IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i12p2238-d997689.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing Ecosystem Services Provided by Pasture-Based Beef Farms in Alentejo, Portugal

Author

Listed:
  • Manuel P. dos Santos

    (MARETEC—Marine, Environment and Technology Centre, LARSyS, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Tiago G. Morais

    (MARETEC—Marine, Environment and Technology Centre, LARSyS, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Tiago Domingos

    (MARETEC—Marine, Environment and Technology Centre, LARSyS, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Ricardo F. M. Teixeira

    (MARETEC—Marine, Environment and Technology Centre, LARSyS, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal)

Abstract

This work aims to measure and value the ecosystem services of grasslands and croplands covered by pasture-based beef farms in Alentejo. It combines pixel-level data from the Portuguese Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem Services study and farm-level data from 40 farms. Five ecosystem services were considered: soil protection, carbon sequestration, support to extensive animal production, plant food production and fiber production. Two different approaches for service quantification were used: an “average class” method and a “buffer” approach. Double counting issues were avoided by applying a specific methodology developed for this study. The results obtained were similar for both approaches in the case of grasslands, with an average value between 146 and 176 €/ha/year. For croplands, the average service value oscillated between 40 and 166 €/ha/year. Soil protection was the most valuable service, with over 90% of the total value. Extrapolating these results for the entire region, the five ecosystem services were estimated to be worth between 173 M€ (class method) and 223 M€ (buffer approach). These results suggest that pasture-based beef farms in Alentejo help to provide a significant number of ecosystem services with positive environmental effects that are currently not remunerated by the market.

Suggested Citation

  • Manuel P. dos Santos & Tiago G. Morais & Tiago Domingos & Ricardo F. M. Teixeira, 2022. "Valuing Ecosystem Services Provided by Pasture-Based Beef Farms in Alentejo, Portugal," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-15, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:12:p:2238-:d:997689
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/12/2238/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/12/2238/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steven K. Rose & Delavane B. Diaz & Geoffrey J. Blanford, 2017. "Understanding The Social Cost Of Carbon: A Model Diagnostic And Inter-Comparison Study," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(02), pages 1-28, May.
    2. Laporta, Lia & Domingos, Tiago & Marta-Pedroso, Cristina, 2021. "It's a keeper: Valuing the carbon storage service of Agroforestry ecosystems in the context of CAP Eco-Schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    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. Shiran Victoria Shen, 2021. "Integrating Political Science into Climate Modeling: An Example of Internalizing the Costs of Climate-Induced Violence in the Optimal Management of the Climate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-24, September.
    2. Adam Michael Bauer & Cristian Proistosescu & Gernot Wagner, 2023. "Carbon Dioxide as a Risky Asset," CESifo Working Paper Series 10278, CESifo.
    3. Richard S.J. Tol, 2021. "Estimates of the social cost of carbon have not changed over time," Working Paper Series 0821, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    4. 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.
    5. Simon Dietz & Frederick van der Ploeg & Armon Rezai & Frank Venmans, 2021. "Are Economists Getting Climate Dynamics Right and Does It Matter?," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 8(5), pages 895-921.
    6. Rennert, Kevin & Prest, Brian C. & Pizer, William & Newell, Richard G. & Anthoff, David & Kingdon, Cora & Rennels, Lisa & Cooke, Roger & Raftery, Adrian E. & Ševčíková, Hana & Errickson, Frank, 2021. "The Social Cost of Carbon: Advances in Long-Term Probabilistic Projections of Population, GDP, Emissions, and Discount Rates," RFF Working Paper Series 21-28, Resources for the Future.
    7. Rising, James A. & Taylor, Charlotte & Ives, Matthew C. & Ward, Robert E.t., 2022. "Challenges and innovations in the economic evaluation of the risks of climate change," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114941, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Simon Dietz & Bruno Lanz, 2019. "Growth and Adaptation to Climate Change in the Long Run," CESifo Working Paper Series 7986, CESifo.
    9. Rising, James A. & Taylor, Charlotte & Ives, Matthew C. & Ward, Robert E.T., 2022. "Challenges and innovations in the economic evaluation of the risks of climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    10. Laporta, Lia & Domingos, Tiago & Marta-Pedroso, Cristina, 2021. "It's a keeper: Valuing the carbon storage service of Agroforestry ecosystems in the context of CAP Eco-Schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    11. Lia Laporta & Tiago Domingos & Cristina Marta-Pedroso, 2021. "Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems Services under the Proposed MAES European Common Framework: Methodological Challenges and Opportunities," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-28, October.
    12. Chen Qu & Wen Li & Jia Xu & Song Shi, 2023. "Blackland Conservation and Utilization, Carbon Storage and Ecological Risk in Green Space: A Case Study from Heilongjiang Province in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-21, February.
    13. Richard S. J. Tol, 2021. "Estimates of the social cost of carbon have increased over time," Papers 2105.03656, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    14. Newell, Richard G. & Prest, Brian C. & Sexton, Steven E., 2021. "The GDP-Temperature relationship: Implications for climate change damages," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    15. Philip Meyer, 2023. "Comment on ‘Climate sensitivity, agricultural productivity and the social cost of carbon in FUND’," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(2), pages 285-290, April.
    16. Richard S.J. Tol, 2018. "The impact of climate change and the social cost of carbon," Working Paper Series 1318, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    17. Souleymane Diallo, 2023. "Natural resource wealth in sub-Saharan Africa: A boon for public investment in renewable energy?," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2023(2), pages 19-40.
    18. 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.

    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:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:12:p:2238-:d:997689. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.