IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i17p7446-d1466157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blue Carbon as a Nature-Based Mitigation Solution in Temperate Zones

Author

Listed:
  • Mine Cinar

    (Department of Economics, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.
    We dedicate this article in memory of Mine Cinar, a prolofic economist dedicated to make the world a better place for future generations.)

  • Nathalie Hilmi

    (Department of Environmental Economics, Centre Scientifique de Monaco, 8 Quai Antoine 1er, Monaco MC98000, Monaco
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Gisele Arruda

    (Natural Resources, Global Commons and Climate Change Management, Circumpolar Studies, UARTIC, 96300 Rovaniemi, Finland)

  • Laura Elsler

    (Department of Nutrition, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA)

  • Alain Safa

    (GRM, IAE Nice Graduate School of Management, Université Côte d’Azur, 06300 Nice, France)

  • Jeroen A. J. M. van de Water

    (Department of Estuarine & Delta Systems, NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Korringaweg 7, 4401 NT Yerseke, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Concern for the future requires local steward-led cooperation between natural and social scientists and decision-makers to develop informed and policy-relevant nature-based mitigation solutions, including blue carbon (BC), which can help secure the future. Salt marshes, kelp forests, and seagrass meadows (and to a lesser extent mangroves) are significant BC ecosystems in temperate areas. We discuss the concept of blue carbon stocks and the scientific approaches to building BC stocks considering the variability in local conditions and the co-benefits of blue carbon ecosystems to improve climate change mitigation and adaptation mechanisms. The study examines (1) methods to assess the potential of BC ecosystems and the impact of disturbances, while (2) building relevant policy based on socio-economic assessments of impacted communities. We highlight economic and social approaches to rebuilding BC using financial tools such as blue bonds, development plans, cost-benefit analyses, cross-ecosystem restoration projects, AI and blockchain, and economic accounts of coastal ecosystems, while emphasizing that cutting carbon emissions is more important than (re)building BC stocks.

Suggested Citation

  • Mine Cinar & Nathalie Hilmi & Gisele Arruda & Laura Elsler & Alain Safa & Jeroen A. J. M. van de Water, 2024. "Blue Carbon as a Nature-Based Mitigation Solution in Temperate Zones," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:17:p:7446-:d:1466157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7446/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7446/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marjo Vierros, 2017. "Communities and blue carbon: the role of traditional management systems in providing benefits for carbon storage, biodiversity conservation and livelihoods," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 89-100, January.
    2. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    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.
    1. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    2. Drakou, E.G. & Crossman, N.D. & Willemen, L. & Burkhard, B. & Palomo, I. & Maes, J. & Peedell, S., 2015. "A visualization and data-sharing tool for ecosystem service maps: Lessons learnt, challenges and the way forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 134-140.
    3. Hooper, Tara & Cooper, Philip & Hunt, Alistair & Austen, Melanie, 2014. "A methodology for the assessment of local-scale changes in marine environmental benefits and its application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 65-74.
    4. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    5. Gerner, Nadine V. & Nafo, Issa & Winking, Caroline & Wencki, Kristina & Strehl, Clemens & Wortberg, Timo & Niemann, André & Anzaldua, Gerardo & Lago, Manuel & Birk, Sebastian, 2018. "Large-scale river restoration pays off: A case study of ecosystem service valuation for the Emscher restoration generation project," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 327-338.
    6. H. Spencer Banzhaf & James Boyd, 2012. "The Architecture and Measurement of an Ecosystem Services Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-32, March.
    7. Wang, Shifeng & Wang, Sicong & Smith, Pete, 2015. "Quantifying impacts of onshore wind farms on ecosystem services at local and global scales," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1424-1428.
    8. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    9. Diane P. Dupont, 2019. "Editorial: Special Issue in Honour of Dr. Steven Renzetti," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(02), pages 1-10, April.
    10. Chun-Chu Yeh & Cheng-Shen Lin & Chin-Huang Huang, 2018. "The Total Economic Value of Sport Tourism in Belt and Road Development—An Environmental Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    11. Bo Yang & Ming-Han Li & Shujuan Li, 2013. "Design-with-Nature for Multifunctional Landscapes: Environmental Benefits and Social Barriers in Community Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, October.
    12. Pistorius, Till & Schaich, Harald & Winkel, Georg & Plieninger, Tobias & Bieling, Claudia & Konold, Werner & Volz, Karl-Reinhard, 2012. "Lessons for REDDplus: A comparative analysis of the German discourse on forest functions and the global ecosystem services debate," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 4-12.
    13. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    14. Aevermann Tim & Schmude Jürgen, 2015. "Quantification and monetary valuation of urban ecosystem services in Munich, Germany," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 59(3), pages 188-200, December.
    15. 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.
    16. Cordier, Mateo & Pérez Agúndez, José A. & Hecq, Walter & Hamaide, Bertrand, 2014. "A guiding framework for ecosystem services monetization in ecological–economic modeling," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 86-96.
    17. Hahn, Thomas & McDermott, Constance & Ituarte-Lima, Claudia & Schultz, Maria & Green, Tom & Tuvendal, Magnus, 2015. "Purposes and degrees of commodification: Economic instruments for biodiversity and ecosystem services need not rely on markets or monetary valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 74-82.
    18. 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.
    19. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2009. "Governing of agro-ecosystem services - modes, efficiency, perspectives," MPRA Paper 99870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.

    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:17:p:7446-:d:1466157. 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.