IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nas/journl/v115y2018p3876-3881.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Grassland biodiversity can pay

Author

Listed:
  • Seth Binder

    (Department of Economics, St. Olaf College, Northfield, MN 55057; Department of Environmental Studies, St. Olaf College, Northfield, MN 55057)

  • Forest Isbell

    (Cedar Creek Ecosystem Science Reserve, East Bethel, MN 55005; Department of Ecology, Evolution & Behavior, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108)

  • Stephen Polasky

    (Department of Ecology, Evolution & Behavior, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108; Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108)

  • Jane A. Catford

    (Biological Sciences, University of Southampton, SO17 1BJ Southampton, United Kingdom; School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; Fenner School of Environment & Society, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia)

  • David Tilman

    (Department of Ecology, Evolution & Behavior, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108; Bren School of the Environmental Science & Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106)

Abstract

The biodiversity–ecosystem functioning (BEF) literature provides strong evidence of the biophysical basis for the potential profitability of greater diversity but does not address questions of optimal management. BEF studies typically focus on the ecosystem outputs produced by randomly assembled communities that only differ in their biodiversity levels, measured by indices such as species richness. Landholders, however, do not randomly select species to plant; they choose particular species that collectively maximize profits. As such, their interest is not in comparing the average performance of randomly assembled communities at each level of biodiversity but rather comparing the best-performing communities at each diversity level. Assessing the best-performing mixture requires detailed accounting of species’ identities and relative abundances. It also requires accounting for the financial cost of individual species’ seeds, and the economic value of changes in the quality, quantity, and variability of the species’ collective output—something that existing multifunctionality indices fail to do. This study presents an assessment approach that integrates the relevant factors into a single, coherent framework. It uses ecological production functions to inform an economic model consistent with the utility-maximizing decisions of a potentially risk-averse private landowner. We demonstrate the salience and applicability of the framework using data from an experimental grassland to estimate production relationships for hay and carbon storage. For that case, our results suggest that even a risk-neutral, profit-maximizing landowner would favor a highly diverse mix of species, with optimal species richness falling between the low levels currently found in commercial grasslands and the high levels found in natural grasslands.

Suggested Citation

  • Seth Binder & Forest Isbell & Stephen Polasky & Jane A. Catford & David Tilman, 2018. "Grassland biodiversity can pay," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115(15), pages 3876-3881, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:nas:journl:v:115:y:2018:p:3876-3881
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.pnas.org/content/115/15/3876.full
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lewis, C.D. & Smith, K.F. & Jacobs, J.L. & Ho, C.K.M. & Leddin, C.M. & Moate, P.J. & Malcolm, B., 2024. "Using a two-price market value framework to value differences in metabolizable energy concentration of pasture across seasons," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    2. Jayalath, Tharaka A. & Grala, Robert K. & Grado, Stephen C. & Evans, David L., 2021. "Increasing provision of ecosystem services through participation in a conservation program," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(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:nas:journl:v:115:y:2018:p:3876-3881. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Eric Cain (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.pnas.org/ .

    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.