Environmental (including Ecosystem) Goods and Services

TG-2.4 Section 2: Compiling Indicators from Ocean Accounts Applied Draft

Circular ID	TG-2.4
Version	7.0
Badge	Applied
Status	Draft
Last Updated	May 2026

1. Outcome

1This Circular provides guidance on compiling indicators of environmental goods and services, including ecosystem services, within the context of ocean accounting. Ecosystem services represent the contributions that marine and coastal ecosystems make to benefits enjoyed by people and the economy. These contributions fall into three categories: provisioning services such as fish and other harvested biomass, regulating services such as coastal protection and carbon sequestration, and cultural services such as recreation and amenity values.¹

2This Circular establishes an indicator framework aligned with the SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA) reference list of ecosystem services, providing guidance on measurement approaches for provisioning, regulating, and cultural service indicators in both physical and monetary terms.² The guidance covers the derivation of indicators from ecosystem service flow accounts, the selection of appropriate measurement units, and the interpretation of physical versus monetary indicators for different policy applications.

3The methodology supports ocean-related EGSS measurement (identifying industries engaged in environmental protection and resource management under CEPA and CReMA), green and blue economy monitoring, environmental protection expenditure tracking, and marine spatial planning by quantifying ecosystem service flows associated with different ocean uses (see TG-1.2 Marine Spatial Planning).³

4This Circular is distinct from TG-3.2 Flows from Environment to Economy, which covers the underlying supply and use table methodology for ecosystem service accounts. The present Circular focuses on compiling summary indicators from those accounts. The guidance supports the valuation framework described in TG-1.9 Safe Usage of Monetary Valuation and builds on the asset-service linkages established in TG-3.1 Asset Accounts.

2. Requirements

1This Circular requires familiarity with:

• 2TG-0.1 General Introduction to Ocean Accounts — for the conceptual framework connecting ecosystems to economic activity
• 3TG-0.2 Overview of Relevant Statistical Standards — for the international statistical standards underpinning ocean accounting, including the SEEA EA and SEEA CF frameworks referenced throughout this Circular
• 4TG-3.1 Asset Accounts — for understanding ecosystem assets and their relationship to service supply
• 5TG-3.2 Flows from Environment to Economy — for the accounting structure underlying ecosystem service indicators, including physical supply and use tables

6For detailed guidance on monetary valuation methods referenced throughout this Circular, see TG-1.9 Safe Usage of Monetary Valuation.

3. Guidance Material

1Indicators derived from ecosystem service accounts provide summary measures that can be used to track changes over time, compare across ecosystem types and regions, and inform policy decisions concerning ocean management and conservation.⁴

2This section establishes the indicator framework (Section 3.1), addresses the relationship between ecosystem services and the environmental goods and services sector (Section 3.2), then examines indicators for each major category of ecosystem services: provisioning (Section 3.3), regulating (Section 3.4), and cultural services (Section 3.5). Section 3.6 addresses the distinction between physical and monetary indicators and their appropriate applications. Section 3.7 presents the compilation procedure for deriving indicators from accounts, and Section 3.8 provides a worked example with synthetic data.

3.1 Ecosystem Services Indicator Framework

1The SEEA EA provides a framework for deriving indicators from ecosystem service accounts.⁵ Ecosystem service indicators can be derived from both the supply and use perspectives of the ecosystem services supply and use tables (SUTs), and can be expressed in physical or monetary terms. Figure 2.4.1 illustrates how ecosystem assets supply the three service categories, how those flows are recorded in the supply and use tables, and how physical indicators — with an optional valuation step — are derived from them.

Figure 2.4.1 Ecosystem-service supply and use tables yield physical flow, capacity, and ratio indicators, with optional monetary aggregates. Dashed boxes mark capacity and derived ratios; solid marks primary flow indicators. Source: TG-2.4 draft v7, §3.1 (indicator typology), §3.6 (physical vs monetary), §3.7 Steps 5--7 (compilation sequence); SEEA EA Tables 5.3--5.4 (supply-use of ecosystem services), Chapter 6 & para. 9.18 (monetary aggregates). Adapted from: Ouyang et al. (2020), "Using gross ecosystem product (GEP) to value nature in decision making", PNAS 117(25); SEEA EA Figure 6.1 (ecosystem service capacity and flow).

3.1.1 Classification structure

1The reference list of ecosystem services in SEEA EA organises services into three broad categories, summarised in Table 3.1.1 below.⁶

Category	Description
Provisioning services	Ecosystem contributions to the growth of biomass and other materials that are extracted or harvested from ecosystems for use in economic activity.
Regulating and maintenance services	Ecosystem contributions that regulate biological processes and influence climate, hydrological, and biochemical cycles, thereby maintaining environmental conditions beneficial to individuals and society.
Cultural services	The experiential and intangible contributions of ecosystems, related to the perceived or actual qualities of ecosystems, that support a range of cultural benefits.

2For ocean accounting, each category encompasses distinct marine ecosystem services with specific measurement requirements and indicator possibilities. Table 1 summarises the key marine ecosystem services within each category and their indicative measurement units. The selection in Table 1 reflects the ecosystem services most commonly relevant to marine and coastal contexts and is not exhaustive. The SEEA EA reference list (Table 6.3) includes additional services such as wild animals and plants provisioning (covering non-fish marine species and marine bioprospecting for genetic material), storm mitigation services (where these are analytically distinct from coastal protection), and soil and sediment retention services.⁷ Compilers should consult the full SEEA EA reference list and include additional services where they are material for their national ocean accounting context.

Service Category	Ecosystem Service	Key Marine Ecosystem Types	Physical Units	Monetary Approach
Provisioning	Fish provisioning	Marine shelf, pelagic, demersal	tonnes biomass	Resource rent
	Aquaculture provisioning	Coastal, marine shelf	tonnes biomass	Residual value
	Seaweed/algae provisioning	Coastal, rocky shores	tonnes biomass	Market prices
	Water supply	Coastal, estuarine	cubic metres	Replacement cost
Regulating	Global climate regulation	Blue carbon ecosystems	tonnes carbon	Carbon prices
	Coastal protection	Coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass	avoided damages	Avoided damage cost
	Water purification	Coastal wetlands, seagrass	volumes filtered	Replacement cost
	Nursery habitat	Mangroves, seagrass, estuaries	hectares habitat	Productivity change
Cultural	Recreation	Coral reefs, beaches, MPAs	visitor-days	Travel cost
	Visual amenity	Coastal seascapes	hedonic index	Hedonic pricing
	Scientific/education	MPAs, research sites	research outputs	Cost-based

3Table 1: Marine ecosystem services indicator framework (adapted from SEEA EA Table 6.3)⁸

3.1.2 Indicator types

1Three main types of indicators can be derived from ecosystem service accounts:⁹

2Flow indicators measure the quantity of ecosystem services supplied or used during an accounting period. These are the primary indicators derived from ecosystem service SUTs and represent the most direct measure of ecosystem contributions to benefits. Examples include tonnes of fish harvested (provisioning), tonnes of carbon sequestered (regulating), and visitor-days (cultural services).

3Capacity indicators measure the potential or sustainable level of ecosystem service supply. The SEEA EA defines ecosystem capacity as “the ability of an ecosystem to generate an ecosystem service under current ecosystem condition, management and uses, at the highest yield or use level that does not negatively affect the future supply of the same or other ecosystem services.”¹⁰ Capacity indicators are particularly important for sustainability assessment, as they allow comparison of actual flows against sustainable thresholds. The relationship between ecosystem condition and service capacity is addressed in TG-3.1 Asset Accounts.

Compiling capacity indicators when formal assessments are unavailable

Formal capacity assessments are available for some marine ecosystem services (notably fisheries stock assessments), but for most regulating and cultural services there is no equivalent assessment in most developing-country contexts. Compilers should adopt a tiered approach:

• 4Tier 1 — Formal assessments. Where stock assessments or capacity models exist (e.g., fisheries B/BMSY data, peer-reviewed coastal protection capacity models), use these directly. For fisheries, FAO (2022) The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture provides B/BMSY data for global and regional stocks.¹¹
• 5Tier 2 — Condition-index proxies. Where no formal capacity assessment exists, derive a proxy using ecosystem condition indices from TG-3.1 Asset Accounts applied to a benchmark service capacity. Document the proxy method and benchmark assumptions transparently.
• 6Tier 3 — Unknown, with documentation. Where no defensible proxy basis exists, leave the capacity entry blank and document the data gap. Blank entries are preferable to uninformed estimates.

Sustainability ratios (actual flow / capacity) should only be computed for Tier 1 and Tier 2 entries, with the tier explicitly disclosed in metadata.

7Derived indicators combine ecosystem service data with other information to produce policy-relevant ratios and indices. Examples include ecosystem service intensity indicators (ecosystem services per hectare or per unit of ecosystem asset value), sustainability ratios (actual flow divided by sustainable capacity), and dependency ratios (share of industry output dependent on ecosystem services).

8For practical compilation purposes, compilers may find it useful to distinguish headline indicators from supporting indicators. Headline indicators are a small number of high-level summary measures intended for national reporting and policy communication—for example, Gross Ecosystem Product, total fish provisioning services, and aggregate coastal protection value. Supporting indicators provide the disaggregated detail needed for analytical work and are typically reported in supplementary tables. The SEEA EA notes that headline indicators “provide a summary of key features of ecosystems that can be monitored over time” whilst detailed indicators “provide more comprehensive information for use by researchers and policy analysts.”¹²

3.1.3 Spatial allocation

1Many ecosystem services, particularly regulating services, are generated at landscape or seascape scale involving multiple ecosystem types.¹³ For indicator purposes, allocation of service flows to specific ecosystem types may be required. The SEEA EA notes that “a number of ecosystem services, particularly regulating and maintenance services but also some cultural services, are generated at landscape scale in the sense that this involves a range of ecosystem assets of different types.”¹⁴

2For ocean accounting, spatial allocation is particularly relevant for:

• 3Coastal protection services supplied by combinations of coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrass (see TG-6.1 Coral Reef Accounts, TG-6.2 Mangrove and Wetland Accounts, and TG-6.3 Seagrass Accounts)
• 4Water purification services involving multiple coastal ecosystem types within estuaries
• 5Nursery habitat services that span mangroves, seagrass meadows, and nearshore waters

3.2 Environmental Goods and Services Sector (EGSS)

1The Environmental Goods and Services Sector (EGSS) framework complements the ecosystem services accounting framework by identifying the industries and activities engaged in producing goods and services for environmental protection and resource management purposes.¹⁵ Whilst ecosystem services flow from ecosystems to economic units, EGSS represents the economic response—the industries and activities that produce goods and services aimed at environmental protection (following CEPA) or resource management (following CReMA).

3.2.1 Relationship to ecosystem services

1The SEEA Central Framework describes EGSS as comprising “the producers of environmental protection and resource management goods and services” and notes that “the output of the EGSS equals the sum of the supply of environmental protection services and resource management services.”¹⁶ For ocean accounting, the relevant EGSS activities include:

EGSS Category	Ocean-related activities	Related ecosystem services
Environmental protection (CEPA)	Marine pollution monitoring and control (CEPA 1, 2, 3)	Water purification, waste assimilation
	Coastal and marine biodiversity protection (CEPA 6)17	Nursery habitat, biodiversity maintenance
	Marine protected area management (CEPA 6, 9)	Multiple regulating and cultural services
Resource management (CReMA)	Protection of biodiversity and landscapes (CEPA 6)17	Fish provisioning services
	Coastal forest management (mangroves) (CReMA 11)	Coastal protection, carbon sequestration
	Marine renewable energy production (CReMA 13A)	Energy from renewable sources (abiotic flow)

2Table 2: Ocean-related EGSS activities and their connections to ecosystem services

3EGSS output represents economic expenditure on activities that maintain, enhance, or restore the capacity of ecosystems to supply services. For example, expenditure on marine protected area management (CEPA 6) maintains ecosystem condition that sustains the capacity of coral reef, mangrove, and seagrass ecosystems to supply services. Fisheries management expenditure (classified under CEPA 6)¹⁷ aims to maintain fish stocks within sustainable limits, thereby protecting ongoing provisioning capacity.

3.2.2 Compilation approach for ocean EGSS indicators

1EGSS indicators are derived from supply-use tables extended to incorporate environmental protection and resource management activities. The SEEA CF describes the compilation approach as involving three steps: (i) identifying relevant industries and activities using CEPA and CReMA classifications, (ii) measuring the output of environmental goods and services by those industries, and (iii) measuring the use of those goods and services by final demand categories and intermediate consumption.¹⁸

2For ocean accounting, key data sources include:

• 3Government budget data on expenditure by environment and fisheries ministries, classified according to CEPA (e.g., marine protected area management, coastal pollution control) and CReMA (e.g., fisheries stock assessment, aquaculture extension services)
• 4Industry surveys of businesses engaged in environmental consulting, marine monitoring, coastal restoration, and other ocean-related environmental services
• 5Specialised ocean accounts for fisheries management (TG-3.6 Fisheries Accounts), aquaculture (TG-3.9 Aquaculture Accounts), and offshore energy (TG-3.10 Offshore Energy Accounts) that provide detail on resource management activities

6Compilers should distinguish between the producer types summarised in Table 3.2.2 below.

Producer Type	Description
Primary EGSS producers	Units whose principal activity is environmental protection or resource management (e.g., marine consulting firms, government environmental agencies).
Secondary EGSS producers	Units whose principal activity is not environmental, but which produce environmental goods and services as a secondary output (e.g., aquaculture facilities providing fish nursery habitat management as ancillary environmental activity).
Ancillary EGSS producers	Units producing environmental goods or services as an ancillary activity, that is, as an input to their own principal production activity, not for sale or transfer to other units (e.g., manufacturing plants operating in-house wastewater treatment for coastal discharges, where the treated effluent supports the plant’s own production process).

7The distinction matters for indicator interpretation: primary and secondary producers contribute to measured EGSS output and value added, whilst ancillary production is not separately recorded as EGSS output — it is embedded in the intermediate consumption of the producing industry, following SEEA CF paras. 4.100—4.105.¹⁹

3.3 Provisioning Service Indicators

1Ecosystem service categories and the mapping of marine services to the SEEA EA Table 6.3 framework are described in TG-3.2 Flows from Environment to Economy Section 3.1. The sections below present the indicator derivation procedure for each service category applicable to ocean accounting.

3.3.1 Fish provisioning indicators

1Fish provisioning services represent the ecosystem contributions to the growth of wild fish and other aquatic organisms that are harvested by capture fisheries.²⁰ Key indicators include:

2Physical flow indicators:

• 3Gross catch (tonnes): The SEEA CF defines gross catch as “the total live weight of fish or other aquatic organisms taken (captured, caught, harvested or removed) for all purposes (commercial, industrial, recreational and subsistence) by all types and classes of fishing units (including fishermen, vessels, gear, etc.) operating in inland, fresh and brackish water areas, and in inshore, offshore and high-seas fishing areas.”²¹ Gross catch therefore includes retained catch and discarded catch. In practice, NSO compilers should estimate gross catch as landings plus estimated discards, drawing on FAO FishStatJ landings data and FAO/regional fisheries management organisation discard estimates where direct discard surveys are unavailable.²²
• 4Landings (tonnes): Live weight equivalent of fish brought to port, commonly available from fisheries statistics
• 5Catch by species group (tonnes): Disaggregated catch data by major species categories (pelagic, demersal, crustaceans, molluscs)
• 6Catch by ecosystem type (tonnes): Allocation of catch to supplying marine ecosystem types (e.g., continental shelf, pelagic, coral reef associated)

7Capacity and sustainability indicators:

• 8Sustainable yield (tonnes): Maximum catch that can be taken without reducing long-term stock productivity
• 9Exploitation rate: Ratio of actual catch to sustainable yield, where values above 1.0 indicate depletion
• 10Stock status index: Proportion of stocks within biologically sustainable limits

11Fish provisioning services and asset accounts are tightly coupled: extraction recorded in the ecosystem service SUT should correspond to extraction entries in the aquatic resource asset account as described in TG-3.1 Asset Accounts.²³ This correspondence provides a consistency check for ocean accounts.

12IUU fishing must be included in provisioning service flow estimates where estimable, because omission overstates sustainability. For the SEEA CF accounting treatment and estimation methods, see TG-1.5 Small-Scale and Subsistence Fisheries Section 3.6.3.

3.3.2 Water and other provisioning indicators

1While provisioning of water from marine sources is typically treated as an abiotic flow rather than an ecosystem service, ecosystem contributions to water quality and regulation may be relevant:²⁴

2Water-related indicators:

• 3Freshwater provision from coastal ecosystems (cubic metres): Where coastal wetlands contribute to freshwater supply
• 4Desalination intake volume (cubic metres): Seawater abstraction for desalination (treated as abiotic flow)

5Other biomass provisioning indicators:

• 6Seaweed and algae harvest (tonnes): Ecosystem contribution to growth of harvested seaweed
• 7Shellfish harvest (tonnes): Wild shellfish collection
• 8Mangrove timber provisioning (cubic metres): Wood harvested from mangrove ecosystems

3.4 Regulating Service Indicators

Decision rule: Intermediate vs final ecosystem services for regulating services used by industries

SEEA EA paras. 6.11—6.17 distinguish intermediate ecosystem services (services supplied by one ecosystem to another ecosystem, supporting the supply of a further final service) from final ecosystem services (services flowing directly to economic units as beneficiaries).²⁵ For regulating services consumed by industries (e.g., water purification benefiting an aquaculture operation, coastal protection benefiting tourism infrastructure), the SEEA EA convention is to record them as final services flowing to the industry as beneficiary, not as intermediate inputs to the industry’s production process. The industry appears as a user column in the ecosystem service use table.

Intermediate ecosystem service flows are recorded separately (e.g., in supplementary tables) when the analytical purpose requires tracing the ecosystem-to-ecosystem contributions that support a final service. Compilers should not collapse intermediate and final flows into a single column without indicating which row represents which type, as this conflates analytically distinct relationships and risks double-counting.

3.4.1 Global climate regulation indicators

1Global climate regulation services represent ecosystem contributions to reducing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere through carbon sequestration and storage.²⁶ Marine ecosystems form part of the global carbon cycle, and “blue carbon” ecosystems such as mangroves, seagrass meadows, and salt marshes are recognised for their climate mitigation potential.

2The SEEA EA identifies two components of global climate regulation services:²⁷

3Carbon retention reflects the ability of ecosystems to accumulate and retain carbon stocks, supplying a service through the avoided emission of carbon to the atmosphere. The indicator for carbon retention is the stock of carbon held by ecosystem assets at the beginning of the accounting period. Operationally:

Carbon Retention Service Flow (period t) = Opening carbon stock (asset account, period t)

4This identity links the service supply directly to the opening balance of the carbon component of the relevant ecosystem asset account in TG-3.1 Asset Accounts. Compilers should record carbon retention service supply values that equal the corresponding opening stock values in the asset account, providing an automatic consistency check. Where formal asset accounts are not yet compiled, the opening stock can be derived from the most recent national blue carbon inventory or default IPCC Wetlands Supplement (2014) values, with documentation of the source.

Service-account row (Table 4-style)	Corresponding TG-3.1 asset-account entry
Carbon retention — mangroves (tC)	Mangrove ecosystem asset: opening C stock
Carbon retention — seagrass (tC)	Seagrass ecosystem asset: opening C stock
Carbon retention — salt marsh (tC)	Salt marsh ecosystem asset: opening C stock
Carbon sequestration — by ecosystem (tC/yr)	Net change in C stock over period (additions less reductions)

5Compilers should distinguish between soil organic carbon (slow-cycling, long-residence-time stock dominant in mangrove and seagrass sediments and most relevant to carbon retention indicators) and above-ground biomass carbon (faster-cycling, more dynamic, more relevant to short-period sequestration flux estimates). The two pools have different measurement methods and uncertainty profiles, and disaggregation supports interpretation of the retention versus sequestration distinction.

6Carbon sequestration reflects the ability of ecosystems to remove carbon from the atmosphere for long-term storage. The indicator is net carbon uptake over the accounting period, typically measured as net ecosystem carbon balance.

7Key indicators:

• 8Carbon stock (tonnes C): Total carbon stored in blue carbon ecosystems (mangroves, seagrass, salt marshes), including above-ground biomass, below-ground biomass, and soil carbon
• 9Carbon sequestration rate (tonnes C/year): Net annual carbon uptake by marine and coastal ecosystems
• 10Carbon stock by ecosystem type (tonnes C): Disaggregated carbon storage by ecosystem type (mangroves, seagrass, tidal marshes, marine shelf sediments)
• 11Carbon retention service (tonnes C): Opening stock of carbon, serving as proxy for the flow of retention services

12For blue carbon ecosystems, the SEEA EA recommends that measurement scope include carbon stored to a maximum of two metres below the surface in the case of organic carbon-rich soils such as those found in mangroves and seagrass meadows.²⁸ Related asset information is recorded in TG-3.1 Asset Accounts.

13The treatment of global climate regulation services raises questions about user attribution. The SEEA EA notes that the user of global climate regulation services is “the global community or, where the focus is on a national ecosystem accounting area, the rest of the world.”²⁹ For national ocean accounts, this implies that the bulk of carbon sequestration services should be attributed to the rest of the world as the beneficiary. This attribution reflects the global public good nature of climate regulation, whilst a country may also derive domestic benefits from its own contribution to global climate stability. In practice, compilers should record the full physical flow of carbon sequestration in the supply table (attributed to domestic ecosystem types) and allocate the use to “rest of the world” in the use table. For monetary valuation, the exchange value approach would value the service at the price that would be agreed between a willing buyer and seller, which in practice is typically approximated using observed carbon market prices or abatement cost methods. The indicator implications are that physical indicators of carbon sequestration represent domestic ecosystem contributions, whilst monetary indicators should be interpreted carefully given that the beneficiaries are predominantly global rather than domestic.

3.4.2 Coastal protection indicators

1For the full biophysical basis of coastal protection services, SPA/SBA delineation, and tiered method selection, see TG-2.3 Regulating Services Section 3.4.^{30 31}

Operational definition: “kilometres of coastline protected”

“Kilometres of coastline protected” is defined as the length of beneficiary shoreline landward of protective ecosystems with population or assets at risk under a defined reference hazard scenario, following SEEA EA para. 9.72 (no flow recorded where there are no potential damages to avoid).³² Compilers must:

1. 2Choose the hazard reference scenario using the nationally adopted return period for coastal flood and storm risk assessment (commonly 1-in-50 or 1-in-100 year for coastal engineering applications). The choice must be documented in compilation metadata and held constant across reporting periods.
2. 3Choose the attenuation threshold (the minimum wave-energy or wave-height reduction required for a shoreline segment to qualify as “protected”) drawing on national coastal risk assessments, InVEST coastal vulnerability or coastal protection model parameters, or peer-reviewed studies appropriate to the ecosystem types present (e.g., Beck et al. 2018 for coral reefs).³³
3. 4Apply a tiered approach where data are limited:
   • 5Tier 1. Modelled beneficiary shoreline with explicit attenuation and exposure analysis.
   • 6Tier 2. Kilometres of protective ecosystem frontage multiplied by an effectiveness factor derived from peer-reviewed or national-standard sources.
   • 7Tier 3. Kilometres of protective ecosystem frontage as a minimum proxy, flagged as an unadjusted upper bound.

SEEA EA does not prescribe a single numeric attenuation threshold or return period for coastal protection service measurement. Both are localisation decisions to be made by the compiling agency drawing on national coastal risk assessment standards. Cross-country comparability requires that the chosen return period and attenuation threshold are disclosed in compilation metadata and held constant across reporting periods. Cross-references: TG-6.1 Coral Reef Accounts, TG-6.2 Mangrove and Wetland Accounts.

8Physical indicators:

• 9Coastline protected (kilometres): Length of beneficiary coastline as defined in the operational definition box above
• 10Area protected (hectares): Coastal land area with reduced flood risk due to ecosystem services
• 11Wave attenuation (%): Percentage reduction in wave energy provided by coral reefs, mangroves, or seagrass
• 12Population protected (number): Coastal population within areas benefiting from ecosystem-based protection

13Capacity indicators:

• 14Protection capacity index: Measure of ecosystem condition relative to optimal protective function
• 15Vulnerability reduction: Change in coastal vulnerability attributable to ecosystem services

16The measurement of coastal protection services depends on the likelihood of hazard events and the presence of assets or population at risk.³² Even where hazard probability is high, no ecosystem service flow is recorded if there are no potential damages to be avoided.

3.4.3 Other regulating service indicators

1Water purification indicators:

• 2Nutrient retention (tonnes N, P): Quantity of nutrients removed or retained by coastal ecosystems
• 3Sediment retention (tonnes): Sediment captured by coastal vegetation before reaching marine waters
• 4Water quality improvement index: Composite measure of ecosystem contribution to water quality

5Nursery and habitat maintenance indicators:

• 6Nursery habitat extent (hectares): Area of mangroves, seagrass, and other ecosystems providing nursery functions
• 7Recruitment contribution (%): Estimated proportion of commercial fish recruitment dependent on coastal nursery habitat
• 8Habitat connectivity index: Measure of connectivity among nursery, juvenile, and adult habitats

9The SEEA EA treats nursery services as potentially intermediate services: “the nursery population services supplied by seagrass meadows are an input to the supply of fish biomass provisioning services, which in turn contribute to the benefit of marketed fish.”³⁴ Recording both final and intermediate ecosystem services is therefore necessary to fully capture the contributions of coastal ecosystems to commercial fisheries.

10Erosion control indicators:

• 11Sediment stabilisation (hectares): Coastal area with reduced erosion due to ecosystem services
• 12Erosion rate reduction (%): Percentage reduction in erosion attributable to vegetation

3.5 Cultural Service Indicators

3.5.1 Recreation indicators

1Recreation-related services are the ecosystem contributions to recreational activities through the biophysical characteristics and qualities of ecosystems that enable people to use and enjoy the marine environment.³⁵

2Physical indicators:

• 3Visitor-days (number): Total person-days of recreational visits to marine and coastal ecosystems
• 4Recreational fishing trips (number): Fishing trips undertaken for recreation rather than commercial purposes
• 5Diving/snorkelling visits (number): Visits to coral reefs and other underwater attractions
• 6Beach visits (number): Recreational visits to coastal beaches and shores

7Activity-specific indicators:

• 8Recreational catch (tonnes): Fish caught during recreational fishing activities (also recorded as a separate row in the provisioning service supply and use tables — see decision rule below)
• 9Whale/dolphin watching trips (number): Marine wildlife tourism activities
• 10Marine protected area visits (number): Recreational visits to MPAs

Decision rule: Recording recreational catch in supply and use tables³⁶

Where recreational catch is material (as a rule of thumb, where it represents 5% or more of commercial catch by weight, or where it is policy-relevant regardless of share), compilers should record it as a dedicated row in the physical supply and use tables for fish provisioning, with users allocated to “Households” (subsistence/recreational consumption) or “Tourism” (where the catch supports a tourism enterprise). The recreation cultural service is recorded separately on its visitor-day row. The two rows capture distinct phenomena — biomass extracted vs. experiential service — and must not be aggregated into a single headline “fish provisioning” figure without disclosure.

Where recreational catch is not material and is omitted from the supply table, compilers should add a footnote to the provisioning row explicitly stating the omission and the rationale.

11In practice, the physical indicator for the cultural service should be expressed in units that capture the recreational experience (visitor-days or trips), whilst the physical indicator for the provisioning service should be expressed in harvest units (tonnes). Monetary indicators require particular attention: the cultural service value (willingness to pay for the recreational experience) and the provisioning service value (resource rent on the harvested biomass) capture distinct economic contributions and should be presented separately rather than summed without explanation.

3.5.2 Amenity indicators

1Visual amenity services represent ecosystem contributions to local living conditions through sensory benefits, especially visual appreciation of seascapes.³⁷

2Physical indicators:

• 3Coastal access points (number per km of coastline): Publicly accessible coastal entry points enabling visual and sensory access to seascapes
• 4Seascape quality index: Composite measure of visual amenity characteristics
• 5Blue space accessibility (population within distance): Population with access to coastal recreational areas

6Monetary indicators (see Section 3.6.2):

• 7Coastal property premium index: Hedonic-pricing-derived measure of property value differentials attributable to marine views and coastal proximity. This is a monetary-economic indicator (not a physical indicator) and is compiled using hedonic pricing methods. See TG-1.9 Safe Usage of Monetary Valuation for hedonic pricing methodology.

3.5.3 Spiritual, scientific, and educational indicators

1Scientific and educational indicators:

• 2Research publications (number): Scientific outputs associated with marine ecosystem research
• 3Educational visits (number): School and university visits to marine educational sites
• 4Traditional knowledge documentation: Records of indigenous and local knowledge associated with marine ecosystems

5Spiritual and symbolic indicators:

• 6Sacred site extent (hectares): Marine and coastal areas of spiritual significance
• 7Cultural heritage sites (number): Marine and coastal sites of cultural and historical significance

8Indigenous and local communities often hold deep cultural and spiritual connections to marine ecosystems that conventional indicators may not adequately capture. The governing principle is that measurement of these values rests on the free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) of the communities concerned: indicators are co-designed with those communities, complex cultural relationships are not reduced to simplistic quantitative measures, and qualitative supplementary information accompanies any quantitative figures. Where traditional ecological knowledge contributes to the understanding of ecosystem condition or service flows, compilers should acknowledge and appropriately attribute it.³⁸

3.6 Physical vs Monetary Indicators

1The trade-offs between physical and monetary ecosystem service indicators — including advantages, limitations, and appropriate applications — are analysed in TG-1.9 Safe Usage of Monetary Valuation, which should be read in conjunction with this circular.³⁹ Physical accounts should always be compiled as the primary output, with monetary valuation undertaken as a complement where appropriate and feasible.⁴⁰

3.6.1 Valuation approaches by service type

1Valuation approach selection by service type follows the criteria in Table 1.⁴¹ For global climate regulation services, the preferred valuation approach uses observed carbon market prices or abatement cost methods, which align with the exchange value concept used in national accounts. The “social cost of carbon” (SCC) estimates the marginal damage from an additional tonne of carbon emissions. It represents a welfare-based measure rather than an exchange value and is therefore not the preferred approach under SEEA EA guidance.⁴² Where carbon market prices are unavailable, or where the policy context specifically requires a damage-cost perspective, the SCC may be used as an alternative. Where the SCC is used, compilers should clearly document that it represents a welfare value rather than an exchange value and note the divergence from standard accounting practice.

3.6.2 Presentation and interpretation

1When presenting ecosystem service indicators, compilers should follow the principles set out in Table 3.6.4 below.⁴³

Principle	Description
Present physical and monetary indicators together	Physical accounts provide the foundation and should always accompany monetary values.
Document methods and assumptions	Clearly state the valuation methods used and key assumptions.
Acknowledge uncertainties	Communicate the confidence level and key sources of uncertainty.
Avoid over-interpretation	Monetary values represent exchange values, not the full importance of ecosystems.
Provide contextual information	Include data on ecosystem extent, condition, and trends to support interpretation.

3.7 Compilation Procedure for Ecosystem Service Indicators

Step 1: Identify priority ecosystem services and users

1Identify which ecosystem services are most relevant to the national or subnational ocean accounting area, and which economic units and communities use those services. This step should involve:

• 2Reviewing the SEEA EA reference list (Table 6.3) and selecting services relevant to the ecosystem types present (see TG-3.2 Flows from Environment to Economy, Table 1a for marine ecosystem services by type)
• 3Consulting with policy users to identify which services are priorities for management and monitoring
• 4Mapping ecosystem service users by institutional sector (industries, households, government, rest of world)

5For ocean accounting, priority services typically include fish provisioning (used by fisheries industries), coastal protection (used by coastal property owners and government), carbon sequestration (used by the global community), and recreation (used by households).

Step 2: Assemble data sources

1Primary data sources include:

• 2Fisheries statistics from national fisheries agencies and FAO FishStatJ, providing catch data by species, gear type, and fishing zone
• 3Ecological monitoring data from field surveys measuring carbon stocks, water quality, and condition variables (see TG-4.2 Survey Methods)
• 4Remote sensing data for extent and condition of blue carbon ecosystems (see TG-4.1 Remote Sensing Data)
• 5Tourism statistics from visitor surveys at marine protected areas, coastal recreation sites, and diving operators
• 6Geospatial data on coastal population and assets at risk from flooding and erosion

7Data quality should be assessed following TG-0.7 Quality Assurance, with particular attention to temporal consistency and spatial coverage.

Step 3: Compile physical supply table

1The physical supply table records the quantity of each ecosystem service supplied by each ecosystem type over the accounting period. For each service:

• 2Quantify the physical flow in appropriate units (tonnes, cubic metres, visitor-days, etc.)
• 3Attribute the supply to the ecosystem type(s) that generate the service
• 4Where services are co-supplied by multiple ecosystem types (e.g., coastal protection by mangroves and coral reefs), allocate the flow using spatial analysis or modelling

5The compilation follows the methodology described in TG-3.2 Flows from Environment to Economy, Section 3.3. The resulting supply table provides the basis for flow indicators disaggregated by ecosystem type.

Step 4: Compile physical use table

1The use table records which economic units use each ecosystem service. For each service:

• 2Identify the direct users (industries, households, government, rest of world)
• 3Quantify the use in the same physical units as the supply table
• 4Ensure that total use equals total supply for each service (the accounting identity) — this identity is verified for the worked example in Section 3.8 and should be re-checked after any subsequent revision to supply or use entries

5For provisioning services, users are typically industries that harvest the resource (fisheries, timber). For regulating services, users may be dispersed (coastal protection benefits property owners, and climate regulation benefits the global community). For cultural services, households are typically the primary users.

Practical guidance: Informal and unregistered beneficiaries of regulating services

Coastal protection and water purification services disproportionately benefit low-income coastal communities, subsistence households, and informal settlements that are systematically undercounted in national household surveys and industry registers. Omitting these beneficiaries from the use table breaks the supply = use identity, and assigning them to a residual “households” cell without supporting data produces unreliable indicators. Compilers should:

1. 6Use population census and spatial settlement data (including UN-Habitat informal settlement layers and equivalent national datasets) to estimate the total beneficiary population within the protective ecosystem’s zone of influence, irrespective of survey-frame coverage.⁴⁴
2. 7Where household-survey data are unavailable, apply a coastal proximity proxy: “all resident households within X km of the protective shoreline” (X chosen based on national hazard-zone definitions or the relevant return-period inundation extent) and allocate the relevant share of service use to households on this basis.
3. 8Document residual unallocated use explicitly, including the estimation method used for informal beneficiaries and the assumed coastal proximity radius, in compilation metadata. See TG-4.2 Survey Methods for survey design options.

Step 5: Derive physical flow indicators

1From the compiled supply and use tables, derive flow indicators for reporting and analysis:

• 2Headline flow indicators: Total supply of each priority service, aggregated across all ecosystem types
• 3Disaggregated flow indicators: Supply by ecosystem type, use by sector
• 4Intensity indicators: Flow per hectare of ecosystem extent (requires linking to extent accounts from TG-3.1 Asset Accounts)
• 5Sustainability indicators: Actual flow compared to capacity or sustainable yield

Step 6: Apply monetary valuation (optional)

1Where monetary indicators are required, apply valuation methods following the preference order established in TG-1.9 Safe Usage of Monetary Valuation:

• 2For services with observable market prices (e.g., fish quota values, carbon credits), apply observed prices
• 3For services embedded in market transactions (e.g., fish provisioning), apply resource rent method
• 4For services without markets (e.g., coastal protection, water purification), apply replacement cost or avoided damage cost methods
• 5For recreation, apply travel cost or consumer expenditure methods

6For each valuation, document the method, data sources, key assumptions, and uncertainty.

Step 7: Calculate aggregate monetary indicators

1From the monetary valuations, derive aggregate indicators:

• 2Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP): Sum of monetary values of all final ecosystem services, less net imports of intermediate ecosystem services from outside the accounting area (SEEA EA para. 9.18). In practice the deduction is often zero where the accounting area is hydrologically and ecologically self-contained, but compilers must explicitly check for cross-boundary intermediate service flows — for example, freshwater purification capacity supplied by inland watersheds to coastal estuaries — and deduct the net import where material. Where the deduction is assumed zero, this assumption must be stated in metadata.
• 3GEP by service category: Provisioning, regulating, cultural
• 4GEP by ecosystem type: Marine shelf, pelagic, coastal wetlands, etc.
• 5Ecosystem service value added: GEP attributed to domestic ecosystem assets (excluding imports of services)

Step 8: Integration with other accounts and policy applications

• 1Cross-check with asset accounts: Ensure that extraction flows (e.g., fish harvest) recorded in service accounts match extraction entries in asset accounts
• 2Link to EGSS accounts: Compare ecosystem service values with expenditure on environmental protection and resource management
• 3Support SDG 14 monitoring: Derive indicators for SDG 14.4.1 (proportion of fish stocks within sustainable limits), 14.5.1 (marine protected area coverage, linked to service supply), and 14.7.1 (economic benefits from sustainable ocean resources)
• 4Inform budget processes: Provide evidence for natural capital budgeting (see TG-1.1 National Ocean Budgets)

3.8 Worked Example: Coastal Ecosystem Service Indicators

1The example uses synthetic data for three marine ecosystem types (mangroves, seagrass meadows, and coral reefs) to illustrate the compilation procedure described in Section 3.7. The supply = use identity (total supply in Table 4 equals total use in Table 5 for each service row) is verified at Step 4 below. Compilers revising either table independently must re-verify this identity.

Scenario description

1The accounting area is a coastal province encompassing 500 km² of mangrove forest, 200 km² of seagrass meadows, and 150 km² of coral reef systems. The area supports commercial fisheries, coastal aquaculture, and marine tourism. The accounting period is calendar year 2025.

Step 1-2: Priority services and data sources

1Through consultation with the provincial environment ministry and fisheries agency, five priority ecosystem services were identified:

Ecosystem Service	Data Source	Measurement Unit
Fish provisioning	Fisheries agency catch statistics	tonnes (live weight)
Coastal protection	Coastal engineering study + population census	kilometres beneficiary coastline (see Section 3.4.2 operational definition)
Carbon sequestration	Field survey + remote sensing	tonnes C/year
Water purification	Estuary water quality monitoring + nutrient budget model	tonnes N removed/year
Recreation	Marine park visitor survey	visitor-days/year

Step 3: Physical supply table

1Data from field surveys, remote sensing, and modelling were used to quantify the supply of each service by ecosystem type:

Service	Mangroves	Seagrass	Coral Reef	Total Supply
Fish provisioning — commercial (tonnes)	1,200	800	1,500	3,500
Fish provisioning — recreational (tonnes)	20	10	70	100
Coastal protection (km beneficiary coastline)	45	30	25	100
Carbon sequestration (tC/yr)	4,000	1,600	150	5,750
Water purification (tN/yr)	120	80	0	200
Recreation (visitor-days)	5,000	2,000	45,000	52,000

2Table 4: Physical ecosystem service supply by ecosystem type, 2025. Supply totals in this table must equal use totals in Table 5 for each row; the identity is verified at Step 4.

3Interpretation: Coral reefs supply the largest share of commercial fish provisioning (1,500 tonnes, 43% of total) and dominate recreation services (45,000 visitor-days, 87% of total). Mangroves supply the majority of carbon sequestration (4,000 tC/yr, approximately 70% of total) and coastal protection (45 km, 45% of total). The three ecosystem types collectively protect 100 km of beneficiary coastline, purify 200 tonnes of nitrogen annually, and sequester 5,750 tonnes of carbon. Recreational catch is recorded as a dedicated 100-tonne row consistent with the Section 3.5.1 decision rule for material recreational provisioning.

Step 4: Physical use table

1Users were identified from fisheries registration data, property cadastre, tourism statistics, and spatial analysis:

Service	Fisheries Industry	Aquaculture	Tourism	Coastal Households	Rest of World	Total Use
Fish provisioning — commercial (tonnes)	2,800	0	0	0	0	2,800
Wild seed extraction to aquaculture (tonnes) [intermediate flow to asset account]	0	700	0	0	0	700
Fish provisioning — recreational (tonnes)	0	0	30	70	0	100
Coastal protection (km beneficiary coastline)	0	20	0	80	0	100
Carbon sequestration (tC/yr)	0	0	0	0	5,750	5,750
Water purification — final regulating service to aquaculture industry (tN/yr)	0	150	0	0	0	150
Water purification — final regulating service to households (tN/yr)	0	0	0	50	0	50
Recreation (visitor-days)	0	0	8,000	44,000	0	52,000

2Table 5: Physical ecosystem service use by sector, 2025. Supply = use identity verified for all rows against Table 4 (commercial fish provisioning 2,800 + wild seed extraction 700 = 3,500; water purification 150 + 50 = 200; all other rows match by construction).

Boundary call-out: Wild seed extraction vs nursery habitat services

The 700 tonnes attributed to aquaculture in the “wild seed extraction” row represent extraction of wild juveniles from coastal ecosystems for transfer to aquaculture pens. Following SEEA EA paras. 6.11—6.17, this is recorded as a flow that simultaneously appears (a) here in the ecosystem-service use table as a service flow to aquaculture, and (b) in the aquatic resource asset account as an extraction reducing the wild stock — consistent with the asset-account treatment in TG-3.1 Asset Accounts and TG-3.9 Aquaculture Accounts. The conceptually distinct nursery habitat service (ecosystem support for wild juvenile recruitment that subsequently contributes to commercial fish biomass) is recorded separately as an intermediate regulating service and is not aggregated into the 700-tonne entry. Confusing the two would double-count the ecosystem contribution.

3Interpretation: The fisheries industry uses 2,800 tonnes of commercial fish provisioning services (80% of commercial supply). The remaining 700 tonnes of commercial supply are extracted as wild seed for aquaculture and are also recorded in the aquatic resource asset account (see boundary call-out above) — the entries represent the same physical flow viewed from service and asset perspectives. Recreational catch of 100 tonnes is split between tourism enterprises (30 tonnes) and coastal households (70 tonnes). Coastal households benefit from 80 km of beneficiary coastline (80% of supply), with the remaining 20 km protecting aquaculture ponds. All carbon sequestration services are attributed to the rest of the world. This attribution reflects their global public good nature. Water purification is shown on two rows to make explicit that both flows are final regulating services — the 150 tN flowing to the aquaculture industry as beneficiary is a final ecosystem service to that industry (not an intermediate input to fish production, per the Section 3.4 decision rule), and the 50 tN flowing to coastal households is likewise final. Recreation is used primarily by local households (44,000 visitor-days, 85%), with tourism industry organising 8,000 visitor-days (15%).

Step 5: Physical flow indicators

1From the supply and use tables, headline and derived indicators were calculated:

2Headline flow indicators:

• 3Total commercial fish provisioning: 3,500 tonnes
• 4Total recreational fish provisioning: 100 tonnes
• 5Total coastal protection: 100 km beneficiary coastline
• 6Total carbon sequestration: 5,750 tC/yr
• 7Total water purification: 200 tN/yr
• 8Total recreation: 52,000 visitor-days

9Intensity indicator matrix (per km² of ecosystem extent):

Service	Mangroves (500 km²)	Seagrass (200 km²)	Coral Reef (150 km²)
Fish provisioning — commercial (t/km²)	2.4	4.0	10.0
Carbon sequestration (tC/yr/km²)	8.0	8.0	1.0
Coastal protection — linear (m coastline/km² of ecosystem area)45	90	150	— (see note)
Recreation (visitor-days/km²)	10	10	300

10Table 5a: Intensity indicators by ecosystem type and service, 2025.

11Notes on omitted/qualified cells:

• 12Coral reef coastal protection is omitted from the linear-per-area row above because coral reef coastal protection in this example is more meaningfully expressed per kilometre of reef frontage facing the coast (a linear-on-linear metric) than per km² of reef area. Reporting an areal denominator would be misleading where the reef’s protective function is determined by frontage geometry rather than total area.
• 13Water purification and recreational fish provisioning intensities are not reported on a per-km² basis in this example because the supply attributions are dominated by a single ecosystem type for water purification (mangroves and seagrass only) and are small in absolute terms for recreational catch. Compilers facing different attributions should compute these intensities.

14Derived dependency indicators:

• 15Fisheries industry dependency on ecosystem services: 2,800 tonnes commercial fish harvest (80% of commercial provisioning supply attributed to the fisheries industry)
• 16Aquaculture dependency: 700 tonnes wild seed extraction + 150 tN water purification (final regulating service)
• 17Coastal household dependency: 80 km coastal protection + 50 tN water quality maintenance + 44,000 recreation visitor-days + 70 tonnes recreational catch

Step 6-7: Monetary indicators (illustrative)

1For demonstration purposes, monetary values were estimated using the following approaches (see TG-1.9 Safe Usage of Monetary Valuation for method details):

Service	Physical Flow	Unit Value	Valuation Method	Monetary Value
Fish provisioning (commercial + wild seed)	3,500 tonnes	USD 600/tonne	Resource rent	USD 2,100,000
Coastal protection	100 km	USD 500,000/km	Avoided damage cost	USD 50,000,000
Carbon sequestration	5,750 tC/yr	USD 50/tC	Carbon market price	USD 287,500
Water purification	200 tN/yr	USD 8,000/tN	Replacement cost	USD 1,600,000
Recreation	52,000 v-days	USD 25/v-day	Consumer expenditure	USD 1,300,000
Total (GEP, before net-import deduction)				USD 55,287,500

2Table 6: Monetary ecosystem service account, 2025. The GEP figure above is the sum of final ecosystem service values supplied by ecosystems within the accounting area. In this worked example, no imports of intermediate ecosystem services from outside the accounting area are assumed (the coastal province’s water purification supply does not draw on inland watershed services for the modelled period). In practice, compilers must check for cross-boundary intermediate service flows — e.g., freshwater services from inland watersheds supporting coastal estuarine water purification — and deduct net imports per SEEA EA para. 9.18 to obtain the SEEA-EA-compliant GEP. See Step 7.

3Interpretation: The Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP) for the coastal province is approximately USD 55.3 million in 2025 (no intermediate-service net-import deduction applied — see Table 6 note), with coastal protection representing 90% of the total monetary value. This reflects the avoided damage approach, which captures the high value of infrastructure and population at risk in the densely populated coastal zone. Fish provisioning (USD 2.1 million) represents the resource rent accruing to the ecosystem (distinct from the gross value of fish landings, which includes labour and capital inputs). Carbon sequestration has relatively low monetary value (USD 287,500) due to low carbon prices, though the physical quantity (5,750 tC/yr) is substantial. Recreation services (USD 1.3 million) reflect consumer expenditure on marine-based tourism.

Step 8: Policy applications

1The compiled indicators supported several policy applications:

2Natural capital budgeting: The provincial government incorporated the GEP estimate (USD 55.3 million) into supplementary budget documents, comparing ecosystem service values with the provincial environment budget (USD 3.2 million), yielding a 17:1 ratio of ecosystem service value to conservation expenditure. This ratio does not represent a benefit-cost analysis, as ecosystem services are sustained by factors beyond government expenditure alone.

3SDG 14 monitoring: The fish provisioning indicator (3,500 tonnes commercial harvest) was compared to the sustainable yield estimate (3,200 tonnes from stock assessment). The resulting exploitation rate of 1.09 (9% overfishing) was reported under SDG 14.4.1.

4Marine spatial planning: The ecosystem service supply data by ecosystem type were used to evaluate alternative coastal development scenarios, quantifying the trade-offs between converting mangrove areas to aquaculture (loss of carbon sequestration and coastal protection) versus maintaining natural ecosystems.

5EGSS compilation: Government expenditure on marine protected area management (CEPA 6), fisheries monitoring (CEPA 6), and mangrove restoration (CEPA 4, CReMA 11) totaling USD 3.2 million was classified as ocean-related EGSS output, enabling comparison with the ecosystem service flows those expenditures aim to maintain. Government fisheries-management expenditure was classified under CEPA 6 in accordance with the Eurostat EGSS reclassification of former CReMA 12 activities (see Table 2 footnote).

3.9 Summary of Ecosystem Service Measurement Methods

1Sections 3.3—3.5 present the full compilation guidance for provisioning, regulating, and cultural services indicators respectively. For a cross-cutting comparison of data requirements and feasibility, see Table 1.

4. Acknowledgements

1This Circular has been approved for public circulation and comment by the GOAP Technical Experts Group in accordance with the Circular Publication Procedure.

2Authors: [To be confirmed]

3Reviewers: [To be confirmed]

5. References

Footnotes

1. 1

   SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.1, p. 134. ↩

2. 2

   SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.51, Table 6.3, p. 144. ↩

3. 3

   The Classification of Environmental Protection Activities (CEPA) and Classification of Resource Management Activities (CReMA) are statistical classifications maintained internationally for EGSS compilation. Recent updates — documented in Eurostat (2023) Environmental Protection Expenditure Accounts — Compilation Guide and Eurostat’s EGSS compilation guide (most recent edition) — have integrated activities previously classified under CReMA 12 (Protection of biodiversity and landscapes) into CEPA 6. See footnote ¹⁷ for the consolidated classification note used throughout this Circular. ↩

4. 4

   SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Chapter 14, provides guidance on deriving indicators from ecosystem accounts. ↩

5. 5

   SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Chapter 14, provides guidance on deriving indicators from ecosystem accounts. ↩

6. 6

   SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.51, pp. 144-145. ↩

7. 7

   SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Table 6.3, pp. 144-148. The full reference list includes additional services such as biomass provisioning from wild animals and plants other than fish, genetic material services, and storm mitigation services. ↩

8. 8

   Adapted from SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Table 6.3, pp. 144-148. ↩

9. 9

   SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), paras. 14.20-14.30, describe different types of indicators derivable from accounts. ↩

10. 10

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.141, p. 165. ↩

11. 11

    FAO (2022). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022: Towards Blue Transformation. Rome: FAO. The biennial SOFIA report provides global and regional fisheries stock-status data (including B/BMSY indicators where available) used as the Tier 1 capacity data source for fish provisioning indicators. ↩

12. 12

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 14.8, p. 310. The distinction between headline and supporting indicators supports both high-level communication and detailed analytical use of ecosystem service accounts. ↩

13. 13

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 7.58, p. 192. ↩

14. 14

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 7.58, p. 192. ↩

15. 15

    SEEA Central Framework (2012), Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, describes the Environmental Goods and Services Sector (EGSS) and its relationship to environmental protection expenditure (EPE) and resource management expenditure (RME). ↩

16. 16

    SEEA Central Framework (2012), paras. 4.92—4.95. The EGSS consists of producers of all environmental goods and services, encompassing environmental protection services (classified by CEPA) and resource management services (classified by CReMA). ↩

17. 17

    Consolidated note on the CReMA 12 reclassification. The Eurostat EGSS compilation guide (most recent edition) and Eurostat (2023) Environmental Protection Expenditure Accounts — Compilation Guide reclassify activities previously coded under CReMA 12 (“Protection of biodiversity and landscapes”) to CEPA 6. Two distinct activity groups are affected: (a) biodiversity and landscape protection activities (including coastal and marine biodiversity protection and marine protected area management), and (b) fisheries management activities (historically CReMA 12, now also CEPA 6). Compilers using the SEEA CF (2012) classifications, or national adaptations that have not yet adopted the Eurostat reclassification, should check their national adaptation and document the classification convention used. Cross-country comparability is preserved where the reclassification convention is stated in metadata. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴

18. 18

    SEEA Central Framework (2012), paras. 4.140-4.152 describe the compilation approach for EGSS accounts using extended supply-use tables. ↩

19. 19

    SEEA Central Framework (2012), paras. 4.100—4.105; SNA 2025, para. 6.14 (ancillary activities); Eurostat EGSS compilation guide, Section 2.2. Ancillary production — environmental goods or services produced as an input to the producing unit’s own principal activity and consumed within the same unit — is embedded in the intermediate consumption of the producing industry and is not separately recorded as EGSS output. ↩

20. 20

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Table 6.3, p. 145, entry for “Wild fish and other natural aquatic biomass provisioning services.” ↩

21. 21

    SEEA Central Framework (2012), para. 5.399 (definition of gross catch within the aquatic resources extraction section, paras. 5.393—5.430). ↩

22. 22

    FAO FishStatJ database (https://www.fao.org/fishery/en/statistics/software/fishstatj) is the FAO’s primary annual capture-production data source, used in combination with FAO/RFMO discard estimates and the biennial State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA) report for compiling gross catch. ↩

23. 23

    The consistency between ecosystem service flows and asset account entries provides a fundamental quality check for ocean accounts. See TG-3.1 Asset Accounts for detailed guidance. ↩

24. 24

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), paras. 6.98-6.101 discuss the boundary between ecosystem services and abiotic flows for water. ↩

25. 25

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), paras. 6.11—6.17 (definition of and boundary between intermediate and final ecosystem services); para. 7.23 on use-table column structure. ↩

26. 26

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.107, p. 157. ↩

27. 27

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.110, p. 158. ↩

28. 28

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.112, p. 158. ↩

29. 29

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.115, p. 159, on user attribution for global climate regulation services. ↩

30. 30

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Table 6.3, p. 147. ↩

31. 31

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Table 6.3, p. 147, entry for “Coastal protection services.” ↩

32. 32

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 9.72, p. 230. ↩ ↩²

33. 33

    Beck, M.W., Losada, I.J., Menendez, P., Reguero, B.G., Diaz-Simal, P., & Fernandez, F. (2018). The global flood protection savings provided by coral reefs. Nature Communications, 9: 2186. Documents wave-energy attenuation by coral reefs (typically in the range 70—97%) and provides parameters used in coastal protection effectiveness factors and tiered proxy methods. ↩

34. 34

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.15, p. 137. ↩

35. 35

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Table 6.3, p. 148, entry for “Recreation-related services.” ↩

36. 36

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 6.97, p. 156. ↩

37. 37

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Table 6.3, p. 148, entry for “Visual amenity services.” ↩

38. 38

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Table 6.3, p. 148, entry for “Spiritual, artistic and symbolic services.” See also United Nations (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Article 31 on the right to maintain, control, protect, and develop cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions. ↩

39. 39

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 1.34, p. 7. ↩

40. 40

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), para. 1.33(c), p. 6, notes that the framework “enables coherent accounting in both physical terms (e.g. hectares or tons) and monetary terms.” ↩

41. 41

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), paras. 9.21-9.27 establish the preference order for valuation methods. ↩

42. 42

    SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), paras. 9.43-9.48, discuss the use of carbon prices for valuation of global climate regulation services. The social cost of carbon is a welfare-based concept that does not align directly with the exchange value framework of the SNA and SEEA. ↩

43. 43

    Based on SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (2021), Chapter 14 guidance on presentation and communication of indicators. ↩

44. 44

    UN-Habitat (2023). World Cities Report. Nairobi: UN-Habitat. Provides population and informal-settlement data and methodologies relevant to estimating beneficiary populations for coastal regulating services where standard survey frames undercount informal coastal communities. Compilers should also consult the most recent biennial edition of the World Cities Report and national census informal-settlement layers. ↩

45. 45

    Note on linear vs areal intensity metrics for coastal protection. Coastal protection intensity can be expressed as either (a) an areal metric — ecosystem area per unit of beneficiary shoreline protected (km²/km), useful where the protective function is distributed across the ecosystem’s full area such as in mangrove belts that absorb storm surge volumetrically, or (b) a linear metric — length of beneficiary shoreline per kilometre of ecosystem frontage, useful where the protective function is determined by the linear interface with the coast such as in coral reefs and dune systems. The choice should follow the dominant physical mechanism for the ecosystem in question and must be disclosed in metadata. Reporting an areal denominator for ecosystems whose protective function is essentially linear (or vice versa) will produce misleading intensity figures. ↩