Monthly Archives: October 2018

Natural Capital Coalition September Newsletter

Last month, an article and editorial were published in Nature that framed our community as one divided into warring ideological factions, concentrated on squabbles about semantics rather than debates about substance.

Our response has demonstrated that we are anything but.

Last week, Nature published several letters that were received in response, including a joint letter from ourselves, ESP and TEEB, and a letter from IPBES alongside several others.

All letters embody the same core message; that we are committed to working together to protect and enhance the natural world, and that we welcome a diversity of opinions, terminologies and values in this mission.

Many of the leading voices in biodiversity and ecosystems research have also come forward in support of this message.

As we wrote in May: “The more diverse an ecosystem, the more resilient it will be, as it will contain many species with overlapping ecological functions that can be mutually strengthening.

When it comes to systems change, it’s clear that diversity in approach can play the same role as biological diversity plays in an ecosystem. Diversity means many different relationships, and different approaches, working in partnership to solve a common challenge.”

We look forward to continuing these conservations and strengthening the bonds that hold our community together at the Natural Capital Week in Paris this November (26 – 30).

Combatting Canada’s Rising Flood Costs: Natural infrastructure is an underutilized option

This report demonstrates how to quantify the benefits and costs of natural infrastructure as a strong complement or a viable alternative to grey infrastructure option for flood mitigation.

Natural infrastructure can be a cost-effective way to mitigate material financial losses that would otherwise result from flooding Moreover, natural infrastructure can offer other valuable environmental and social benefits that are often not attainable through the implementation of traditional, grey-engineered solutions.

A thorough cost-benefit analysis should measure all infrastructure options through a common cost-benefit lens. For example, although naturally occurring ponds provide stormwater storage capacity, which helps attenuate flooding, they also create habitat for aquatic species, improve biodiversity and provide aesthetic benefits to the community. These additional benefits are not available through a grey infrastructure solution, such as a stormwater storage tank, and this needs to be reflected in a cost-benefit analysis.

A comprehensive assessment of the financial, environmental and social costs and benefits (i.e., a total economic value [TEV] assessment) is required to illuminate these otherwise uncaptured benefits. Canada will continue to experience loss and degradation of its natural infrastructure assets if it does not start to apply a robust TEV assessment for natural versus grey infrastructure solutions.

To assist governments, practitioners and investors with land-use planning and infrastructure investment decisions, this report includes a framework for natural infrastructure project implementation