Last month, greek newspaper Ta Nea published a detailed report on our project titled “Nature works for us for free. But for how much longer?” in close collaboration with our project partner Dimitra Syrou The Green Tank, explores the vital role of Ecosystem Services in our lives and highlights the growing importance of mechanisms like Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES).
Among the ecosystems under increasing threat is the Posidonia oceanica seagrass. Despite offering essential services such as carbon storage, coastal protection, and nursery grounds for marine life, Posidonia meadows are rapidly declining due to pollution, illegal anchoring, and climate change. The degradation of these underwater forests comes at a high ecological and economic cost.
Our ARTEMIS project shines a light on a new and promising path forward: unlocking innovative investment models to restore and protect nature.
The article brings much-needed attention to the need for investing in nature-based solutions especially in the context of marine ecosystems like Posidonia meadows.
*****Read the English version of the article below*****
Nature works for us for free. But for how much longer?
Nature constantly provides us with goods and services – known as Ecosystem Services – such as climate regulation, carbon absorption, and flood protection. While we pay for tangible goods like food and timber, most of these services are offered for free, even though our economy and society depend on them. For example, the World Economic Forum estimates that over 50% of global GDP is dependent on ecosystem services.
Despite their critical importance, ecosystem services have not been integrated into the economic system. This is mainly due to four reasons: first, nature seemed to provide its services abundantly and without limits. Second, valuing these services economically is technically complex. Third, they are public and indivisible goods – meaning no one can be excluded from accessing them, as is the case with oxygen. Fourth, the idea of paying for nature has not yet been embedded in our economic and social worldview.
However, times have changed. Human activities are degrading the natural environment, reducing the capacity of ecosystems to deliver these services, and the narrative of “limitless nature” is collapsing. Floods, wildfires, biodiversity loss, and other phenomena show how the destruction of nature and the loss of its services come with enormous environmental, economic, and social costs.
Although international agreements and targets have been established for the conservation of nature and its services, a significant financing gap remains. The Convention on Biological Diversity estimates an annual shortfall of $598–824 billion. In Europe alone, €65 billion per year is needed for restoration actions, while existing funds cover less than half that amount. That’s why the conversation around Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) is more relevant than ever.
While the idea of PES has been around since the 1970s, it is now becoming more feasible, as tools exist to help quantify the value of nature in economic terms – making it possible to incorporate these services into market mechanisms. The theoretical basis of PES is simple: to ensure the continued provision of services that society and the economy depend on, we must pay for them. However, putting this into practice is difficult due to institutional, legal, ethical, and social challenges.
Gradually, PES schemes are being implemented globally – through fees, investments in conservation, or restoration of nature – and some first steps have also been taken in Greece (e.g., entrance fees in protected areas and planning for forest-based carbon markets). Investment schemes are also being explored for marine ecosystems, such as Posidonia meadows, which serve as biodiversity hotspots and natural carbon sinks (e.g., the Interreg EURO-MED ARTEMIS project). Still, overall, PES implementation remains at an early stage.
PES are not a panacea, nor a solution to every environmental challenge. Their application requires careful consideration of legal, institutional, and ethical issues. Nonetheless, they deserve our attention – as they remind us of the invaluable role of nature and the privilege of enjoying its services for free.
