Assessment of socio-economic options

D2.3 follows on from the preceding deliverable in examining stakeholder relationships with wetlands, but will also include a focus on the economic value (income and employment) of existing activities in the Action Sites and the governance and policy frameworks that support them (WP3). It will likewise draw on the restoration solutions and mapping of ecosystem services included in WP1.3, particularly those of an instrument nature, and will input to the identification of financial measures for restoration solutions in WP4.Sub-Task 2.3.1. Understanding existing and potential economic returns from wetland activities (Lead UNIVE)This will integrate the information on socio-economic context and socio-cultural values, both qualitative and quantitative, from Task 2.2 and combine this with estimates of economic returns from existing activities, on site or within catchments, that have direct or indirect effects on wetlands, and will include activities such as agriculture, fishing and industries or tourism. The economic and social benefits and costs of alternative restoration scenarios (including opportunities for new sustainable systems such as paludiculture or low intensity grazing, renewable energy or tourism) will be investigated for each Action Site. Their potential returns and future sustainability will be compared with the contribution made by existing activities to the local economy and employment. The benefits of both sets of activities will be compared with respect to external environmental costs deriving from excess use or mismanagement of resources, and social costs related to distributional effects and equity issues (informing also WP1). Some use of benefit transfer methods may be used based on the Knowledge Sites where data is not available for Action Sites. Given the need to consider relatively long timeframes (e.g. when considering the profitability of investments), a scenario analysis will be undertaken based on various prospective solutions. Scenarios will be characterised by assumptions and hypotheses about the extent and type of restoration and future assumptions for exogenous drivers such as policy, market and climate.Sub-Task 2.3.2. Exploring a Just Transition through PMCA (Lead UNIVE)As some current activities may not be compatible with wetland restoration, this subtask has the objective of identifying ways forward that achieve a ‘just transition’ without significantly disadvantaging any one group of stakeholders. Based on the information on socio-cultural values and criteria emerging from Task 2.2, this subtask will use participatory multi-criteria analysis (PMCA) to work towards a consensus position. The benefits from restoration could include the enhancement of ecosystem services that improve water quality, provide flood mitigation, etc. Depending on local contexts, including the policy and governance frameworks being assessed concurrently by WP3, PMCA would complement and contribute to 2.3.1 by providing more comprehensive data for cost-benefit (CBA) or cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA).Various mechanisms to achieve the proposed changes can be considered by both 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 and be discussed in D2.3. These may include environmental transfer payments, payments for ecosystem services, carbon financing, and biodiversity offsetting. The design of such mechanisms, and estimates of their value, will be examined further in WP4.