Socio-economic analysis of ponds and pondscapes. Delivarable 1.5.

Données et ressources

Info additionnelle

Champ Valeur
Dernière modification août 1, 2024, 12:13 (TU)
Créé le août 1, 2024, 12:12 (TU)
E-mail pietro.sala@tum.de
Langue Eng
Title in original language Report on the socio-economic analysis of ponds and pondscapes. Delivarable 1.5.
Original language English
Abstract The aim of Deliverable 1.5 is to describe the methods of the socio-economic analysis that was conducted within Task 1.6 of the project, as well as its outcomes. We successfully explored how pondscapes’ benefit delivery capacity could be quantified through available indicators, which were collected by project partners. Then, the Benefit of the Doubt method allowed us to aggregate such indicators at criteria and sub-criteria levels, to further compare heterogeneous pondscapes. With the Analytic Hierarchy Process, we investigated stakeholder preferences for such criteria in a straightforward, bottom-up assessment. Next, such preferences became weights for a Multi-criteria Decision Analysis, comparing pondscapes on their benefit delivery effectiveness. Data Envelopment Analysis was then used to provide insights on pondscapes’ efficiency. Finally, integrating knowledge from the available literature and our data, we discussed how pondscapes perform as NBS in comparison to other such measures. We found that stakeholder preferences for ES and NCP change considerably between demo-sites. More in general, for all the PONDEFUL demo-sites environmental benefits are ranked higher by stakeholders, except for the Uruguayan one where provisioning benefits are favored instead. This is in line with the intended use of such ponds, since Uruguayan pondscapes are mostly privately owned, and maintained in support of agricultural activities. Once these preferences have been extended at the national level, Osona (ESP), Ayas Yolu (TU), Imrendi (TU), Avernako (DK), Altos del Chorro (UY), Albera (ESP), and Sorgun (TU) pondscapes consistently held the highest scores for benefit delivery effectiveness. Indeed, they all provide mostly those benefits that are preferred by their respective stakeholders. Under the efficiency assessment, Ayas Yolu (TU) proved to be the best performing pondscape. This is not only the best in term of input-output performance (technical efficiency), but also at the appropriate scale to optimize such ratio overall (scale efficiency). Finally, comparing the literature with our newly acquired knowledge, we found initial evidence that could support pondscapes’ potential as cost-efficient and scalable NBS.
Licence Creative Commons Attribution
Responsible party Organisation: Technische Universität München
Email: pietro.sala@tum.de
Role: Principal Investigator
Related publications https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13150514