Proposal for Increasing Consistency When Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making

Thumbnail Image



Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Repository Usage Stats



In October 2015, the U.S. Executive Offices of the President—the Office of Management and Budget, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the Office of Science and Technology Policy—released a memo, “Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Federal Decision Making,” that directed federal agencies to develop work plans and implementation guidance by the end of 2016. But many practical questions remain about how ecosystem services can most effectively be used in decision making. This policy brief explores how to achieve consistency in the use of ecosystem services, primarily in terms of which ecosystem services are selected for assessment and how they are quantified. An initial idea for promoting consistency might be to require all decision makers to consider a common set of ecosystem services, each with a pre-defined metric. Although this strategy might seem logical, it may not provide relevant or useful information for decision makers because even fairly constrained categories of these services—say those for maintaining air and water quality, managing water quantity, and reducing risks from fire, storms, and droughts—when further refined break up into many more services that are defined by who is affected and how they are affected. For example, a water quality management issue results in a change in water quality for downstream stakeholders—which can alter services such as municipal water supplies, irrigation, fishing, swimming, and so on. Each of these services involves different stakeholder populations or beneficiaries. Moreover, each of these services might be more or less relevant in different contexts or regions. The ecosystem services that should be considered in a particular decision depend on the ecosystem type, the attributes and qualities of that ecosystem, the ways in which surrounding human communities use or appreciate the ecosystem, vulnerabilities and characteristics of those communities, and the preferences and values of human beneficiaries in different areas and policy contexts. They also depend on the temporal and spatial scale of the project, plan, program, or policy under consideration. Consequently, achieving consistency in the selection of ecosystem services to be considered is a complex task, as is achieving consistency in quantification of those services across decision contexts.






Olander, Lydia, Dean Urban, Robert Johnston, George Van Houtven and James Kagan (2016). Proposal for Increasing Consistency When Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Decision Making. Retrieved from



Lydia Olander

Adjunct Professor in the Environmental Sciences and Policy Division

Lydia Olander is a program director at the Nicholas Institute for Energy Environment & Sustainability at Duke University and adjunct professor at the Nicholas School of the Environment. She works on improving evidence-based policy and accelerating implementation of climate resilience, nature-based solutions, natural capital accounting, and environmental markets. She leads the National Ecosystem Services Partnership and sits on Duke’s Climate Commitment action team. She recently spent two years with the Biden administration at the Council on Environmental Quality as Director of Nature based Resilience and before that spent five years on the Environmental Advisory Board for the US Army Corps of Engineers. She is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and widely published researcher. Prior to joining the Nicholas Institute, she spent a year as an AAAS Congressional Science and Technology Fellow working with Senator Joseph Lieberman on environmental and energy issues. She was a college scholar at Cornell University and earned her Master of Forest Science from Yale University and Ph.D. from Stanford University.


Dean L. Urban

Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences and Policy

My interest in landscape ecology focuses on the agents and implications of pattern in forested landscapes. Increasingly, my research is in what has been termed "theoretical applied ecology," developing new analytic approaches to applications of immediate practical concern such as conservation planning. A hallmark of my Lab is the integration of field studies, spatial analysis, and simulation modeling in extrapolating our fine-scale empirical understanding of environmental issues to the larger space and time scales of management and policy.

Material is made available in this collection at the direction of authors according to their understanding of their rights in that material. You may download and use these materials in any manner not prohibited by copyright or other applicable law.