Try to use any ecological service or environmental economy manual, there you will find different way for measuring the needed values

Dear Ho,

See, please, if I remember well, papers of Odum and colleagues. Especially famous are work in evaluation of price of wetlands (peat-bog?)...evaluation was'nt under 200.000 USD per hectare. Anyway, should have professional economist. During Soviet period when working at the Institute of Hydrobiology in Kiev (Ukraine) I was familiar with one guy that professionally calculated such prices, even forecasting of possible losses was evaluated in rubles (Soviet currency)... So, contact economists, working in Nature Conservation.

Andrey

Thanks Albaba and Kovalchuk for your responses.

Actually I am using the ecosystem services as the back bone for my research. So far it works well for other ecosystems with market goods. However, the biosphere is quite tricky for me. 

Another problem is that even the administration office of the area does not have the sufficient information about the flora and fauna ecosystem inside the biosphere. What they could provide is the number of species which makes the valuation such a tough work. 

I would appreciate more answers ...

 Google for this document; Economic Valuation of Forest Ecosystem Services in Malaysia by Awang Noor Abd. Ghani  Department of Forest Management Faculty of Forestry Universiti Putra Malaysia

You can use the document as a guide line.

Dear Ho,

It is generally difficult to estimate the economic value of biodiversity, and many authors even argue that it is not helpful to put a price-tag on biodiversity or a species. One way to estimate the economic value of biodiversity can be to conduct a visitor survey, which evaluates things like number of visitors, money spend by those visitors, willingness to travel (i.e. how far are the visitors traveling to visit the park and enjoy its biodiversity) etc. I highly recommend that you look at the work by the Natural Capital project. They also have many publications on the topic (see attached publication for a start).

Nadja

naturalcapitalproject.org

Article Economic analysis for ecosystem assessments: Application for...

Ian Bateman paper is very relevant of question.

Hello Ho,

along with the methods indicated above, you can also estimate loss of use and recovery cost based on best management practices for breeding and protection programs for iconic organisms. The cost of recovery in the event of a loss is used by some to estimate the value. It is similar to the buy back value for an insured vehicle if the car is destroyed.

Ecosystem services can be estimated by indirectly evaluating the damage of habitats

Sure, restoration of landscapes, even protection measures  that leads into changing the category "threatend" of animal or plant into "normal abundance". Cost of 1 species is about 10 mln USD, so revenant cost much, remind taka-he in New Zealand, or Nipponia nippon history in Japan...

Andrey

I agree with Nadja, that the Natural Capital Project is a good place to start for tools and literature. A key philosophy of the Natural Capital approach is that there is no single value that can be calculated. Various scenarios are examined with input from all stakeholders and values are assigned to different components of the system according to stakeholder input. 

The classic question when assigning value to biodiversity is "value to whom?" To give the example of cattle ranching, a productive, homogeneous grassland with relatively low species diversity is of value to the cattle ranchers, but might be of less value to, say, bird watchers who want a heterogeneous, patchy grassland to provide habitat for a wider variety of bird species.  The key then is in optimising the value, by finding a management scenario that provides sufficient forage for cattle as well as habitat for high bird diversity to encourage paying visitors (for example).

Another key philosophy of the Natural Capital Project is that it is not always necessary to attach dollar values to everything. It is often sufficient to calculate units of production of some key ecosystem services, such as Ml of water per year or (in their example) pounds of lobster catch under different scenarios. Those units of production will be added to other key measures that are important to stakeholders, such as numbers of tourists, or numbers of livestock, or whatever is important in that area. So your final ecosystem valuation model might have, say, three or four important variables, each measured in its own units, and not all of them will be dollars (lobster fishermen can understand the value of pounds of lobster quite easily).

For other work on ecosystem services valuation, look up Jane Turpie here on ResearchGate, as well as Charlie and Sheona Shackleton. These guys have done a ton of work on ecosystem services in southern Africa. I've just checked Jane's profile, and she has many reports relevant to your question.

I'll attach a few other grey literature reports below.

Thank you every one for your responses, 

to Mukesh, can you kindly send the link to Bateman's publications.

The motivation behind the effort to convert values into monetary terms is to aggregate and compare with other services in the research area. I understand that putting a single price tag to a dynamic system such ecosystems is prone to either over/under-estimation. But even partially captured values would be much more informative than vague statements. 

Thank you all again for your responses and recommendations

Just click another page of answer and click on heading, paper will come down.

 Dear Mukesh

Please spare my ignorance, I still do not catch your instruction

with regards

Dear Ho, just after your response you will see < 1  2   in the response column. Ian paper is in 1 so just click 1 and find his paper pasted. Then you have to click heading (title). The pdf file of paper will downloaded. May be I am using primitive windows and became easier for me. But you will definitely. Mukesh/NEPAL

Hi Ho!

Alan's Short response is very accurated, and I am just adding some exaples on how to apply it.

Try to separate the services that the Biosphere provide in: tangibles and untangibles. What I mean is that you can try to value the flora and fauna as well as the services that the Biosphere provides.

For example, if there is any lumber species that is of special interest find the value of the sq m of the wood and and estimation of the population in the area, you can obtain a value per hectare.  You can repeat this process as much as needed with plants and animals.

Then proceed with the intangibles: CO2 sequestration, tourist value (and in this you can use park fees, camping facilities, guiding servicies, etc.). That way you can provide a tangible value on the biosphere.

I hope this works.  

Rebeca

may be helping... in my opinion and some articles.. the CVM and Value Methods is not equal and do not give one reason for the goal also.. proceed and agreed with Mr. Alan.. i wonder for you to try with biodiversity research metodology about it..  there is more case for being a one short answer to provide your question... thanx

Hi, Ho

Its long time from the interesting discussion you rased on prices and evaluation of "biodiversity". I found one my populat small book (it is my translation from Slovak original published by DAPHNE environmental society). There are some methods of calculating profits from Wetlands. I did'nt find the English original (not sure that it was or is in the Internet), may be you will be lucky. Ukrainian original I'm attaching for you (as well I put it into RG), as it has perfect reference on a problem of yoyr interest!

Andrey 

Hello. There was a similar journal article written on this wherein they were writing about the economic value of ecosystems, you might want to check it out as a reference. It was by Constanza et al 2014 titled "Changes in the global value of ecosystem services".