Valuing the ecosystem services delivered by conservation and stewardship programs is of interest within USDA and across the federal government. Answering these types of questions requires accurate and scientifically sound measures of Ecosystem Service Values (ESVs). While there is a rich literature on valuation of nonmarket goods, it is often difficult to use for the ESVs provided by USDA and other federal agencies. To advance understanding of the use of ESVs in conservation programs, this special issue of ARER presents selected papers from a 2019 workshop entitled “Applications and Potential of Ecosystem Services Valuation within USDA – Advancing the Science.”

Much of the research on ecosystem service values (ESVs) has limited applicability to USDA program benefit analyses, largely because the models/data/results (1) lack spatial breadth and hence cannot be applied in national analyses of USDA programs, and (2) do not link land use changes to the changes in ESs. This article provides an overview of a set of 15 ESVs related to agriculture's impacts on erosion in order to identify (1) weaknesses in methods, data, and assumptions that limit the quality of the ESVs and means of avoiding such weaknesses in future ESV development, and (2) approaches that might improve the reliability and spatial resolution of future ESV estimates.

This article discusses prospects and challenges related to the use of meta-regression models (MRMs) for ecosystem service benefit transfer, with an emphasis on validity criteria and post-estimation procedures given sparse attention in the ecosystem services literature. We illustrate these topics using a meta-analysis of willingness to pay for water quality changes that support aquatic ecosystem services and the application of this model to estimate water quality benefits under alternative riparian buffer restoration scenarios in New Hampshire's Great Bay Watershed. These illustrations highlight the advantages of MRM benefit transfers, together with the challenges and data needs encountered when quantifying ecosystem service values.

The National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) program data underlies estimates of the volume of recreation use of the National Forest System. The data also enable estimation of both the local economic contributions and nonmarket benefits of that visitation. Applications include evaluating the effects of natural disasters, site characteristics, and climate change, as well as expenditure and benefit transfers. This article describes the history and science background of the NVUM program, outlines the methods used in estimating market and nonmarket economic outcomes, and lists some examples of results found in the literature.

We discuss the process of estimating the ecosystem service value (ESV) for provisioning of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) to market, with a focus on the United States. NTFPs are harvested throughout the U.S. for numerous purposes, and those sold in market contribute significantly to household and local economies. While estimates of ESV can aid decision-making related to conservation and management, NTFPs have been generally neglected. We discuss challenges and approaches for prioritizing valuation, quantifying production, measuring costs and benefits, and finding data sources. Many NTFP markets are informal, and market players may have an interest in withholding information. Data about geographic and temporal distribution, production cost, quantity harvested, and price may therefore be limited. In two case studies, we explore the nuances of estimating ESV of forests for medicinal products.

We estimate the ecosystem service value of water supplied by the San Bernardino National Forest in Southern California under climate change projections through the 21st century. We couple water flow projections from a dynamic vegetation model with an economic demand model for residential water originating from the San Bernardino National Forest. Application of the method demonstrates how estimates of consumer welfare changes due to variation in water supply from public lands in Southern California can inform policy and land management decisions. Results suggest variations in welfare changes over time due to alterations in the projected water supply surpluses, shifting demand limited by water supply shortages or surpluses, and price increases. Results are sensitive to future climate projections—in some cases large decreases in welfare due to supply shortages—and to assumptions about the demand model.

We demonstrate an application evaluating carbon sequestration benefits from federal policy alternatives. Using detailed forest inventory data, we projected carbon sequestration outcomes in the coterminous 48 states for a baseline scenario and three policy scenarios through 2050. Alternatives included (1) reducing deforestation from development, (2) afforestation in the eastern United States and reforestation in the western United States, and (3) reducing stand-replacing wildfires. We used social cost of carbon estimates to evaluate the present value of carbon sequestration benefits gained with each policy. Results suggest that afforestation and reforestation would provide the greatest marginal increase in carbon benefit, far exceeding policy cost.

Federal agencies invest taxpayer dollars every year in conservation programs that are focused on improving a suite of ecosystem services produced on private lands. A better understanding of the public benefits generated by federal conservation programs could help improve governmental efficiency and economic welfare by providing science-based evidence for use in policy decision-making regarding targeting of federal conservation investments. Of specific concern here are conservation investments made by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). While previous research has shown that efficiency gains are possible using cost-benefit analysis for targeting conservation investments, agency-wide implementation of this approach by policy makers has been constrained by the limited availability of location-specific information regarding conservation benefits. Cost-effective opportunities for integrating location-specific ecosystem service valuation research with USDA conservation decision-making include: (1) institutionalizing funding of comparable studies suitable for benefit transfer, (2) utilizing non-traditional data sources for research complementing benefit transfer, and (3) creating a state-of-the-art program for developing and communicating research in ecosystem service valuation exemplifying the highest standards of scientific conduct.