IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaaeke/9539.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Payments for Environmental Services under Emerging International Agreements: A Basis for Inclusion of Agricultural Soil Carbon Sinks

Author

Listed:
  • Odera, Michael M.
  • Kimani, Stephen K.

Abstract

This review places in context the role agricultural soils play in global carbon dynamics, and their potential interaction with climate change through soil carbon sequestration. The paper first examine the potential of soils as carbon sinks, agricultural practices and dynamics in soil organic carbon, emerging agreements on payments for environmental services (PES) that mitigate global warming through enhanced carbon sinks, exclusion of agricultural activities in PES under Kyoto Protocol, and the basis for inclusion of agricultural soil carbon sinks through sustainability based production systems. Soils are one of the planet's largest sinks for carbon and hold potential for expanded carbon sequestration through changes in management. The global soil organic carbon (SOC) inventory is estimated to be 1200-1600 billion metric tonnes, which is equal to or slightly greater than amounts stored in terrestrial vegetation (500-700 billion metric tonnes) and the atmosphere (750 billion metric tonnes), combined. Agricultural soils, having been depleted of much of their native carbon stocks, and occupying an estimated 1.7 billion hectares, have a more significant potential SOC sink capacity. Global estimates of this sink capacity are in the order of 20-30 billion metric tonnes over the next 50-100 years. The total global agricultural soils' SOC stocks are estimated at 167-170 billion metric tonnes. When soil is put into cultivation, associated biological and physical processes result in a release of SOC over time, often 50% or more, depending on soil conditions and agricultural practices. Consequently, there is potential to increase SOC in most cultivated soils. Many management practices have been demonstrated to increase SOC, including incorporation of crop residues, and increases in cropping intensity and fertilization. Past and on-going biophysical studies have been able to identify and demonstrate organic based soil fertility management practices, with modest applications of mineral fertilizers that would concurrently lead to improvement in SOC levels, nutrient loss amelioration and improved agricultural productivity. Management practices that could add 4 T C ha-1 yr-1 in the system have been demonstrated. Due to the potential impacts of climate change on the environment as a result of increasing concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere, particularly carbon dioxide, the world community established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988. The responsibility of IPCC is to undertake an assessment of the science, impacts, adaptation, and mitigation options in relation to climate change and advise the Conference of Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). At the sixth Conference of the Parties (COP-6) in Marrakech, Morocco, limits were placed on the nature of activities that could be undertaken and the amount of carbon credits that could be generated through land use change and forestry activities to benefit from PES. These limits excluded all activities associated with management of natural forests and agricultural lands. This review argues that a demonstration of sustainability of carbon sinks in agricultural soils under empirically derived predictable management practices could serve as a basis for arguing the case for inclusion of carbon sinks in such systems in payments for environmental services under the Clean Development (CDM) of Kyoto Protocol.

Suggested Citation

  • Odera, Michael M. & Kimani, Stephen K., 2004. "Payments for Environmental Services under Emerging International Agreements: A Basis for Inclusion of Agricultural Soil Carbon Sinks," 2004 Inaugural Symposium, December 6-8, 2004, Nairobi, Kenya 9539, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaaeke:9539
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.9539
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/9539/files/cp04od01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.9539?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antle, John M. & Capalbo, Susan Marie & Mooney, Sian & Elliott, Edward T. & Paustian, Keith H., 2001. "Economic Analysis Of Agricultural Soil Carbon Sequestration: An Integrated Assessment Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-24, December.
    2. John M. Antle & Susan M. Capalbo, 2001. "Econometric-Process Models for Integrated Assessment of Agricultural Production Systems," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(2), pages 389-401.
    3. Ian Noble & R. J. Scholes, 2001. "Sinks and the Kyoto Protocol," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 5-25, March.
    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. Heng‐Chi Lee & Bruce A. McCarl & Dhazn Gillig, 2005. "The Dynamic Competitiveness of U.S. Agricultural and Forest Carbon Sequestration," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(4), pages 343-357, December.
    2. Edwin Van Der Werf & Sonja Peterson, 2009. "Modeling linkages between climate policy and land use: an overview," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(5), pages 507-517, September.
    3. Adams, Thomas & Turner, James A., 2012. "An investigation into the effects of an emissions trading scheme on forest management and land use in New Zealand," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 78-90.
    4. Johansson, Robert C. & Gowda, Prasanna H. & Mulla, David J. & Dalzell, Brent J., 2004. "Metamodelling phosphorus best management practices for policy use: a frontier approach," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 63-74, January.
    5. Michael Hartmann & Werner Hediger & Simon Peter, 2008. "How Much Should Swiss Farmers Contribute to Greenhouse Gas Reduction? A Meta-Analytical Approach," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 1(1), pages 183-218.
    6. John M. Antle & Susan M. Capalbo, 2001. "Econometric-Process Models for Integrated Assessment of Agricultural Production Systems," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(2), pages 389-401.
    7. Uwe A. Schneider & Bruce A. McCarl, 2003. "Measuring Abatement Potentials When Multiple Change Is Present: The Case Of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation In U.S. Agriculture And Forestry," Working Papers FNU-23, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Apr 2002.
    8. Arnade, Carlos Anthony & Kelch, David R. & Leetmaa, Susan E., 2002. "Supply Response In France, Germany, And The Uk: Technology And Price," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19702, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. John Antle & Stephen Ogle, 2012. "Influence of soil C, N 2 O and fuel use on GHG mitigation with no-till adoption," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 111(3), pages 609-625, April.
    10. Lecocq, Franck & Chomitz, Kenneth, 2001. "Optimal use of carbon sequestration in a global climate change strategy : is there a wooden bridge to a clean energy future ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2635, The World Bank.
    11. Tas Thamo & David J. Pannell & Marit E. Kragt & Michael J. Robertson & Maksym Polyakov, 2017. "Dynamics and the economics of carbon sequestration: common oversights and their implications," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 1095-1111, October.
    12. Rouhi Rad, Mani & Haacker, Erin M.K. & Sharda, Vaishali & Nozari, Soheil & Xiang, Zaichen & Araya, A. & Uddameri, Venkatesh & Suter, Jordan F. & Gowda, Prasanna, 2020. "MOD$$AT: A hydro-economic modeling framework for aquifer management in irrigated agricultural regions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).
    13. Shunsuke Managi, 2010. "Productivity measures and effects from subsidies and trade: an empirical analysis for Japan's forestry," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(30), pages 3871-3883.
    14. Troost, Christian & Berger, Thomas, 2015. "Process-based simulation of regional agricultural supply functions in Southwestern Germany using farm-level and agent-based models," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211929, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Gulati, Sumeet & Vercammen, James, 2005. "The Optimal Length of an Agricultural Carbon Contract," Working Papers 37027, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    16. Robert Finger & Stéphanie Schmid, 2008. "Modeling agricultural production risk and the adaptation to climate change," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 68(1), pages 25-41, May.
    17. Pfeiffer, Lisa & Lin, C.-Y. Cynthia, 2014. "Does efficient irrigation technology lead to reduced groundwater extraction? Empirical evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 189-208.
    18. Coxhead, Ian A. & Demeke, Bayou, 2006. "Modeling Spatially Differentiated Environmental Policy in a Philippine Watershed: Tradeoffs between Environmental Protection and Poverty Reduction," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21115, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. JunJie Wu & Richard M. Adams & Catherine L. Kling & Katsuya Tanaka, 2004. "From Microlevel Decisions to Landscape Changes: An Assessment of Agricultural Conservation Policies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 26-41.
    20. Wise, Russell M. & Cacho, Oscar J., 2006. "Optimal Land-Use Decisions in the Presence of Carbon Payments and Fertilizer Subsidies: An Indonesian Case Study," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25356, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:aaaeke:9539. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaaeaea.html .

    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.