IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v159y2019icp291-300.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards valuation of biodiversity in agricultural soils: A case for earthworms

Author

Listed:
  • Plaas, Elke
  • Meyer-Wolfarth, Friederike
  • Banse, Martin
  • Bengtsson, Jan
  • Bergmann, Holger
  • Faber, Jack
  • Potthoff, Martin
  • Runge, Tania
  • Schrader, Stefan
  • Taylor, Astrid

Abstract

Soil biodiversity is deteriorating in Europe due to an on-going intensification of agriculture, climate change and food production supporting measures of the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Nevertheless, the CAP tries to take biodiversity into account via proposing a range of agri-environmental measures. These ES contribute to food security, climate change mitigation, water retention and plant biomass growth. Healthy soils also help to prevent erosion, desertification, and landslides and to stabilise crop yields. The provision of ES by soil biota is a result of their impact on soil processes in interaction with soil conditions as well as soil management practices of the farmers such as tillage or crop rotations. Some taxa amongst soil biota play key roles in regulating soil processes. With respect to biocontrol of soil-borne pests, the earthworm species Lumbricus terrestris is known to play an important role in suppressing toxigenic plant pathogens, such as Fusarium culmorum and its mycotoxin deoxynivalenol (DON). We highlight the importance of earthworms for pest control to conceptualise and show how farmers' management practices influence soil ecosystem services and outline how this can be examined in a socio-ecological context by providing a concrete example of an economical evaluation of ES provided by earthworms.

Suggested Citation

  • Plaas, Elke & Meyer-Wolfarth, Friederike & Banse, Martin & Bengtsson, Jan & Bergmann, Holger & Faber, Jack & Potthoff, Martin & Runge, Tania & Schrader, Stefan & Taylor, Astrid, 2019. "Towards valuation of biodiversity in agricultural soils: A case for earthworms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 291-300.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:159:y:2019:i:c:p:291-300
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.02.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800918304610
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.02.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    2. United Nations, 2016. "The Sustainable Development Goals 2016," Working Papers id:11456, eSocialSciences.
    3. Barrios, Edmundo, 2007. "Soil biota, ecosystem services and land productivity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 269-285, December.
    4. Ingrid M. Lubbers & Kees Jan van Groenigen & Steven J. Fonte & Johan Six & Lijbert Brussaard & Jan Willem van Groenigen, 2013. "Greenhouse-gas emissions from soils increased by earthworms," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 187-194, March.
    5. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    6. Wolfert, Sjaak & Ge, Lan & Verdouw, Cor & Bogaardt, Marc-Jeroen, 2017. "Big Data in Smart Farming – A review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 69-80.
    7. Nadia Glæsner & Katharina Helming & Wim De Vries, 2014. "Do Current European Policies Prevent Soil Threats and Support Soil Functions?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-26, December.
    8. Zhang, Wei & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Kremen, Claire & Carney, Karen & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 253-260, December.
    9. Pascual, Unai & Termansen, Mette & Hedlund, Katarina & Brussaard, Lijbert & Faber, Jack H. & Foudi, Sébastien & Lemanceau, Philippe & Jørgensen, Sisse Liv, 2015. "On the value of soil biodiversity and ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 11-18.
    10. Diana H. Wall & Uffe N. Nielsen & Johan Six, 2015. "Soil biodiversity and human health," Nature, Nature, vol. 528(7580), pages 69-76, December.
    11. Jane Mills & Peter Gaskell & Julie Ingram & Janet Dwyer & Matt Reed & Christopher Short, 2017. "Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 283-299, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mark V. Brady & Jordan Hristov & Fredrik Wilhelmsson & Katarina Hedlund, 2019. "Roadmap for Valuing Soil Ecosystem Services to Inform Multi-Level Decision-Making in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, September.
    2. Konstantinos X. Soulis & Emmanouil Psomiadis & Paraskevi Londra & Dimitris Skuras, 2020. "A New Model-Based Approach for the Evaluation of the Net Contribution of the European Union Rural Development Program to the Reduction of Water Abstractions in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, September.
    3. Weituschat, Chiara Sophia & Pascucci, Stefano & Materia, Valentina Cristiana & Caracciolo, Francesco, 2023. "Can contract farming support sustainable intensification in agri-food value chains?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    4. Haensch, Juliane & Bergmann, Holger & Quaranta, Gianni & Salvia, Rosanna & Sun, Dingqiang & Zhong, Funing & Plaas, Elke, 2022. "Water management in agriculture under growing water scarcity: Comparing policy options and listening to stakeholders across Europe, Israel and China," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 321231, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    5. Ali Bagheri-Kordeshami & Jahangir Khajehali & Farshid Nourbakhsh & Masoud M. Ardestani, 2021. "Responses of soil-inhabiting mesostigmatid mites to deforestation and disturbance in oak (Quercus brontii) forests of southwestern Iran," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(12), pages 562-569.
    6. Black, Michael A. & Woodward, Richard T. & Morgan, Cristine & Bagnall, Dianna & Kiella, Erin & Cisneros, Marissa & McIntosh, William Alex, 2020. "An empirical estimate of value of manageable soil quality," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304430, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Yosefin Ari Silvianingsih & Kurniatun Hairiah & Didik Suprayogo & Meine van Noordwijk, 2021. "Kaleka Agroforest in Central Kalimantan (Indonesia): Soil Quality, Hydrological Protection of Adjacent Peatlands, and Sustainability," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    8. Steven J. Fonte & Marian Hsieh & Nathaniel D. Mueller, 2023. "Earthworms contribute significantly to global food production," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-5, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sébastien Foudi, 2012. "Exploitation of soil biota ecosystem services in agriculture: a bioeconomic approach," Working Papers 2012-02, BC3.
    2. Elizabeth M. Bach & Kelly S. Ramirez & Tandra D. Fraser & Diana H. Wall, 2020. "Soil Biodiversity Integrates Solutions for a Sustainable Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, March.
    3. Bartosz Bartkowski & Stephan Bartke, 2018. "Leverage Points for Governing Agricultural Soils: A Review of Empirical Studies of European Farmers’ Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-27, September.
    4. Dietze, Victoria & Hagemann, Nina & Jürges, Nataly & Bartke, Stephan & Fürst, Christine, 2019. "Farmers consideration of soil ecosystem services in agricultural management - A case study from Saxony, Germany," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 813-824.
    5. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur, 2016. "Classification and valuation of soil ecosystem services," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 24-38.
    6. Liu, Wenjing & Wang, Jingsheng & Li, Chao & Chen, Baoxiong & Sun, Yufang, 2019. "Using Bibliometric Analysis to Understand the Recent Progress in Agroecosystem Services Research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 293-305.
    7. Anna M. Hansson & Eja Pedersen & Niklas P. E. Karlsson & Stefan E. B. Weisner, 2023. "Barriers and drivers for sustainable business model innovation based on a radical farmland change scenario," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8083-8106, August.
    8. Arturo Sanchez-Porras & María Guadalupe Tenorio-Arvide & Ricardo Darío Peña-Moreno & María Laura Sampedro-Rosas & Sonia Emilia Silva-Gómez, 2018. "Evaluation of the Potential Change to the Ecosystem Service Provision Due to Industrialization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    9. Makovníková Jarmila & Pálka Boris & Kološta Stanislav & Flaška Filip & Orságová Katarína & Spišiaková Mária, 2020. "Non-Monetary Assessment and Mapping of the Potential of Agroecosystem Services in Rural Slovakia," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 12(2), pages 257-276, June.
    10. Wakita, Kazumi & Kurokura, Hisashi & Oishi, Taro & Shen, Zhonghua & Furuya, Ken, 2019. "Exploring the effect of psychometric variables on willingness to pay for marine ecosystem services: A survey in Japan," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 130-138.
    11. Juerges, Nataly & Arts, Bas & Masiero, Mauro & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke & Borges, José G. & Brodrechtova, Yvonne & Brukas, Vilis & Canadas, Maria João & Carvalho, Pedro Ochôa & Corradini, Giulia & Cor, 2021. "Power analysis as a tool to analyse trade-offs between ecosystem services in forest management: A case study from nine European countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    12. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    13. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    14. Costanza, Robert, 2020. "Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    15. Hysing, Erik, 2021. "Challenges and opportunities for the Ecosystem Services approach: Evaluating experiences of implementation in Sweden," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    16. H. Yildirim & Mélanie Requier-Desjardins & Hélène Rey-Valette, 2017. "Étudier la perception des services écosystémiques pour appréhender le capital environnemental d’un territoire et ses enjeux de développement, le cas de la péninsule de Karaburun en Turquie," Post-Print hal-02043021, HAL.
    17. Hua Li & Dan Su & Yu Cao & Jiayi Wang & Yu Cao, 2022. "Optimizing the Compensation Standard of Cultivated Land Protection Based on Ecosystem Services in the Hangzhou Bay Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    18. Rui Zhao & Junying Li & Kening Wu & Long Kang, 2021. "Cultivated Land Use Zoning Based on Soil Function Evaluation from the Perspective of Black Soil Protection," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-29, June.
    19. Jiang, Hongqiang & Wu, Wenjun & Wang, Jinnan & Yang, Weishan & Gao, Yueming & Duan, Yang & Ma, Guoxia & Wu, Chunsheng & Shao, Jiacheng, 2021. "Mapping global value of terrestrial ecosystem services by countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    20. Coria, Jessica & Robinson, Elizabeth & Smith, Henrik G. & Sterner, Thomas, 2012. "Biodiversity Conservation and Ecosystem Services Provision: Tale of Confused Objectives, Multiple Market Failures and Policy Challenges," Working Papers in Economics 546, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:159:y:2019:i:c:p:291-300. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.