IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v64y2019ics0301420719306890.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Changes in ecosystem service benefit in Soma lignite region of Turkey

Author

Listed:
  • Demirbugan, Alper

Abstract

Throughout the mining cycle, which includes exploration, operation, enrichment and closure stages, the ecosystems and services such as forests and wetlands, which form the other part of natural capital with the ore deposit, undergo significant changes. Today, mining and rehabilitation activities are progressing synchronously. In this study, the ‘ecosystem services valuation approach’ is first discussed in the theoretical framework. Later, the net benefits of ecosystem services and change profile emerged in the historical process is examined in the Soma coal region located in the western part of Turkey, where one-quarter of the lignite coal production of the country is carried out. This study aims to determine the change in the ecosystem benefit arising during the mining and rehabilitation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Demirbugan, Alper, 2019. "Changes in ecosystem service benefit in Soma lignite region of Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:64:y:2019:i:c:s0301420719306890
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101522
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420719306890
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101522?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. Nunez, Daisy & Nahuelhual, Laura & Oyarzun, Carlos, 2006. "Forests and water: The value of native temperate forests in supplying water for human consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 606-616, June.
    2. Croitoru, Lelia, 2007. "How much are Mediterranean forests worth?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 536-545, January.
    3. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    4. Richard O. Zerbe Jr & Allen S. Bellas, 2006. "A Primer for Benefit–Cost Analysis," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3480.
    5. 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.
    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. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz, 2021. "Overlapping of natural stone mining field with high-speed train project in Turkey: Was the economic public benefit evaluation made sufficiently?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    2. Shufei Wang & Yining Zhuang & Yingui Cao & Kai Yang, 2022. "Ecosystem Service Assessment and Sensitivity Analysis of a Typical Mine–Agriculture–Urban Compound Area in North Shanxi, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-16, August.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Élia Pires-Marques & Cristina Chaves & Lígia M. Costa Pinto, 2021. "Biophysical and monetary quantification of ecosystem services in a mountain region: the case of avoided soil erosion," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 11382-11405, August.
    4. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    5. World Bank Group, 2015. "Valuing Forest Products and Services in Turkey," World Bank Publications - Reports 22961, The World Bank Group.
    6. Kontogianni, Areti & Luck, Gary W. & Skourtos, Michalis, 2010. "Valuing ecosystem services on the basis of service-providing units: A potential approach to address the 'endpoint problem' and improve stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1479-1487, May.
    7. Bianchi, Ettore & Accastello, Cristian & Trappmann, Daniel & Blanc, Simone & Brun, Filippo, 2018. "The Economic Evaluation of Forest Protection Service Against Rockfall: A Review of Experiences and Approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 409-418.
    8. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2019. "Global trend of forest ecosystem services valuation – An analysis of publications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    9. Loc, Ho Huu & Thi Hong Diep, Nguyen & Can, Nguyen Trong & Irvine, Kim N. & Shimizu, Yoshihisa, 2017. "Integrated evaluation of Ecosystem Services in Prawn-Rice rotational crops, Vietnam," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 377-387.
    10. Pavanelli, David Domingues & Voulvoulis, Nikolaos, 2019. "Habitat Equivalency Analysis, a framework for forensic cost evaluation of environmental damage," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Wu, Yu & Mullan, Katrina & Biggs, Trent & Caviglia-Harris, Jill L. & Harris, Daniel & Sills, Erin O., 2018. "Do Forests Provide Watershed Services to Local Populations in the Humid Tropics? Evidence from the Brazilian Amazon," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274012, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    13. Just, Richard E. & Schmitz, Andrew & Zerbe, Richard O., 2012. "Scitovsky Reversals and Practical Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 1-12, May.
    14. Peringer, Alexander & Gillet, François & Rosenthal, Gert & Stoicescu, Ioana & Pătru-Stupariu, Ileana & Stupariu, Mihai-Sorin & Buttler, Alexandre, 2016. "Landscape-scale simulation experiments test Romanian and Swiss management guidelines for mountain pasture-woodland habitat diversity," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 330(C), pages 41-49.
    15. Admiraal, Jeroen F. & Wossink, Ada & de Groot, Wouter T. & de Snoo, Geert R., 2013. "More than total economic value: How to combine economic valuation of biodiversity with ecological resilience," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 115-122.
    16. Olivier Petit & Franck-Dominique Vivien, 2015. "When economists and ecologists meet on Ecological Economics: two science paths around two interdisciplinary concepts," Post-Print halshs-01249774, HAL.
    17. McVittie, Alistair & Norton, Lisa & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Siameti, Ioanna & Glenk, Klaus & Aalders, Inge, 2015. "Operationalizing an ecosystem services-based approach using Bayesian Belief Networks: An application to riparian buffer strips," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-27.
    18. Daniel Muller, 2018. "Economics of Human-AI Ecosystem: Value Bias and Lost Utility in Multi-Dimensional Gaps," Papers 1811.06606, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2018.
    19. Alamanos, Angelos & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2022. "Economics of Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Water Resource Planning and Management," MPRA Paper 122046, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Chen, G.Q. & Chen, B., 2007. "Resource analysis of the Chinese society 1980-2002 based on energy--Part 5: Resource structure and intensity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2087-2095, April.

    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:jrpoli:v:64:y:2019:i:c:s0301420719306890. 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/inca/30467 .

    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.