IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i16p7201-d1461282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling Ecosystem Regulation Services and Performing Cost–Benefit Analysis for Climate Change Mitigation through Nature-Based Solutions Using InVEST Models

Author

Listed:
  • Sana Bouguerra

    (National Institute of Research in Rural Engineering Water and Forestry, Ariana 2080, Tunisia)

  • Boutheina Stiti

    (National Institute of Research in Rural Engineering Water and Forestry, Ariana 2080, Tunisia)

  • Mariem Khalfaoui

    (National Institute of Research in Rural Engineering Water and Forestry, Ariana 2080, Tunisia)

  • Sihem Jebari

    (National Institute of Research in Rural Engineering Water and Forestry, Ariana 2080, Tunisia)

  • Abdelhamid Khaldi

    (National Institute of Research in Rural Engineering Water and Forestry, Ariana 2080, Tunisia)

  • Ronny Berndtsson

    (Centre for Advanced Middle Eastern Studies, Lund University, 223 62 Lund, Sweden)

Abstract

Climate change and land degradation menace ecosystem sustainability. This study assessed the effectiveness of integrating nature-based solutions (NBSs); soil and water conservation techniques, agroforestry, and reforestation, to mitigate these impacts. Focusing on carbon storage and sediment retention at the watershed level (Sidi Barrak), the InVEST model quantified changes from 1990 to 2050 under the Business as Usual (BAU) and management scenarios. The results showed a significant decrease in sediment retention and carbon storage from 19.25 to 15.5 t ha −1 year −1 and from 1.72 to 1.61 t ha −1 year −1 , respectively, between 1990 and 2021. By 2050, BAU scenario projections demonstrate a 28% decrease in sediment retention and a 16% drop in carbon storage under Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) 4.5. The Management scenarios indicate substantial improvements, with carbon storage increasing by 77% and sediment retention by 87% when all strategies were combined. The economic valuation, performed through the application of the cost–benefit analysis, shows positive net benefit values (NPVs) for the different NBS management scenarios. The combined management scenario, which includes soil and water conservation techniques, agroforestry, and reforestation under the same scenario, presents the highest total NPV with 11.4 M€ (2%, 2050), an average of 130 €/ha (2%, 2050), and an opportunity cost of 1.7 M€ compared to BAU. Such results may orient decision-making by providing solid arguments toward ecosystem resilience and climate change mitigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Sana Bouguerra & Boutheina Stiti & Mariem Khalfaoui & Sihem Jebari & Abdelhamid Khaldi & Ronny Berndtsson, 2024. "Modeling Ecosystem Regulation Services and Performing Cost–Benefit Analysis for Climate Change Mitigation through Nature-Based Solutions Using InVEST Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-20, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:16:p:7201-:d:1461282
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/16/7201/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/16/7201/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sana Bouguerra & Sihem Jebari & Jamila Tarhouni, 2021. "Spatiotemporal analysis of landscape patterns and its effect on soil loss in the Rmel river basin, Tunisia," Soil and Water Research, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 16(1), pages 39-49.
    2. Clara García-Mayor & Almudena Nolasco-Cirugeda, 2023. "New Approach to Landscape-Based Spatial Planning Using Meaningful Geolocated Digital Traces," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-22, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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.

      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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:16:p:7201-:d:1461282. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      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.