Valuing forest-based ecosystem services in Bangladesh: Implications for research and policies

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecosystem Services journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoser

Valuing forest-based ecosystem services in Bangladesh: Implications for research and policies

T

Sepul K. Baruaa, , Marco Boscolob, Illias Animonb ⁎

a b

NIRAS International Consulting, Finland Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Ecosystem services valuation Sundarbans Trees outside forests Coastal forests Hill forests Village forests

Ecosystem services (ES) are not adequately accounted for in policy decisions in Bangladesh. This article takes stock of existing literature on economic valuation of forest-based ES. Even if ES valuation has started to receive attention in policy discussions, their literature is still scarce in the country. We compiled 67 value estimates for 19 ES from 30 studies covering all major forest zones of Bangladesh. Most of them focused on the Sundarbans. Other forest zones were neglected or inadequately addressed. Most studies focused on provisioning services. The available estimates indicate that forests of Bangladesh are worth USD 840 ha−1 yr−1 on average. The value was the highest for the Sundarbans (USD 2176 ha−1 yr−1) while the hill forests’ value was a distant second with USD 1066 ha−1 yr−1. The variability in valuation estimates could possibly be explained by the different methodologies employed, or the narrow geographic focus of many studies. The review indicates the need of systematically researching the demand, supply and values of ES over time. This is critical to support decision making which ensures that the development of Bangladesh does not occur at the expense of natural ecosystems and of the people that depend on them.

1. Introduction With nearly 1200 people living per square kilometre (km2), Bangladesh is one of the most densely populated countries in the world (World Bank, 2018). About 19 million people depend directly (Rahman and Ahmed, 2016) and tens of millions more depend indirectly on forests and other natural resources for their livelihoods. These people mostly live in rural areas1 which host about 61% of Bangladesh’s total population (World Bank, 2017). Forest-based ES play an important role in the livelihood and wellbeing of people of Bangladesh. Important ES include provisioning services such as fuelwood, food, fodder, timber and house construction materials. Regulating services such as water regulation, erosion control, protection from sea storms and tidal surges particularly in coastal areas, and climate change adaptation and mitigation are also important. Among the cultural services, recreation is considered the most important one (see, e.g. Uddin et al., 2013a,b). However, many policymakers and resource managers in Bangladesh, as in many other countries, often view ES as having no significant value (Broitman et al., 2015). Many are not even aware that ES exists and how their provision is influenced by human activities,

while many other value them less than other potential ecosystem benefits. At a time when Bangladesh’s gross domestic product (GDP) is growing at a sustained pace of over 6% per year (World Bank, 2018), and the country is investing in sizable infrastructure projects, it is important for planners and analysts to consider the economic value of ES in planning and programmatic decisions. This is particularly important since trade-offs often exist between infrastructure development and the supply of ES (see, e.g. Hayes, 2014). Infrastructures may be developed at the direct expense of, and may also have indirect impacts on natural resources. All these can finally affect the supply of ES. Economic valuation of ES can aid assessments of the impacts on ecosystems of projects, programs or policies. ES and their valuation have been gaining increasing attention particularly in the policy domain in Bangladesh in the recent years. Notably, the Country Investment Plan (CIP) for the Environment, Forestry and Climate Change (EFCC) 2016–2021, which was approved by the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) in 2017, adopted the enhanced provision of ES as its overarching goal (GoB, 2017). The new Bangladesh Forestry Master Plan 2017–2036 (Bangladesh Forest Department [BFD], 2017) underlined the importance of conducting ES valuation to inform decision making. The importance of forest-based ES was also highlighted in

Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (S.K. Barua), [email protected] (M. Boscolo), [email protected] (I. Animon). 1 High dependency of rural people on forests and tree resources is mainly due to higher poverty level in those areas compared to the urban areas. ⁎

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101069 Received 18 December 2018; Received in revised form 9 January 2020; Accepted 14 January 2020 2212-0416/ © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

many other policies and plans such as the draft National Forest Policy, the Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan, the National Adaptation Plan, the Coastal Zone Policy, the Nationally Appropriate Plan of Action, and the Land Use Policy. The importance of ES valuation for monitoring the progress and the impacts of such programmatic decisions on ecosystems is likely to grow in the future in Bangladesh. Despite a growing attention to ES in policy documents in recent years, scientific literature on ES valuation remains limited in Bangladesh. ES being a relatively new area of research may be a reason for this. To the best of the authors’ knowledge there is no comprehensive study covering ES and their valuation in the entire country and our article is the first attempt to fill this knowledge gap. This article takes stock of the existing literature on the economic valuation of forest-based ES so as to:

Table 1 Area under different forest zones in Bangladesh.19 Forest zone

Area (ha)

% of country’s total area

The Sundarbans (Bangladesh Part) Coastal forests Hill forests Sal forests Village forests and TOF

600,000 196,000 670,000 120,000 1, 920,000

4.1% 1.3% 4.5% 0.8% 13.0%

Source: BFD (2017), Chowdhury et al. (2016), Potapov et al. (2017). 19 The Bangladesh Forest Department has finished a countrywide forest inventory with the technical assistance of UN FAO in June 2019. The inventory results, which are expected provide better figures on the extent of forest resources in the country, has not be officially released as of July 2019.

• Qualitatively assess the most important ES provided by forests in Bangladesh, • Identify and summarize existing valuation studies of these services, • Identify and analyse gaps in ES valuation, and • Provide recommendations for future direction in research and policy implementation.

The rest of the article is structured as four sections. The first section briefly introduces the state of forests in Bangladesh and describes the five main forest zones. The next section describes the material and methods of the study. The fourth section contains the results and discussion and the fifth provides conclusions and recommendations for further research, capacity development, investment planning and policy making. The final section discusses the limitations of the study. 2. Forest resources in Bangladesh About 2.6 million hectares (mha) of land in Bangladesh is legally defined as forests. This amounts to 19.8% of the country’s total land area2 (BFD, 2017). However, even if legally defined as forest, a significant portion of this area has been cleared of tree cover and is now under other land uses. According to the Global Forest Resource Assessment 2015 (FAO, 2015), the country has only about 1.43 mha of forests that complies with the FAO definition of forests (see footnote 2). Moreover, there are trees outside forests (TOF), which mostly do not fall under the legally defined forest area. The forest and tree resources in Bangladesh can be grouped into five major zones (Table 1 and Fig. 1). The forest zones are described below. The Sundarbans: It is a natural mangrove forest located in the southwestern part of Bangladesh and south-east India. Between the two countries, the Sundarbans cover an area of 1 mha, of which 0.6 mha are in Bangladesh. It is the largest continuous mangrove forest in the world (Chowdhury et al., 2016). The Sundarbans hosts rich biodiversity including 334 floral and 269 faunal species (BFD, 2017). These include the sundri tree (Heritiera fomes) – after which the forest is named – and the world-renowned Royal Bengal Tiger (Panthera tigris). The Sundarbans was recognized as a World Heritage Site (about 0.14 million ha of it) by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1997. This article considers the Bangladeshi part of the Sundarbans. Coastal forests: They consist mainly of plantations raised through afforestation and reforestation along the coastline and in offshore islands in the southern part of Bangladesh. Keora (Sonneratia apetala) and goran (Avicennia officinalis) are the main species used in the coastal

Fig. 1. Forest zones of Bangladesh. Source: Akhter et al. (2016).

plantations (BFD, 2017). Hill forests: Hill forests are the tropical evergreen and semi-evergreen forests located in the south-eastern and eastern parts of the country (BFD, 2017). These forests are degraded and enriched through plantations in many parts (Chowdhury et al., 2016). Sal forests: Sal forests are the tropical moist deciduous forests located in the central and western parts of the country. These forests are highly degraded and fragmented into small patches (Chowdhury et al., 2016, BFD, 2017). Village forests and trees outside forests (TOF): Village forests are the trees grown in and around the homesteads in rural areas of the country. This forests often do not meet the FAO definition of ‘forests’ (see Footnote 2), and thus can be considered as TOF. TOFs are also grown along roadside, canals, embankments and fallow land across the country. Strip plantations have also been established under social forestry program in various parts of Bangladesh (BFD, 2017). The village forests and TOF are very important for the rural economy of Bangladesh. Various studies (e.g. Barua and Kumar, 2015) reported that nearly 80% of the timber and fuelwood demand of the country is met by these

2 All land that is legally defined as forest land do not comply with FAO definition of forests (FRA, 2015), i.e. land spanning more than 0.5 hectares with minimum trees heights of 5 meters and a canopy cover of more than 10 % or trees able to reach these thresholds in situ.

2

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

forest resources.

3.3. Compilation of ES values We compiled both the economic and livelihood5 values of the ES. While compiling the values, we focused on flow (e.g. timber production and carbon sequestration) only, not the stock (e.g. timber stock and carbon storage). This allowed us to estimate and compare annual ES values as explained below. The ES stock always represents a single point of time, while the flow is measured over a certain period of time. More specifically, flow being the difference between stock at two points of time can be measured for an entire period and so its value can be annualized, while that of stock cannot be (see Barua, 2019). This means the values of stock and flow cannot be compared. The identified valuation studies were done in different years and the estimates were presented in various currencies. Also, some studies gave total value of ES per year for an entire forest area or ecosystem and some gave values per ha per year. For village forests and TOF, the total values of timber, fuelwood and bamboo are given per extraction cycle, not per year. To make estimates comparable, we converted all total values to values per ha per year and presented them in 2017 constant USD. For conversion to value per ha per year we divided the total values per year of an ES in a forest zone by its total area. For conversion of the values of timber, fuelwood and bamboo in village forests and TOF presented in literature, we divided them with total area and number of years in the extraction cycle.6 In our calculation, year of publication of studies is used as the base unless year of the value is specifically mentioned in the publication. All values in the paper are expressed in 2017 constant USD. If i < 2017,

3. Material and methods 3.1. Identification and filtering of literature The first step of this study was the identification of literature on forest-based ES and their valuation in Bangladesh. We searched for the literature using four scientific databases: Scopus, CABI Direct, CABI Forest Science Database and Google Scholar. The terms used for searches were, ‘ecosystem services’, ‘timber’, ‘fuelwood’, ‘fish’, ‘non-timber forest products (NTFP)’, ‘valuation’, value’, ‘forests’, ‘Bangladesh’, ‘hill’, ‘hill forests’, ‘sal’, ‘sal forests’, ‘village forests’, ‘trees outside forests’, ‘social forests’, ‘roadside plantations’, homestate forests’, ‘homegardens’, ‘coastal plantations’, ‘coastal forests’ ‘the Sundarbans’ and ‘mangrove forests’. The search and filtering procedure is explained in detail in Annex A. Apart from scientific literature, we identified the key policy documents (i.e. that cover the entire country or a particular ecological zone within) of Bangladesh related to forest and other natural resources by searching the websites of the relevant ministries of the Government of Bangladesh (GoB). Such documents included the Forest Master Plan 2017–2036 (BFD, 2016a), the 7th Five-Year Plan [7FYP] (GED, 2015), the National Forest Policy (Bangladesh Forest Department, 2016c), the Land Use Plan, the Coastal Zone Plan, the Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (MoEF, 2009), the National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) (MoEF, 2005) and the Country Investment Plan for Environment, Forestry and Climate Change (EFCC CIP) (GoB, 2017).

V2017 = Vi {(1 + IRi + 1 )(1 + IRi + 2)

(1)

.(1 + IRi + n = 2017)}

If i > 2017,

3.2. Qualitative assessment of ES

V2017 = Vi {(1 + IRi

The collected scientific literature and policy documents were reviewed carefully and ES provided by different forest zones were identified. A limited number of experts were also consulted to ensure that potentially important services not included in literature would not be neglected. The identified ES were categorized following the Version V5.1 of the mapping and assessment methodology suggested by the Common International Standard for Ecosystem Services (CICES).3 The justification for using the CICES methodology is that it is a widely accepted framework of ES classification and environmental accounting worldwide. The Version V5.1 of the CICES methodology provides a detailed classification: ES are first divided into three sections, i.e. provisioning, regulation and maintenance, and cultural. These sections are then divided into 10 divisions which are further divided into groups, and then groups into classes. Because of this elaborate classification it is easier to compare studies and assessments by using the CICES methodology than by other ones, e.g. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Important ES for each forest zone were then classified into three levels of importance4 – high, medium and low. The levels are defined as follows: high included the ES that are perceived to be very important for livelihood, conservation or the economy in the policy documents mentioned above and, in the literature reviewed. Medium included the ones that are perceived to be fairly important, while low included the ones perceived to be important for livelihoods, conservation and economy in the forest zones of their origin or entire country. The above qualitative assessment will enable to point to knowledge gaps about ES perceived as important and yet without proper assessments (see Section 4.4).

Vi =

1 )(1

+ IRi 2)

.(1 + IRi

n = 2017 )}

1

TVi if the total value of a forest area or ecosystem is available AEt

TVi =

tvi, oc if the value is given in other currency than USD ERi

(2)

(3) (4)

where Vi = Original value (i.e. value in USD per ha per year of an ES in the year i), V2107 = Value per ha per year of an ES in 2017 constant USD, i = The year of estimation or publication of the original ES value, IR = USD inflation rate TV = Total value of an ES in a forest area or ecosystem given in USD, A = Area of forest or ecosystem in ha, Et = Length of collection/supply period in years (in case of total

5

To be consistent with all relevant literature assessed in this study (see, e.g. Getzner and Islam, 2013), we defined livelihood as the income of collectors. This implies that our definition applied to ES that were collected and actually marketed, i.e. provisioning services. It should be noted here that considering income for collectors ex ante excluded income for ES that are not collected (e.g. carbon credits and entrance fee to a park) or income for beneficiaries different from collectors (e.g. managers of a protected area). We did not find any study that estimated income from ES that are not collected for Bangladesh though. This further justifies the definition of livelihood we adapted this article. 6 We assumed an extraction cycle of 3 years for fuelwood and bamboo, and 20 years for timber. Jashimuddin and Inoue (2012) reported an extraction cycle of up to 3 years for bamboo. The assumptions for fuelwood and timber are based on the experience of the first author of the article whose family owns village forests and TOF in Bangladesh. Information on extraction cycle of these two products in village forests and TOF is not available in literature.

3

The CICES is developed by the European Environment Agency (see http:// cices.eu/). Please see also Haines-Young and Potschin (2011, 2017). 4 The level of importance given to the ES is based on, due to the lack of official classification systems at the national level, qualitative criteria adopted by authors. As such it remains subject to possible improvements in the future. 3

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

value per year, Et = 1), tvi,oc = Total value of an ES in a forest or ecosystem given in a currency other than USD and ER = Exchange rate between USD and the currency in which an ES value is given.

4.2. Qualitative assessment of forest-based ES in Bangladesh Annex C provides a summary framework of forest-based ES in Bangladesh as reported in the literature we assessed for this article. The specific ES reported by the literature as available in different forest zones of the country are provided in the Supplementary Materials. We have identified the ES of the major forest zones (Table 2) and qualitatively ranked them by level of importance, by forest zone. The most important ES under all three CICES sections are discussed next.

4. Results and discussion 4.1. Studies on ES and their valuation

4.2.1. Provisioning services The most important provisioning services provided by the forests of Bangladesh include products such as timber, fuelwood and biomass, bamboo, fodder, medicinal plants, fruits and other food. They are important especially in the context of village forests and TOF. For example, the wood and biomass for energy provided by this forest zone are marked as highly important, while that provided by the sal forests are of low importance (Table 2). By meeting 80% of the country’s demand (Barua and Kumar, 2015), wood and biomass from the village forests and TOF are vital for Bangladesh’s rural energy security and national economy. On the other hand, contribution of the sal forests to the country’s total fuelwood demand is negligible mostly because of its ever-shrinking size and so are the scale and the national importance of this service of the forest zone in question. Among other provisioning services, the potable water provided by hill forests, coastal plantations and the Sundarbans in the country is also important (Table 2). Due to high elevation from the mean sea level, installing deep tube well for accessing ground water is infeasible or highly expensive for people living in the hill forest zone. On the other hand, in the Sundarbans and other coastal areas of Bangladesh, ground water is saline and thus not suitable for drinking. In all three forest zones, rainwater does not provide year-round water supply as rainfall is mainly concentrated in the monsoon months (May to September). Thus, people living in these areas rely on surface water either coming from forests or protected (from e.g. evaporation) by trees and forests. The information on the supply of provisioning services by different forest zone of Bangladesh is limited due to very limited research done on this topic. Such information is available for just a few common provisioning services. Barua and Kumar (2015) reported that the country produces about 1.2 million m3 timber, about 70% of which come from village forests and TOF. According to FAOSTAT (FAOSTAT, 2018), Bangladesh produces 26.5 million m3 of fuelwood, about fourfifth of which comes from the forest zone mentioned above (Barua and Kumar, 2015). BBS (2014) reported that the village forests and TOF supply 105 million pieces of bamboo which satisfy more than 70% the country’s demand.

A total of 52 studies were identified that discussed the ES supplied by different zones of forests in Bangladesh. Of them, 30 studies provided 67 value estimates for 19 ES (See Annex B). 18 studies (most of them published since 2013) address the economic valuation of ES from the Sundarbans, six for the village forests and TOF, four for the hill forests, while just two for the coastal plantations in Bangladesh.7 There is no ES valuation study available for sal forests (Annex B). In terms of methodology used (see Annex B), more than half (i.e. 18) of the valuation studies applied the market-value method, 13 of which used primary data collected through surveys and the rest used secondary data (see, e.g. Masiero et al., 2019 for details on ES valuation methods). 10 more studies applied value transfer methods. This means that exactly half (i.e. 15) of all valuation studies available for Bangladesh actually used secondary data.8 This may have reduced the accuracy of estimated values to some extent. It can also be noted here that the surveys conducted for ES valuation in many studies had narrow geographical focus within individual forest zone. Thus, the economic values estimated by them might not represent an entire forest zone. As reported earlier, the Sundarbans was the most studied forest zone in Bangladesh, while the sal forests was the least studied. This was expected since the Sundarbans is the world’s largest continuous mangrove forests, hosts rich biodiversity, provides coastal protection and supports the livelihoods of millions of people. This forest zone is given high importance in key policy documents of GoB. Being a UNESCO World Heritage Site, the Sundarbans is also recognized internationally. The national importance and international recognition have generated high research interest about the Sundarbans on various aspects including the ES. The sal forests, on the other hand, have increasingly been losing national significance as only a small area is left with forest cover9 (Rahman, 2016). With decreasing national significance, the research interest about the sal forests also has remained low. Overall, the coverage of ES in valuation studies has remained limited (Annex B). According to our review, the first study that estimated the economic value of forest products in Bangladesh was published in 1984. Just three studies were published between 1984 and 2006 which estimated six ES values in total. Since 2007, both the number of studies and valuation estimations have increased (Fig. 2). They predominantly included provisioning services, which are usually marketed. Studies covering non-marketed services (i.e. regulation and maintenance, and cultural) addressed storm protection, biodiversity conservation, recreation and tourism, and carbon sequestration. The number and estimation echo the policy discussion and interest of development partners concerning natural resources management in Bangladesh in general.

4.2.2. Regulation and maintenance services The most important regulation and maintenance services include protection from sea storms and tidal surges, and land stabilization by coastal plantations and the Sundarbans, as well as carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation, nutrient and watershed regulations and soil erosion control by all forest zones (Table 2). Only a handful of regulation and maintenance services10 receive attention at the policy level. These most notably include protection from sea storms and tidal surges by the Sundarbans and coastal plantations. Because of Bangladesh’s geographic location, the calamities mentioned above are common events which cause huge damages to life and property in coastal area every year. Protection from them is a national interest. Stabilization of newly accreted lands, e.g. through coastal

7

Many studies covered more than one forest zones and thus the total does not match with the sum of studies on individual forest type. 8 Giving less focus on economic aspects of forestry, e.g. ES valuation in research and policy making, is a reason for this. ES and their valuation, particularly in the Sundarbans, have started to receive attention in policy sphere in the country only recently. As an outcome of this attention an ES Valuation Manual (Masiero et al., 2019), the very first of its kind in Bangladesh, has recently been prepared with the support of FAO. 9 It is estimated that only 15% of the sal forests has any significant tree cover (BFD, 2016a).

10 Many important regulation and maintenance services of the forests of Bangladesh (e.g. carbon sequestration in village forests and TOF) are underinvestigated or under-considered in the literature and policy discussion.

4

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

Fig. 2. Studies on and estimates of ES values in Bangladesh.

value of USD 389 ha−1 yr−1 was reported for fish. This was the second highest value reported in the literature assessed for this service in South and Southeast Asia. Gunawardena and Rowan (2005) reported USD 451 ha−1 yr−1 for fish collected from natural mangroves in Southern Sri Lanka. Verma et al. (2017) and Bann (2002) reported far lower values for the Indian part of the Sundarbans (USD 99 ha−1 yr−1 on average) and mangroves in Cambodia (USD 159 ha−1 yr−1), respectively. The crab collected from the Sundarbans was also reported to have substantial economic value (USD 102 ha−1 yr−1). Among other provisioning services, timber and fuelwood were reported to have average values of USD 33 ha−1 yr−1 and USD 0.5 ha−1 yr−1, respectively. Gunawardena and Rowan (2005) reported a similar value for timber (USD 40 ha−1 yr−1) collected from natural mangroves in Southern Sri Lanka. Likewise, a fuelwood value of below USD 1 ha−1 yr−1 was reported for natural mangroves in Sri Lanka (IUCN, 2003) and the Indian Sundarbans (Santhakumar et al., 2005). The lower value of woody provisioning services of the Bangladeshi part of the Sundarbans reflected the low extraction rate due to harvesting moratorium that is in place there for a decade now. Even though market price of timber and fuelwood is high, low extraction rates13 translate into a low per hectare value. Among the regulation and maintenance services, biodiversity conservation (i.e. gene pool conservation and nursery and habitat services),14 was estimated to have a value of USD 813 ha−1 yr−1 (Table 3). This value was much higher than that in the Indian part of Sundarbans (USD 518 ha−1 yr−1). This difference most probably reflects the fact that the Bangladeshi part is much more biodiverse than the Indian part (see, e.g. Aziz and Paul, 2015). The lower level of water and soil salinity probably is the major reason for this. The use of different economic assessment methodologies or approaches in the literature assessed and different management regimes in Bangladesh and the Indian parts of the Sundarbans may also be the reasons. Apart from biodiversity, storm and other coastal protection value of the Sundarbans was significant with USD 528 ha−1 yr−1 (Table 2). With one devasting cyclone making landfall to Bangladesh every year on average (Sarker et al., 2017), the value estimated for the Sundarbans seems to be appropriate. Barbier (2016) reported a coastal protection value equivalent to USD 1907 ha−1 yr−1 in 2017 constant price for Southern Thailand. Among the cultural services, recreation and tourism were the only ones of the

plantations, is identified in the key policy documents of Bangladesh (e.g. 7FYP) as an important ES of coastal plantations. Chow (2018) reported a net accretion of land under coastal plantations in Bangladesh. It is estimated that several thousand ha of sediments are deposited in coastal areas every year (GED, 2017). Hasan et al. (2013) estimated that over 0.5 million ha of new land emerged in the coastal zone between 1972 and 2010. Stabilizing this land through tree plantations, along with construction of polders and dams, to create agricultural land is one of the important goals of the relevant policies of GoB (see, e.g. GED, 2015). This stems from the fact that the country’s arable land is shrinking every year because of erosion, salinity intrusion and manmade causes such as rural settlement and urbanization (see, e.g. Hasan et al., 2013). 4.2.3. Cultural services Tourism, recreation, religious and education purposes are the most important cultural services provided by the forests of Bangladesh (Table 2). Tourism and recreation play a prominent role among the cultural ES from the Sundarbans and the hill forests. Of the five forest zones, statistics about the number of visitors are only tracked for the Sundarbans (Fig. 3). There, visits are mostly made up of Bangladeshi citizens. Visits declined during 2009–2010 and in 2014, possibly because of political uncertainty leading to nationwide unrest during these periods. Generally, lack of adequate facilities is a reason for the relatively small number of visitors in the Sundarbans and other forest zones of the country. The other important cultural services include the symbolic value of the Royal Bengal Tiger11 of the Sundarbans (Table 2). The cultural services provided by other forest zones in the country are far less recorded or researched. 4.3. Valuation of ES in Bangladesh 4.3.1. Economic values of ES in different forest zones 4.3.1.1. The Sundarbans. Among over 100 separate ES (recall Section 4.2, and Table 1 in Supplementary Materials) that the Bangladeshi part of the Sundarbans provides, the economic value estimates are available for only 15 of them in 19 valuation studies.12 Eight of these services are provisioning, six fall under regulation and maintenance and one is cultural (Table 3). Among the provisioning services the highest average

13 Extraction rate is low partly because only legal extraction is considered in the literature assessed. It can be stated here that the literature assessed in this study mainly focused on the flow of a certain ES, i.e. the proportion of the total supply of a certain ES that was actually delivered to (e.g. harvested by) beneficiaries rather than the stock, i.e. total potential supply. 14 Carbon storage in the Sundarbans was reported to have an average value of USD 1,720 ha−1. However, because of being stock value, it was excluded from our total value calculation.

11 The tiger is considered the symbol of courage, and also used in the logo of Bangladesh Cricket Board, the governing body of cricket, the country’s most popular sports. In fact, the men’s and women’s cricket teams of Bangladesh are called the Tigers and the Tigresses. 12 Studies on the Indian part to the Sundarbans also exist (e.g. Verma et al., 2017).

5

Fuelwood & biomass [**]

Energy

6

Cultural

Physical and intellectual interaction with biota, ecosystem and landscape Spiritual, symbolic and other interaction with biota, ecosystem and landscape

Maintenance of physical, chemical and biological conditions

Mediation of waste, toxics and other nuisances Mediation of flows

Wax, thatching materials & medicinal plants [*]

Materials

Regulation and maintenance

Honey, fish, shrimps, crabs & potable water [**]

Nutrition

Provisioning

Protection from sea storms & tidal surges, & stabilization of newly accreted land [***] Control of salinity intrusion [**]

Protection from sea storms & tidal surges [***] Stabilization of newly accreted land & control of salinity intrusion [**] Biodiversity conservation & carbon sequestration [***] Education & research [**] Tourism [*] Wilderness [*]

Tourism, education & research, cultural heritage value [**] Symbolic value of tiger [***] Wilderness [*]

Carbon sequestration [**] Biodiversity conservation [*]

Negligible

Fuelwood & biomass [**]

Timber, medicinal plants, fodder & thatching material [**]

Potable water [**]

Nutrient cycling [*]

Sundarbans

Coastal

Services [level of importance: * = low, ** = medium, *** = high]

Division

Section

Table 2 Important ES from different forest zones of Bangladesh.

Wilderness & bequest values [**]

Education & research [**]

Carbon sequestration [***] Pollination & biodiversity conservation [**]

Soil erosion control [*]

Nutrient cycling [*]

Timber, bamboo, medicinal plants & handicraft-making materials (e.g. cane, murta & hogla) [***] Ground water & fodder [**] Fuelwood & biomass [***]

Cultivated fruits, vegetables and spices [**]

Village & TOF

Wilderness [*]

Tourism [**] Education & research [*]

Pollination & biodiversity conservation [**] Carbon sequestration [*]

Soil erosion control [*]

Nutrient cycling [*]

Fuelwood & biomass [*]

Cultivated fruits, vegetables and spices [**] Medicinal plants & ground water [**] Timber & bamboo [*]

Sal

Wilderness [*]

Tourism, education & research [**]

Carbon sequestration, pollination & biodiversity conservation [**]

Soil erosion control & watershed regulation [***]

Nutrient cycling [**]

Fuelwood & biomass [**]

Potable water [***] Cultivated & wild fruits, vegetables and spices [**] Timber, bamboo, medicinal plants, cane, gum & ground water [**]

Hill

S.K. Barua, et al.

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

Fig. 3. Number of visitors in the Sundarbans of Bangladesh. Source: Sarker et al. (2017), and Golub and Golub (2016).

Sundarbans for which an estimate of economic value was available (USD 293 ha−1 yr−1). When all available ES values were summed up, the total value of the Bangladeshi Sundarbans amounted to USD 2,176 ha−1 yr−1 (Table 3 and Fig. 4).15 This was about two times the total economic values (TEV) of USD 964 ha−1 yr−1 and USD 1192 ha−1 yr−1 reported for this forest by Costanza et al. (1997) and IUCN (2014), respectively. This difference might stem from the fact that two above mentioned studies accounted for less number of ES than what we have accounted for.

contribute to lower economic value for carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation. This easier access probably has an effect on the economic value of recreation and tourisms in the hill forests. The value was estimated to be USD 583 ha−1 yr−1 (Kawsar et al., 2015) which was twice as much of economic value of the same service of the Sundarbans (Table 3). This difference can be explained as follows. Hill forests cover a large area in the Southeasten Chittagong and Northeastern Sylhet regions (see Fig. 1) and are easily accessible by road in most parts. Conversely, the Sundarbans can only be accessed by waterways. Also, there are well established lodging and dining facilities for the visitors in the vicinity of or even inside the forests, which help attract tourists from all parts of the country. The establishment of a number of national and eco-parks and other nature-based recreational areas in these forests also helps in this regard. Better facilities and easier access, compared with other forest zones, help recreation and tourism in the hill forests of Bangladesh. However, they may also contribute to unsustainable extractive uses leading to forest degradation and deforestation resulting in reduced supply and value of other ES.

4.3.1.2. Coastal plantation. Economic value estimate of only two ES, i.e. fuelwood and timber of coastal plantations of Bangladesh was available. The value of fuelwood was reported to be USD 57 ha−1 yr−1 (Table 3). This value was much higher than that in the Sundarbans (USD 0.5 ha−1 yr−1). This big difference was most probably due to higher extraction rate per ha which itself was driven by lower restriction imposed on collecting fuelwood from these plantations. In fact, some coastal plantations are managed under social forestry (SF) in which beneficiaries are fully entitled to collect fuelwood and non-timber forest products (NTFPs). This lower restriction on collection drives up the number of collectors, total collection and thus economic value of fuelwood per ha. It can be noted here that, the fuelwood value reported for the coastal plantations was just one-fifteenth of the value (USD 447 ha−1 yr−1) found for fuelwood collected from mangrove plantation in Southeastern Sri Lanka (IUCN, 2007). The value of timber, which was estimated only by Islam et al. (2012), was USD 102 ha−1 yr−1. Surprisingly, we could not identify any study assessing the regulation and maintenance value of coastal plantations, even if these are the primary reasons coastal plantations are established.

4.3.1.4. Village forests and TOF. For the village forests and TOF, the value estimates of five services were available and all of them were of provisioning services. The value of fuelwood (USD 54 ha−1 yr−1) is much higher than those from any other forest zones in Bangladesh (Table 3). The value of timber (USD 22 ha−1 yr−1) is also substantial compared with the Sundarbans. This certainly has to do with better access to the services of village forests and TOF as they are privately owned or managed under the social forestry. These forests supply nearly 80% of the total demand of these two products (Barua and Kumar, 2015), that indicates a very high yield rate per ha. This drives the economic value of timber and fuelwood up.

4.3.1.3. Hill forests. Only the economic values of three ES (i.e. carbon sequestration, biodiversity, and recreation and tourism) of the hill forests were available in three studies (Barua and Haque, 2013; Kawsar et al., 2015; Rasul, 2009). The average values of the first two were much lower than those of the Sundarbans (Table 3). This probably was due to the fact that the hill forests are heavily degraded owing to heavy population pressure and raid economic development of the country (Chowdhury et al., 2016). Encroachment and illegal logging are common (Barua et al., 2018), which all contribute to severe forest degradation and deforestation. This lowers forest carbon sequestration rate and fragments habitats for biodiversity which themselves

4.3.1.5. Overall situation. Based on estimates available in the literature assessed, the average ES value of all five forest zones of Bangladesh was estimated to be USD 840 ha−1 yr−1. With an aggregate value of USD 2176 ha−1 yr−1 based on available estimates, the Sundarbans worth more than any other forest zones in Bangladesh. The hill forests ranked the second with USD 1066 ha−1 yr−1. The average ES values of village forests and TOF, and coastal plantations were much less than the earlier two (Table 3 and Fig. 4), most probably because of the availability of a few ES values estimated for this zone. Although the available value estimates concern a fraction of the diverse ES provided by the forests of Bangladesh (see Supplementary Materials), they convey an important message: forests of Bangladesh have high economic values. Multiplying the average ES value per ha of each forest zone with its area and then summing them up gave a total value of USD 2.94 billion yr−1, which was equivalent to 1.2% of

15 This total value does not consider potential trade-off among ES, i.e. availability one services may affect that of the others. The total value might be different in case such trade-offs were considered.

7

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

estimated ES values between typically marketed and non-marketed services provides an interesting insight. For the Sundarbans, 73% of estimated ES values was constituted by non-marketed (i.e. regulation and maintenance, and cultural services), and for the hill forests the proportion was 100%. The above apparently suggests that the nonmarketed services from these two forest zones are considered to be of the higher importance than the marketed ones by the scientific community. Ignoring them in the policy processes might give undesirable policy outcome regarding natural resources management in the country. It can be noted here that the figures mentioned above were consistent with Verma et al. (2017) who reported high proportions of non-marketed services in the combined total values of services provided by the Indian parts of the Sundarbans. For the village forests and TOF the exact opposite of the hill forests held true: 100% of the available total value estimates was for provisioning services which can be traded in the market. This matches with the widespread perception in the general public and policy sphere about the village forests and TOF that the only important services provided by them are the provisioning services (particularly timber, bamboo, and fuelwood). Thus, regulation and maintenance, and cultural services of these forests are largely ignored in the policy sphere of Bangladesh and scientific literature. However, our findings suggest that about 56% of the total value estimated for all forest zone in the country was associated with non-marketed regulation and cultural services (Table 3). This proportion would have been higher if any value estimate for such services from village forests and TOF was available. The proportion we estimated was similar to what was found in most globallevel studies: non-marketed ESs constitute a majority share of the total economic value estimated (de Groot et al., 2012). The provisioning services provided by forests in Bangladesh play an important role in the livelihoods of many rural households and communities that live in some of the poorest and most isolated places in the country (Table 4). For example, in the Sundarbans, crab collectors earn an USD 660 per year while honey collectors earn USD 261 per year on average. These estimates are net of entrance fees paid to the Bangladesh Forest Department and of illegal payments to bandits that collectors often have to pay to guarantee their safe passage. Table 4 provides a summary of the income earned by collectors of selected forest products, from different forest zones.

Table 3 Estimated values for ES of different forest zones of Bangladesh.* ES

Provisioning Fish Crab Timber Thatching materials Honey Fuelwood Vegetables Fruits Bamboo Fodder Other non-wood NTFPs Average value of provisioning services

Average Value (range ± ) in USD ha−1 yr−1 (in 2017 constant price) Sundarbans

Coastal

Hill

Village & TOF

389 (75–956) 102 33 (1–72) 17 (0.1–34) 29 (5–52) 0.5 (0.1–1) NA NA NA 25 1

NA

NA

NA

NA 102

NA NA

NA 22

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

57 (30–83) NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA

54 (2–106) 106 230 53 NA NA

596

159

0

465

Regulation and maintenance Avoided storm damage 284 (13–720) Other coastal protection 244 Carbon sequestration 2

NA

NA

NA

NA NA

NA NA

Soil erosion control Biodiversity conservation

NA NA NA NA

NA 251 (153–370) NA 231 (185–278) 0 0

NA NA

1,345

30

483

0

235 (2–1050)

NA

583

NA

Average value of cultural services

235

0

583

0

Forest zone Average

2,176

159

1,066

465

Share of non-market value in each forest zone Share of non-market value in all forest zones

73%

0%

100%

0%

Gene pool conservation Nursery and habitat services Average value of regulation and maintenance services Cultural Recreation and tourism

2 813¥ (627–999) 618 195 (9–381)

NA NA

4.4. Gap analysis We compare here the qualitative findings summarized in Table 2 with those of valuation studies, highlighting a few observations. First, based on the findings of the literature review, no ES was reported for any forest zone in the country under nine out of 48 classes of the CICES methodology V5.1 (see Annex C), even if some of them are crucial for the health and wellbeing of people, or for the national economy. For example, hill forests are the source of potable water for millions of people in Chittagong and Chittagong Hill Tracts (see also Table 2). However, no valuation study was identified. The estimates from other countries suggest that potable water is indeed a valuable ES. Notably, Nunez et al. (2006) estimated that the value of drinking water provided by the Valdivian Rainforest Ecoregion in Chile ranged from USD 61 to USD 162 ha−1 yr−1. Costanza et al. (2006) estimated the value for the forests in New Jersey, USA to be between from USD 4 to USD 66 ha−1 yr−1. de Groot et al. (2012) reported an average value of water provided by tropical forests of USD 27 ha−1 yr−1. Another significant gap was identified for the damage avoidance from sea storms and tidal surges, and the stabilization of newly accreted land by coastal plantations. These services are hugely important for the survival and livelihood of people in coastal areas and the economy of Bangladesh. The GoB has invested significant resources to establish plantations along the coastline of the country for several decades now. This suggests that the value of damage avoided by coastal plantations may be substantial. Indeed, Das and Vincent (2009) estimated that the

56%

Source: Authors’ calculation based on estimates from literature, *No estimate was available for sal forests; ± When multiple values were available; NA = not available; ¥Summation of the values of gene pool conservation, and nursery and protection services.

Bangladesh’s nominal gross domestic product (GDP) in 2017.16 The provisioning and regulation and maintenance services constituted 0.5% each, and the rest 0.2% by the cultural services.17 Apart from the GDP equivalence, the analysis of the distribution of 16 Bangladesh’s nominal GDP in 2017 was USD 249.7 billion (World Bank, 2018). 17 One has to bear in mind that this total value was calculated based only on the estimates available in the literature surveyed, not on the economic value of all ES supplied by the forests of Bangladesh. Thus, the value we estimated is lower than the total value of forest-based ES in the country should have been.

8

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

Fig. 4. Overall economic value* of different CICES sections of forest-based ES in Bangladesh. Source: Authors’ calculation based on values from literature; * in 2017 constant price.

regulation and maintenance and cultural services). Similar to the above, estimates of economic values of just 19 out of over 100 individual forest-based ES in Bangladesh were available in the literature. Most of these estimates were for the provisioning services such as timber, fuelwood and food. Estimates of regulation, maintenance, and cultural services were limited. The former result is probably due to the fact that the provisioning ES are usually traded in the market and thus easier to estimate. The latter one can be explained by the fact that the regulation, maintenance and cultural services are not traded in the market, and require time, resource, and specialized knowledge to value them. Overall, the ES research in Bangladesh has focused more on the quantification of impacts than on the economic valuation. Most valuation studies relied on the value-transfer method and used secondary data. This is consistent with the findings of Costanza et al. (2017). Existing valuation studies that used primary data from surveys mostly had a narrow geographical focus. Thus, the estimated values may not fully represent the different forest zones of the country. On a positive note though, the findings of this article suggest that with increased recognition for ES and their valuation at the policy level, the research interest on and funding for them are also increasing. This article showed that the most studies on the ES and their valuation were done for the Sundarbans, whereas there was the least amount of research on ES and none on valuation for the sal forests. The Sundarbans, being world’s largest mangrove forests in a single tract with its rich biodiversity, high coastal protection value and support to the livelihoods of millions of people, possesses values of high national and global significance. This has helped generating high research interest about this forest zone. Moreover, more projects and activities focused on the Sundarbans than other forest zones of Bangladesh. On the other hand, with their small land area which has been shrinking continuously, the sal forests have lost significance at the national particularly in terms of economic contribution and thus the research interest about this forest zone becomes low. This is counter intuitive as more research accompanied by effective policy actions are exactly what are needed to save the forests in this zone from disappearing. Overall, the findings of this article suggest that there is a need for more systematic research to address the huge knowledge gap regarding forest-based ES and their valuation in Bangladesh. The research focus, which is currently disproportionately high on the Sundarbans, should be made more balanced among the forest zones. Giving priority in research on measuring the supply and demand over time and valuing the important services, as identified across all forest zones in this study could help bring this balance. This balanced approach of research would help in evolving better informed policies and realizing optimal benefits from and ensure sustainable management of the forests across Bangladesh. For instance, knowing the economic values of the

Table 4 Livelihood values of forest-based ES in Bangladesh. ES

Fuelwood Fish Crab Thatching materials Honey Other non-wood NTFPs When collectors collect whatever products, they get

Average livelihood value (range ± ) in USD collector−1 yr−1 (in 2017 constant price) Sundarbans

Coastal

Hill

Village and TOF

25 587 (410–907) 660 (64–1407) 726 (382–1069) 261 (31–509) 0 602 (134–951)

0 NA

0 NA

48 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

0 NA

0 80

51 45 (22–66)

Source: Authors’ calculation based on estimates from literature, multiple values are available.

±

For which

coastal plantations in Orissa state of India helped save 0.0148 lives per hectare from cyclone (i.e. roughly 68 ha of plantations save one life) and the economic value was USD 248,93618 per life saved. This means the cyclone protection value of coastal plantations in Orissa was USD 3684 ha−1 cyclone−1. Yet, we identified no valuation study for this important service. Another identified gap is in the availability of ES estimates over time. Of the studies identified, all but two were cross-sectional: Hossain et al. (2016a,b) and IUCN (2014). The rest just focused on one point of time. We conclude that a significant gap exists in forest-based ES valuation research in Bangladesh, which may lead to inappropriately informed policy decisions. 5. Conclusion and implications for policies and research The findings of the article suggest that research on forest-based ES in Bangladesh, although increasing in recent years, is still insufficient. The existing literature reported ES under more than a third of CICES classes for all forest zones of the country. These mostly included the marketed services that the people could easily associate with the forests and trees (e.g. many provisioning services) as well as some of nonmarketed services that people might not relate easily (mostly the 18 Converted from the original estimate in Indian Rupees of 11.7 million using 2009 exchange rate of 1 USD = 47 Indian Rupees.

9

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

important ES provided by the sal forests and putting them in the context of the country’s GDP could be a strong argument to convince the policy makers to take more effective measures to reverse its shrinking trends, instead of allocating the forestland to other uses. Likewise, knowing the value of potable water collected from surface ponds by local people in the coastal areas of Bangladesh would also help estimate the economic impacts of and better design projects for supplying safer driving water, e.g. on rainwater harvesting. Expanding the horizon of financial analyses to include economic dimensions (such as the consideration of ES) is also becoming a requirement of important funding sources like the Green Climate Fund. Market-based instruments such as Payment for ES (Wunder, 2005) can also provide additional funding to support ES provision and natural resource conservation (see e.g. Razzaque, 2017). Hence, valuation information is becoming more important in the development of projects and programmes. Awareness raising among the policy makers, researchers and general public would help bring more attention to and funding for ES and ES valuation research from both national and international sources. Capacity building, i.e. providing training courses on ES valuation to the decision makers, high-level government officials involved in the development, assessment and evaluation of projects and researchers would be crucial. A valuation database of the most important ES from each forest zone in Bangladesh could be created and regularly updated. This would help the policy makers, planners, and project developers to conduct assessments or evaluations easily and thus make decisions quickly.

value estimates. Further research is needed for estimating the total economic value of all forest-based ES in Bangladesh. Second, the assessed literature was written in different time periods, used various methods, applied varying interest rates, and focused on specific geographical areas within one or more forest zones. Consequently, wide ranging values for the same ES even in the same forest zone were estimated, which made it difficult to examine the uncertainties of the individual values estimated by the assessed literature. This is another area which deserve further attention from research community. Finally, more than half of all valuation studies assessed in this article used secondary data for ES value estimation. Any inaccuracies, inconsistencies or flaws in that data could have been transferred to the corresponding ES value estimates reducing their accuracies. This calls for carrying out more research on various aspects ES valuation in Bangladesh using primary data on the other hand.

6. Limitations and areas of potential future research

Acknowledgements

This article has encountered a number of limitations each of which constitutes a potential area for the future research. First, our findings, conclusions and recommendations are based on the review of literature that we gathered through a comprehensive process of search and filtering in four scientific databases. The literature assessed presents the value estimates for a relatively small selection among a large number of ES that the forests of Bangladesh can supply. The average and total ES values presented in this article were calculated based on the available

The authors would like to cordially thank the anonymous reviewers, the editor and the associate editor for their insightful comments and suggestions. The first draft of the article was prepared when the first author (Sepul Kanti Barua) was still working at the Food and Agriculture Organizations of the United Nations (FAO). The views presented in this article are entirely of the authors, not of the organizations they are and were affiliated to. Any remaining errors in the article are entirely of the authors.

Conflict of interest statement The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest in publishing this article. Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Appendix A Search and filtering procedure Below the search and filtering procedure is explained step by step first for the Scopus, and then for the other three databases. Step 1: We searched Scopus with the terms ‘Ecosystem services’ and ‘Bangladesh’ and included title, abstract and key words in the search. More than 100 studies were found. Step 2: Since our study focused on forests, we searched within the studies found in Step 1 with the term ‘forests’. The number of studies reduced to below 100 this time. Step 3: In this step, we meticulously read the abstracts of all studies found in Step 2, and selected only those ones that apparently analysed or discussed ES in different forest zones of Bangladesh. This brought down the number of studies further. Step 4: We read through all studies selected in Step 3 in full and selected those ones that indeed analysed or discussed ES in different forest zones of Bangladesh. These were identified as the relevant studies to be reviewed for the thorough ES assessment. Within these selected studies, we identified by thorough reading the ones that estimated the economic values of forest-based ES in Bangladesh. Step 5: In order to double check that all forest-based ES valuation studies were indeed identified in Step 4, we searched with the studies found in Step 2 using the term ‘valuation’ and ‘value’. This process returned with slightly higher number of studies than what was identified in Step 4. We went through the additional studies in order to make sure that no valuation studies were excluded. No new valuation studies were identified in this step. Step 6: The selected studies on ES and their economic valuation (Step 4) individually covered one or more of the forest zones. Nevertheless, in order to ensure that no relevant studies for individual forest zone were excluded, we searched the studies found in Step 1 with forest zone specific terms one by one. For example, we used the terms ‘hill’ and ‘hill forests’ for the hill forest, and ‘village forests’, ‘trees outside forests’, ‘social forests’, ‘roadside plantations’, homestate forests’, ‘homegardens’ for village forests and TOF. Less than 10 studies were found for each forest zone. These included the ones we already found in Step 4 plus few additional ones for each forest zone. We read through the additional ones, none of which discussed ES or estimated their value, meaning no new studies were added in this step. To identify the old literature that was published before the term ‘ecosystem services’ became popular or that did not use term at all, but was still relevant to this study, we did another search in Scopus. We started by searching with the terms that describe the common forest products, i.e. ‘timber’, or ‘fuelwood’, or ‘fish’ or ‘non-timber forest products’ AND ‘Bangladesh’, and included title, abstract and key words in the search. Then we followed the steps 2–5 as described above. A few additional studies were found. We followed the same procedure described above for CABI Direct and CABI Forest Science Database, and were able to identify a few additional studies on ES and their economic valuation in Bangladesh which did not appear in Scopus search. These additional studies were added for the thorough review. 10

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

Finally, we carried out the Google Scholar search by using the keys ‘Ecosystem services AND forests AND Bangladesh’ and ‘Ecosystem services AND forests AND Valuation AND Bangladesh’. We ticked on to ‘anywhere in the article’. We sorted the initial search by using ‘sort by relevance’ and considered the results appearing in the first five pages. Through numerous searches in Google Scholar over the years, we observed that the relevant documents usually appear in the first three pages. Thus, searching the first five pages ensured that no relevant studies were ignored. No additional studies to Scopus and CABI searches were found from Google Scholar search. Appendix B Meta-data on studies on economic valuation of forest-based ES in Bangladesh Study

Services (estimation unit)

Method used

Mehvar et al. (20- Timber, fuelwood and recreation (value/ha/yr) 19) Kibria et al. (2018) Livelihood values of honey, crabs, fish (mixed fish, shrimp, shrimp fry) and fuelwood (income/collector/yr) Rahman et al. (20- Fish, fuelwood, honey, fodder, storm protection, soil erosion control, habitat 18) protection for fish (value/ha/yr) Sarker et al. (201- Cultural services; coastal protection & livelihood value of common provisioning 7) services (total value/yr, value/ha/yr) BFD (2016a) Carbon sequestration (total value/yr)

Forest zone

Ahmad (1984)

Common provisioning services (value/ha/yr)

Chow (2015) Islam et al. (2012) Barua and Haque (2013) Kawsar et al. (2015) Miah et al. (2012) Rasul (2009) BBS (2014)

Fuelwood (value/ha/yr) Fuelwood and timber (value/ha/extraction cycle) Carbon sequestration (total value/yr)

The Sundarbans The Sundarbans Market-value and choice experiment method based on The survey data Sundarbans Zonal travel cost method, damage cost avoided method The & market value method based on survey Sundarbans Value transfer method The Sundarbans Value-transfer method The Sundarbans Zonal travel cost method The Sundarbans Value-transfer method The Sundarbans Value-transfer method The Sundarbans Value-transfer method The Sundarbans Value-transfer method The Sundarbans Value transfer method The Sundarbans Market-value method based on survey data The Sundarbans Market-value method based on survey data The Sundarbans Value-transfer method The Sundarbans Value transfer method The Sundarbans Market-value method based on survey data The Sundarbans Value transfer method The Sundarbans, Market-value method Coastal forest Market-value method Coastal forests Market-value method Hill forests

Recreation (total value/yr)

Travel-cost method

Hill forests

Livelihood value of common provisioning services (income/household/yr) Biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration (value/ha/yr) Timber, bamboo, fuelwood (total value/extraction cycle)

Market-value method based on survey data Market value method Market value method based on survey data

Muhammed et al. (2011) Kibria and Anik (2010) Jahan et al. (2008)

Fuelwood (total value/extraction cycle); Livelihood value of fuelwood (income/ participant/yr) Livelihood value of common provisioning services (income/household/yr)

Market-value method based on survey data

Vegetables, fruits (value/ha/yr)

Market value method based on survey data

Masum et al. (2008) Ahmed et al. (2007)

Livelihood value of common provisioning services (income/household/yr)

Market-value method based on survey data

Livelihood value of NTFP (patipata) (income/household/yr)

Market-value method based on survey data

Hill forests Hill forests Village forests and TOF Village forests and TOF Village forests and TOF Village forests and TOF Village forests and TOF Village forests and TOF

Golub and Golub (2016) Bashar (2015)

Gene pool conservation, nursery services, recreation (value/ha/yr)

IUCN (2014)

Avoided storm damage, total economic value (value/collector/yr)

Uddin et al. (2013a) Uddin et al. (2013b) Uddin et al. (2013c) Winrock International (2013) Getzner and Islam (2013) Islam and Islam (2011) Islam (2010a)

Livelihood value of fish (income/collector/yr); timber, thatching materials, other nonwood NTFPs, fuelwood, recreation (total value/yr) Crabs (value/collector/yr); Fish (total value/yr)

Costanza et al. (1997) Mitchell (1995)

Recreation (total value/yr)

Livelihood value of common non-timber provisioning services (total income/household/yr) Avoided storm damage, tourism (total value/yr) Livelihood values of fish, honey, crab and thatching material (income/collector/yr) Livelihood value of common non-timber provisioning services (total income/ collector/yr) Livelihood value of fish, timber & thatching materials, (income/collector/yr); crabs, honey (income/collector/yr and total value/yr) Total economic value (value/ha/yr) Timber, fish, fuelwood and other nonwood NTFPs (value/ha/yr)

11

Travel cost method, & market value method based on survey Market-value method

Market-value method based on survey data

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al.

Appendix C Forest-based ES in Bangladesh, classified according to CICES Section

Division

Group

Class

Forest zones where services are available

Provisioning

Nutrition

Biomass

Cultivated crops Reared animals and their products Wild plants, algae and their outputs

Village and TOF, sal, hill Village and TOF, sal, hill Sal, hill, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans None Sal, the Sundarbans Hill Hill, Village and TOF Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF and coastal Sal, hill, Village and TOF and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF and the Sundarbans Sal, hill and Village and TOF

Wild animals and their products

Biomass

Plants and algae from in-situ aquaculture Animal from in-situ aquaculture Surface water for drinking Ground water for drinking Fibres and other materials from plants, algae and animals for direct use or processing Materials from plants, algae and animals for agricultural use Genetic materials from all biota

Water

Surface water for non-drinking

Water Materials

Ground water for non-drinking Energy

Biomass energy

Plant-based resources Animal-based resources

Regulation and maintenance

Mediation of waste, toxics and other nuisances

Mechanical energy

Animal-based energy

Mediation by biota

Bio-remediation by micro-organisms, algae, plants and animals Filtration/sequestration/storage/accumulation by micro-organisms, algae, plants and animals Filtration/sequestration/storage/accumulation by ecosystems Dilution by atmosphere, freshwater and marine ecosystems Mediation of smell/noise/visual impacts Mass stabilisation

Mediation by ecosystems

Mediation of flows

Mass flows

Buffering and attenuation of mass flows Liquid flows

Hydrological cycle and water flow maintenance Flood protection

Gaseous / air flows Maintenance of physical, chemical and biological conditions

Lifecycle maintenance, habitat and gene pool protection

Storm protection Ventilation and transpiration Pollination and seed dispersal Maintaining nursery population and habitats

Pest and disease control

Pest control Disease control Soil formation and composition Weathering process Decomposition and fixing process Water conditions Atmospheric composition and climate regulation

12

Chemical condition of freshwater Chemical condition of salt waters Global climate regulation by reduction of GHG concentration Micro and regional climate regulations

Sal, hill, Village and TOF and coastal Sal, hill, Village and TOF and coastal None None None Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Hill, coastal and the Sundarbans Coastal and the Sundarbans None Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans None None Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans None None Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al. Cultural

Physical and intellectual interaction with biota, ecosystem and landscape

Physical and experimental interaction

In-situ experimental use of plants, animals and landscape In-situ physical use of landscape

Intellectual and representative interaction

Scientific Education Heritage, cultural Entertainment Aesthetic

Spiritual, symbolic and other interaction with biota, ecosystem and landscape

Spiritual and emblematic

Symbolic Sacred and religious

Other Cultural

Existence Bequest

Hill and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Hill and the Sundarbans Sal, coastal, hill and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans The Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans Sal, hill, Village and TOF, coastal and the Sundarbans

Appendix D. Supplementary data Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101069.

FAOSTAT., 2018. Available at http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FO (last sighted on 16 March 2018). General Economics Division [GED], 2015. 7th Five Year Plan. Planning Commission. The Government of Bangladesh. General Economics Division [GED], 2017. Bangladesh Delta Plan 2100. Planning Commission. The Government of Bangladesh. Getzner, M., Islam, M.S., 2013. Natural resources, livelihoods, and reserve management: a case study from Sundarbans mangrove forests Bangladesh. Int. J. Sustainable Dev. Plann. 8 (1), 75–87. Golub, A., Golub, E.S., 2016. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Adaptation Strategy in Bangladesh. Copenhagen Consensus Centre, Copenhagen, Demark. Government of Bangladesh [GoB]. 2017. Bangladesh Country Investment Plan for Environment, Forestry and Climate Change 2016–2021. Dhaka, Bangladesh. Gunawardena, M., Rowan, J.S., 2005. Economic valuation of a mangrove ecosystem threatened by shrimp aquaculture in Sri Lanka. Environ. Manage. 36, 535–550. Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M.B., 2011. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): 2011 Update. European Environment Agency. Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M.B., 2017. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the Application of the Revised Structure. European Environment Agency. Hasan, M.N., Hossain, M.S., Bari, M.A., Islam, M.R., 2013. Agricultural land availability in Bangladesh. Soil Resource Development Institute, Ministry of Land, Bangladesh. Hayes, D.J., 2014. Addressing the environmental impacts of large infrastructure projects: making “mitigation” matter. Environ. Law Report 44, 10016–10021. Hossain, S., Dearing, J.A., Rahman, M.M., Salehin, M., 2016. Recent changes in ecosystem services and human well-being in the Bangladesh coastal zone. Reg. Environ. Change 16, 429–443. Hossain, M.I., Nabil, R., Ansari, M.N.A., Latif, A., Mahmud, R., Islam, M.S., 2016. Ecosystem services of the world largest mangrove forest Sundarbans in Bangladesh. Int. J. Innov. Sci. Res. 27 (1), 9–15. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 2014. Bangladesh Sundarbans Delta Vision 2050 A first step in its formulation. Document 2: Background information. Dhaka, Bangladesh. International Union for Conservation of Nature [IUCN]. 2003. Regional technical assistance for coastal and marine resources management and poverty reduction in South Asia (ADB RETA 5974) – an economic evaluation of mangrove ecosystem and different fishing techniques in the Vanthavilluwa Divisional Secretariat in Puttalam District of Sri Lanka. Islam, N., 2010. A Study of the Principal Marketed Value Chains Derived from the Sundarbans Reserved Forest. USAID, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Islam, K.M.N., Islam, M.N., 2011. Economics of extraction of products from Sundarbans Reserve Forest, Bangladesh. J. Agric. Econ. XXXIV (1&2), 29–53. IUCN, 2007. Environmental and Socioeconomic Value of Mangroves in Tsunami Affected Areas: Rapid Mangrove Valuation study. Panama Village in South Eastern Coast of Sri Lanka, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Jahan, N., Rashid, M.H.A., Jinan, T., Islam, S., 2008. Impacts of homestead agro-forestry on sustaining livelihoods of rural poor in Mymensingh District of Bangladesh. Progr. Agric. 19 (1), 169–178. Jashimuddin, M., Inoue, M. 2012. Management of village common forests in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh: historical background and current issues in terms of sustainability. 2 (3):121–137. Kawsar, M.H., Al Pavel, M.A., Uddin, M.B., Rahman, S.A., Al Mamun, M.A., Hassan, S.B., Alam, M.S., Tamrakar, R., Wadud, M.A., 2015. Quantifying recreational value and the functional relationship between travel cost and visiting national park. Int. J. Environ. Plann. Manage. 1 (3), 84–89. Kibria, G.M., Anik, S.I., 2010. Homestead plant species diversity and its contribution to

References Ahmad, N., 1984. Some aspects of economic resources of Sundarban mangrove forest of Bangladesh. In: Sepadimo, R., Rao, A.N., Macintosh, D.J. (Eds.), Procedures of Asian symposium on mangrove environment research and management, pp. 644–657. Akhter, M., Jalal, R., Costello, L., Rahman, L., Tasnuva, U., 2016. Zoning of tree and forest assessment in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Forest Inventory Project, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Aziz, A., Paul, A.B. 2015. Bangladesh Sundarbans: present status of the environment and biota. 7: 242–269. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. BBS. 2014. Household Based Forestry Survey Report. Bangladesh Forest Department. 2016a. Bangladesh Forestry Master Plan 2017–2036. Draft Final (December 2016). Bangladesh Forest Department., 2017. Forest types and management. Available at http:// www.bforest.gov.bd/ (last sighted on 11 April 2017). Bann, C., 2002. Economic analysis of alternative mangrove management strategies in Cambodia. In: Pearce, D., Pearce, C., Palmer, C. (Eds.), Valuing the environment in developing countries. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, United Kingdom, pp. 501–535. Barbier, E.B., 2016. The protective service of mangrove ecosystems: a review of valuation methods. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 109 (2), 676–681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul. 2016.01.033. Barua, S.K., Haque, S.M.S., 2013. Soil characteristics and carbon sequestration potentials of vegetation in degraded hills of Chittagong, Bangladesh. Land Degrad. Dev. 24, 63–71. Barua, S.K., Kumar, D., 2015. SAARC Area Cross-Border Timber Trade Including Regional Institutional Mechanisms And Trade Links with Myanmar. European Forest Institute. Barua, S.K., 2019. Carbon sequestration versus carbon stock. Article published in newspaper. The Financial Express (Bangladesh) on 10 June 2019. Bashar, R., 2015. Travel Cost Valuation of the Sundarbans Reserved Forest in Bangladesh. Master of Science in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, Durham University Business School. Broitman, B.R., et al., 2015. Success Stories in Mainstreaming Ecosystem Services into Macro-Economic Policy and Land Use Planning: Evidence from Chile. UNEP, Trinidad and Tobago South Africa and Vietnam. Chow, J., 2015. Spatially explicit evaluation of local extractive benefits from mangrove plantations in Bangladesh. J. Sustainable For. 34, 651–681. Chow, J., 2018. Mangrove management for climate change adaptation and sustainable development in coastal zones. J. Sustainable For. 37 (2), 139–156. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/10549811.2017.1339615. Chowdhury, N., Costello, L., Chakma, N., 2016. Understanding Tree and Forest Resource Change in Bangladesh: A Literature Review to Support the Preparation of the Socioeconomic Survey. Bangladesh Forest Department and Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Costanza, R., et al., 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387. Costanza, R., Wilson, M., Troy, A., Voinov, A., Liu, A., D’Agostina, J., 2006. The Value of New Jersey’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital. Gund Institute for Ecological Economics. Robinson School of Environment and Natural Resources. University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont. Costanza, R., de Groot, R., Braat, L., Kubiszewski, I., Fioramonti, L., Sutton, P., Farber, S., Grosso, M., 2017. Twenty years of ecosystem services: how far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosyst. Serv. 28, 1–16. Das, S., Vincent, J.R., 2009. Mangroves protected villages and reduced death toll during Indian super cyclone. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 106 (18), 7357–7360. de Groot, R., et al., 2012. Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units. Ecosyst. Serv. 1, 50–61.

13

Ecosystem Services 42 (2020) 101069

S.K. Barua, et al. the household economy: a case study from northern part of Bangladesh. J. For. Environ. Sci. 26 (1), 9–15. Kibria, A.S.M.G., Costanza, R., Groves, C., Behie, A.M., 2018. The interactions between livelihood capitals and access of local communities to the forest provisioning services of the Sundarbans Mangrove Forest, Bangladesh. Ecosyst. Serv. 32, 41–49. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.05.003. Masiero, M., Pettenella, D., Boscolo, M., Barua, S. K., Animon, I., Rao, M. 2019. Valuing forest ecosystem services: a training manual policy makers and project developers. Forestry Working Paper no.11. Rome, Italy. Masum, K.M., Alam, M.S., Al-Manun, M.M.A., 2008. Ecological and economical significance of homestead forest to household of the offshore island in Bangladesh. J. For. Res. 19 (4), 307–310. Mehvar, S., Filatova, T., Sarker, M.H., Dastgheib, A., Ranasinghe, R., 2019. Climate change-driven losses in ecosystem services of coastal wetlands: A case study in the West coast of Banglades. Ocean Coastal Manage. 169, 273–283. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.12.009. In this issue. Miah, D., Chakma, S., Koike, M., Muhammed, N., 2012. Contribution of forests to the livelihood of the Chakma community in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh. J. For. Res. 17 (6), 449–457. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystem and Human Well-Being. Health Synthesis. World Health Organization. Ministry of Environment and Forests [MoEF]. 2005. Bangladesh National Adaptation Plan of Action. Dhaka, Bangladesh. Ministry of Environment and Forests [MoEF]. 2009. Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan. Dhaka, Bangladesh. Mitchell, A., 1995. Integrated Resource Development of the Sundarbans Reserve Forest, Bangladesh: Draft Report on Natural Resource Economics. United Nations Development Programme and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Khulna, Bangladesh. Bangladesh Forest Department. 2016c. National Forest Policy. Final Draft. Nunez, D., Nahuelhual, L., Oyarzun, C., 2006. Forests and water: the value of native temperate forests in supplying water for human consumption. Ecol. Econ. 58, 606–616. Potapov, P., Siddiqui, B.N., Iqbal, Z., Aziz, T., Zaman, B., Islam, A., Pickens, A., Talero, Y., Tyukavina, A., Turubanova, S., Hansen, M.C., 2017. Comprehensive monitoring of Bangladesh tree cover inside and outside of forests, 2000–2014. Environ. Res. Lett. 12, 104015.

Rahman, L.M., 2016. Bangladesh National Conservation Strategy: Forest Resources. Bangladesh Forest Department and International Union for Nature Conservation. Rahman, L.M., Ahmed, F.U., 2016. Forest dependent people in Bangladesh. In: Bhuiyan, Z.H., Thakur, A.B., Uddin, M.S., Hossain, M.A. (Eds.), Souvenir. National Tree Fair Campaign and Tree Fair. Forest Department, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, pp. 57–60. Rahman, M.M., Jiang, Y., Irvine, K., 2018. Assessing wetland services for improved development decision-making: a case study of mangroves in coastal Bangladesh. Wetland Ecol. Manage. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-018-9592-0. Rasul, G., 2009. Ecosystem services and agricultural land-use practices: a case study of the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh. Sustainability: Sci. Pract. Policy 5 (2), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2009.11908032. Razzaque, J., 2017. Payments for ecosystem services in sustainable mangrove forest management in Bangladesh. Transnatl. Environ. Law 6 (2), 309–333. Santhakumar, V., Haque, A.K.E., Bhattacharya, R., 2005. An economic analysis of mangroves in South Asia. In: Khan, M.S. (Ed.), Economic Development in South Asia. Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi, India, pp. 369–437. Sarker, A.H.M.R et al. 2017. Valuation of Ecosystem Services in the Sundarbans. CREL Project. Uddin, S., Stevenincka, E.R.S., Stuipa, M., Shah, M.A.R. 2013b. Economic valuation of provisioning and cultural services of a protected mangrove ecosystem: a case study on Sundarbans Reserve Forest, Bangladesh. Poster. Uddin, M.S., Shah, M.A.R., Khanom, S., Nesha, M.K., 2013c. Climate change impacts on the Sundarbans mangrove ecosystem services and dependent livelihoods in Bangladesh. Asian J. Conserv. Biol. 2 (2), 152–156. Uddin, S., Stevenincka, E.R.S., Stuipa, M., Shah, M.A.R., 2013a. Economic valuation of provisioning and cultural services of a protected mangrove ecosystem: a case study on Sundarbans Reserve Forest, Bangladesh. Ecosyst. Serv. 5, 88–93. Verma, M., Negandhi, D., Khanna, C., Edgaonkar, A., David, A., Kadekodi, G., Costanza, R., Gopal, R., Bonal, B.S., Yadav, S.P., 2017. Making the hidden visible: economic valuation of tiger reserves in India. Ecosyst. Serv. 26, 236–244. Winrock International. 2013. Pioneering mangrove valuation research. World Bank. 2018. World Bank Development Indicators. Available at http://data. worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators (last sighed on 11 April 2017). Wunder, S. 2005. Payments for Ecosystem Services. Some Nuts and Bolts. CIFOR Occasional Paper 42. Bogor, Indonesia.

14