landscape planning and management. We observed a downstream positive gradient of demand and opposite upstream gradient of supply, as expected. Surprisingly, the capacity of forest ecosystems to satisfy local drinking water demand and water retention supply appeared to be low and only contributed to 4% of the total consumption in the Marecchia River Basin. Only in the High region of watershed the drinking water demand was satised by local supply. Concerning CO2 sequestration, the supply exceeded the demand in the higher watershed section, whereas the opposite occurred in the low and medium sections. The observed mismatch in ES supply and demand was both spatial and chronological and involved two groups of beneciaries related to the public (citizens and tourists) and private sectors (forestry, agriculture, industry). Most benets from ESs owed continuously over time, whereas the benets related to direct forest use (forestry sector) ran out periodically, for example, with the cutting cycle (approximately 15 years for coppice). Hence, forest owners or managers, generally the residents of higher basin sections, beneted from natural resources but also generated the most ESs at the watershed level. Currently, such a mismatch was not considered by local institutions, although the economy of the lower regions was increasingly dependent on ES from upstream areas. A weak link between the up- and downstream areas was because of recreation value and nature-based tourism. The tourist ow from the coast reaches the upper regions of the watershed by guided tours. The obtained information supported the need of ESs governance at the watershed level to promote the coordination of more detailed

valuations and actions. Such coordination could be a component of adaptive and multi-level governance seeking policy denitions for ecological-economic sustainability (e.g., considering the peak water demands in the dry season) and in particular, economic equity among territories in terms of benet redistribution from ESs. A multi-level perspective is required to understand and manage different scales of the different processes involved in ES provisioning, which range from forest management scattered by private small landownership to the regional water cycle and water use regimes. Further specic calculations may guide the denition of payments for ecosystem services at the river basin scale, target management rules for existing forests and expressly address ES cumulative returns (i.e., future benets from ESs). Currently, in the study area, there are no mechanisms to pay for the selected ecosystem services, although they are mentioned in some of the latest policies (e.g., agriculture); some examples in Italy are described in the context of water management (Pettenella et al., 2012). 5. Conclusions - Our study described a simplied procedure for the evaluation of selected ecosystem services provided by forests using a set of replacement costs or avoided costs, market prices and environmental variables (such as land cover, slope, precipitation and temperature). Replacement costs or market prices related to the specic regional context are expected to support assessment reliability to reward provisioning areas where ecosystem services are maintained or compensate losses in ecosystem benets. - The results showed that the indirect use values of the selected ecosystem services were three times higher than the direct use values (i.e., rewood production). This information also focused on the value of ecosystem processes not previously considered in natural resources management. - The analysis of supply and demand of the selected ecosystem services showed a spatial mismatch, thus emphasizing a debt in coastal areas from upstream areas, particularly concerning drinking water supply and CO2 sequestration, in which the upstream region, characterized by extensive forests, could partially support the total demand of ecosystem services in the river basin. - This approach can be easily applied in similar contexts and in the planning scenarios assessment as indicators at different levels, such as urban planning (e.g., land use change, urban green functions) and environmental effect evaluations, which rely on available basic data from variables sensitive to land use change and forest management (forest typologies). The produced value-based information can support compensation mechanism denitions or PES schemes to promote the re-distribution of resources or different types of decision-making for conservation and resource management planning. Acknowledgement This research was funded by the Pesaro Urbino and Rimini Provinces. The authors are also grateful to ASSAM (Agenzia Servizi Settore Agroalimentare Marche) for support with local soil data knowledge, ISSI (Istituto Sviluppo Sostenibile Italia) for support on carbon sequestration valuation methodologies, Terre.it for his support on slope map analysis. We thank the anonymous referees for their comments and suggestions. We are grateful for interesting suggestions allowing for manuscript improvement. References
Abildtrup, J., Garcia, S., Stenger, A., 2011. The effect of forest land use on the cost of drinking water supply: a spatial econometric analysis. In: International

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

G Model
ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10

ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Morri et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx 9 Gooch, G.D., Stlnacke, P., 2006. Integrated Transboundary Water Management in Theory and Practice: Experiences from the New EU Eastern Border. IWA Publisher, London. Gret-Regamey, A., Kytzia, S., 2007. Integrating the valuation of ecosystem services into the inputoutput economics of an Alpine region. Ecol. Econ. 63, 4. Gunatilake, H.M., Vieth, G.R., 2000. Estimation of on-site cost of soil erosion: a comparison of replacement and productivity change methods. J. Soil Water Conserv. 55 (2), 197204, Second Quarter. Guo, Z., Xiao, X., Gan, Y., Zheng, Y., 2001. Ecosystem functions, services and their values a case study in Xingshan County of China. Ecol. Econ. 38, 141154. Hao, G., Bing, W., XiangQian, M., GuangDong, Z., ShaoNing, L., 2008. Evaluation of ecosystem services of Chinese pine forests in China. Sci. China Ser. C Life Sci. 51, 662670. Hein, L., van Koppen, K., de Groot, R.S., van Ierland, E.C., 2006. Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol. Econ. 57, 209228. Howarth, R., Farber, S., 2002. Accounting for the value of ecosystem services. Ecol. Econ. 41, 421429. Hmann, M., Schler, G., Mller, C., Schneider, R., Johst, M., Caspari, T., 2011. Identication of runoff processes the impact of different forest types and soil properties on runoff formation and oods. J. Hydrol. 409, 637649. INEMAR Project, 2009. Available at http://www.inemar.eu/xwiki/bin/view/Inemar/ WebHome INFC, 2005. National Inventory of Forests and Forest Carbon Sinks. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Policies, General DepartmentNational Forest Service. CRAMPF, Trento. INFC, 2009. I caratteri quantitativi 2005parte 1, vers. 2. Inventario Nazionale delle Foreste e dei Serbatoi Forestali di Carbonio (National Inventory of Forests and Forest Carbon Sinks). MiPAAFIspettorato Generale Corpo Forestale dello Stato, CRA-MPF, Trento. IPCC, 2003. Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry. IPCC Technical Support Unit, Kanagawa, Japan. IPCC, 2007. Climate change 2007: the scientic basis. In: IPCC 4th Assessment Report, Working Group I, Available on line on the web site http://www.ipcc.ch IPLA, 2000. I tipi forestali delle Marche-20012002 (Forestry typologies of Marche Region. Regione Marche). ISTAT, 1958. Circoscrizioni statistiche (District statistics). Metodi e norme Serie C (1), 710. ISTAT, 2001. 14 C ensimento generale della popolazione e delle abitazioni (Housing and population census). Istituto Nazionale di Statistica, Rome. Jewitt, G., 2002. Can integrated water resources management sustain the provision of ecosystem goods and services? Phys. Chem. Earth A/B/C 27, 887895. Kelman, S., 1982. Cost-benet analysis and environmental safety and health regulation: ethical and philosophical considerations. In: Swartzman, D., Liroff, R.A., Croke, K.G. (Eds.), CostBenet Analysis and Environmental Regulations: Politics, Ethics, and Methods. The Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC, pp. 5385. Kremen, C., Niles, J.O., Dalton, M.G., Daily, G.C., Ehrlich, P.R., Fay, J.P., Grewal, D., Guillery, R.P., 2000. Economic incentives for rain forest conservation across scales. Science 9, 18281832. Kremen, C., 2005. Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology? Ecol. Lett. 8, 468479, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00751.xKremen. Luck, G.W., Chan, K.M.A., Klein, C.J., 2012. Identifying spatial priorities for protecting ecosystem services. F1000 Res. 1, 17, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3410/f1000research.1-17.v1. Mahmoudzadeh, A., Erskin, W.D., Myers, C., 2002. Sediment yields and soil loss rates from native forest, pasture and cultivated land in the Bathurst area, New South Wales. Aust. For. 65, 7380. Marche Multiservizi, 2008. Bilancio di Sostenibilit 2008. Marche Multiservizi S.P.A, pp. 119. Marche Multiservizi, 2011. Bilancio di sostenibilit (Balance of sustainability). http://www.gruppomarchemultiservizi.it Merlo, M., Croitoru, L., 2005. Valuing Mediterranean Forests-Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Cambridge, MA. MEA, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystem and Human Well-Being: A Framework for Assessment. Island Press, Washington, DC. Ming, J., Xian-Guo, L., Lin-Shu, X., Li-Juan, C., Shouzheng, T., 2007. Flood mitigation benet of wetland soil a case study in Momoge National Reserve in China. Ecol. Econ. 61, 217223. Morri, E., 2012. Lo stato ambientale del bacino del ume Foglia: Funzionalit Fluviale e Servizi Ecosistemici (Environmental state of Foglia river basin: river functionality and ecosystem services). Urbino University, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Nelson, G.C., Bennett, E., Berhe, A.A., Cassman, K., DeFries, R., Dietz, T., Dobermann, A., Dobson, A., Janetos, A., Levy, M., Marco, D., Nakicenovic, N., ONeill, B., Norgaard, R., Petschel-Held, G., Ojima, D., Pingali, P., Watson, R., Zurek, M., 2006. Anthropogenic drivers of ecosystem change: an overview. Ecol. Soc. 11 (2), 29, URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art29/ Nittrouer, N., Miserocchi, S., Trincardi, F., 2004. The PASTA project investigation of Po and Apennine sediment transport and accumulation. Oceanography 17, 4657. Palomo, I., Martn-Lpez, B., Potschin, M., Haines-Young, R., Montes, C., 2013. National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: mapping ecosystem service ows. Ecosyst. Serv. 4, 104116.

Congress, August 30September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland, 120385, European Association of Agricultural Economists. ARPA, 2007. www.arpa.emr.it (accessed September 2011). ATO, 2007. Piano di conservazione della risorsa idrica (Water conservation plan), http://www.atorimini.it Bartier, P.M., Keller, P.C., 1996. Multivariate interpolation to incorporate thematic surface data using inverse distance weighting (IDW). Comput. Geosci. 22, 195799. Bini, C., Gemignani, S., Zilocchi, L., 2006. Effect of different land use on soil erosion in the pre-alpine fringe (North-East Italy): ion budget and sediment yield. Sci. Total Environ. 369, 433440. Bonan, G.B., 2008. Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benets of forests. Science 320, 14441449. Borsuk, M., Clemen, R., Maguire, L., Reckhow, K., 2001. Stakeholder values and scientic modeling in the Neuse River watershed. Group. Decis. Negot. 10, 355373. Bosch, J.M., Hewlett, J.D., 1982. A review of catchment experiments to determine the effect of vegetation changes on water yield and evapotranspiration. J. Hidrol. 55, 323. Bruer, I., Marggraf, R., March 2004. Valuation of Ecosystem Services Provided by Biodiversity Conservation: An Integrated Hydrological and Economic Model to Value the Enhanced Nitrogen Retention in Renaturated Streams. FEEM Working Paper No. 54.04. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=541106 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.541106 Brauman, K.A., Daily, G.C., Duarte, T.K., Mooney, H.A., 2007. The nature and value of ecosystem services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 32, 67L 98. Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Nedkov, S., Mller, F., 2012. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol. Indic. 21, 1729. Catorci, A., Biondi, E., Casavecchia, S., Pesaresi, S., Vitanzi, A., Foglia, A., Galassi, S., Pinzi, M., Angelini, E., Bianchelli, M., Ventrone, F., Cesaretti, S., Gatti, R., 2007. La Carta della vegetazione e degli elementi di paesaggio vegetale delle Marche (scala 1:50. 000) per la progettazione e la gestione della rete ecologica regionale. Fitosociologia 44, 115118. Cavatassi, R., 2004. Valuation Methods for Environmental Benets in Forestry and Watershed Investment Projects. ESA Working Paper No. 04-01. Agricultural and Development Economics Division, FAO. Chiabai, A., Travisi, C.M., Ding, H., Markandya, A., Nunes, P.A.L.D., 2009. Economic Valuation of Forest Ecosystem Services: Methodology and Monetary Estimates. Fondazione ENI Enrico Mattei, Milano. Cosman, D., Schmidt, R., Harrison-Cox, J., Batker, D., 2012. How water utilities can spearhead natural capita accounting. Solutions 2, 2831. Costanza, R., dArge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., ONeill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, J.R., Sutton, P., van den Belt, M., 1997. The value of the worlds ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253260. Costanza, R., dArge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., ONeill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., van den Belt, M., 1998. The value of eco system service: putting the issues in perspective. Ecol. Econ. 25, 6772. Costanza, R., 2008. Ecosystem services: multiple classication systems are needed. Biol. Conserv. 41, 350352. de Groot, R., Wilson, M., Boumans, R., 2002. Special issue: the dynamics and value of ecosystem services: integrating economic and ecological perspectives. A typology for the classication, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol. Econ. 41, 393408. de Groot, R., Alchemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., Willemen, L., 2010. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol. Complexity 7, 260272. Didero, M., Franca, E., Calcagnini, E., Farina, G., 1990. Studio delle risorse idriche sotterranee presenti nel territorio provinciale in relazione al loro stato di compromissione (Study of groundwater resources in the province related to their impaired state. Internal report of Urbino-Pesaro Province. Pesaro and Urbino Province.). Duong, M.H., 2009. What is the price of carbon? Five denitions. Surv. Perspect. Integr. Environ. Soc. 1, 15. ENCAP, 2005. Enhanced capture of CO2 . http://www.encapco2.org Ernst, C., 2004. Land Conservation and the Future of Americas Drinking Water: Protecting the Source. Trust for Public Land, San Francisco, CA. Fankhauser, S., 1995. Valuing Climate Change. The Economics of the Greenhouse. Earthscan, London. Farber, S., Costanza, R., Wilson, M., 2002. Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecol. Econ. 41, 375392. Farber, S., Costanza, R., Childers, D.L., Erickson, J., Gross, K., Grove, M., Hopkinson, C.S., Kahn, J., Pincetl, S., Troy, A., Warren, P., Wilson, M., 2006. Linking ecology and economics for ecosystem management. Bioscience 56 (2.). Federici, S., Vitullo, M., Tulipano, S., De Lauretis, R., Seufert, G., 2007. An approach to estimate carbon stocks change in forest carbon pools under the UNFCCC: the Italian case. iForest 1, 8695. Fisher, B., Turner, K., Zylstra, M., Brouwer, R., Groot, R., Farber, S., Ferraro, P., Green, R., Hadley, D., Harlow, J., 2008. Ecosystem services and economic theory: integration for policy-relevant research. Ecol. Appl. 18, 20502067. Gatto, P., Pettenella, D., Secco, L., 2009. Payment for forest environmental services: organisational models and related experiences in Italy. iForest 2, 133139. Goio, I., Gios, G., Pollini, C., 2008. The development of forest accounting in the province of Trento (Italy). J. For. Econ. 14, 177196.

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016

G Model
ECOIND-1650; No. of Pages 10 10

ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Morri et al. / Ecological Indicators xxx (2013) xxxxxx Ruhl, J.B., Kraft, S.E., Lant, C.L., 2007. The Law and Policy of Ecosystem Services. Island Press, Washington, DC. Rusco, E., Marchal, B., Tiberi, M., Bernacconi, C., Ciabocco, G., Ricci, P., Spurio, E., 2009. Case study Italy Sustainable Agriculture and Soil Conservation (SoCo Project). In: JRC Technical Notes EUR 24131 EN/9. Schuler, G., 2006. Identication of ood-generating forest areas and forestry measures for water retention. For. Snow Landsc. Res. 80, 99114. Scolozzi, R., Morri, E., Santolini, R., 2012. Delphi-based change assessment in ecosystem service values to support strategic spatial planning in Italian landscapes. Ecol. Indicat. 21, 134144. Syrbe, R.U., Walz, U., 2012. Spatial indicators for the assessment of ecosystem services: providing, beneting and connecting areas and landscape metrics. Ecol. Indicat. 21, 8088. Stern, N., 2007. The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, New York. TEEB, European Communities, 2008. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity. In: Interim Report European Communities, 64 pp. Tol, R.S.J., 2008. The social cost of carbon: trends, outliers and catastrophes. Economics 2 (25), 122. Van der Keur, P., Henriksen, H., Refsgaard, J., Brugnach, M., Pahl-Wostl, C., Dewulf, A., Buiteveld, H., 2008. Identication of major sources of uncertainty in current IWRM practice. Illustrated for the Rhine basin. Water Res. Manage. 22, 16771708. Villa, F., Bagstad, K., Johnson, G., Voigt, B., 2012. Towards a comprehensive approach to quantifying and mapping ecosystem services ows. In: Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), BC3 Working Paper Series 2012-07., http://www.bc3research.org/working papers/view.html Vitullo, M., De Lauretis, R., Federici, S., 2007. La contabilit del carbonio contenuto nelle foreste italiane [National carbon account in Italian forests]. Silvae Anno III (9), 91104. Xue, D., Tisdell, C., 2001. Valuing ecological functions of biodiversity in Changbaishan Mountain Biosphere Reserve in Northeast China. Biodivers. Conserv. 10, 467481. Zhao, F.F., Zhang, L., Xu, Z.X., 2009. Effects of vegetation cover change on streamow at a range of spatial scales. In: Proceedings of 18th World IMACS/MODSIM Congress, Cairns, Australia.

Pettenella, D., Vidale, E., Gatto, P., Secco, L., 2012. Paying for water-related forest services: a survey on Italian payment mechanisms. iForest 5, 210215, http://dx.doi.org/10.3832/ifor0626-005. C.M., Guevara, A., Torres, J.M., Brana, J., 2008. Paying for the hydrological Pina, services of Mexicos forests: analysis, negotiations and results. Ecol. Econ. 65, 725736. Pires, M., 2004. Watershed protection for a world city: the case of New York. Land Use Policy 21, 161175. Postel, S.L., Thompson, B.H., 2005. Watershed protection: capturing the benets of natures water supply services. Nat. Resour. Forum 29, 98108. Quine, C.P., Cahalan, C., Hester, A., Humphrey, J., Kirby, K., Moffat, A., Valatin, G., 2011. Woodlands. In: The UK National Ecosystem Assessment Technical Report, UK National Ecosystem Assessment, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. Regione Emilia Romagna, 2010. 2008 Coperture vettoriali delluso del suolo (2008 Land Use Cover), http://archiviocartograco.regione. emilia-romagna.it/bookshopfe/ Regione Emilia Romagna and ARPA, 2007. Inventario delle emissioni in atmosfera (Gas Emission Inventory to the Atmosphere), www.arpa.emr.it/ cms3/documenti/ cerca doc/meteo/ambiente/inventario emissioni 2007.pdf Regione Marche, 2009. Inventario delle emissioni in atmosfera (Gas Emission Inventory to the Atmosphere), http://www.provincia.ancona.it/ ecologia/Engine/RAServeFile.php/f/PianoAria 2009 luglio allegato1.pdf Regione Marche, 2010. Prezziario generale (General Price List), http://www. operepubbliche.marche.it/defaultprezz.asp?quale=generale Reyes, J., Mates, W., 2004. The Economic Value of New Jersey State Parks and Forests. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, New Jersey. Rodrguez, J.P., Beard, T.D., Bennett Jr., E.M., Cumming, G.S., Cork, S., Agard, J., Dobson, A.P., Peterson, G.D., 2006. Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecology and Society 11 (1), 28, URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art28/ Romano, D., Arcarese, C., Bernetti, A., Caputo, A., Cndor, R.D., Contaldi, M., Lauretis, R., Di Cristofaro, E., Federici, S., Gagna, A., Gonella, B., Liburdi, R., Taurino, E., Vitullo, M., 2009. Italian Greenhouse Gas Inventory 19902007. In: National Inventory Report 2009, ISPRA Institute for Environmental Protection and Research, Italy.

Please cite this article in press as: Morri, E., et al., A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: Supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol. Indicat. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016