Natural Capital

& Roads

Managing dependencies
and impacts on ecosystem
services for sustainable
road investments
Cataloging-in-Publication data provided by the Inter-American
Development Bank Felipe Herrera Library. Natural Capital & Roads:
Managing dependencies and impacts on ecosystem services for sustainable
road investments. Lisa Mandle, Rob Griffin, Josh Goldstein, Rafael Acevedo-
Daunas, Ashley Camhi, Michele Lemay, Elizabeth Rauer, Victoria Peterson.
p. cm. — (Monograph del BID ; 476)
Includes bibliographic references.
1. Roads-Environmental aspects-Latin America. 2. Ecosystem services-
Latin America. 3. Environmental economics-Latin America. I. Mandle, Lisa.
II. Griffin, Rob. III. Goldstein, Josh. IV. Acevedo-Daunas, Rafael. V. Camhi,
Ashley. VI. Lemay, Michele H. VII. Rauer, Elizabeth. VIII. Peterson, Victoria.
IX. Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. División de Medio Ambiente,
Desarrollo Rural y Administración de Riesgos por Desastres. X. Serie. Inter-
American Development Bank.
IDB-MG-476
JEL Codes: Q57, R42
Key Words: Roads, Ecosystem Service, Natural Capital, Impact

www.iadb.org
Copyright © 2016 Inter-American Development Bank
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons IGO 3.0 Attribution-
NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC-IGO BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO) license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ igo/legalcode)
and may be reproduced with attribution to the IDB and for any
non-commercial purpose. No derivative work is allowed. Any dispute related
to the use of the works of the IDB that cannot be settled amicably shall be
submitted to arbitration pursuant to the UNCITRAL rules. The use of the
IDB’s name for any purpose other than for attribution, and the use of IDB’s
logo shall be subject to a separate written license agreement between the
IDB and the user and is not authorized as part of this CC-IGO license.
Note that link provided above includes additional terms and conditions
of the license. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Inter-American
Development Bank, its Board of Directors, or the countries they represent.

For more information, please contact:

Lisa Mandle | The Study Coordinator | [email protected]
Carmen del Río | The Bio Program | [email protected]

All images are courtesy of IDB unless otherwise noted.

Front cover image:

Nathan Hoyt | IMG_6169 Santa Ynez Valley February 28, 2015
https://www.flickr.com/photos/41452775@N02/
This photograph is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 2.0 Generic license
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/
Natural Capital & Roads: Managing dependencies and impacts on ecosystem
services for sustainable road investments provides an introduction to incorpo-
rating ecosystem services into road design and development. It is intended
to help transportation specialists and road engineers at the Inter-American
Development Bank as well as others planning and building roads to identify,
prioritize, and proactively manage the impacts the environment has on roads
and the impacts roads have on the environment. This document provides
practical examples of how natural capital thinking has been useful to road
development in the past, and how ecosystem services can be incorporated
into future road projects.

Natural Capital & Roads was written by Lisa Mandle and Rob Griffin of the
Natural Capital Project and Josh Goldstein of The Nature Conservancy for the
Inter-American Development Bank. The document was designed and edited
by Elizabeth Rauer and Victoria Peterson of the Natural Capital Project. Its
production was supervised by Rafael Acevedo-Daunas, Ashley Camhi, and
Michele Lemay at the Inter-American Development Bank.

The Natural Capital Project is an innovative partnership with the Stanford

Woods Institute for the Environment, the University of Minnesota’s Institute
on the Environment, The Nature Conservancy, and the World Wildlife Fund,
aimed at aligning economic forces with conservation.

The Nature Conservancy is the leading conservation organization working

around the world to protect ecologically important lands and waters for
nature and people.

The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) is the main source of multilat-

eral financing in Latin America. They support efforts by Latin America and the
Caribbean countries to reduce poverty and inequality, and aim to bring about
development in a sustainable, climate-friendly way.
List of Abbreviations

BIO Program | Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Program within the IDB

EIA | Environmental Impact Assessment

GDP | Gross Domestic Product

GIZ | German Agency for International Cooperation

IDB | The Inter-American Development Bank

InVEST | Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs

LAC | Latin America and the Caribbean

NatCap | The Natural Capital Project

NGO | Non-Governmental Organization

PES | Payment for Ecosystem Services

RIOS | Resource Investment Optimization System

TNC | The Nature Conservancy

USDA | United States Department of Agriculture

Table of Contents
Executive Summary............................................................................................................................................................5

1. Roads and Ecosystem Services ................................................................................................................................. 6

1.1 Using ecosystem services to develop sustainable road projects ...............................................................6

1.2 Types of ecosystem services ............................................................................................................................. 10

1.3 Which ecosystem services are important to roads? ....................................................................................12

2. Roads Depend On, and Benefit From, Ecosystem Services........................................................................... 16

2.1 Servicesheds ............................................................................................................................................................18

2.2 Evaluating ecosystem services in the context of multi-sector infrastructure planning ....................21

3. Road Impacts on Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services ........................................................................... 22

3.1 Mechanisms of road impacts on ecosystem services ................................................................................ 23

3.2 Direct impacts of roads on ecosystem services .......................................................................................... 24

3.3 Looking beyond the right of way: indirect impacts of roads on ecosystem services....................... 30

3.4 Integrating fine- and landscape-scale perspectives for sustainable road development ................. 32

4. Critical Contexts for Evaluating Ecosystem Services ...................................................................................... 33

5. Opportunities for Mainstreaming Ecosystem Services into Road Decisions .......................................... 35

5.1 National and regional level transportation planning .................................................................................. 37

5.2 Incorporating ecosystem services into project-level decisions ..............................................................40

5.3 Incorporating ecosystem services into economic analysis ...................................................................... 42

6. Tools for Incorporating Ecosystem Services Information into Road Planning ...................................... 45

6.1 Tools for screening ............................................................................................................................................... 46

6.2 Tools for mapping, quantifying, and valuing ecosystem services........................................................... 46

Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................................................48

More Information and Resources...............................................................................................................................49

References..........................................................................................................................................................................50
Executive Summary

Roads are a cornerstone of economic development in Latin America and the

Caribbean. Ecosystems, such as forests, wetlands, and mangroves, provide
important benefits by protecting roads from natural hazards such as land-
slides and flooding, and reducing deterioration by protecting against erosion.
However, these benefits often are not taken into account when making deci-
sions about where and how to improve roadways, with possible severe con-
sequences for both the road project and for surrounding communities.

This document illustrates how incorporating ecosystem services into road

project design and development can lead to more sustainable, cost-effective
roads while maintaining or enhancing the additional benefits nature provides
to the region’s citizens, from clean water and air, to food and timber.

Drawing on case studies from Latin America and the Caribbean, this docu-
ment shows how roads both depend on and impact ecosystem services, and
provides guidance on how to identify which ecosystem services are critical
to road development in a number of different contexts. Finally, it highlights
a number of practical ways in which ecosystem services information can be
incorporated into different stages of road project planning to improve road
sustainability and maximize the benefits to society.

Natural Capital and Roads | 5

1. Roads and Ecosystem Services
Including ecosystem services in road design and construction
can enhance sustainability of roads and increase benefits to
transport agencies and road users, while avoiding unintended
negative consequences to surrounding communities.

1.1. USING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES TO DEVELOP SUSTAINABLE

ROAD PROJECTS

The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) plays a catalytic role throughout

Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) in advancing road projects that drive
efficient and equitable economic development and improve people’s quality
of life. Ensuring that these investments are made with minimal environmen-
tal impact is critical to achieving the IDB’s goal of producing sustainable and
inclusive growth, and to delivering lasting, positive results for road users and
affected communities.

As the IDB and the LAC region expand their focus on sustainable infrastruc-
ture projects, roads provide an important opportunity to demonstrate how to
create more economically beneficial and resilient projects by incorporating
strategies that take advantage of benefits from the environment. Roads are
exposed to floods, landslides, storms, and other natural hazards. Taking pro-
active steps to reduce a project’s exposure to environmental risks can result
in reduced costs for constructing and maintaining a road investment.

Natural Capital and Roads | 6

Construction and operation of roads can also have negative impacts on water,
air, and land resources. Minimizing these unintended consequences can
ensure that benefits to road users do not come at the expense of degraded
environmental quality. Accounting for and managing natural capital —the
stock of natural ecosystems that produces benefits to people in the form of
ecosystem services— can result in projects that are more cost effective, have
enhanced net economic benefits for road users and communities, and are
more resilient in the face of climate change, urbanization, and other social
and environmental changes. This interdisciplinary approach focuses on ben-
efits to people and nature, and is a tool for more informed and sustainable
decision-making and planning.

Ecosystem services are the benefits people derive from nature that support
and fulfill human life. These benefits include food, clean and abundant water,
clean air, reduced exposure to natural hazards, and many others. Integrating
ecosystem services into planning, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating
road projects opens up the opportunity to “put nature to work” to reduce
risks to roads (e.g., flooding, landslides) and to create safer and more reliable
road projects, supporting equitable economic development. For example, a
road project along a coastline might benefit from protecting critical areas of
mangrove forests that buffer the road’s exposure to storm surge. Further-
more, protecting this forest could provide areas for sustainable fuelwood
collection by local communities, protection of biodiversity, and other envi-
ronmental and social benefits. Mapping and quantifying the value of these
benefits, and incorporating this information in project design and execution,
can improve road project feasibility and outcomes.

Natural Capital and Roads | 7

This report describes how an understanding of natural capital and ecosystem
services can be used to develop more sustainable road projects —effective
and reliable roads that can meet today’s needs with minimal impacts to the
surrounding environment and natural resources. It introduces the concept
of ecosystem services, describes road dependencies and impacts on ecosys-
tem services, provides guidance on prioritizing ecosystem services for road
projects and highlights a number of opportunities for integrating ecosystem
services information into project planning.

Implementing this type of ecosystem services-based strategy systematically

across IDB’s road projects can contribute to several of the Transport Division’s
strategic principles and priority areas 1, including:

• Promotion of sustainable and inclusive growth.

• Construction and maintenance of socially and environmentally

sustainable infrastructure.

• Incorporation of social and environmental considerations in

infrastructure planning at local, national, and regional levels.

• Increasing the contribution of biodiversity and ecosystem

services to sustainable development.

• Promotion of a multi-sector agenda.

Natural Capital and Roads | 8

IDB’s Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Services Program

The IDB’s innovative Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (BIO) pro-

gram was created in 2013 to help fulfill the promise that wise man-
agement of biodiversity and ecosystem services can contribute to
inclusive and sustainable economic growth and human development.
The Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region contains nearly 50% of
the world’s forests, more than 30% of available freshwater, and 40%
of the world’s biological diversity, leading to the region’s designation
as a “biodiversity superpower.” As LAC countries continue to grow in
size and affluence in the coming decades, demand for energy and
water is expected to increase by up to 50% and 25% respectively, along
with growing demand for other natural resources. The environmental
richness of the region, combined with recent and projected growth,
means that there is great opportunity to make smart investments now
to ensure that natural capital and the benefits it provides continue to
sustain economic growth.

The BIO program leverages the IDB’s unique position to create opportu-
nities and utilize the region’s comparative advantage in biodiversity and
ecosystem services for inclusive and sustainable growth. To accom-
plish these goals, the BIO program is pursuing four lines of action:

1. Integrating the value of biodiversity and ecosystem

services into key economic sectors.

2. Investing in priority regional ecosystem conservation.

3. Supporting effective environmental governance and policy.

4. Creating new sustainable development business

and opportunities.

The BIO program’s success depends on collaboration with and partici-

pation from sectors and individuals throughout the IDB, as well as from
member countries, the private sector, NGOs, and local communities.
The BIO program is excited to work with the Transport Division and
its government counterparts to account for the values of ecosystem
services throughout their project cycles for the benefit of economic
development and human well-being.

Natural Capital and Roads | 9

1.2. TYPES OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

Ecosystemic services are the direct benefits human beings receive from eco-
systems. These services and benefits are generated as the result of the com-
plex interactions that occur between flora and fauna species, the physical
environment, and solar energy. People’s well-being and the majority of their
economic activities depend upon a healthy environment, and in that sense,
upon the capacity of ecosystems to provide these services. There exists a
broad spectrum of ecosystemic services, some of which benefit people
directly, and others which benefit them indirectly.

Ecosystem services are provided by both natural and human-managed areas,

and can be grouped into four categories 2:

1. Provisioning services such as food, water, and timber.

2. Regulating services are processes by which ecosystems help to regulate

the environment such as water purification and flood risk reduction.

3. Cultural services such as recreational and educational activities, and the

aesthetic and spiritual fulfillment that comes from connecting with nature.

4. Supporting services which are the ecological functions needed to support

the production of services in the preceding three categories, such as nutri-
ent cycling and soil formation.

Natural Capital and Roads | 10

Definitions

Biodiversity
The variety of all living things. This includes diversity within species,
between species, and between ecosystems.

Ecosystem
A dynamic community of living organisms (plants, animals,
microorganisms) and their non-living environment interacting
as a functional unit 24.

Ecosystem services
Benefits that people derive from nature that support and fulfill
human life.

Natural capital
The stock of natural ecosystems that yields a flow of valuable
ecosystem goods or services into the future. It is the extension of
the economic notion of capital (manufactured means of production)
to goods and services from the natural environment 33.

Sustainable
Sustainable projects or activities are those that can be implemented
in a way that allows for current development and benefits while
maintaining the integrity of natural resources for future generations
to use and enjoy.

Natural Capital and Roads | 11

 1.3. WHICH ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ARE IMPORTANT
TO ROADS?

The table below provides a description of some of the ecosystem services

that are often important to road projects. Project developers in some cases
can use natural areas (e.g., mangroves, forests, wetlands) or surrounding
agricultural and other types of working lands to reduce natural hazard risks
to roads. Integrating such landscapes into road design also can reduce the
likelihood of unintended consequences of degraded water quality, increased
flood risk, or other negative impacts of poorly designed roads. Additional
information on integrating these services into road projects is provided in the
sections that follow.

Ecosystem Service Importance to Road Projects

Flood regulation Protecting or restoring vegetation in key locations

upstream of roadways can reduce flood risk to roads.
Vegetation reduces peak storm flows and flood height by
enhancing soil infiltration and increasing water storage,
reducing storm runoff. Avoiding constrictions in flood-
plains from road construction or other development can
also reduce road flooding by providing room for water to
flow during flood events.

Coastal storm Coastal ecosystems such as marshes, mangroves, sea

protection grass beds, and reefs slow waves and reduce coastal ero-
sion and flooding. Protection and restoration of coastal
ecosystems can reduce exposure of coastal roads to
flooding and erosion, particularly during storm events.
When coastal ecosystems are degraded or cleared for
development, either directly or indirectly as a result of
road construction, the risk of damage to coastal property
and people increases.

Natural Capital and Roads | 12

Ecosystem Service Importance to Road Projects

Erosion control Vegetation holds soil in place and captures sediment,

preventing erosion and keeping sediment out of drainage
systems and waterways. Vegetation that is maintained
or restored upstream of roadways reduces the amount
of sediment in runoff and storm water from reaching
roadways. This reduces sediment scour to roads and
bridges, lowering infrastructure and vehicle maintenance
costs. Exposed roadsides and unpaved roads are often
sources of sediment themselves. Roads can also facilitate
the conversion of natural vegetation to other land use
types that are less effective at retaining sediment, such as
agricultural fields or adjacent paved areas.

Landslide Vegetation can help to stabilize soils and hillsides, con-

prevention tributing to the prevention of landslides in risk-prone
areas. Protecting and restoring vegetation uphill of
roads can reduce the risk of a landslide impacting a road.
This in turn can result in reduced safety concerns for
road users, reduced maintenance costs, and enhanced
road use reliability.

Water quality When roads replace or lead to the conversion of veg-

regulation etation, they can impact water quality by reducing the
ability of ecosystems to filter and retain pollutants. Vege-
tation and soils help to maintain clean water by remov-
ing pollutants. Wetlands are particularly effective as they
can slow flow long enough for pollutants to be taken up
by vegetation. Restoration or construction of vegetation
that improves water quality can be a cost-effective way
of mitigating road impacts and ensuring road project
compliance with regulatory requirements.

Natural Capital and Roads | 13

 Ecosystem Service Importance to Road Projects

Air quality Air pollution has negative consequences for human

regulation health and is associated with respiratory and cardiovas-
cular diseases, as well as some forms of cancer. Roads,
and especially the traffic they generate, reduce air quality.
Vegetation can help to mitigate these impacts of roads
on air quality by trapping and filtering pollutants. Res-
toration of vegetation that reduces air pollution can serve
as a cost-effective means of offsetting road impacts on
air quality and ensuring regulatory compliance of the
road project.

Carbon sequestration The consequences of increased carbon dioxide and

and storage for climate other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are felt by
regulation people around the world through the impacts of cli-
mate change on rainfall patterns, storm frequency and
severity, temperature, and sea-level rise. By storing car-
bon in vegetation, ecosystems keep carbon dioxide out
of the atmosphere, where it would otherwise contribute
to climate change. Restoration of vegetation can offset
carbon emissions associated with road construction,
leading to a carbon-neutral project. It can also help off-
set the CO2 from increased road traffic and conversion
of vegetation which can happen directly or indirectly
from road construction.

Table 1. A number of ecosystem services are particularly important to road projects, either because roads depend on these services
to reduce risk from natural hazards and rates of deterioration, or because roads can reduce the benefits these services provide to
people. Images courtesy of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). ©Jan Sasse for TEEB.

Natural Capital and Roads | 14

Steps for integrating ecosystem services
into road planning

Following the steps outlined below can help streamline the integration
of ecosystem services information into road project planning, design
and implementation. The remaining sections of this document provide
additional details and examples of how these steps can be addressed to
improve project feasibility and project outcomes. In practice the partic-
ulars will depend on the point in the project cycle at which ecosystem
services are being considered (see Section 5 and Figure 4) and the proj-
ect context, though examples of possible questions are provided here
for each step of the process.

Define specific decision and scope.

Is this a country-level screening or an analysis
1 of alternatives for a particular project?

Identify and prioritize relevant

ecosystem services.
Which serrvices matter most to the road
2 and to people in the project area?

Determine key questions and metrics

needed.
Is monetary valuation required, or a measure
3 of the relative risk of environmental hazards?

Assess ecosystem service outcomes.

Which approach and tools can answer key
questions, given data and resource availability?
4

Natural Capital and Roads | 15

2. Roads Depend On, and Benefit From,
Ecosystem Services

Key Points:

1. Considering where important ecosystems and people are rel-

ative to a road is key to identifying and implementing effective
strategies to manage the benefits from ecosystem services.

2. Conserving or restoring ecosystems to reduce hazard risks

to roads may also provide benefits to downstream commu-
nities, such as reduced flood risk or improved water quality.
In such cases, road projects could benefit from multi-sector
planning by identifying coordinated and cost-effective strat-
egies to manage ecosystem services.

When floods, landslides, and other hazards affect roads, they compromise
access and safety for road users and people living in affected areas users,
require increased expenditures for repairs, and may decrease a project’s lon-
gevity. While some level of risk will always be present, a key part of proj-
ect design is to use environmental and geotechnical analyses to reduce the
exposure and vulnerability of roads and their users to hazards.

The concept of ecosystem services provides a useful perspective for thinking

about the exposure of roads to hazards from the surrounding landscape, and
for turning this understanding into a risk mitigation strategy. An ecosystem
service dependency is a situation in which ecosystems provide a benefit to
a road project. As an example, consider the case of a road that is exposed to
flooding. Protecting wetlands adjacent to and upstream of the road might
be an important component of an ecosystem services-based strategy for
flood regulation. Conversely, if the wetlands were degraded or paved over,
this could severely compromise the flood regulation service, putting the road,
its users, and surrounding communities at greater risk and result in more fre-
quent and costly repairs when flood damages occur.

Natural Capital and Roads | 16

 As this example highlights, appropriate identification of ecosystem service
dependencies requires taking a landscape-level perspective that extends well
beyond the road’s right of way (Figure 1). If project developers only considered
the road’s right of way, important and cost-effective opportunities to reduce
hazard exposure can be missed. Empowered by an understanding of how
a road project depends upon and benefits from ecosystem services, proj-
ect developers and affected stakeholders will be better positioned to answer
questions such as the following:

• How do ecosystem services affect a road project?

• Which route for a new road maximizes economic return on investment

with minimum ecosystem risk?

• Which segments of a road are most sensitive to the degradation

of ecosystem services in the surrounding landscape?

• How might the road project result in land use change, and what might
the impacts of this be in terms of degraded ecosystem services increasing
risk exposure for the road and its users?

• How might different scenarios of climate change affect ecosystem

services provision and alter risk exposure for the road and its users?

Figure 1. Roads depend on the surrounding landscape to control flooding and erosion and reduce risks from natural hazards such
as landslides and coastal storms. Different road segments depend on different parts of the landscape for different services. These
areas that provide benefits to particular road segments are referred to as “servicesheds.” Conservation, restoration, and good
management of these “serviceshed” areas can help minimize road construction and maintenance costs and maximize benefits.

Natural Capital and Roads | 17

There are three overarching benefits to incorporating ecosystem services
dependencies into road projects with resulting enhancements to a project’s
economic returns and sustainability:

1. Improving the identification of which road projects or design alternatives

are best to pursue in light of contributions from ecosystem services.

2. Informing where new economic activities will be most compatible in the

landscape surrounding and enhanced by the road so that policies and
incentive structures can be complementary.

3. Enabling proactive identification of regions that are most sensitive to

ecosystem degradation where intended or unintended activities (e.g., ille-
gal resource extraction) would most strongly compromise ecosystem ser-
vices provided to a road.

This information would enable project developers to take proactive steps to

reduce the likelihood of these negative impacts occurring.

2.1. SERVICESHEDS

When incorporating ecosystem services into road design, it is important to

know where on the landscape ecosystem services are being provided to
protect the road (Figure 1). A serviceshed is the area that supplies a par-
ticular ecosystem service to specific people or places 3. The key value of a
serviceshed is to provide a clear linkage between where an ecosystem ser-
vice is provided in a landscape and where and to whom the benefits accrue.
Servicesheds are also useful in identifying who may lose ecosystem services
with road development, so that mitigation activities can be targeted to benefit
those communities.

For flood regulation and several other ecosystem services that are important
to roads (e.g., erosion control, landslide prevention, water quality regulation),
the serviceshed, or ecosystem service supply area, will be the upslope and/or
hydrological contributing area from which water runoff, erosion, or a landslide
would originate. Similarly, for coastal storm protection, the serviceshed would
be the offshore and coastal areas across which storms travel. For air quality
regulation, the supply area would be determined by air patterns and where
vegetation is located that can remove pollutants originating from the road.

Once the serviceshed area is determined, institutional factors (e.g., identify-

ing who owns and manages the lands upslope of a road from which runoff
occurs) and physical factors (e.g., determining if there is any existing flood
control infrastructure that could protect the road) inform how road project

Natural Capital and Roads | 18

developers can be proactive and strategic in using this knowledge to harness
the protection value of the environment. For example, in the case of flooding,
this information could be used to develop a management plan for protecting
or restoring ecosystems within the serviceshed to maximize the contribution
of ecosystem services to flood mitigation for the road, as part of a strategy
that is blended with conventional site-level engineering components.

Natural Capital and Roads | 19

Avoiding unintended consequences before
they occur: Establishment of the Braulio Carrillo
National Park in Costa Rica

Building and improving roads is a central component of economic

development to deliver positive benefits for increased mobility, access
to markets, and social services. However, these same factors also open
up the possibility for roads to facilitate unsustainable land-use change
and illegal activities. These unintended impacts can compromise the
safety and reliability of the road project, undermine a project’s ability
to meet its environmental obligations, and harm local communities in
the long run. To maximize net economic benefits, a key strategy is to
anticipate future unintended changes and develop actions during the
planning phase that are implemented before or at the same time as
road construction or improvement.

A real-world example of this coordinated approach comes from Costa

Rica in the 1970s where the construction of a new highway from San
José to Puerto Limón was coordinated with the establishment of the
Braulio Carrillo National Park. Traveling across the Cordillera Central
region, the Limón highway played an important role in providing rela-
tively remote areas on the Caribbean side with improved market access
and mobility. At the same time, the planned route would be impacting
areas of high conservation value, which raised concerns among envi-
ronmental groups.

Establishing the national park before the highway was built was crit-
ical to the success of this project. This foresight prevented uncon-
trolled spread of settlements and illegal activities in the area. Because
such encroachment was prevented, the park remains a valuable pro-
vider of ecosystem services. The protection afforded by the park has
maintained healthy ecosystems that provide source water protection
for downstream communities. The park also serves as an important
area for biodiversity protection in Costa Rica. It supports the altitudinal
migrations of resident birds by stretching along an elevational gradient.
This same feature also provides potential for species to adapt to cli-
mate change. While establishing a protected area will not always be a
practical or effective strategy, this example illustrates the need for road
project planners to anticipate how intended and unintended changes
resulting from the road will impact the surrounding region, and take
proactive steps to protect or restore ecosystem services that will pro-
tect the road from hazards and avoid unintended consequences for
affected communities.

Natural Capital and Roads | 20

2.2. EVALUATING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IN THE CONTEXT
OF MULTI-SECTOR INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING

The IDB is promoting a multi-sector approach for future work in the infra-
structure sector, recognizing the important interactions among sectors and
the fact that investments are generally irreversible, specific, and large-scale 1.
An ecosystem services approach that identifies how different types of infra-
structure depend on ecosystem services provided by the surrounding region
is a practical way to integrate ecosystem services into multi-sector planning
efforts that include road projects. To realize synergies and avoid unintended
consequences, coordination needs to occur at early scoping and planning
phases, as well as throughout project implementation.

A key strength for such an approach is that investments in ecosystem protec-

tion or restoration can result in multiple benefits that matter to policy-makers
and planners focused on different sectors 4.

For example, roads, reservoirs, hydropower plants, and municipal water sup-
plies are all negatively impacted by sediment erosion, landslides, and floods
that further exacerbate erosion. This shared exposure to hazards opens up the
opportunity to identify regions on the landscape where actions to improve
land management practices would reduce risks to multiple sectors and likely
do so more cost-effectively for each sector. Other examples could be road
expansion projects that are coordinated with targeted investment in sustain-
able agricultural enterprises or reforesting areas near roads to minimize local
air quality impacts on human health and sequester carbon dioxide to mitigate
climate change.

From an environmental perspective, a coordinated multi-sector strategy

should lead to planning that improves where infrastructure projects are sited
to maximize their potential to benefit from ecosystem services and minimize
their cumulative negative impacts.

Natural Capital and Roads | 21

3. Road Impacts on Natural Capital
and Ecosystem Services

Key Points:

1. The connectivity and access made possible by roads provide

vital benefits to people, but can also have important nega-
tive feedbacks on ecosystem services. Erosion control, water
quality regulation, flood regulation, and climate regulation
are some of the ecosystem services commonly lost with road
development.

2. Strategic placement of roads, along with good design and

engineering of new and existing roads, can reduce many of
the direct impacts roads have on ecosystem services. When
best practices are not followed, mitigating the direct impacts
of roads can be very expensive.

3. The greatest impacts roads have on natural capital often

come from their indirect effects, such as the conversion of
areas along roads from natural vegetation to agricultural
production. Anticipating and appropriately managing these
indirect impacts is critical to ensuring that roads contribute
to development in a sustainable way.

Roads are an important driver of economic growth and improve people’s

quality of life. They connect people to basic services, such as education and
health care, in addition to providing access to markets, expanding employ-
ment opportunities and reducing production costs 1. Roads play a critical role
in development and economic prosperity. Rural roads help bring development
to local markets and economies 5 and reduce poverty 6. Similarly, expenditures
on public road infrastructure have been found to contribute significantly to the
productivity 7 and economic performance of private industry 8. When devel-
oped strategically, roads play a pivotal role in economic growth.

Natural Capital and Roads | 22

At the same time, roads may have severe negative consequences for sur-
rounding ecosystems and the people who rely on them, both by directly
impacting the local environment and by enabling deforestation and other
land use change in surrounding areas. When roads are built without ade-
quate consideration of their potential impacts —both direct and indirect—
roads can undermine the development benefits they are intended to provide
and compromise future opportunities for growth.

Agriculture, fishing, forestry, and tourism together comprise 15% of Latin

American and the Caribbean’s GDP, employ 17% of the region’s workforce
and make up 50% of total exports 1. These economically important sectors
depend on ecosystem services, such as the provision of clean water, flood
mitigation, and erosion control, which may be compromised with poorly
managed road development.

Considering the important benefits of roads alongside their potential neg-

ative impacts can help reduce unintended consequences of road devel-
opment and maximize roads’ development benefits. It is important to
understand, minimize, and be transparent about trade-offs between road
development and other benefits, such as ecosystem services flowing from
natural capital, in order to make informed decisions about how to best serve
societal needs, as well as to make prudent use of the scarce funds available
for road development.

This section identifies key ecosystem services commonly impacted by roads.

It also describes the direct and indirect pathways by which roads affect eco-
system services and illustrates the importance of considering both kinds of
impacts when making decisions about where and how to build new roads
and improve existing roads.

3.1. MECHANISMS OF ROAD IMPACTS

ON ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

By altering vegetation and soils, roads can have far-reaching impacts on eco-
system services important to economic growth and human well-being. In
particular, erosion control, flood regulation, coastal protection, water quality,
and climate regulation are frequently impacted by roads (Table 1).

When assessing road impacts, it is therefore important to consider not just the
impact to ecosystems in terms of the number of hectares affected, but also
how those changes affect the flows of benefits to people who may be located
more distantly from the impact site. In the case of roads through protected

Natural Capital and Roads | 23

areas, for example, road development or improvement is likely to affect not
just the protected area itself but also the benefits provided to close-by and
downstream communities.

Roads can also affect ecosystem service provision indirectly by increasing

access to natural areas and natural capital. When accompanied by sustainable
management, roads can facilitate increased timber production, tourism, and
recreational opportunities. In the absence of good governance and manage-
ment, however, the increased access to natural areas facilitated by roads can
deplete natural capital by increasing timber harvest and hunting or reducing
the recreational and tourism benefits of areas valued for their isolation, biodi-
versity, or aesthetic quality.

3.2. DIRECT IMPACTS OF ROADS ON ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

The direct impacts of roads can extend great distances into the surround-
ing landscape, especially for areas and people located downstream of roads
(Fig. 2). Roads have been implicated in declines in economically and culturally
important fisheries due to changes in peak storm flows, increased sediment
in stream water, losses of streamside vegetation, road-related landslides, and
the blockage of streams by poorly designed, constructed, or maintained cul-
verts and bridges 9.

Natural Capital and Roads | 24

Road Impacts on the Environment by Distance

1 10 100 1.000

Roadside mowed or intensively managed area

Earth-and-fill area formed by road construction

Microclimate changes

Sand and silt in road dust

Erosion and sedimentation caused by road construction

Lead, roadsalt, and other chemical effects to water and aquatic ecosystems

Heavy metals

Watertable, wetland soil, and other vegetation altered

Invasion by roadside weeds, non-native species

Human access, resulting in impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services

Habitat fragmentation and disruption to wildlife

1 10 100 1.000

Distance from road surface (meters)

Figure 2. The range of average and maximum distances from the road across which impacts on
ecosystems and ecosystem services have been documented (adapted from Figure 11.6 in Road
Ecology by Richard T.T. Forman © 2003 Island Press. Reproduced by permission of Island Press).

Roads replace vegetation with paved surfaces or exposed ground, which

alters hydrological processes on and around roadways. This can accelerate
flows in waterways during rainstorms and increase flooding 9. Forests roads
have been found to increase mean annual floods by up to 10% 10. Roads can
also increase flooding by reducing infiltration of water. In areas dominated by
plants, most rain infiltrates into the ground. Where paved surfaces occupy an
increasing fraction of a watershed, more rain becomes surface runoff 11. For
this reason, flooding often increases along with the proportion of paved sur-
faces, resulting in greater damages to infrastructure and property, and even
threatening lives.

Natural Capital and Roads | 25

Roads are key contributors to erosion, particularly in wet environments with
steep slopes. Exposed soil along roadsides and unpaved road surfaces com-
monly erode, resulting in a regular flow of sediment into downstream water
bodies 9. Road construction is especially likely to exacerbate sheet erosion
because of the cutbanks and fill slopes that are created up- and downslope
of roads 9. The degree of erosion depends on soil type, the depth and velocity
of water flows, and the length and steepness of slope. Increased erosion and
sedimentation reduces drinking water quality, diminishes the aesthetic quality
of landscapes and waterways, affects freshwater fisheries that are important
for food and livelihoods, and impedes hydropower production and irrigation.
Roads can also lead to disturbance cascades in which water and sediment
from hill slopes and stream channels are intercepted by roads and diverted
through road drainage structures, eroding larger channels downslope with
greater flows.9,12,13

Minimizing direct impacts of roads

to ecosystem services

The direct impacts of roads can be minimized in two ways:

1. Siting roads in locations where impacts are likely to be low.

2. Employing best practices in road design and construction.

Avoiding road construction in the most sensitive areas is important. The envi-
ronmental impacts of roads are greatest when they are constructed along
valley floors and in mid-hillslope locations, where they intercept more water
than those on ridgelines 9, though ridgelines may not always be the most
practical location for a road. Best management practices including stabilizing
soil surfaces with vegetation, diverting surface water flows, and constructing
wetlands to trap sediments and other pollutants, can help minimize erosion,
control sediment, and attenuate surface flows9,14.

By following these principles —strategic siting of roads to avoid major

impacts and adherence to best practices in construction— impacts of roads
on ecosystem services can be greatly reduced. The consequences of ignoring
direct impacts can be substantial and costly. For example, the government of
Colombia, with a loan from the IDB and assistance from the German Agency
for International Cooperation (GIZ) has spent tens of millions of dollars restor-
ing the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta wetlands after highway construction
blocked flows between freshwater systems and the ocean, leading to a drastic
dieback of mangroves and subsequent reductions in local fisheries 15,16.

Natural Capital and Roads | 26

 The Ciénaga-Barranquilla Highway, Colombia:
The consequences of ignoring road dependencies
and impacts on ecosystem services

In 1949, inadequate transportation infrastructure was identified as the

largest single impediment to economic development in Colombia. The
World Bank subsequently provided loans for improving ~3,000 km of
Colombia’s highways in order to connect major population centers
with ocean and river ports, including the construction of the Ciéna-
Image courtesy of ga-Barranquilla highway, which began in 1956 34.
www.deracamandaca.com
The Ciénaga-Barranquilla highway cuts across the Ciénaga Grande de
Santa Marta, a mosaic of mangrove forest, dry forest, pasture, plan-
tations, subsistence agriculture, and marine wetlands, covering thou-
sands of square kilometers of Colombia’s Caribbean coast 16. It is the
predominant source of seafood in the region, providing food to local
communities as well as coastal and inland cities 16. Most of the ~350,000
people that currently live in the region live in poverty, without access to
adequate sanitation, drinking water, housing, or education 16.

Cascading effects of the Ciénaga-Barranquilla

highway on ecosystem services

Construction of the Ciénaga-Barranquilla highway cut off all but one

of the natural connections between the lagoon complex and the
ocean 16. This changed the hydrology of the wetland system, contrib-
uting to substantial mangrove mortality (nearly 70%) and declines in
fisheries which depended on mangroves as nursery habitat. Between
the 1980s and 1990s, fish biomass declined 70% 16. In an attempt to
compensate for declining catches, fishermen reduced the mesh size
of their nets. With finer nets, a higher proportion of the fish caught
were below reproductive size, furthering the decline of one of the most
important artisanal fisheries in Colombia 16. By 2005, fishermen saw a
41% decrease in catch volume compared to a decade prior, and experi-
enced a 35% decrease in income, leading to increased poverty rates in
villages dependent on fishing 16.

Natural Capital and Roads | 27

The decline of seafood, resulting from loss of mangroves and changes
in hydrology, was not due to highway construction alone. These losses
resulted from the cumulative impacts of infrastructure development
and economic activities near and upstream of the Ciénaga Grande de
Santa Marta. Road and dam construction along the Magdalena River,
along with expansion of banana and oil palm plantations and cattle
ranching, all contributed to the reduced freshwater flows, increased
sedimentation, and increased nutrient pollution in the waterways,
lagoons, and wetlands 16.

Consideration of the combined benefits and impacts of road and dam

construction, along with agricultural development in a multi-sector
planning framework, could have helped identify where these activities
were compatible with each other, and how they could be developed to
minimize impacts to fisheries, as well as to the mangrove ecosystems
on which the fisheries depend.

www.shutterstock.com (Tomas Konopasek)

The Ciénaga-Barranquilla highway additionally illustrates the impor-

tance of considering the indirect effects of roads. In the 40 years fol-
lowing the construction of the highway, mangroves declined nearly

Natural Capital and Roads | 28

70% 35. This was due in part to the direct effects of the road as well as
the cumulative effects of other development on hydrology and salin-
ity. However, the road also opened up access to the mangroves for
commercial wood extraction, and it was during this 20-year period
of extraction that mangrove declines accelerated 16. While wood
extraction is an economic benefit, in this case it also had environmental
and economic costs in the form of reduced fish landings related to the
loss of mangroves. In addition to the lost nursery habitat for fisheries,
mangrove declines appear to also have contributed to eutrophication
and fish kills 16. Mangroves can serve as sinks of inorganic nitrogen and
phosphorous, so as mangroves declined, the ability of the ecosystem
to remove nutrient pollutants from the water and buffer the effects of
upstream agricultural expansion declined as well.

Restoring ecosystem services and

managing dependencies

The PROCIÉNAGA project, which began in 1992, aimed to restore nat-

ural hydrological flows by re-establishing connections between the
ocean and the lagoon that were blocked by highway construction, as
well as connections between the lagoon and the Magdalena River. The
government of Colombia, with a loan from the IDB assistance from GIZ
tens of millions of dollars restoring flows 15. However, efforts to restore
the mangrove forests are ongoing.

A multi-sector approach to planning, one which considered cumulative

and indirect effects, could have created a pathway towards develop-
ment in the region that maximized the combined economic benefits,
while averting some of the expenses of restoration and mitigation that
are still accruing today. Indeed, after the PROCIÉNAGA project ended
in 2000, the restored connections were not properly maintained and as
a result filled with sediment, renewing fish mortality and mangrove die
back 16. In 2005, Colombia added an environmental tax to the highway
toll to support dredging and other maintenance activities, along with
environmental monitoring 36. Since 2010, more than $10 million has
been spent installing an artificial reef and replenishing sand to facilitate
beach formation and mangrove restoration along the road in order to
restore coastal protection services and reduce coastal erosion 37. How-
ever, erosion of the road continues even with these efforts, and addi-
tional actions are needed. This document outlines some approaches
that can help evaluate, and reduce, the kinds of trade-offs between
infrastructure development and ecosystem service provision that
occurred in the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta region.

Natural Capital and Roads | 29

3.3. LOOKING BEYOND THE RIGHT OF WAY: INDIRECT
IMPACTS OF ROADS ON ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

Roads can have far-reaching effects on the surrounding landscape and the
ecosystem services they provide. Indirect impacts from road development
can spread tens of kilometers from the road —even further in the case of cli-
mate change. By increasing access and reducing transportation costs, roads
spur changes in local land use such as increasing timber harvests and conver-
sion of forests to pasture or cropland. New or improved roads can also lead
to changes in land management practices by allowing for easier and cheaper
access year-round. Increased rates of deforestation around new roads in the
Amazon have been observed across distances of 50 km or more 17-19, and
even improvements to existing roads can have an impact, with higher rates of
deforestation around paved roads than unpaved roads 20.

When road improvement or construction spurs changes in local land use or

land management practices, these changes result in a change in ecosystem
services provided from those areas.

For example, increased timber harvest from forests that are now accessible
year-round because of newly paved roads could reduce carbon sequestration
and increase erosion. These changes can far exceed a road’s direct impact on
ecosystem services. Analysis of a proposed road linking Pucallpa, Peru with
Cruzeiro do Sul, Brazil suggests that conversion of natural vegetation to pas-
ture or oil palm in areas near the road could lead to sediment levels in drinking
water 1,000 times greater than would be expected from the road alone 21.

Natural Capital and Roads | 30

Some of the indirect impacts of roads are in fact economic benefits, provid-
ing jobs and important material goods. However, there is also a risk that the
increased access to natural resources provided by roads can lead to degrada-
tion and depletion of these ecosystem goods and services. Without adequate
management provisions in place and institutional capacity to support sustain-
able management, renewable natural resources can be overexploited, under-
mining both the supply of the resource and the jobs that depend on them.

The tendency for land use change to radiate out from roadways also provides
an opportunity to guide development in a way that minimizes its negative
environmental impacts. With knowledge of key areas of ecosystem service
provision and good planning, strategic placement of roads could concentrate
development in less sensitive areas while directing development away from
the most sensitive areas 22.

For these reasons, considering the indirect impacts of roads along with their
direct impacts and benefits is important for ensuring that the net effect of
road development is indeed beneficial, and does not undermine devel-
opment objectives by reducing water quality, food availability, or other
important ecosystem services. This is especially true for indigenous com-
munities, the poor, and other vulnerable populations who depend heavily on
ecosystem services for their livelihoods and well-being 23,24.

Natural Capital and Roads | 31

3.4. INTEGRATING FINE- AND LANDSCAPE-SCALE
PERSPECTIVES FOR SUSTAINABLE ROAD DEVELOPMENT

To anticipate and minimize the negative impacts of roads while maximizing

their development benefits, it is valuable to integrate the fine-scale perspec-
tive needed for well-engineered roads with a landscape-scale perspective that
provides a more holistic picture of a road’s interaction with the surrounding
landscape. Taking a landscape-scale perspective also enables coordination of
activities among sectors. This coordination can help prevent negative impacts
(e.g., increased erosion from road construction curtailing hydropower pro-
duction downstream) and, as mentioned previously, allows for identification
of synergies where protecting the provision of ecosystem services benefits
multiple sectors and their beneficiaries. The following sections highlight pri-
ority ecosystem services to consider in different contexts, opportunities for
integrating ecosystem services into road decisions at key stages in the trans-
portation planning process, and examples of tools to support analysis of eco-
system services.

Natural Capital and Roads | 32

 4. Critical Contexts for Evaluating
Ecosystem Services

Based on an understanding of how roads both depend on and impact eco-

system services, the following chart provides a screening tool for identifying
which ecosystem services are a high priority for evaluation. In these con-
texts, adapting plans based on ecosystem services information is expected
to be most beneficial in terms of reducing the exposure of a road to floods,
landslides, or other ecosystem-service related risks, as well as avoiding and
minimizing undesirable impacts on surrounding communities. This type of
screening should be conducted at the earliest possible project stage. As with
any screening tool, the following guidance should be used with an under-
standing of local geotechnical, economic, and social factors that provide addi-
tional context for which ecosystem services are most likely to be impacted by
the project and which strategies to reduce impacts and mitigate risks are likely
to be most effective. Such screenings can also contribute to meeting the IDB’s
environmental and social safeguards.

Locally important
natural resources
Flood regulation
Carbon storage

Erosion control
Coastal storm

Water quality
prevention
protection
regulation

regulation
Air quality

Landslide
Priority Ecosystem
Services to Assess:

ROAD PROJECTS THAT OCCUR IN SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS

Areas with steep slopes,

unstable soils and/or
experiencing heavy rains

Arid areas with high winds

Roads alongside or crossing

streams and rivers

Coastal areas exposed to storms,

especially lowlying areas

Headwater areas for

downstream populations

Areas with active forest clearing,

or the potential for forest clearing

Natural Capital and Roads | 33

 Locally important
natural resources
Flood regulation
Carbon storage

Erosion control
Coastal storm

Water quality
prevention
protection
regulation

regulation
Air quality

Landslide
Priority Ecosystem
Services to Assess:

ROAD PROJECTS THAT AFFECT ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

IMPORTANT TO AT-RISK COMMUNITIES

Near or upstream of
vulnerable communiti

Areas where local livelihoods

depend highly on renewable
natural resources

Upstream of towns that

get drinking water
directly from streams

Projects that are part of

multi-sector planning efforts

ROAD PROJECTS THAT MAY RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL

OR HIGH-RISK LAND USE CHANGE

Potential for extensive

clearing of natural vegetation

Potential for loss of

wetlands or vegetation
buffers along streams

Potential for loss of coastal

habitats, especially mangroves
and wetlands

Potential for urban

growth

Potential for expansion

of agricultural activities

Potential for increased

natural resource
extraction

Figure 3. Which ecosystem services matter most depends on the context of the road and the surrounding landscape. This figure
provides a checklist of priority ecosystem services to consider across a variety of common contexts.

Natural Capital and Roads | 34

5. Opportunities for Mainstreaming
Ecosystem Services into Road Decisions

Key Points:

1. Incorporating ecosystem services information at key points

in the design and implementation of road projects can
increase the economic and development benefits roads pro-
vide, while improving the durability of road investments.

2. Ecosystem services information can contribute to multiple

aspects of road investment decisions.

3. Considering ecosystem services early on in the transporta-

tion planning process yields the greatest benefits.

Incorporating ecosystem services information throughout the design and

implementation of road projects can help minimize risks and maximize bene-
fits while also enhancing social benefits. This can help achieve IDB’s strategic
principles for transport 1, as well as facilitate compliance with IDB’s environ-
ment and safeguards requirements 25.

Many approaches and tools exist that can provide the information on ecosys-
tem services needed to support these types of decisions. New and established
scientific knowledge can also be used to develop tools tailored to the needs
of IDB and its country counterparts in order to streamline this process.

Natural Capital and Roads | 35

 This section outlines key areas of opportunity for integrating ecosystem
services information into road development decisions at multiple planning
levels (Figure 4), provides examples of how ecosystem services information
has been used in infrastructure planning decisions, and highlights how these
approaches can be tailored to road projects.

QUESTIONS

• Where are the safest locations to build a road?

National &
regional • Where do ecosystems help maintain safe roads?
PRE-PROJECT

planning
• Where should new roads be avoided to prevent impacts to ecosystem services?

• What are the potential evironmental hazards, and how can ecosystem services
Selecting
among road be managed to reduce these risks?
projects
• Which road projects have the lowest impacts on ecosystem services?

• Where can ecosystems reduce hazard risk, and how much is needed?
Road
project • Where can nature reduce road engineering and maintenance costs?
design
• What route should the road take to minimize impacts to local communities?
PROJECT LEVEL

• Which alternatives have the lowest risk and impact on ecosystem services?
Alternatives
analysis • How does road dependence on ecosystem services vary among alternatives?
What is necessary to secure these ecosystem service benefits?

• Where can nature reduce costs or mitigate environmental impacts?

Economic
valuation
• What economic benefits does nature provide to road users and maintainers?
• What is the rate of return, accounting for environmental costs and benefits?

Figure 4. Opportunities for incorporating valuable natural capital and ecosystem services information into road development
exist throughout the project cycle. The scale and nature of the questions that can be answered varies across stages.

Natural Capital and Roads | 36

5.1. NATIONAL AND REGIONAL LEVEL TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING

The greatest opportunity to maximize the benefits from ecosystem services

while minimizing losses and managing dependencies comes when the rela-
tionship between roads and ecosystem services are considered even before
specific projects have been defined. National or regional level screening can
identify hotspots of ecosystem service provision that would be threatened by
road construction or expansion, as well as reveal parts of the landscape that
are less sensitive to road construction. For example, forested areas in a water-
shed’s steep upper reaches can be both critical for maintaining drinking water
supplies for downstream populations and very sensitive to road development.
On the other hand, flatland areas that have already been converted for agri-
cultural production may provide fewer water-quality regulating services and a
lower-impact route for road development. Such information can help inform
tradeoffs or synergies in road siting against other costs and benefits. Similarly,
information on areas where roads themselves would be at risk from flood-
ing, landslides, or other environmental threats could also be incorporated to
guide road development towards low-risk areas.

Screening maps that highlight the varying sensitivity of the landscape to road
construction can be incorporated into countries’ transportation master plans
or sector notes, and can guide road development investments by the pri-
vate and public sectors in a way that both meets a country’s transportation
needs and maintains the natural infrastructure on which the country’s citi-
zens depend.

Natural Capital and Roads | 37

This form of landscape-scale planning has been successfully applied in the
energy sector where it is often found that energy targets can easily be met
while avoiding the most sensitive parts of the landscape 26-28. This approach
can be extended to the transport sector to incorporate ecosystem services
into transportation development planning in order to meet road development
needs alongside protection of critical ecosystem services. For example, envi-
ronmental and socioeconomic information could be integrated to guide new
road development towards areas where landslides and erosion provide little
threat to roads and road users as well as areas where runoff and sediments
from roads do not pose risks to drinking water for downstream communities.

Considering ecosystem services early in the planning process can set the
stage for road projects to advance more rapidly and cost-effectively, min-
imizing the risk of delays associated with environmental safeguards provi-
sions. This same approach would be valuable for multi-sector planning as
well as managing the cumulative effects of concurrent development activi-
ties. This would help ensure compatibility between, for example, road devel-
opment and hydropower production needs, where increased sediments from
road construction could impede power generation and where watershed
protection could both improve bridge sustainability and reduce reservoir
maintenance costs.

With the great gap between infrastructure supply and demand in Latin Amer-
ica and the Caribbean, there are routinely more road projects under con-
sideration than can be approved in a given funding cycle. Landscape-scale
screening can also help prioritize among projects to select those that are
exposed to lower risks and/or have lower negative impacts on ecosystem
services. For example, it may be better to invest in road projects in areas
where risks of landslides are low or where protection of vegetation to secure
a reduced risk is possible, as opposed to roads in areas where anticipated land
conversion and/or climate change is likely to pose a risk to roads, leading to
increased construction or maintenance costs. Clearly, these risks and impacts
are just a few of many criteria that factor into project selection. However,
all else being equal, projects at low risk and with fewer impacts are likely to
proceed to implementation with fewer delays and to be more sustainable
investments over the lifetime of the project.

Natural Capital and Roads | 38

 Paving a road through the Amazon

The IDB’s Acre Sustainable Development in Brazil project illustrates how

considering the landscape context around a road project can contrib-
ute to project success. In this case, paving of a segment of the BR-364
highway, which connects the state capitals of Acre and Rondônia, was
integrated into a larger spatial planning and sustainable development
project. Based on previous road development in the Brazilian Amazon,
it was clear that road paving without management or protection of sur-
rounding forests was likely to lead to high levels of deforestation beyond
the road’s right of way. Such deforestation would have negative conse-
quences both for the environment and for local communities, including
increased air pollution, soil erosion and soil nutrient loss, reduced water
quality, and increased pressure on natural resources. Funding for road
paving was therefore made conditional on spatial planning, institutional
strengthening, and other mitigation measures implemented over more
than 250,000 square kilometers that would reduce deforestation rates.

The landscape-level perspective and multi-sector approach adopted in

the Acre Sustainable Development project were essential to the proj-
ect’s success at completing road paving with only a slight increase in
deforestation rates 38. Such an approach is especially relevant for road
projects in areas with high levels of remaining natural vegetation, and
for multi-sector planning processes. While ecosystem services such as
erosion control and air quality regulation were considered in a gen-
eral way in the Acre project, new approaches now make it possible for
these benefits to be included in a more spatially explicit and quantita-
tive manner. For example, those areas identified as most important for
erosion control or flood regulation —both for the roads themselves and
for local communities— could be specifically targeted for inclusion in
sustainable management areas or development of resource manage-
ment plans. Advance planning for the conservation and management
of such places would mean not only that overall deforestation rates are
lowered, as occurred in the case of BR-364, but that deforestation is
avoided in the most critical areas, thereby maximizing the benefits from
conservation activities.

www.shutterstock.com (Ammit Jack)

Natural Capital and Roads | 39

 5.2. INCORPORATING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES INTO
PROJECT-LEVEL DECISIONS: EVALUATING ALTERNATIVES
AND DEPENDENCIES

Once a project has been selected, ecosystem service information can con-
tinue to play a role in maximizing project sustainability. Two areas stand out as
particularly useful opportunities for integrating ecosystem services informa-
tion in project-level decisions:

1. The analysis of alternatives, which are often part of a project’s environ-

mental assessment and economic assessment.

2. Assessing and managing project dependencies on ecosystem services.

Approaches for addressing these two areas can equally be applied to the
rehabilitation and repair of existing roads as to construction of new roads.

An ecosystem services framework can provide a useful tool for integrating

social and environmental aspects when evaluating alternative routes or alter-
native road segments under consideration for a given project. By combining
information on the magnitude of the impact with information on servicesheds
that trace the distribution of impacts to beneficiaries, this approach can reveal
how a particular option is likely to affect both the environment and surround-
ing populations, and allows for a comparison of how impacts and the equity
of their distribution varies among alternatives (Figure 5).

ROAD ONLY ROAD + DEFORESTATION

Indigenous people
(15,436)

Non-indigenous people
(220,642)

All people
(236,078)

Erosion Nitrogen Phosphorus Carbon Erosion Nitrogen Phosphorus Carbon

control regulation regulation sequestration control regulation regulation sequestration

Proportion of population negatively Proportion of population without negative

impacted by road development impacts from road development

Figure 5. Projected impacts of development of the Pucallpa-Cruzeiro do Sul road on water quality and climate regulation services
provided to local people in Peru 21. Each pie represents the full population of a beneficiary group (indigenous, non-indigenous
and all people). The “road only” scenario considers only the direct impacts of the road, while “road + deforestation” additionally
accounts for likely road-facilitated conversion of forest to oil palm plantations and pasture.

Natural Capital and Roads | 40

Projects can also benefit from an evaluation of the benefits a road receives,
or depends on, from surrounding ecosystems. Ecosystem service models and
decision support tools can help identify key areas that provide erosion con-
trol or flood mitigation services to infrastructure and local communities that
rely on that infrastructure 29. This approach can be used to identify both where
protection or restoration of natural vegetation would benefit the road most,
by reducing erosion onto the road or protecting the road from coastal storm
surges, and how much vegetation is needed to ensure these benefits. If pro-
tection or restoration of these critical service provision areas is incorporated
into the project, this can help secure the sustainability of the road invest-
ment, potentially reducing maintenance costs, extending the productive
lifespan of the road, and reducing risk from natural disasters.

Such activities could take the form of restoring vegetation to prevent erosion
into streams that would exacerbate bridge scour or protecting mangroves
between the road and the coast that are important to averting road flooding
during storms. For example, the city of Portland, Oregon, USA reduced flood
risk to its Foster Road by one-third by restoring 63 acres of wetland and
floodplain ecosystems around a nearby creek 30. Previously, the road flooded
every other year, making the road unusable and requiring businesses along it
to close regularly. After restoration, the road is expected to flood only once
every 6-8 years. Following a 2012 storm in which the creek reached more
than two feet above flood stage, Foster Road remained dry and local busi-
nesses remained open thanks to the increased water storage capacity of the
restored area.

Natural Capital and Roads | 41

This information can also be used alongside, or integrated with, economic
analyses. As just one example, Conservation Strategy Fund and The Nature
Conservancy-Panama used the Roads Economic Decision Model to assess
the proposed Cerro Punta-Boquete road through Barú Volcano National Park
in Panama and two alternative road investments under consideration in the
region 31. They also assessed the potential impacts of each possible route
on ecosystem services including water for hydropower and irrigation and
eco-tourism. In this case, the road that was the most viable from a standard
economic perspective, the alternative southern route, was also the route with
the fewest expected ecosystem service losses. In this example, the analysis
did not need to quantify ecosystem service losses in monetary terms because
it would not have affected conclusions about the best option. However, if
desired, environmental costs could be calculated in monetary terms and inte-
grated with the road economic analysis. This approach is likely to be espe-
cially useful in cases where there are trade-offs between the benefits to road
users and the costs in terms of lost ecosystem services.

5.3. INCORPORATING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES INTO

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

When planning for a new road or road maintenance, project assessments typ-
ically include a comprehensive engineering study and a detailed cost-bene-
fit analysis to ensure appropriate design standards and that limited budgets
are being spent appropriately. Many projects also include an environmen-
tal impact assessment (EIA) or similar environmental assessment to qualita-
tively assess the direct and indirect impacts roads have on the environment.
However, a comprehensive cost benefit analysis of road projects requires
that landscape-level environmental impacts and dependencies are assessed
quantitatively in a common monetary metric. In this way, environmental
considerations can be assessed as part of an integrated whole —rather than
through an uncoupled cost benefit analysis and environmental assessment.

The functional relationship among roads, the surrounding environment,

and people includes multiple pathways. As previously illustrated, roads both
impact the surrounding landscape and depend on the integrity of surrounding
ecosystems to ensure their continued function. For siting of roads and road
design questions, representing landscape dependencies in monetary terms
can allow for their explicit consideration in a cost benefit analysis alongside
traditional engineering considerations.

Monetary values can be used to assess avoided damages, maintenance or

engineering costs to roads, and increased benefits to road users provided by
protection or restoration of ecosystems. For example, native shrub-steppe

Natural Capital and Roads | 42

vegetation in the arid western region of the United States plays an important
role in stabilizing soils and preventing erosion. When these ecosystems are
converted to cropland, the loss of erosion control results in more severe dust
storms, leading to increases in automobile accidents on roads from impaired
visibility, closures, and increased maintenance costs to remove wind-blown
soil from roads and ditches. An analysis by Scott and colleagues quantified the
avoided costs from wind erosion provided by shrub-steppe at approximately
$180 per hectare per year 33. These values applied to rural roads with low levels
of traffic and would increase with higher rates of use. Payments to land own-
ers to maintain shrub-steppe vegetation on their property could be a cost-ef-
fective way to control road maintenance costs and prevent traffic accidents.

Beyond accounting for ecosystem benefits to roads, a comprehensive

cost-benefit analysis would also allow for monetary valuation of benefits
from ecosystems to society as well as the impact of the road on these ben-
efits. In addition to contributing benefits in terms of reduced accidents and
maintenance costs, shrub-steppe vegetation also provides recreational value,
reduces house maintenance costs from dust storm damage, and improves
water and air quality. If protection or restoration of natural vegetation is incor-
porated into road projects, the value of these additional benefits to society
could be factored into the cost-benefit analysis. In the case analyzed by Scott
and colleagues 32, shrub-steppe ecosystems provide another $180 per hect-
are per year in value to recreational game hunters, on par with the wind ero-
sion prevention benefits.

Many of the services relevant to roads have multiple options for estimating
monetary and non-monetary values that range from simple to complex. The
most appropriate approach for a given context depends on the question of
interest, data availability, and compatibility with other approaches or models
being used. The following section describes the range of tools available for
evaluating ecosystem services and provides a starting point for selecting a
tool to answer a specific question in the road-planning process.

Natural Capital and Roads | 43

 Integrating Road Development with
Conservation and Payment for Ecosystem
Service Programs in Honduras

The road sector in Honduras supports 80% of overland freight and pas-
senger travel, but Honduras’ road network is substantially under-de-
veloped. As of 2008, only 20% of the country’s roads were paved, and
the road service index (kilometers per thousand population) and road
density index (kilometers per thousand square kilometers area) were
well below Central American averages 39. Like many LAC countries,
www.shutterstock.com
(Martin Mecnarowski) Honduras also supports high levels of biodiversity and many endemic
species found nowhere else in the world. As a consequence, several
key roads that would benefit from paving or other improvements pass
near or through critical habitat for endangered species. In the case of
the globally endangered Emerald Hummingbird, which exists only in
four remaining areas, both the World Bank and the IDB have linked road
pavement projects to payment for ecosystem services (PES) schemes to
enable protection of remaining humming bird habitat. The PES schemes
compensate landowners who maintain or restore hummingbird habitat
on their lands.

The San Lorenzo-Olanchito road is part of a road corridor connecting

central Honduras to the Caribbean port of Trujillo. A 2008 World Bank
loan provided funding for road improvement conditional on protection
of 1400 ha of hummingbird habitat. This led to the creation of a PES
schem which, by 2011, protected 835 ha of habitat on private lands,
with funding to enroll an additional 600 ha and funds for 10 years 40.
However, this program faces challenges of financial sustainability and
the ability to maintain payments to landowners to secure conservation
of habitat over the long term.

The IDB is financing a road-paving project in the nearby Agalta Valley in

northeast Honduras. Twenty remaining hummingbird habitat fragments
exist within the project’s area of influence; all but one are on private
land. Building on the World Bank’s experiences with the San Loren-
zo-Olanchito project, the IDB is supporting the development of a similar
PES scheme. Design of the PES scheme will bring together stakehold-
ers from local government, landholders, and environmental NGOs to
ensure effective conservation measures supported by appropriate levels
of compensation 41. This PES-based approach could be used in other
road projects to conserve areas, providing erosion control, flood regu-
lation, or coastal protection services to roads directly.

Natural Capital and Roads | 44

6. Tools for Incorporating Ecosystem
Services Information into Road Planning
The number of decision-support tools available to assess ecosystem ser-
vices is growing rapidly. The most appropriate tool for a particular project and
question depends on the issue being evaluated, the level of precision needed
in the results, and the amount of time, data, and expertise available. Screening
tools tend to be simpler, requiring less technical or scientific expertise, and
provide results in ranked or relative terms. Tools for mapping, quantifying, and
valuing ecosystem services generally require more data, time, and technical
capacity, produce quantitative outputs that show the location and amount of
services provided, and can be directly linked to economic valuation.

The following list provides some examples of freely available tools that can
be useful for assessing road impacts to, and dependence on, ecosystem
services. This list is meant to be illustrative rather than comprehensive. See
the “Additional Resources” section of this document for a link to Business
for Social Responsibility’s 2014 report Making the Invisible Visible: Analyti-
cal Tools for Assessing Business Impacts & Dependencies Upon Ecosystem
Services, which provides information on approximately 50 useful tools for
ecosystem service analysis.

Natural Capital and Roads | 45

 6.1. TOOLS FOR SCREENING
Simpler tools, qualitative or relative results.

ROADS FILTER
Conservation Strategy Fund
The Roads Filter compares the relative risks and benefits of roads, integrat-
ing measures of economic, environmental, socio-political, and cultural risk.
Quantitative and qualitative indicator variables are weighted by their impor-
tance and combined into a risk index. The Roads Filter can be used to priori-
tize road projects that have lower risk.

ESR FOR IA – ECOSYSTEM SERVICES REVIEW

FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT
World Resources Institute
ESR for IA is a six-step approach with spreadsheet-based tools for assessing
and prioritizing project impacts and dependencies on ecosystem services. It
can be used to identify options to manage road dependencies on ecosystems
and to mitigate road impacts on the benefits from ecosystems.
Increasing complexity

6.2. TOOLS FOR MAPPING, QUANTIFYING,

AND VALUING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
More complex tools, quantitative and detailed.

RIOS – RESOURCE INVESTMENT OPTIMIZATION SYSTEM

Natural Capital Project
RIOS combines biophysical, social, and economic data to identify where
watershed management activities would provide the greatest ecosystem ser-
vice benefits. It can be used, for example, to determine where restoration or
protection of ecosystems would be most effective at reducing erosion that
could damage bridges or roads, or improving water quality for users affected
by road development.

InVEST – INTEGRATED VALUATION OF ECOSYSTEM

SERVICES & TRADEOFFS
Natural Capital Project
InVEST uses spatially-explicit environmental and economic data to map,
quantify, and value ecosystem service provision. It can be used to evaluate,
for example, which coastal roads depend most on mangroves for protection
from flooding, or to quantify and value the change in erosion expected from
agricultural expansion from road paving.

Natural Capital and Roads | 46

 SWAT – SOIL AND WATER ASSESSMENT TOOL
Texas A&M University and the USDA Agricultural Research Service
SWAT simulates the quality and quantity of surface and ground water and
predicts the environmental impact of land use, land management practices,
and climate change. SWAT can be used to assess soil erosion prevention and
control measures and watershed management activities. It can provide results
Increasing complexity

with high temporal resolution (e.g., daily estimates) but requires more data
and expertise to run than simpler tools.

ARIES – ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

University of Vermont’s Gund Institute for Ecological Economics
ARIES models and maps ecosystem service provision, using spatial dynamics
based on the location and demands of beneficiaries. ARIES is very flexible
and will eventually allow users to automatically select the most appropriate
models and data for the areas and services of interest. ARIES remains under
development, so at this time, it requires a high level of expertise to run and/or
close collaboration with its developers.

Natural Capital and Roads | 47

Conclusions
Applying an ecosystem services approach to planning, preparation, and
implementation of road projects can improve returns on investment by pro-
ducing more reliable and durable roads that contribute to sustainable and
equitable economic benefits. This report has highlighted a number of prac-
tical ways in which the benefits of ecosystem services can be accounted for
and put to use in the context of road investments. There is great opportu-
nity to invest in Latin America and the Caribbean’s natural capital —its wealth
of ecosystems and biodiversity— towards achieving inclusive and sustain-
able economic development. The region’s ecosystems prevent flooding and
erosion, protect infrastructure and people from coastal storms, and provide
clean water for drinking and energy production alongside numerous other
benefits that form the foundation of current and future economic growth and
well-being. Consideration of these vital ecosystem services provides a useful
lens for understanding the connections among nature, infrastructure invest-
ments, and development. The Latin America and Caribbean region and the
Inter-American Development Bank are poised to lead the way, demonstrating
the benefits of this approach to the global community.

Natural Capital and Roads | 48

More Information and Resources

FOR MORE INFORMATION

• IDB’s Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Program
www.iadb.org/biodiversity
• Natural Capital Project
www.naturalcapitalproject.org
• The Nature Conservancy
www.nature.org

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Business for Social Responsibility (BSR). Making the Invisible Visible: Analytical Tools
for Assessing Business Impacts and Dependencies upon Ecosystem Services.
http://www.bsr.org/reports/BSR_Analytical_Tools_for_Ecosystem_Services_2014.pdf

Gore, Leoniak et Al. Best Management Practices: A Guide for Reducing

Erosion in the British Virgin Islands.
http://issuu.com/alookingglass/docs/best_erosion_practices-alookingglas

Transportation Research Board. Evaluation of Best Management Practices

for Highway Runoff Control.
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_565.pdf

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Runoff control for roads,

highways and bridges.
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/roadshwys.cfm

USAID. Low-Volume Roads Engineering: Best Management Practices and Field Guide.
http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADB595.pdf

World Bank. Road Maintenance and the Environment.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTROADSHIGHWAYS/Resources/td-rd17.pdf

World Bank. Roads and the Environment. A Handbook.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTTRANSPORT/Resources/336291-1107880869673/cov-
ertoc.pdf

World Bank. Watershed Management Approaches, Policies, and Operations.

http://www.unwater.org/downloads/442220NWP0dp111Box0327398B01PUBLIC1.pdf

World Resources Institute. Weaving Ecosystem Services into Impact Assessment.

http://www.wri.org/publication/weaving-ecosystem-services-into-impact-assessment

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Many thanks to Kim Bonine and John Reid for providing us with information
from Conservation Strategy Fund case studies, Michael Ahrens and Katie
Arkema for their help locating case studies and source material in Latin
America, Kelsey Schueler, Jasmin Hundorf and Ben Bryant for helpful feed-
back, and Mary Ruckelshaus for valuable input throughout.

Natural Capital and Roads | 49

References
1. Inter-American Development Bank. 2013. Infrastructure Strategy for Competitiveness.
Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank.

2. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis.

Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

3. Tallis H, Polasky S, Lozano JS, Wolny S. 2012. Inclusive wealth accounting for regulating
ecosystem services. In: Inclusive Wealth Report 2012. Measuring Progress toward Sustainability.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

4. TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity). 2009. The Economics of Ecosystems
and Biodiversity for National and International Policy Makers.

5. Mu R, van de Walle D. 2011. Rural roads and local market development in Vietnam. The Jour-
nal of Development Studies. 47(5):709-734.

6. Khandker SR, Bakht Z, Koolwal GB. 2009. The poverty impact of rural roads: evidence from
Bangladesh. Economic Development and Cultural Change. 57(4):685-722.

7. Fernald JG. 1999. Roads to prosperity? Assessing the link between public capital and produc-
tivity. The American Economic Review. 619-638.

8. Seitz H. 1993. A dual economic analysis of the benefits of the public road networks. The
Annals of Regional Science. 27(3):223-239.

9. Forman RTT, Sperling D, Bissonette JA, et al. 2003. Road Ecology: Science and Solutions.
Washington, DC: Island Press.

10. La Marche JL, Lettenmaier DP. 2001. Effects of forest roads on flood flows in the Deschutes
River, Washington. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms. 26(2):115-134.

11. Arnold CL, Gibbons CJ. 1996. Impervious surface coverage: the emergence of a key envi-
ronmental indicator. Journal of the American Planning Association. 62(2):243-258.

12. Nakamura F, Swanson FJ, Wondzell SM. 2000. Disturbance regimes of stream and riparian
systems: a disturbance-cascade perspective. Hydrological Processes. 14:2849-2860.

13. Wemple B, Swanson FJ, Jones JA. 2001. Forest roads and geomorphic process interactions,
Cascade Range, Oregon. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms. 26:191-204.

14. Transportation Research Board. 2006. National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Report 565: Evaluation of Best Management Practices for Highway Runoff Control. Washington,
D.C.: Transprotation Research Board.

15. Martinez AR. 2005. Cienaga Grande de Santa Marta: Un Modelo de Gestion Interinstitucional
Para Su Recuperacion. Santa Marta, Colombia: CORPAMAG.

16. Vilardy SP, González JA., Martín-López B, Montes C. 2011. Relationships between hydrolog-
ical regime and ecosystem services supply in a Caribbean coastal wetland: a social-ecological
approach. Hydrological Sciences Journal. 56(8):1423-1435.

17. Reymondin L, Argote K, Jarvis A, et al. 2013. Road Impact Assessment Using Remote Sensing
Methodology for Monitoring Land-Use Change in Latin America: Results of Five Case Studies.
Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank.

18. Southworth J, Marsik M, Qiu Y, et al. 2011. Roads as drivers of change: trajectories across the
tri-national frontier in MAP, the Southwestern Amazon. Remote Sensing. 3(12):1047-1066.

19. Laurance WF, Goosem M, Laurance SGW. 2009. Impacts of roads and linear clearings on
tropical forests. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 2009;24(12):659-669.

20. Nepstad D, Carvalho G, Barros AC, et al. 2001. Road paving, fire regime feedbacks, and the
future of Amazon forests. Forest Ecology and Management. 154:395-407.

Natural Capital and Roads | 50

21. Mandle L, Tallis H, Vogl A, et al. 2013. Can the Pucallpa-Cruzeiro Do Sul Road Be Developed
with No Net Loss of Natural Capital in Peru? A Framework for Including Natural Capital in Miti-
gation. Stanford, CA: The Natural Capital Project.

22. Carvalho G, Barros AC, Moutinho P, Nepstad D. 2001. Sensitive development could protect
Amazonia instead of destroying it. Nature. 409:131.

23. Bovarnick A, Alpizar F, Schnell C. 2010. The Importance of Biodiversity and Ecosystems in
Economic Growth and Equity in Latin America and the Caribbean: An Economic Valuation of
Ecosystems. New York: United Nations Development Programme.

24. TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity). 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems
and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature. A Synthesis of the Approach, Con-
clusions and Recommendations of TEEB.

25. Inter-American Development Bank. 2007. Implementation Guidelines for the Environment
and Safeguards Compliance Policy. Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank.

26. Kiesecker JM, Evans JS, Fargione J, et al. 2011. Win-win for wind and wildlife: a vision to
facilitate sustainable development. PLoS One. 6(4):e17566.

27. Cameron DR, Cohen BS, Morrison SA. 2012. An approach to enhance the conserva-
tion-compatibility of solar energy development. PLoS One7(6):e38437.

28. Fargione J, Kiesecker J, Slaats MJ, Olimb S. 2012. Wind and wildlife in the Northern Great
Plains: identifying low-impact areas for wind development. PLoS One. 7(7):e41468.

29. Arkema KK, Guannel G, Verutes G, et al. 2013. Coastal habitats shield people and property
from sea-level rise and storms. Nature Climate Change. 3(10):913-918.

30. City of Portland. 2014. Foster Floodplain Natural Area Information. Available online at:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bes/article/286175. Accessed July 1, 2014.

31. Reid J, Hanily G. 2003. Economic Analysis of Three Road Investments through Western
Panama’s Barú Volcano National Park and Surrounding Areas. Sebastabol, CA: Conservation
Strategy Fund.

32. Scott M, Bilyard G, Link S, et al. 1998. Valuation of ecological resources and functions.
Environmental Management. 22(1):49-68.

33. Costanza R. 2008. Natural capital. The Encyclopedia of Earth.

Available online at: http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/154791

34. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank). 1956. Appraisal of
Revised Highway Project, Colombia. Washington, D.C.: International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development (World Bank).

35. Perdomo L, Ensminger I, Espinosa LF, Elster C. et al. 1999. The mangrove ecosystem of the
Cienaga Grande de Santa Marta (Colombia): observations on regeneration and trace metals in
Sediment. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 37:393-403.

36. Republica de Colombia. 2005. Diario Oficial No. 45.982 de Julio de 2005.
Bogotá, Colombia: Republica de Colombia.

37. El Tiempo. 2013. Obras no frenan erosión en vía Ciénaga-Barranquilla.

Bogotá, Colombia: El Tiempo.

38. Bank D, Redwood J. 2012. Managing the Environmental and Social Impacts of Major IDB-
Financed Road Improvement Projects in the Brazilian Amazon: The Case of BR-364 in Acre.
Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank.

39. World Bank. 2008. Honduras Road Reconstruction and Improvement II, Report AB3436.
Washington, DC; World Bank.

40. Bernardini T, Brushett S. 2012. Balancing Biodiversity Preservation and Economic Develop-
ment: The Case of the San Lorenzo Olanchito Road in the Valle de Aguan in Honduras.
Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

41. Inter-American Development Bank. 2013. Agalta Valley Payment of Ecosystem Services
Scheme HO-T1196. Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank.

Natural Capital and Roads | 51

 This document provides guidance on how to include
ecosystem services into road design and development.
It is intended to help readers identify, prioritize, and
proactively manage the impacts the environment has on
roads as well as the impacts roads have on the environment.

natural
capital
P R O J E C T