IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v17y2012icp45-58.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple environmental services as an opportunity for watershed restoration

Author

Listed:
  • Townsend, P.V.
  • Harper, R.J.
  • Brennan, P.D.
  • Dean, C.
  • Wu, S.
  • Smettem, K.R.J.
  • Cook, S.E.

Abstract

The impact of reforestation on water supplies is often considered in terms of impacts on water yields. In specific circumstances, reforestation will improve water quality, to the extent that previously unusable water can be utilised. Such is the case with salinisation, a process that threatens up to 17million hectares of Australian farmland, major fresh water resources, biodiversity and built infrastructure. This paper highlights the value of bundling payments for environmental services (PES) from watershed restoration, including water quality improvement and carbon sequestration coupled with wood production, and compares the net returns with the existing agricultural land-use, using as an example the 408000ha Warren–Tone watershed (WT) in south-western Australia. The externalities of different land use systems are also taken into account. In this watershed 105000ha of the land was cleared for agriculture, with 25000ha subsequently reforested. A hydrological model (LUCICAT) was used to define the relationships between reforestation/deforestation and water yield and quality, thus providing a basis for valuing the hydrological benefits of reforestation. Various land-use change scenarios were examined, with modelling indicating more than 70% reforestation is required to restore stream salinity to a potable threshold of 500mg/L total dissolved salts (TDS). Options that involve traditional agricultural land-uses or perennial pastures will not deliver potable water.

Suggested Citation

  • Townsend, P.V. & Harper, R.J. & Brennan, P.D. & Dean, C. & Wu, S. & Smettem, K.R.J. & Cook, S.E., 2012. "Multiple environmental services as an opportunity for watershed restoration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 45-58.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:17:y:2012:i:c:p:45-58
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.06.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934111000888
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.06.008?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. Ward, P. R. & Dunin, F. X. & Micin, S. F., 2002. "Water use and root growth by annual and perennial pastures and subsequent crops in a phase rotation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1-3), pages 83-97, February.
    2. George, R. J. & Nulsen, R. A. & Ferdowsian, R. & Raper, G. P., 1999. "Interactions between trees and groundwaters in recharge and discharge areas - A survey of Western Australian sites," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2-3), pages 91-113, February.
    3. Edward B. Barbier, 2007. "Valuing ecosystem services as productive inputs [‘Valuing groundwater recharge through agricultural production in the Hadejia-Jama’are wetlands in northern Nigeria’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 22(49), pages 178-229.
    4. Kosoy, Nicolas & Martinez-Tuna, Miguel & Muradian, Roldan & Martinez-Alier, Joan, 2007. "Payments for environmental services in watersheds: Insights from a comparative study of three cases in Central America," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 446-455, March.
    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. Beardmore, Leslie & Heagney, Elizabeth & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2019. "Complementary land use in the Richmond River catchment: Evaluating economic and environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    2. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    3. Hill, Brian H. & Kolka, Randall K. & McCormick, Frank H. & Starry, Matthew A., 2014. "A synoptic survey of ecosystem services from headwater catchments in the United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 106-115.
    4. Duffy, Colm & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary & Kilcline, Kevin & Upton, Vincent & Spillane, Charles, 2020. "The impact of forestry as a land use on water quality outcomes: An integrated analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    5. Bryan, Brett Anthony & Crossman, Neville David, 2013. "Impact of multiple interacting financial incentives on land use change and the supply of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 60-72.
    6. Moss, Jonathan & Cacho, Oscar J., 2014. "Farm-scale analysis of the potential uptake of carbon offset activities," 2014 Conference, August 28-29, 2014, Nelson, New Zealand 187402, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    8. Nery, Thayse & Polyakov, Maksym & Sadler, Rohan & White, Ben, 2019. "Spatial patterns of boom and bust forestry investment development: A case study from Western Australia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 67-77.
    9. Chin-Hsien Yu & Bruce A. McCarl, 2018. "The Water Implications of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation: Effects on Land Use, Land Use Change, and Forestry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-22, July.
    10. Constant, Natasha Louise & Taylor, Peter John, 2020. "Restoring the forest revives our culture: Ecosystem services and values for ecological restoration across the rural-urban nexus in South Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).

    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. Bathgate, Andrew & Pannell, David J., 2002. "Economics of deep-rooted perennials in western Australia," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1-3), pages 117-132, February.
    2. Pannell, David J. & Ewing, Michael A., 2006. "Managing secondary dryland salinity: Options and challenges," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 80(1-3), pages 41-56, February.
    3. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    4. Hajkowicz, Stefan & Young, Michael D., 2003. "Economic Impacts Of Dryland Salinity For Grains Industries," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57884, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    6. Ngoc, Quach Thi Khanh, 2019. "Assessing the value of coral reefs in the face of climate change: The evidence from Nha Trang Bay, Vietnam," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 99-108.
    7. Bennett, Drew E. & Gosnell, Hannah & Lurie, Susan & Duncan, Sally, 2014. "Utility engagement with payments for watershed services in the United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 56-64.
    8. McVittie, Alistair & Moran, Dominic, 2010. "Valuing the non-use benefits of marine conservation zones: An application to the UK Marine Bill," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 413-424, December.
    9. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    10. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    11. Hou, Chenli & Tian, Delong & Xu, Bing & Ren, Jie & Hao, Lei & Chen, Ning & Li, Xianyue, 2021. "Use of the stable oxygen isotope method to evaluate the difference in water consumption and utilization strategy between alfalfa and maize fields in an arid shallow groundwater area," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    12. Kisaka, Lily & Obi, Ajuruchukwu, 2015. "Farmers’ Preferences for Management Options as Payment for Environmental Services Scheme," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 18(3), pages 1-22, September.
    13. Craig A. Bond, 2017. "Valuing Coastal Natural Capital in a Bioeconomic Framework," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(02), pages 1-26, April.
    14. Yamamoto, Yuki, 2023. "Living under ecosystem degradation: Evidence from the mangrove–fishery linkage in Indonesia," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    15. Kathleen McAfee, 2012. "The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 105-131, January.
    16. Simonit, Silvio & Perrings, Charles, 2011. "Sustainability and the value of the 'regulating' services: Wetlands and water quality in Lake Victoria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1189-1199, April.
    17. Diop, Bassirou & Blanchard, Fabian & Sanz, Nicolas, 2018. "Mangrove increases resiliency of the French Guiana shrimp fishery facing global warming," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 387(C), pages 27-37.
    18. Lin, Yongsheng & Dong, Zhanfeng & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Hongyu, 2020. "Estimating inter-regional payments for ecosystem services: Taking China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    19. Ioannis Souliotis & Nikolaos Voulvoulis, 2021. "Natural Capital Accounting Informing Water Management Policies in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-24, October.
    20. Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak & Alexey Dushin, 2022. "Valuating Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services: Systematic Review of Methods in Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.

    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:forpol:v:17:y:2012:i:c:p:45-58. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.