IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v39y2019ics2212041619302396.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Promoting co-benefits of carbon farming in Oceania: Applying and adapting approaches and metrics from existing market-based schemes

Author

Listed:
  • Baumber, Alex
  • Metternicht, Graciela
  • Cross, Rebecca
  • Ruoso, Laure-Elise
  • Cowie, Annette L.
  • Waters, Cathleen

Abstract

Carbon farming in its various forms has the potential to deliver a range of ecosystem services in addition to climate regulation. In Australia, the main public ‘co-benefits’ that could result from carbon farming are conservation of biodiversity, increases in soil and water quality, productivity increases, and economic and cultural services for Indigenous communities. While there is a lack of empirical evidence that carbon farming is delivering these ecosystem services to date, various metrics have been developed by researchers and through other payment for ecosystem services schemes that may enable effective targeting of these co-benefits. In this article, we review previous studies and schemes and identify four main approaches for metrics that could be applied to carbon farming in Australia: (1) spatial modelling, (2) benchmarks; (3) environmental benefit indices; and (4) indicators. The relative value of each of these approaches varies, depending on the objectives of policy-makers. Spatial modelling and benchmarks can play a key role in decision support systems for landholders who may be interested in carbon farming. Indices are valuable for the development of new or modified market-based schemes that weigh up different co-benefits. Indicators are critical for outcome-based payment schemes and for verifying the effectiveness of co-benefit policies overall.

Suggested Citation

  • Baumber, Alex & Metternicht, Graciela & Cross, Rebecca & Ruoso, Laure-Elise & Cowie, Annette L. & Waters, Cathleen, 2019. "Promoting co-benefits of carbon farming in Oceania: Applying and adapting approaches and metrics from existing market-based schemes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:39:y:2019:i:c:s2212041619302396
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100982
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041619302396
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100982?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. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    2. Robinson, Catherine J. & Renwick, Anna R. & May, Tracey & Gerrard, Emily & Foley, Rowan & Battaglia, Michael & Possingham, Hugh & Griggs, David & Walker, Daniel, 2016. "Indigenous benefits and carbon offset schemes: An Australian case study," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 129-134.
    3. Kragt, Marit E. & Dumbrell, Nikki P. & Blackmore, Louise, 2017. "Motivations and barriers for Western Australian broad-acre farmers to adopt carbon farming," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 115-123.
    4. Paul J. Burke, 2016. "Undermined by Adverse Selection: Australia's Direct Action Abatement Subsidies," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 35(3), pages 216-229, September.
    5. Baumber, Alex, 2017. "Enhancing ecosystem services through targeted bioenergy support policies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 98-110.
    6. Annette Cowie & Uwe A. Schneider & Luca Montanarella, 2007. "Potential synergies between existing multilateral environmental agreements in the implementation of Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry activities," Working Papers FNU-123, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Jan 2007.
    7. Kragt, M.E. & Gibson, F.L. & Maseyk, F. & Wilson, K.A., 2016. "Public willingness to pay for carbon farming and its co-benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 125-131.
    8. Elizondo Azuela, Gabriela & Barroso, Luiz & Khanna, Ashish & Wang, Xiaodong & Wu, Yun & Cunha, Gabriel, 2014. "Performance of renewable energy auctions : experience in Brazil, China and India," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7062, The World Bank.
    9. Mayrhofer, Jan P. & Gupta, Joyeeta, 2016. "The science and politics of co-benefits in climate policy," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 22-30.
    10. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    11. Torabi, Nooshin & Bekessy, Sarah A., 2015. "Bundling and stacking in bio-sequestration schemes: Opportunities and risks identified by Australian stakeholders," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 84-92.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Meenakshi Sharma & Rajesh Kaushal & Prashant Kaushik & Seeram Ramakrishna, 2021. "Carbon Farming: Prospects and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, October.
    2. Ethan Gordon & Federico Davila & Chris Riedy, 2022. "Transforming landscapes and mindscapes through regenerative agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 809-826, June.
    3. Alex Baumber & Rebecca Cross & Cathy Waters & Graciela Metternicht & Hermann Kam, 2021. "Understanding the Social Licence of Carbon Farming in the Australian Rangelands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.

    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. Regan, Courtney M. & Connor, Jeffery D. & Summers, David M. & Settre, Claire & O’Connor, Patrick J. & Cavagnaro, Timothy R., 2020. "The influence of crediting and permanence periods on Australian forest-based carbon offset supply," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Ito, Junichi & Feuer, Hart N. & Kitano, Shinichi & Asahi, Haruka, 2019. "Assessing the effectiveness of Japan's community-based direct payment scheme for hilly and mountainous areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 62-75.
    3. Keenan, Rodney J. & Pozza, Greg & Fitzsimons, James A., 2019. "Ecosystem services in environmental policy: Barriers and opportunities for increased adoption," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Buchholz, Wolfgang & Rübbelke, Dirk, 2020. "Overstraining International Climate Finance: When Conflicts of Objectives Threaten Its Success," FACTS: Firms And Cities Towards Sustainability 307983, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM) > FACTS: Firms And Cities Towards Sustainability.
    5. Erin C. Pischke & Adam M. Wellstead, 2020. "Reimagining instrument constituencies: the case of conservation policy in Mexico," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 371-388, June.
    6. Rohan Best & Paul J. Burke, 2020. "Energy mix persistence and the effect of carbon pricing," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 555-574, July.
    7. Ouellet, F. & Mundler, P. & Dupras, J. & Ruiz, J., 2020. "“Community developed and farmer delivered.” An analysis of the spatial and relational proximities of the Alternative Land Use Services program in Ontario," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    8. Martínez-Martínez, Yenisleidy & Dewulf, Jo & Casas-Ledón, Yannay, 2022. "GIS-based site suitability analysis and ecosystem services approach for supporting renewable energy development in south-central Chile," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 363-376.
    9. He, Bao-Jie & Zhu, Jin & Zhao, Dong-Xue & Gou, Zhong-Hua & Qi, Jin-Da & Wang, Junsong, 2019. "Co-benefits approach: Opportunities for implementing sponge city and urban heat island mitigation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 147-157.
    10. Matteo Zavalloni & Meri Raggi & Davide Viaggi, 2016. "Assessing Collective Measures in Rural Policy: The Effect of Minimum Participation Rules on the Distribution of Benefits from Irrigation Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, December.
    11. Mst Asma Khatun & Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani, 2020. "Cooperation and cognition gaps for salinity: A field experiment of information provision," Working Papers SDES-2020-4, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jun 2020.
    12. Mangubhai, Sangeeta & Sykes, Helen & Manley, Marita & Vukikomoala, Kiji & Beattie, Madeline, 2020. "Contributions of tourism-based Marine Conservation Agreements to natural resource management in Fiji," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    13. Roos M. Den Uyl & Martin J. Wassen, 2013. "A Comparative Study of Strategies for Sustainable Development of Multifunctional Fen Landscapes: Signposts to Explore New Avenues," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(6), pages 801-837, June.
    14. Sattler, Claudia & Trampnau, Susanne & Schomers, Sarah & Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 31-45.
    15. Sauer, Timm & Havlik, Petr & Schneider, Uwe A. & Kindermann, Georg E. & Obersteiner, Michael, 2008. "Agriculture, Population, Land and Water Scarcity in a Changing World – The Role of Irrigation," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44271, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Sarah Schomers & Bettina Matzdorf & Claas Meyer & Claudia Sattler, 2015. "How Local Intermediaries Improve the Effectiveness of Public Payment for Ecosystem Services Programs: The Role of Networks and Agri-Environmental Assistance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-31, October.
    17. Stine Broch & Suzanne Vedel, 2012. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 561-581, April.
    18. Helin, Janne, 2008. "Environmental protection of agriculture -clash of policies?," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6468, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Chapman, Mollie & Satterfield, Terre & Wittman, Hannah & Chan, Kai M.A., 2020. "A payment by any other name: Is Costa Rica’s PES a payment for services or a support for stewards?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    20. Rachael D. Garrett & Meredith Niles & Juliana Gil & Philip Dy & Julio Reis & Judson Valentim, 2017. "Policies for Reintegrating Crop and Livestock Systems: A Comparative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-22, March.

    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:eee:ecoser:v:39:y:2019:i:c:s2212041619302396. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.