IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v21y2016ipap103-108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing uncertainty in the profitability of prairie biomass production with ecosystem service compensation

Author

Listed:
  • Noe, Ryan R.
  • Nachman, Elizabeth R.
  • Heavenrich, Hannah R.
  • Keeler, Bonnie L.
  • Hernández, Daniel L.
  • Hill, Jason D.

Abstract

Compensation for ecosystem services can encourage the management of agricultural systems for a broad range of benefits beyond crop production. Here we explore how payments for carbon sequestration and phosphorus retention affect the profitability and economic competitiveness of perennial herbaceous biomass. We consider the case of converting marginal land currently in corn and soy production in southern Minnesota, United States, to native diverse prairie grown as a biofuel feedstock. We estimate the resulting changes in soil carbon storage and water quality, and the economic value of both. To test the robustness of our results, we perform Monte Carlo simulations that incorporate variability and uncertainty in our model parameters. Our analyses show that prairie biomass production on marginal lands is 22% likely to be profitable when ecosystem service compensation is included, but only 5% when it is not. This suggests that the two ecosystem services modeled here may alone be insufficient to make prairie biomass production reliably profitable. Furthermore, by using ranges of model parameters rather than point estimates, this study shows that the profitability gap between conventional row crops and prairie is too large to be closed with the two services modeled here across a range of recent economic conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Noe, Ryan R. & Nachman, Elizabeth R. & Heavenrich, Hannah R. & Keeler, Bonnie L. & Hernández, Daniel L. & Hill, Jason D., 2016. "Assessing uncertainty in the profitability of prairie biomass production with ecosystem service compensation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 103-108.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:21:y:2016:i:pa:p:103-108
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.05.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221204161630095X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.05.004?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. Johnson, Kris A. & Polasky, Stephen & Nelson, Erik & Pennington, Derric, 2012. "Uncertainty in ecosystem services valuation and implications for assessing land use tradeoffs: An agricultural case study in the Minnesota River Basin," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 71-79.
    2. Richard S.J. Tol, 2011. "The Social Cost of Carbon," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 419-443, October.
    3. Stephen Polasky & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Kris Johnson, 2011. "The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 219-242, February.
    4. Osteen, Craig D. & Vasavada, Utpal, 2012. "Agricultural Resources and Environmental Indicators, 2012 Edition," Economic Information Bulletin 132048, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. Brandes, Elke & McNunn, Gabriel Sean & Schulte, Lisa A. & Bonner, Ian J. & Muth, D. J. & Babcock, Bruce A. & Sharma, Bhavna & Heaton, Emily A., 2016. "Subfield profitability analysis reveals an economic case for cropland diversification," ISU General Staff Papers 201601010800001048, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Brandes, Elke & McNunn, Gabriel Sean & Schulte, Lisa A. & Bonner, Ian J. & Muth, D. J. & Babcock, Bruce A. & Sharma, Bhavna & Heaton, Emily A., 2016. "Subfield profitability analysis reveals an economic case for cropland diversification," ISU General Staff Papers 3442, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Sumner, Daniel A. & Zulauf, Carl R., 2012. "Economic and Environmental Effects of Agricultural Insurance Programs," C-FARE Reports 156622, Council on Food, Agricultural, and Resource Economics (C-FARE).
    8. Stephen Polasky & Kris Johnson & Bonnie Keeler & Kent Kovacs & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Andrew J. Plantinga & John Withey, 2012. "Are investments to promote biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services aligned?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 139-163, Spring.
    9. Searchinger, Timothy & Heimlich, Ralph & Houghton, R. A. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Tokgoz, Simla & Hayes, Dermot J. & Yu, Hun-Hsiang, 2008. "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12881, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    10. Chamberlain, Jim F. & Miller, Shelie A., 2012. "Policy incentives for switchgrass production using valuation of non-market ecosystem services," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 526-536.
    11. Kovacs, Kent F. & Polasky, Stephen & Keeler, Bonnie & Pennington, Derric & Nelson, Erik & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Taff, Steven J., 2012. "Evaluating the Return in Ecosystem Services from Investment in Public Land Acquisitions," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124660, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    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. Baumber, Alex, 2017. "Enhancing ecosystem services through targeted bioenergy support policies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 98-110.
    2. Connor, Jeffery D. & Summers, David & Regan, Courtney & Abbott, Hayley & Van Der Linden, Leon & Frizenschaf, Jacqueline, 2022. "Sensitivity analysis in economic evaluation of payments for water and carbon ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    3. Vera V. Yurak & Margarita N. Ignatyeva & Aleksey V. Dushin, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services in a region: A review of the international experience," Journal of New Economy, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 21(4), pages 79-103, December.
    4. Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Edgardo Sica, 2019. "Assessing the Opportunities and Challenges of Green Finance in Italy: An Analysis of the Biomass Production Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, January.
    5. Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Edgardo Sica, 2018. "Policy pathways for green finance in biomass production: The case of Italy," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(2), pages 135-149.

    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. Hoekman, S. Kent & Broch, Amber, 2018. "Environmental implications of higher ethanol production and use in the U.S.: A literature review. Part II – Biodiversity, land use change, GHG emissions, and sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 3159-3177.
    2. Kreig, Jasmine A.F. & Lenhart, Suzanne & Ponce, Eduardo & Jager, Henriette I., 2024. "Agent-based modeling to evaluate the effects of harvesting biomass and hunting on ring-necked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) populations," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 492(C).
    3. Lee, Jongyeol & Kim, Hyungsub & Song, Cholho & Kim, Gang Sun & Lee, Woo-Kyun & Son, Yowhan, 2020. "Determining economically viable forest management option with consideration of ecosystem services in Korea: A strategy after successful national forestation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    4. Nguyen, Trung H. & Granger, Julien & Pandya, Deval & Paustian, Keith, 2019. "High-resolution multi-objective optimization of feedstock landscape design for hybrid first and second generation biorefineries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1484-1496.
    5. Capmourteres, Virginia & Adams, Justin & Berg, Aaron & Fraser, Evan & Swanton, Clarence & Anand, Madhur, 2018. "Precision conservation meets precision agriculture: A case study from southern Ontario," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 176-185.
    6. Gorelick, David E. & Baskaran, Latha M. & Jager, Henriëtte I., 2019. "Visualizing feedstock siting in biomass production: Tradeoffs between economic and water quality objectives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    7. Daigneault, Adam & Strong, Aaron L. & Meyer, Spencer R., 2021. "Benefits, costs, and feasibility of scaling up land conservation for maintaining ecosystem services in the Sebago Lake watershed, Maine, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    8. Léa Tardieu, 2017. "The need for integrated spatial assessments in ecosystem service mapping," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 173-200, December.
    9. Dupoux, Marion, 2019. "The land use change time-accounting failure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Bas Jacobs, 2013. "From Optimal Tax Theory to Applied Tax Policy," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 69(3), pages 338-389, September.
    11. Jianxin Yang & Jian Gong & Wenwu Tang, 2019. "Prioritizing Spatially Aggregated Cost-Effective Sites in Natural Reserves to Mitigate Human-Induced Threats: A Case Study of the Qinghai Plateau, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-23, March.
    12. Christie Klimas & Allison Williams & Megan Hoff & Beth Lawrence & Jennifer Thompson & James Montgomery, 2016. "Valuing Ecosystem Services and Disservices across Heterogeneous Green Spaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-21, August.
    13. Marion Dupoux, 2016. "The land use change time-accounting failure," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-28, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    14. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    15. G. Denisse Chamochumbi D. & Massimo Ciambotti & Federica Palazzi & Francesca Sgr?, 2022. "The digital transformation process in the agri-food sector: A case study," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2022(2 Suppl.), pages 43-70.
    16. Christopher R. Knittel, 2012. "Reducing Petroleum Consumption from Transportation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(1), pages 93-118, Winter.
    17. Walston, Leroy J. & Li, Yudi & Hartmann, Heidi M. & Macknick, Jordan & Hanson, Aaron & Nootenboom, Chris & Lonsdorf, Eric & Hellmann, Jessica, 2021. "Modeling the ecosystem services of native vegetation management practices at solar energy facilities in the Midwestern United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    18. Madhu Khanna, 2021. "Digital Transformation of the Agricultural Sector: Pathways, Drivers and Policy Implications," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(4), pages 1221-1242, December.
    19. Scott M. Swinton, 2022. "Precision conservation: Linking set‐aside and working lands policy," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(3), pages 1158-1167, September.
    20. Matthew Langholtz & Ingrid Busch & Abishek Kasturi & Michael R. Hilliard & Joanna McFarlane & Costas Tsouris & Srijib Mukherjee & Olufemi A. Omitaomu & Susan M. Kotikot & Melissa R. Allen-Dumas & Chri, 2020. "The Economic Accessibility of CO 2 Sequestration through Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the US," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-24, August.

    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:ecoser:v:21:y:2016:i:pa:p:103-108. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.