scholarly journals A Systems-Based Approach to Ecosystem Services Valuation of Various Atmospheric Calcium Deposition Flows

Resources ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Mikhailova ◽  
Christopher Post ◽  
Mark Schlautman ◽  
Garth Groshans ◽  
Michael Cope ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Spatial Distribution ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Atmospheric Deposition ◽  
Sustainable Management ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Commodity Prices ◽  
Calcium Deposition ◽  
National Atmospheric Deposition Program ◽  
State Region

Atmospheric resources are very important for assessing ecosystem services at different administrative levels (e.g., state, region, etc.). Quantification of atmospheric calcium (Ca2+) deposition on the total basis provides incomplete information about the ecosystem services flows (both “natural” and “human-derived”), therefore lacking a systems approach to guide sustainable management of the flows which support many ecosystem services. This study assessed the value of wet, dry, and total atmospheric calcium deposition flows in the contiguous United States (U.S.) by different spatial aggregation levels (e.g., state, region) using information from the National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NRSP-3) and commodity prices of human-derived materials: agricultural limestone (CaCO3) and uncalcined gypsum (CaSO4•2H2O). The total provisioning ecosystem value of atmospheric calcium deposition flows was $66.7M (i.e., 66.7 million U.S. dollars) ($30M wet + $36.7M dry) based on an average 2014 price of $10.42 per U.S. ton of agricultural limestone (CaCO3) or nearly $364M ($164M wet + $200M dry) based on an average 2014 price of $33.00 per U.S. ton gypsum (CaSO4•2H2O). The quantified spatial distribution of wet, dry, and total atmospheric calcium deposition could be used to identify areas with opportunities for more efficient use of “human-derived” materials since they are already being supplied by atmospheric deposition.

scholarly journals Assessing the Value of Soil Inorganic Carbon for Ecosystem Services in the Contiguous United States Based on Liming Replacement Costs

Land ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garth R. Groshans ◽  
Elena A. Mikhailova ◽  
Christopher J. Post ◽  
Mark A. Schlautman ◽  
Hamdi A. Zurqani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Winter Wheat ◽  
Great Plains ◽  
Inorganic Carbon ◽  
Land Resource ◽  
Replacement Cost ◽  
Soil Inorganic Carbon ◽  
South Central ◽  
State Region

Soil databases are very important for assessing ecosystem services at different administrative levels (e.g., state, region etc.). Soil databases provide information about numerous soil properties, including soil inorganic carbon (SIC), which is a naturally occurring liming material that regulates soil pH and performs other key functions related to all four recognized ecosystem services (e.g., provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting services). However, the ecosystem services value, or “true value,” of SIC is not recognized in the current land market. In this case, a negative externality arises because SIC with a positive value has zero market price, resulting in the market failure and the inefficient use of land. One potential method to assess the value of SIC is by determining its replacement cost based on the price of commercial limestone that would be required to amend soil. The objective of this study is to assess SIC replacement cost value in the contiguous United States (U.S.) by depth (0–20, 20–100, 100–200 cm) and considering different spatial aggregation levels (i.e., state, region, land resource region (LRR) using the State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) soil database. A replacement cost value of SIC was determined based on an average price of limestone in 2014 ($10.42 per U.S. ton). Within the contiguous U.S., the total replacement cost value of SIC in the upper two meters of soil is between $2.16T (i.e., 2.16 trillion U.S. dollars, where T = trillion = 1012) and $8.97T. States with the highest midpoint total value of SIC were: (1) Texas ($1.84T), (2) New Mexico ($355B, that is, 355 billion U.S. dollars, where B = billion = 109) and (3) Montana ($325B). When normalized by area, the states with the highest midpoint SIC values were: (1) Texas ($2.78 m−2), (2) Utah ($1.72 m−2) and (3) Minnesota ($1.35 m−2). The highest ranked regions for total SIC value were: (1) South Central ($1.95T), (2) West ($1.23T) and (3) Northern Plains ($1.01T), while the highest ranked regions based on area-normalized SIC value were: (1) South Central ($1.80 m−2), (2) Midwest ($0.82 m−2) and (3) West ($0.63 m−2). For land resource regions (LRR), the rankings were: (1) Western Range and Irrigated Region ($1.10T), (2) Central Great Plains Winter Wheat and Range Region ($926B) and (3) Central Feed Grains and Livestock Region ($635B) based on total SIC value, while the LRR rankings based on area-normalized SIC value were: (1) Southwest Plateaus and Plains Range and Cotton Region ($3.33 m−2), (2) Southwestern Prairies Cotton and Forage Region ($2.83 m−2) and (3) Central Great Plains Winter Wheat and Range Region ($1.59 m−2). Most of the SIC is located within the 100–200 cm depth interval with a midpoint replacement cost value of $2.49T and an area-normalized value of $0.34 m−2. Results from this study provide a link between science-based estimates (e.g., soil order) of SIC replacement costs within the administrative boundaries (e.g., state, region etc.).

scholarly journals Ecosystem Services Assessment and Valuation of Atmospheric Magnesium Deposition

Geosciences ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garth R. Groshans ◽  
Elena A. Mikhailova ◽  
Christopher J. Post ◽  
Mark A. Schlautman ◽  
Michael P. Cope ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Economic Valuation ◽  
Market Price ◽  
Biogeochemical Cycles ◽  
National Atmospheric Deposition Program ◽  
Valuation Method ◽  
Naturally Occurring ◽  
Lack Of Information ◽  
Liming Material ◽  
State Region

Ecosystem services (ES) often rely on biogeochemical cycles, but values associated with abiotic services are often ignored or underestimated. Ecosystem services from atmospheric magnesium (Mg2+) deposition are abiotic flows (wet, dry, and total), which can be considered a source of naturally-occurring fertilizer and liming material, have not been included in economic valuations of ecosystem services. Market-based valuation of these atmospheric ecosystem service flows can partially address this negative externality. This study assessed the value of wet, dry, and total atmospheric magnesium deposition flows in the contiguous United States (USA) within boundary-based administrative accounts (e.g., state, region) based on data from the National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NRSP-3), and the market price of human-derived material (agricultural dolomite, CaMg(CO3)2). The total supporting ecosystem value of atmospheric magnesium deposition flows was $46.7M (i.e., 46.7 million U.S. dollars) ($18.5M wet + $28.2M dry) based on an average 2014 price of $12.90 per U.S. ton of agricultural dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2). The atmosphere is a common-pool resource that plays an important role in the pedosphere, providing important abiotic ES, but its monetary value is often not identified in the market due to a lack of information and/or knowledge of the proper valuation method. This study demonstrates one approach to translate atmospheric magnesium deposition flows entering the soil as an abiotic ES and potential monetary values at various scales. Omission of abiotic services in ES analysis can lead to an incomplete economic valuation.

The Birth, Growth and Future of Systems Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 113-114
Author(s):  
Nelson Laville ◽  
Kenrick Witty ◽  
Ulises Garcia
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Department Of Agriculture ◽  
States Department ◽  
Global Team ◽  
Video Link ◽  
Agricultural Research Service ◽  
Research Service

The Beyond Compliance Global team held an interview by video link with Dr Eric Jang, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service (USDA/ARS), now retired. His lab was based in Hawaii, where he continues to reside. Eric was an early advocate and one of the originators of the concepts for Systems Approach.

ESTIMASI HASIL AIR DARI DAERAH TANGKAPAN AIR DANAU RAWA PENING DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN MODEL INVEST

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 157
Author(s):  
Nunung Puji Nugroho
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Distribution ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Water Resources ◽  
High Water ◽  
Water Yield ◽  
Accurate Information ◽  
Yield Model ◽  
Catchment Areas ◽  
Integrated Valuation ◽  
Valuation Of Ecosystem Services

<p class="JudulABSInd"><strong>ABSTRAK</strong></p><p class="abstrak">Informasi hasil air dari suatu ekosistem sangat penting dalam pengelolaan sumber daya air. Dalam perencanaan kegiatan konservasi sumber daya air, informasi sebaran spasial hasil air diperlukan untuk menentukan prioritas wilayah terkait dengan alokasi anggaran. Hasil air dari suatu ekosistem atau daerah aliran sungai (DAS) dapat diestimasi dengan menggunakan model hidrologi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendapatkan informasi tentang hasil air, baik besaran maupun sebaran spasialnya, dari daerah tangkapan air (DTA) Danau Rawa Pening. Hasil air dari lokasi penelitian dihitung dengan menggunakan model hasil air pada InVEST (<em>the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs</em>), yang didasarkan pada pendekatan neraca air. Hasil perhitungan menunjukkan bahwa volume hasil air di DTA Danau Rawa Pening pada tahun 2015 adalah sekitar 337 juta m<sup>3</sup>. SubDAS Galeh, sebagai subDAS terluas, merupakan penghasil air terbesar (72,4 juta m<sup>3</sup>) diikuti oleh subDAS Sraten (66,8 juta m<sup>3</sup>) dan Parat (62,4 juta m<sup>3</sup>). Secara spasial, hasil air di lokasi kajian mempunyai nilai antara 0 hingga 29.634,19 m<sup>3</sup>/ha. Wilayah hulu dan tengah subDAS Sraten secara umum mempunyai hasil air yang lebih tinggi, sedangkan wilayah danau dan sekitarnya serta hulu subDAS Galeh mempunyai hasil air yang lebih rendah dibandingkan dengan wilayah lainnya. Wilayah dengan hasil air tinggi dapat diprioritaskan dalam kegiatan konservasi sumber daya air untuk mendukung pasokan air ke Danau Rawa Pening.</p><p><strong><em>Kata kunci</em></strong><em>: hasil air, daerah tangkapan air, model InVEST, Danau Rawa Pening</em><em></em></p><p class="judulABS"><strong>ABSTRACT</strong></p><p class="Abstrakeng">Accurate information on water yield from an ecosystem is very important in the management of water resources. In the planning of water resources conservation activities, the information on the spatial distribution of water yield is needed to determine regional priorities related to budget allocations. The water yield from an ecosystem or watershed can be estimated using a hydrological model. This study aimed to obtain information about the water yield, both the magnitude and their spatial distribution, from the catchment areas of Lake Rawa Pening. The water yield from the study area was calculated using the water yield model in InVEST (the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs), which based on the water balance approach. The results indicated that the volume of water yield in Lake Rawa Pening for 2015 is approximately 337 million m<sup>3</sup>. Galeh subwatershed, as the largest subwatershed, is the largest water producer (72.4 million m<sup>3</sup>), followed by Sraten subwatershed (66.8 million m<sup>3</sup>) and Parat subwatershed (62.4 million m<sup>3</sup>). Spatially, the water yield at the study site has a value between 0 to 29,634.19 m<sup>3</sup>/ha. Upstream and middle areas of Sraten subwatershed generally have higher water yield, while the lake and its surrounding areas as well as the upstream of Galeh subwatershed have lower water yield compared to other regions. The regions with high water yield can be prioritized in water resource conservation activities to support the supply of water to Lake Rawa Pening.</p><p><strong><em>Keywords</em></strong><em>: water yield, catchment areas, InVEST model, Lake Rawa Pening</em><em></em></p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document