IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v27y2017ipap48-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecosystem services of the Big Bend region of the Chihuahuan Desert

Author

Listed:
  • Taylor, Nathan T.
  • Davis, Kendall M.
  • Abad, Helena
  • McClung, Maureen R.
  • Moran, Matthew D.

Abstract

Ecosystem services estimates have not been published for some biomes, notably desert ecosystems. The Chihuahuan bioregion, which is the largest desert in North America, exhibits high biodiversity and important cultural significance for parts of Mexico and the United States. With low levels of development, the Big Bend region is a relatively unmodified ecosystem, which makes it a good representative landscape to study desert ecosystem services. We found that this region has $504 (2015 USD) of annual value per hectare ($1.61 billion for entire study area), with raw materials, climate regulation, ornamental services, and cultural services contributing the most value. This estimate is markedly lower than published values for other terrestrial biomes, which is not surprising considering deserts are low productivity environments. However, given the size of the Chihuahuan Desert, the ecosystem services value for the entire bioregion is likely considerable. The Chihuahuan Desert is facing numerous threats, including energy development and overuse of natural resources. Projected growth in oil, gas, and wind energy could further degrade the services provided by this region. The relatively low ecosystem services values for this desert environment also indicate that the widespread desertification occurring globally is causing large decreases in ecosystem services across many landscapes.

Suggested Citation

  • Taylor, Nathan T. & Davis, Kendall M. & Abad, Helena & McClung, Maureen R. & Moran, Matthew D., 2017. "Ecosystem services of the Big Bend region of the Chihuahuan Desert," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 48-57.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:27:y:2017:i:pa:p:48-57
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041617301869
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.017?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. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    2. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    3. Tol, Richard S. J., 2008. "The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 2, pages 1-22.
    4. Stephan Weiler & Andrew Seidl, 2004. "What's in a Name? Extracting Econometric Drivers to Assess The Impact of National Park Designation," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 245-262, May.
    5. Miguel Arato & Stijn Speelman & Guido Van Huylenbroeck, 2014. "The contribution of non‐timber forest products towards sustainable rural development: The case of Candelilla wax from the Chihuahuan Desert in Mexico," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 0(2), pages 141-153, May.
    6. Thomas P. Holmes, 1988. "The Offsite Impact of Soil Erosion on the Water Treatment Industry," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 64(4), pages 356-366.
    7. Jerrell Richer, 1995. "Willingness To Pay For Desert Protection," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 13(4), pages 93-104, October.
    8. Nunes, Paulo A. L. D. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M., 2001. "Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 203-222, November.
    9. Swofford, Jeffrey & Slattery, Michael, 2010. "Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: Local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2508-2519, May.
    10. Isabel Mendes & Isabel Proença, 2005. "Estimating the Recreation Value of Ecosystems by Using a Travel Cost Method Approach," Working Papers Department of Economics 2005/08, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    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. Sarah M. Jordaan & Junghun Lee & Maureen R. McClung & Matthew D. Moran, 2021. "Quantifying the ecosystem services values of electricity generation in the US Chihuahuan Desert: A life cycle perspective," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(4), pages 1089-1101, August.
    2. Dan, Michelle E. & Olaka, Lydia A. & Mamo, Mamo Boru & Chalo, Duncan Mutiso & Cuni-Sanchez, Aida, 2021. "Desert landscape services: Insights from pastoralist communities in northern Kenya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    3. Chen, Haojie & Costanza, Robert, 2024. "Valuation and management of desert ecosystems and their services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).

    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. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    2. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 289(C), pages 124-132.
    3. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    4. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    5. Frélichová, Jana & Vačkář, David & Pártl, Adam & Loučková, Blanka & Harmáčková, Zuzana V. & Lorencová, Eliška, 2014. "Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 110-117.
    6. Rosalie Arendt & Till M. Bachmann & Masaharu Motoshita & Vanessa Bach & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2020. "Comparison of Different Monetization Methods in LCA: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-39, December.
    7. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    8. Pinke, Zsolt & Kiss, Márton & Lövei, Gábor L., 2018. "Developing an integrated land use planning system on reclaimed wetlands of the Hungarian Plain using economic valuation of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 299-308.
    9. 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).
    10. Halkos, George, 2012. "The use of contingent valuation in assessing marine and coastal ecosystems’ water quality: A review," MPRA Paper 42183, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Gaaff, Aris & Reinhard, Stijn, 2012. "Incorporating the value of ecological networks into cost–benefit analysis to improve spatially explicit land-use planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 66-74.
    12. Ochoa, Vivian & Urbina-Cardona, Nicolás, 2017. "Tools for spatially modeling ecosystem services: Publication trends, conceptual reflections and future challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 155-169.
    13. Barkmann, J. & Glenk, K. & Keil, A. & Leemhuis, C. & Dietrich, N. & Gerold, G. & Marggraf, R., 2008. "Confronting unfamiliarity with ecosystem functions: The case for an ecosystem service approach to environmental valuation with stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 48-62, March.
    14. Nunes, Paulo A. L. D. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M., 2001. "Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 203-222, November.
    15. Natho, Stephanie & Hudson, Paul, 2024. "Accounting for the value of ecosystem services of floodplains in Germany – National studies matter," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    16. Achille Amatucci & Vera Ventura & Anna Simonetto & Gianni Gilioli, 2024. "The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services: Meta-analysis and Potential Application of Value Transfer for Freshwater Ecosystems," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(11), pages 3041-3061, November.
    17. Zhang, Jingjing & Pimm, Stuart L. & Xu, Weihua & Shi, Xuewei & Xiao, Yang & Kong, Lingqiao & Fan, Xinyue & Ouyang, Zhiyun, 2020. "Relationship between giant panda populations and selected ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    18. Vassallo, P. & Paoli, C. & Buonocore, E. & Franzese, P.P. & Russo, G.F. & Povero, P., 2017. "Assessing the value of natural capital in marine protected areas: A biophysical and trophodynamic environmental accounting model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 355(C), pages 12-17.
    19. De Valck, Jeremy & Rolfe, John, 2019. "Comparing biodiversity valuation approaches for the sustainable management of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 23-31.
    20. Zhou, Peng & Zhang, Haijie & Huang, Bei & Ji, Yongli & Peng, Shaolin & Zhou, Ting, 2022. "Are productivity and biodiversity adequate predictors for rapid assessment of forest ecosystem services values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).

    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:27:y:2017:i:pa:p:48-57. 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.