IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ccexxx/v03y2012i04ns2010007812500212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing The Impacts Of Climate Change On Terrestrial Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • ALAN KRUPNICK

    (Resources for the Future, 1616 P Street, NW Washington, DC 20036, USA)

  • DAVID McLAUGHLIN

    (Resources for the Future, 1616 P Street, NW Washington, DC 20036, USA)

Abstract

Climate change is already having impacts on terrestrial ecosystem services and such impacts are only expected to broaden and worsen as greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) continue at their historic levels. To set appropriate policies for reducing GHG emissions, economists recommend the use of cost-benefit analysis. To perform such analyses, the predominant approach has been to use integrated assessment models. There is a need for more targeted valuation studies to serve as further evidence about the willingness to pay (WTP) to reduce climate change. The purpose of this brief paper is to sample and classify the literature valuing terrestrial ecosystem services and make some judgments about its usefulness to benefits analysis associated with climate change mitigation. With an emphasis on nonuse values, this paper focuses on stated preference studies.We find that with the pervasiveness of the effects of global warming on all types of natural and human systems, and given the interconnectedness of those systems, it seems too reductionist to focus on valuation of changes to specific resources or systems, in this case terrestrial ecosystems. That is, the value of slowing climate change needs to be estimated from a holistic perspective. To do so, the only possible way to go is with the top-down studies, recognizing that these studies can never provide the detail and the preciseness of commodity definition that is desirable in, say, natural resource damage assessments. However we must ask ourselves as a society if we are willing to trade off precision for comprehensiveness and breadth.The vast literature simply valuing ecosystem services is not largely motivated or directly applicable to climate change. And use of these studies in benefits transfers therefore involves huge assumptions and, even then, there will be gaps in geographic coverage. There are an increasing number of ecosystem valuation studies motivated by climate change that have the right scale and type of commodities being valued. Yet, such studies are invariably place-based and draw relatively tight, rather than porous boundaries between the ecosystem of interest and its linkages to other systems. Thus, one will not be able to easily aggregate such studies, properly account for overlaps and gaps and eventually come out with a cost of carbon. However, examining such studies one at a time and drawing insights out of them may both inform the design of information treatments for the studies and lead to a more qualitative/judgmental basis for settling on a "cost of carbon" number.

Suggested Citation

  • ALAN KRUPNICK & DAVID McLAUGHLIN, 2012. "Valuing The Impacts Of Climate Change On Terrestrial Ecosystem Services," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(04), pages 1-11.
  • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ccexxx:v:03:y:2012:i:04:n:s2010007812500212
    DOI: 10.1142/S2010007812500212
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S2010007812500212
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S2010007812500212?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. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Alan Krupnick & Elina Lampi & Åsa Löfgren & Ping Qin & Susie Chun & Thomas Sterner, 2012. "Paying for Mitigation: A Multiple Country Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 326-340.
    2. Sonia Akter & Jeff Bennett, 2011. "Household perceptions of climate change and preferences for mitigation action: the case of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 417-436, December.
    3. David F. Layton & Gardner Brown & Mark L. Plummer, 1999. "Valuing Multiple Programs to Improve Fish Populations," Working Papers 0042, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    4. Boyd, James & Krupnick, Alan, 2009. "The Definition and Choice of Environmental Commodities for Nonmarket Valuation," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-35, Resources for the Future.
    5. -, 2008. "Women and Water: Climate Change in the Caribbean," Sede Subregional de la CEPAL para el Caribe (Estudios e Investigaciones) 38435, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    6. -, 2009. "The economics of climate change," Sede Subregional de la CEPAL para el Caribe (Estudios e Investigaciones) 38679, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    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. Dienes, Christian, 2015. "Actions and intentions to pay for climate change mitigation: Environmental concern and the role of economic factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 122-129.
    2. Sebastian Levi & Christian Flachsland & Michael Jakob, 2020. "Political Economy Determinants of Carbon Pricing," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(2), pages 128-156, May.
    3. Jens Abildtrup & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Suzanne Elizabeth Vedel & Udo Mantau & Robert Mavsar & Davide Pettenella & Irina Prokofieva & Florian Schubert & Anne Stenger & Elsa Varela & Enrico Vidale & , 2024. "Preferences for climate change policies: the role of co-benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 110-128, January.
    4. Shewmake, Sharon & Okrent, Abigail M. & Thabrew, Lanka & Vandenbergh, Michael, 2012. "Carbon Labeling for Consumer Food Goods," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124369, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Artjoms Ivlevs, 2019. "Adverse Welfare Shocks and Pro‐Environmental Behavior: Evidence from the Global Economic Crisis," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(2), pages 293-311, June.
    6. Basurto, Saul, 2016. "A Mexican Ricardian analysis: land rental prices or net revenues?," 90th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2016, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 236362, Agricultural Economics Society.
    7. Tanya O'Garra & Susana Mourato, 2016. "Are we willing to give what it takes? Willingness to pay for climate change adaptation in developing countries," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(3), pages 249-264, September.
    8. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo, 2011. "Willingness to Pay for Individual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions: Evidence from a Large Field Experiment," Working Papers 0517, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    9. Acquah, H. de-Graft & Onumah, Edward E., 2011. "Farmers Perception and Adaptation to Climate Change: An Estimation of Willingness to Pay," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 3(4), pages 1-9, December.
    10. Dalia Streimikiene & Tomas Balezentis & Ilona Alisauskaite-Seskiene & Gintare Stankuniene & Zaneta Simanaviciene, 2019. "A Review of Willingness to Pay Studies for Climate Change Mitigation in the Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-38, April.
    11. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Alan Krupnick & Elina Lampi & Åsa Löfgren & Ping Qin & Susie Chun & Thomas Sterner, 2012. "Paying for Mitigation: A Multiple Country Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 326-340.
    12. Johannes Diederich & Timo Goeschl, 2014. "Willingness to Pay for Voluntary Climate Action and Its Determinants: Field-Experimental Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(3), pages 405-429, March.
    13. Howes, Stephen & Talberg, Anita, 2010. "Party divides: expertise in and attitude towards climate change among Australian Members of Parliament," Working Papers 249385, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    14. Lea S. Svenningsen & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, 2020. "Preferences for Distributional Impacts of Climate Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(1), pages 1-24, January.
    15. Shewmake, Sharon & Okrent, Abigail & Thabrew, Lanka & Vandenbergh, Michael, 2015. "Predicting consumer demand responses to carbon labels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 168-180.
    16. Emőke Kiss & Dániel Balla & András Donát Kovács, 2022. "Characteristics of Climate Concern—Attitudes and Personal Actions—A Case Study of Hungarian Settlements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-22, April.
    17. Harinder Kohli & Ashok Sharma & Anil Sood (ed.), 2011. "Asia 2050: Realizing the Asian Century," Books, Emerging Markets Forum, edition 1, number asia2050, May.
    18. Louise Ella Desquith & Olivier Renault, 2021. "Gestion du risque climatique : les déterminants des stratégies d’adaptation des agriculteurs en Afrique Subsaharienne," EconomiX Working Papers 2021-17, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    19. Pindilli, Emily & Sleeter, Rachel & Hogan, Dianna, 2018. "Estimating the Societal Benefits of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration Through Peatland Restoration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 145-155.
    20. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.

    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:wsi:ccexxx:v:03:y:2012:i:04:n:s2010007812500212. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/cce/cce.shtml .

    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.