Public Comment for CISRERP

Arthur R. Marshall Foundation & Florida Environmental Institute, Inc (ArtMarshall.org)
Public Comment on synthesis, ecosystem services, etc., to the 24th meeting of the
Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress

It is great to see “Synthesis,” “Ecosystem Services,” “Restoration Benefits,” and “Costs” (Budget Implications) on the Agenda for the 24th Meeting of CISRERP as applied to Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plans (CERP) and Non-CERP projects, which I’m calling CERP-plus = CERP(+) here.

Unfortunately I am unable to attend the meeting to see the synthesis results presented. In lieu of not attending the following public comment is submitted for the record.

First, I am pleased to introduce a new member of the Art Marshall.org Science & Technology Team as our representative at the 24th CISRERP meeting: Dr. Teresa Thornton, PhD in Forestry Resources, University of Maine, and another ArtMarshall.org spokesperson for the trees, environmental education, and more.

Second, on Synthesis: As always, the late Art Marshall was ahead of his time on this subject:
“If you don’t synthesize knowledge, scientific journals become spare-parts catalogues for machines that are never built. Until isolated and separated pieces of information are assimilated by the human mind, we will continue to rattle around aimlessly.” --- from “Anatomy of Man-made Drought,” Sports Illustrated, March 15, 1982 [Google for an interesting read]

Finally, the main point of this comment: The Art Marshall Foundation position, consistent with my late Uncle’s view re synthesis, is that better environmental decision making results from incorporating comprehensive ecosystem services valuation (ESV) based on total dollar accounting (total economic valuation) of benefits and costs (NRC, 2005) and that includes decisions on how to apply or implement CERP(+) for the following reasons:

• No matter what comprehensive ESV approach is taken, the benefits demonstrated are greater than the B:C go-no-go decision ratios of 1.5 traditionally used by the Corps of Engineers. Using an ESV B:C for CERP(+) looks to have a B:C range of 6 to 9 times dollars invested as a return on investment. (ROI);
• The White House (PCAST 2011) has called for ROI to be calculated for programs such as CERP(+) to support decision-making. Fully accounting for benefits and costs is more likely to result in support by Congress, Office of Mgt & Budget, and the public, while avoiding the influence of high cost nay-sayers;
• In the Case of CERP(+), which has a 40-50 year life-cycle, the ESV approach forces long-term, strategic thinking, by requiring life-cycle benefits and costs to be projected, whereas the present focus on near-term project costs yields “sticker shock” for lack of accounting for long-term benefits.
• Provides those implementing CERP(+) the opportunity to exercise leadership by example, as a better way of doing business, and is an opportunity to shift the zero-value paradigm.

The ESV approach is a fast emerging paradigm owing to the need to achieve optimum return on investment in these difficult economic times. We are very pleased to see the White House Report to The President: Sustaining National Capital: Protecting Society and the Economy hit the street (PCAST 2011), with strong recommendations that the Federal government adopt the ESV approach in projects like CERP(+). The Florida Ranchlands Payment for Ecosystem Services (FRPES) Project is a start.

Having presented a demonstration project (Marshall, et al, 2010) using the Costanza Synthesis (Google Nature 387), which got good peer review, e.g., The Honorable Rock Salt’s comments at a previous CISRERP meeting, we are happy to tout using the Costanza Synthesis (1997) and the benefits-transfer approach to move the implementation of CERP(+) forward, based on preliminary estimates of ESV.

Consistent with the latest literature we acknowledge that the benefits transfer method may have disadvantages over other methods. (Daily, Polasky, et al: 2011), However as a starting point when no other information is available, the benefits transfer approach using the Costanza Synthesis (Costanza, et al, 1997) appears to meet the mission impossible 3 out of 3: Quicker, better, and cheaper (QBC) goals. This appears more effective than resorting to narrative assessments necessitating subjective judgments by decision-makers, absent numeric decision-support.

The benefits transfer method also provides an order-of- magnitude reality check when alternative ESV approaches are taken up. Such an approach is equally great for QBC analysis of alternatives when several configurations are under consideration, and a determination of relative merit ROI is a primary consideration. This was the main purpose of the Valuing Ecosystem Services of a Restored River of Grass demonstration by our 2010 Summer Interns (Marshall, et al; 2010). As the late Admiral Grace Hopper noted: One good experiment [demonstration] is worth a 1,000 expert opinions.

P.S. Back to the future regarding the current man-made drought debate on the 2011 managed water shortage: The 2011 Arthur R. Marshall Summer Interns calculated the cost of the 2011 drought/water shortage to south Florida’s society and economy. They projected the drought/water supply shortage cost over the 40 year life-cycle of CERP(+), assuming three droughts a decade. The total cost to society and the economy exceeded $11 Billion. They concluded that at least $7.6 Billion Dollars in drought costs could be avoided. That’s enough to pay for implementing most of the proposed River of Grass configurations. (Marshall, et al, 2010). Greater focus is needed on such cost avoidance as CERP(+) is fully implemented.

All this begs an ethical question: Who are we as scientists and CERP(+) implementers if we can’t demonstrate the added value of our work to society? Art Marshall had an answer to this question as well:

I have to believe, as all scientists should, that the more exactly we define realities, the closer society will adhere to them. If this is not true, then many of our careers are personal opiates rather than contributions to hope in the world. American Association for Advancement of Science Conference, December, 1972.

Respectfully submitted,

John Arthur Marshall, Chairman of the Board, Chair Science & Technology Committee
Arthur R. Marshall Foundation & Florida Environmental Institute, Inc.; www.ArtMarshall.org
1028 North Federal Highway; Lake Worth, FL 33460; 561-233-9004

Primary References:
Costanza, et al; 15 May 1997: The Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital.
NRC, 2005: Valuing Ecosystem Services – Toward Better Environmental Decision Making
Marshall, et al; 2010 GEER Conference; Valuing Ecosystem Services of a Restored River of Grass;
Daily, Polasky, et al; 201l; Natural Capital – Theory & Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services
PCAST, 2011: President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (S&T); Report to the President: Sustaining Natural Capital – Protecting Society & The Economy;