What Role Does Planning Have in the Creation of Ecosystem Service Markets? Evidence from Two Cases in Oregon

Abstract

Spanish

Chinese

Ecosystem service markets (ESMs) facilitate the buying and selling of credits that represent specific environmental improvements, like a reduction in atmospheric carbon dioxide or a waterborne pollutant, such as phosphorous or nitrogen. The popularity of this institution has the potential to change land-use planning, especially at the regional level. This comparative analysis of two prominent ESMs in Oregon finds that these institutions can severely restrict opportunities for public participation in land-use decision making, reduce the transparency of measurement technologies used to target restoration activities, and prioritize privately owned land outside of urban areas for restoration investments, thereby limiting public access to green spaces.

Keywords

ecosystem services markets land use participation Oregon

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Argyris

Schön

D. A.

1978. Organizational Learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Bell

Nina.

2013a. “EPA Oversight of Trading in Oregon Permits Needed to Ensure Consistency with EPA Regulations Implementing the Clean Water Act.” Letter to M. Ligard, March 15, 2013.

Bell

Nina.

2013b. “Freedom of Information Act Request.” EPA-R10-2013-004864, March 25, 2013.

Bell

Nina

Hawley.

Andrew

2015. “Comments on Draft Trading Rules.” Letter to D. Ades, February 27, 2015.

BenDor

Todd K.

Brozović

Nicholas

. 2007. “Determinants of Spatial and Temporal Patterns in Compensatory Wetland Mitigation.” Environmental Management 40 (3): 349–64.

BenDor

Todd

Brozović

Nicholas

Pallathucheril

Varkki George

. 2007. “Assessing the Socioeconomic Impacts of Wetland Mitigation in the Chicago Region.” Journal of the American Planning Association 73 (3): 263–82.

BenDor

Todd

Brozović

Nicholas

Pallathucheril

Varkki George

. 2008. “The Social Impacts of Wetland Mitigation Policies in the United States.” Journal of Planning Literature 22 (4): 341–57.

BenDor

Todd K.

Doyle

Martin W.

2009. “Planning for Ecosystem Service Markets.” Journal of the American Planning Association 76 (1): 59–72.

BenDor

Todd K.

Spurlock

Danielle

Woodruff

Sierra C.

Olander

Lydia

. 2017. “A Research Agenda for Ecosystem Services in American Environmental and Land Use Planning.” Cities 60, part A (February): 260–71.

10.

Bennett

Genevieve

Carroll

Nathaniel

. 2014. Gaining Depth: State of Watershed Payments 2014. Washington, DC: Forest Trends.

11.

Beschta

Robert

. 1999. “Heat Source Methodology Review 4.” Portland: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Available from http://www.oregon.gov/deq/wq/tmdls/Pages/TMDLS-Heat-Source-Review.aspx

12.

Bienkowski

Brian.

2015. “Can Planting Trees Make Up for Warming River Water?” Scientific American, July 30, 2015.

13.

Boyd

Matthew S.

1996. “Heat Source: Stream, River and Open Channel Temperature Prediction.” Corvallis: Oregon State University. http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/handle/1957/27036.

14.

Castree

Noel

. 2008. “Neoliberalising Nature: The Logics of Deregulation and Reregulation.” Environment and Planning A 40 (1): 131–52.

15.

Clean Water Services. 2005. Healthy Streams Plan. Hillsboro, OR: Author. http://www.cleanwaterservices.org/media/1298/healthy-streams-plan.pdf.

16.

Clean Water Services. 2014. “Temperature Management Plan and Credit Trading Activities: 2014 Annual Report.” Hillsboro, OR: Author.

17.

Cochran

Bobby

Logue

Charles

. 2011. “A Watershed Approach to Improve Water Quality: Case Study of Clean Water Services’ Tualatin River Program.” JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 47 (1): 29–38.

18.

Cornell

Sarah

. 2011. “The Rise and Rise of Ecosystem Services: Is ‘Value’ the Best Bridging Concept between Society and the Natural World?” Procedia Environmental Sciences 6:88–95.

19.

Cleland

Bruce

. 1999. “Heat Source Methodology Review 2.” Portland: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Available from http://www.oregon.gov/deq/wq/tmdls/Pages/TMDLS-Heat-Source-Review.aspx

20.

Daily

Gretchen C.

1997. Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence On Natural Ecosystems. Washington, DC: Island Press.

21.

Daily

Gretchen C.

Polasky

Stephen

Goldstein

Joshua

Kareiva

Peter M.

Mooney

Harold A.

Pejchar

Liba

Ricketts

Taylor H.

Salzman

James

Shallenberger

Robert

. 2009. “Ecosystem Services in Decision Making: Time to Deliver.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7 (1): 21–28.

22.

Dooling

Sarah

. 2008. “Ecological Gentrification: Re-negotiating Justice in the City.” Critical Planning 15:40–57.

23.

Dooling

Sarah

. 2009. “Ecological Gentrification: A Research Agenda Exploring Justice in the City.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 33 (3): 621–39.

24.

Douglas Smith

Jack

. n.d. “Heat Source Methodology Review 5.” Portland: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Accessed November 28, 2017. Available from http://www.oregon.gov/deq/wq/tmdls/Pages/TMDLS-Heat-Source-Review.aspx

25.

Dyckman

Caitlin S.

Paulsen

Kurt

. 2012. “Not in My Watershed! Will Increased Federal Supervision Really Bring Better Coordination between Land Use and Water Planning?” Journal of Planning Education and Research 32 (1): 91–106.

26.

Effinger

Anthony.

2011. “Harry & David’s Bankruptcy Rocks Medford, Oregon.” BusinessWeek, March 31, 2011.

27.

Fisher

Brendan

Turner

R. Kerry

Morling

Paul

. 2009. “Defining and Classifying Ecosystem Services for Decision Making.” Ecological Economics 68 (3): 643–53.

28.

Forester

John

. 2009. Dealing with Differences: Dramas of Mediating Public Disputes. New York: Oxford University Press.

29.

The Freshwater Trust. n.d. “History.” https://www.thefreshwatertrust.org/about-us/history/ (accessed November 28, 2017).

30.

Hamstead

Zoé A.

BenDor

Todd K.

2010. “Overcompliance in Water Quality Trading Programs: Findings from a Qualitative Case Study in North Carolina.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 28 (1): 1–17.

31.

Heal

G. M.

2000. Nature and the Marketplace: Capturing the Value of Ecosystem Services. Washington, DC: Island Press.

32.

Hennings

Raymond Banks

. 2014. “Stream Temperature Management in the Tualatin Watershed: Is It Improving Salmonid Habitat?” Geography Masters Research Paper 8, Portland State University, Portland, OR.

33.

Heynen

Nik

. 2007. Neoliberal Environments: False Promises and Unnatural Consequences. London: Routledge.

34.

Holzapfel

Gerda

Weihs

Philipp

Rauch

Hans Peter

. 2013. “Use of the Shade-a-lator 6.2 Model to Assess the Shading Potential of Riparian Purple Willow (Salix Purpurea) Coppices on Small to Medium Sized Rivers.” Ecological Engineering 61 (Part C): 697–705.

35.

IHS Markit. 2017. “IHS Markit Wins Best Carbon Credit Registry Award for Eight Straight Year.” IHS Online Newsroom. http://news.ihsmarkit.com/press-release/financial-markets/ihs-markit-wins-best-carbon-credit-registry-award-eighth-straight-ye.

36.

King

Dennis

Herbert

Luke

. 1997. “The Fungibility of Wetlands.” National Wetlands Newsletter–Environmental Law Institute 19 (5): 10–13.

37.

Krueger

William

. 1999. “Heat Source Methodology Review 3.” Portland: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Available from http://www.oregon.gov/deq/wq/tmdls/Pages/TMDLS-Heat-Source-Review.aspx

38.

Lamy

France

Bolte

John

Santelmann

Mary

Smith

Courtland

. 2002. “Development and Evaluation of Multiple-Objective Decision-Making Methods for Watershed Management Planning.” JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 38 (2): 517–29.

39.

Lucero

Carl

. 2009. “USDA Effort Supporting Ecosystem Services and Markets.” https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs141p2_002537.pdf.

40.

McGinnis

S. L.

2001. “Watershed-Based Pollution Trading Development and Current Trading Programs.” Environmental Engineering and Policy 2 (3): 161–70.

41.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2003. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: A Framework for Assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press.

42.

Mohammad

Basma

Dietrich

Emily

. 2017. Ecosystem Services Case Study: Clean Water Services. Portland, OR: Portland State University, Institute for Sustainable Solutions.

43.

Nelson

Erik

Mendoza

Guillermo

Regetz

James

Polasky

Stephen

Tallis

Heather

Cameron

Richard

Chan

Kai

. 2009. “Modeling Multiple Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity Conservation, Commodity Production, and Tradeoffs at Landscape Scales.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7 (1): 4–11.

44.

Obama

Barack

. 2012. “Remarks by the President at Conservation Conference.” Speech, March 2, 2012. Washington, DC: Office of the Press Secretary. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/02/remarks-president-conservation-conference.

45.

Oregon Association of Clean Water Agencies. 2012. “Medford Water Quality Permit Moves Trading Forward.” 2012 newsletter, winter edition.

46.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2001. “Tualatin Basin Final TMDL.” Portland, OR: Author.

47.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2004. “National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit: Watershed-Based Waste Discharge Permit.” Permit Nos. 101141-101144. Portland, OR: Author.

48.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2006. “Willamette Basin TMDL Order.” September 21. Portland, OR: Author.

49.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2008. “Rogue River Basin Final TMDL.” Portland, OR: Author.

50.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2009. “Water Quality Trading in NPDES Permits: Internal Management Directive.” DEQ 10-WQ-003. Portland, OR: Author.

51.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2011a. “National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Waste Discharge Permit: City of Medford.” Permit Number: 100985. Salem, OR: Author.

52.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2011b. “NPDES Permit Evaluation Report and Fact Sheet.” Medford, OR: Author.

53.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2016. “Water Quality Trading: Internal Management Directive.” Portland, OR: Author.

54.

Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board. 2017. “Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board Oregon Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP).” http://www.oregon.gov/OWEB/pages/crep.aspx (accessed July 25, 2017).

55.

Porter

Theodore M.

1995. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

56.

Portland Business Journal . 2010. “Freshwater Trust Is Ready to Make a National Splash,” April 2010, section Sustainable Business Oregon.

57.

Robertson

Morgan M.

2006. “The Nature That Capital Can See: Science, State, and Market in the Commodification of Ecosystem Services.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 24 (3): 367–87.

58.

Robertson

Morgan M.

2009. “The Work of Wetland Credit Markets: Two Cases in Entrepreneurial Wetland Banking.” Wetlands Ecology and Management 17 (1): 35–51.

59.

Robertson

Morgan M.

2012. “Measurement and Alienation: Making a World of Ecosystem Services.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 37 (3): 386–401.

60.

Ruckelshaus

Mary

McKenzie

Emily

Tallis

Heather

Guerry

Anne

Daily

Gretchen

Kareiva

Peter

Polasky

Stephen

, et al. 2015. “Notes from the Field: Lessons Learned from Using Ecosystem Service Approaches to Inform Real-World Decisions.” Ecological Economics 115 (July): 11–21.

61.

Ruhl

J. B.

Salzman

2006. “The Effects of Wetland Mitigation Banking on People.” National Wetlands Newsletter 28 (2): 9–14.

62.

Salzman

James

. 2005. “Creating Markets for Ecosystem Services: Notes from the Field.” NYU Law Review 80:870–961.

63.

Scarlett

Lynn

Boyd

James

. 2011. “Ecosystem Services: Quantification, Policy Applications, and Current Federal Capabilities.” Discussion Paper RFF DP 11-13, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.

64.

Susskind

Lawrence E.

1985. “The Siting Puzzle: Balancing Economic and Environmental Gains and Losses.” Environmental Impact Assessment Review 5 (2): 157–63.

65.

Susskind

Lawrence

McKearnan

Sarah

Thomas-Larmer

Jennifer

, eds. 1999. The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

66.

Taylor

Joseph E.

1999. Making Salmon: An Environmental History of the Northwest Fisheries Crisis. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

67.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. n.d. “CIG Project Search: NRCS.” https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ciglanding/national/programs/financial/cig/cigsearch/ (accessed November 22, 2017).

68.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007a. “Water Quality Trading Toolkit for Permit Writers.” EPA 833-R-07-004. Washington, DC: Author.

69.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007b. Watershed-Based Permitting Case Study: Tualatin River Watershed, Oregon. Washington, DC: Author.

70.

Valentine

Gill

. 1997. “Tell Me about . . . : Using Interviews as a Research Methodology.” In Methods in Human Geography: A Guide for Students Doing a Research Project, edited by Flowerdew

Martin

, 110–26. Harlow, UK: Longman.

71.

Wallis

Graham

. 1999. “Heat Source Methodology Review 1.” Portland: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Available from http://www.oregon.gov/deq/wq/tmdls/Pages/TMDLS-Heat-Source-Review.aspx

72.

Whitworth

Joe S.

2013. “Corrections to Northwest Environmental Advocates’ March 15, 2013 Letter Seeking EPA Oversight of Oregon Water Quality Trading Program and Medford Permit.” http://www.oregon.gov/deq/Rulemaking%20Docs/wqt2015TFTletterNWEA.pdf.

73.

Whitworth

Joe S.

2015. Quantified: Redefining Conservation for the Next Economy. Washington, DC: Island Press.

74.

Willamette Partnership. 2009. Counting on the Environment: Joint Statement of Agreement for an Ecosystem Credit Accounting System. Portland, OR: Author.

75.

Willamette Partnership, Pinchot Institute for Conservation, and World Resources Institute. 2012. In It Together: A How-To Reference to Building Point-Nonpoint Water Quality Trading Programs. Hillsboro, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

76.

Willamette Partnership, World Resources Institute, and the National Network on Water Quality Trading. 2015. Building a Water Quality Trading Program: Options and Considerations. National Network on Water Quality Trading.