Skip Navigation Links
Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management
António Mendes Lopes (editor), Jiazhong Zhang(editor)
António Mendes Lopes (editor)

University of Porto, Portugal


Jiazhong Zhang (editor)

School of Energy and Power Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi Province 710049, China

Fax: +86 29 82668723 Email:

Environmental Accounting in Marine Protected Areas: the EAMPA Project

Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management 3(4) (2015) 323--331 | DOI:10.5890/JEAM.2015.11.002

Pier Paolo Franzese$^{1}$, Elvira Buonocore$^{1}$, Chiara Paoli$^{2}$, Francesco Massa$^{2}$, Donati Stefano$^{3}$, Giorgio Fanciulli$^{4}$, Antonino Miccio$^{5}$, Emanuele Mollica$^{6}$, Augusto Navone$^{7}$, Giovanni F. Russo$^{1}$, Paolo Povero$^{2}$, Paolo Vassallo$^{2}$

$^{1}$ Laboratory of Ecodynamics and Sustainable Development, Department of Science and Technology, Parthenope University of Naples, Italy

$^{2}$ Department of Earth, Environmental and Life Sciences (DISTAV), University of Genova, Italy

$^{3}$ MPA Egadi Islands

$^{4}$ MPA Portofino

$^{5}$ MPA Punta Campanella

$^{6}$ MPA Ciclopi Islands

$^{7}$ MPA Tavolara

Download Full Text PDF



The EAMPA project is a research programme focused on the implementation of an environmental accounting system for all the 29 Italian Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). The main goal of such a system is the calculation of the ecological and economic value of the MPAs, with particular reference to the ecosystem services generated in each protected area. Environmental and economic costs as well as the impacts related to human activities in the MPAs will be also assessed. Finally, an overall balance and the assessment of net benefits will be calculated. To reach this goal, a multicriteria environmental accounting system will be implemented following a standardized protocol of assessment. The outcomes of the project will be managed through an operational WebGIS platform capable of spreading user-friendly information to local managers, policy makers, and other stakeholders. The environmental accounting system will be structured to be updatable over time, thus representing a useful tool for the management of the MPAs in the years to come. Moreover, the research programme represents a unique opportunity to establish a collaborative network among all Italian MPAs. Finally, the outcomes of the project will be also functional to other important and timely processes dealing with the study and protection of European marine ecosystems, such as the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.


Authors gratefully acknowledge the support of Dr. Maria Carmela Giarratano (head of General Direction for Nature and Sea Protection, Ministry of Environment) and the Italian Ministry of Environment for funding the EAMPA project.


  1. [1]  Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P. and van den Belt, M. (1997), The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital, Nature 387, 253-260.
  2. [2]  Dapueto, G., Massa, F., Costa, S., Cimoli, L., Olivari, E., Chiantore,M., Federici, B. and Povero, P. (2015), A spatial multi-criteria evaluation for site selection of offshore marine fish farm in the Ligurian Sea, Italy, Ocean & Coastal Management 116, 64-77.
  3. [3]  De Groot, R., Brander, L., van der Ploeg, S., Costanza, R., Bernard, F., Braat, L., Christie, M., Crossman, N., Ghermandi, A., Hein, L., Hussain, S., Kumar, P., McVittie, A., Portela, R., Rodriguez, L., Ten Brink, P. and van Beukering, P. (2012), Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units, Ecosystem Services 1, 50-61.
  4. [4]  De Groot, R., Wilson, M. and Boumans, R. (2002), A typology for the description, classification, and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services, Ecological Economics 41, 393-408.
  5. [5]  European Commission (2011), Communication from the commission to the european parliament, the council, the economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. Brussels COM, 244 final.
  6. [6]  Farber, S., Costanza, R. and Wilson, M. (2002), Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services, Ecological Economics 41, 375-392.
  7. [7]  Fisher, B., Turner, R. and Morling, P. (2009), Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making, Ecological Economics 68, 643-653.
  8. [8]  Franzese, P.P., Russo, G.F. and Ulgiati, S. (2008), Modelling the interplay of environment, economy and resources in Marine Protected Areas. A case study in Southern Italy, Ecological Questions 10, 91-97.
  9. [9]  Franzese, P.P., Brown, M.T. and Ulgiati, S. (2014), Environmental accounting: emergy,systems ecology, and ecological modelling, Ecological Modelling 271, 1-3.
  10. [10]  Haines-Young, R. and Potschin, M. (2011), Common international classification of ecosystem services (cices): 2011 update, Tech. rep., European Environmental Agency, Nottingham.
  11. [11]  Häyhä, T. and Franzese, P.P. (2014), Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective, Ecological Modelling 289, 124-132.
  12. [12]  Maes, J., Egoh, B., Willemen, L., Liquete, C., Vihervaara, P., Schgner, J. P., Grizzetti, B., Drakou, E. G., Notte, A. L., Zulian, G., Bouraoui, F., Paracchini, M. L., Braat, L. and Bidoglio, G. (2012), Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the european union. Ecosystem Services 1, 31-39.
  13. [13]  Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005), Ecosystems and Human Well-being, Island Press, Washington, DC.
  14. [14]  National Research Council (2004), Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better Environmental Decision-Making, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  15. [15]  Odum, H. (1996), Environmental Accounting, Emergy and Environmental Decision Making, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
  16. [16]  Odum, H. and Odum, E. (2000), Modeling for All Scales: An Introduction to Systems and Simulation, Academic Press, San Diego.
  17. [17]  Paoli, C., Gastaudo, I. and Vassallo, P. (2013), The environmental cost to restore beach ecoservices, Ecological Engineering 52, 182- 190.
  18. [18]  TEEB (2010), The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of teeb, Tech. Rep.
  19. [19]  Turcato, C., Paoli, C., Scopesi, C., Montagnani, C., Mariotti, M.G. and Vassallo P. (2015), Matsucoccus bast scale in Pinus pinaster forests: a comparison of two systems by means of emergy analysis, Journal of Cleaner Production 96, 539-548.
  20. [20]  Ulgiati, S., Raugei, M. and Bargigli, S. (2006), Overcoming the inadequacy of single-criterion approaches to life cycle assessment, Ecological Modelling 190: 432-442.
  21. [21]  Ulgiati, S., Zucaro, A. and Franzese, P.P. (2011), Shared wealth or nobody’s land? Theworth of natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 70, 778-787.
  22. [22]  Vassallo, P., Paoli, C., Rovere, A., Montefalcone, M., Morri, C. and Bianchi, C. (2013), The value of the seagrass posidonia oceanica: A natural capital assessment, Marine Pollution Bulletin 75 (1-2), 157-167.