IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i3p288-d515398.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Soil Diversity (Pedodiversity) and Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • Elena A. Mikhailova

    (Department of Forestry and Environmental Conservation, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA)

  • Hamdi A. Zurqani

    (Department of Forestry and Environmental Conservation, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA
    Department of Soil and Water Sciences, University of Tripoli, Tripoli 13538, Libya)

  • Christopher J. Post

    (Department of Forestry and Environmental Conservation, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA)

  • Mark A. Schlautman

    (Department of Environmental Engineering and Earth Sciences, Clemson University, Anderson, SC 29625, USA)

  • Gregory C. Post

    (Economics Department, Reed College, Portland, OR 97202, USA)

Abstract

Soil ecosystem services (ES) (e.g., provisioning, regulation/maintenance, and cultural) and ecosystem disservices (ED) are dependent on soil diversity/pedodiversity (variability of soils), which needs to be accounted for in the economic analysis and business decision-making. The concept of pedodiversity (biotic + abiotic) is highly complex and can be broadly interpreted because it is formed from the interaction of atmospheric diversity (abiotic + biotic), biodiversity (biotic), hydrodiversity (abiotic + biotic), and lithodiversity (abiotic) within ecosphere and anthroposphere. Pedodiversity is influenced by intrinsic (within the soil) and extrinsic (outside soil) factors, which are also relevant to ES/ED. Pedodiversity concepts and measures may need to be adapted to the ES framework and business applications. Currently, there are four main approaches to analyze pedodiversity: taxonomic (diversity of soil classes), genetic (diversity of genetic horizons), parametric (diversity of soil properties), and functional (soil behavior under different uses). The objective of this article is to illustrate the application of pedodiversity concepts and measures to value ES/ED with examples based on the contiguous United States (U.S.), its administrative units, and the systems of soil classification (e.g., U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Taxonomy, Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database). This study is based on a combination of original research and literature review examples. Taxonomic pedodiversity in the contiguous U.S. exhibits high soil diversity, with 11 soil orders, 65 suborders, 317 great groups, 2026 subgroups, and 19,602 series. The ranking of “soil order abundance” (area of each soil order within the U.S.) expressed as the proportion of the total area is: (1) Mollisols (27%), (2) Alfisols (17%), (3) Entisols (14%), (4) Inceptisols and Aridisols (11% each), (5) Spodosols (3%), (6) Vertisols (2%), and (7) Histosols and Andisols (1% each). Taxonomic, genetic, parametric, and functional pedodiversity are an essential context for analyzing, interpreting, and reporting ES/ED within the ES framework. Although each approach can be used separately, three of these approaches (genetic, parametric, and functional) fall within the “umbrella” of taxonomic pedodiversity, which separates soils based on properties important to potential use. Extrinsic factors play a major role in pedodiversity and should be accounted for in ES/ED valuation based on various databases (e.g., National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) databases). Pedodiversity is crucial in identifying soil capacity (pedocapacity) and “hotspots” of ES/ED as part of business decision making to provide more sustainable use of soil resources. Pedodiversity is not a static construct but is highly dynamic, and various human activities (e.g., agriculture, urbanization) can lead to soil degradation and even soil extinction.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena A. Mikhailova & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Gregory C. Post, 2021. "Soil Diversity (Pedodiversity) and Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-34, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:3:p:288-:d:515398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/3/288/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/3/288/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bradley J. Cardinale & J. Emmett Duffy & Andrew Gonzalez & David U. Hooper & Charles Perrings & Patrick Venail & Anita Narwani & Georgina M. Mace & David Tilman & David A. Wardle & Ann P. Kinzig & Gre, 2012. "Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 486(7401), pages 59-67, June.
    2. Wentland, Scott A. & Ancona, Zachary H. & Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Boyd, James & Hass, Julie L. & Gindelsky, Marina & Moulton, Jeremy G., 2020. "Accounting for land in the United States: Integrating physical land cover, land use, and monetary valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    3. Garth R. Groshans & Elena A. Mikhailova & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Lisha Zhang, 2018. "Assessing the Value of Soil Inorganic Carbon for Ecosystem Services in the Contiguous United States Based on Liming Replacement Costs," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-12, November.
    4. Elizabeth M. Bach & Kelly S. Ramirez & Tandra D. Fraser & Diana H. Wall, 2020. "Soil Biodiversity Integrates Solutions for a Sustainable Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, March.
    5. J. Leifeld & L. Menichetti, 2018. "The underappreciated potential of peatlands in global climate change mitigation strategies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-7, December.
    6. Jones, Carol Adaire & DiPinto, Lisa, 2018. "The role of ecosystem services in USA natural resource liability litigation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 333-351.
    7. Hamdi A. Zurqani & Elena A. Mikhailova & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Azzeddin R. Elhawej, 2019. "A Review of Libyan Soil Databases for Use within an Ecosystem Services Framework," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-30, May.
    8. Pascual, Unai & Termansen, Mette & Hedlund, Katarina & Brussaard, Lijbert & Faber, Jack H. & Foudi, Sébastien & Lemanceau, Philippe & Jørgensen, Sisse Liv, 2015. "On the value of soil biodiversity and ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 11-18.
    9. Asah, Stanley T. & Guerry, Anne D. & Blahna, Dale J. & Lawler, Joshua J., 2014. "Perception, acquisition and use of ecosystem services: Human behavior, and ecosystem management and policy implications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 180-186.
    10. Bernd Hansjürgens & Andreas Lienkamp & Stefan Möckel, 2018. "Justifying Soil Protection and Sustainable Soil Management: Creation-Ethical, Legal and Economic Considerations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-12, October.
    11. Chi-Chung Chen & Bruce McCarl & Ching-Cheng Chang, 2012. "Climate change, sea level rise and rice: global market implications," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(3), pages 543-560, February.
    12. Karsten Grunewald & Olaf Bastian ., 2017. "Special Issue: “Maintaining Ecosystem Services to Support Urban Needs”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-9, September.
    13. Bartkowski, Bartosz, 2017. "Are diverse ecosystems more valuable? Economic value of biodiversity as result of uncertainty and spatial interactions in ecosystem service provision," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 50-57.
    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. Elena A. Mikhailova & Lili Lin & Zhenbang Hao & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Gregory C. Post & George B. Shepherd, 2022. "Conflicts of Interest and Emissions from Land Conversions: State of New Jersey as a Case Study," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-22, November.
    2. Xiang Fan & Yanjun Guan & Zhongke Bai & Wei Zhou & Chuxin Zhu, 2022. "Optimization of Reclamation Measures in a Mining Area by Analysis of Variations in Soil Nutrient Grades under Different Types of Land Usage—A Case Study of Pingshuo Coal Mine, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Elena A. Mikhailova & Lili Lin & Zhenbang Hao & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Gregory C. Post, 2022. "Massachusetts Roadmap to Net Zero: Accounting for Ownership of Soil Carbon Regulating Ecosystem Services and Land Conversions," Laws, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, March.
    4. Elena A. Mikhailova & Lili Lin & Zhenbang Hao & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Gregory C. Post, 2022. "Contribution of Land Cover Conversions to Connecticut (USA) Carbon Footprint," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-17, May.
    5. Elena A. Mikhailova & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Lili Lin & Zhenbang Hao & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & George B. Shepherd, 2023. "Opportunities for Monitoring Soil and Land Development to Support United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A Case Study of the United States of America (USA)," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, September.
    6. Elena A. Mikhailova & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Gregory C. Post & Lili Lin & Zhenbang Hao, 2021. "Soil Carbon Regulating Ecosystem Services in the State of South Carolina, USA," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-19, March.
    7. Philip C. Hutton & Elena A. Mikhailova & Lili Lin & Zhenbang Hao & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & George B. Shepherd, 2022. "Net-Zero Target and Emissions from Land Conversions: A Case Study of Maryland’s Climate Solutions Now Act," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Guillaume Jacek & Anne Rozan & Isabelle Combroux, 2022. "Are Mechanical and Biological Techniques Efficient in Restoring Soil and Associated Biodiversity in a Brownfield Site?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, November.
    9. Elena A. Mikhailova & Hamdi A. Zurqani & Lili Lin & Zhenbang Hao & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Gregory C. Post & George B. Shepherd & Renee M. Dixon, 2023. "Quantifying Damages to Soil Health and Emissions from Land Development in the State of Illinois (USA)," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, August.

    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. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.
    2. Balaine, Lorraine & Gallai, Nicola & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos, 2020. "Trading off environmental goods for compensations: Insights from traditional and deliberative valuation methods in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    3. Peled, Yoav & Zemah-Shamir, Shiri & Israel, Alvaro & Shechter, Mordechai & Ofir, Eyal & Gal, Gideon, 2020. "Incorporating insurance value into ecosystem services assessments: Mitigation of ecosystem users’ welfare uncertainty through biological control," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    4. De Valck, Jeremy & Rolfe, John, 2019. "Comparing biodiversity valuation approaches for the sustainable management of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 23-31.
    5. Bartosz Bartkowski & Bernd Hansjürgens & Stefan Möckel & Stephan Bartke, 2018. "Institutional Economics of Agricultural Soil Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-14, July.
    6. Paavola, Jouni & Primmer, Eeva, 2019. "Governing the Provision of Insurance Value From Ecosystems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Ratzke, Leonie, 2023. "Revealing preferences for urban biodiversity as an environmental good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    8. Dallimer, Martin & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Rendon, Olivia & Afionis, Stavros & Bark, Rosalind & Gordon, Iain J. & Paavola, Jouni, 2020. "Taking stock of the empirical evidence on the insurance value of ecosystems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    9. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    10. Yang Liu & Jing Zhao & Xi Zheng & Xiaoyang Ou & Yaru Zhang & Jiaying Li, 2023. "Evaluation of Biodiversity Maintenance Capacity in Forest Landscapes: A Case Study in Beijing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-23, June.
    11. Kedi Liu & Ranran Wang & Inge Schrijver & Rutger Hoekstra, 2024. "Can we project well-being? Towards integral well-being projections in climate models and beyond," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    12. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    13. Bardsley, Douglas K. & Bardsley, Annette M., 2014. "Organising for socio-ecological resilience: The roles of the mountain farmer cooperative Genossenschaft Gran Alpin in Graubünden, Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 11-21.
    14. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    15. Nina Tiel & Fabian Fopp & Philipp Brun & Johan Hoogen & Dirk Nikolaus Karger & Cecilia M. Casadei & Lisha Lyu & Devis Tuia & Niklaus E. Zimmermann & Thomas W. Crowther & Loïc Pellissier, 2024. "Regional uniqueness of tree species composition and response to forest loss and climate change," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Andrey Sirin & Maria Medvedeva & Vladimir Korotkov & Victor Itkin & Tatiana Minayeva & Danil Ilyasov & Gennady Suvorov & Hans Joosten, 2021. "Addressing Peatland Rewetting in Russian Federation Climate Reporting," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    17. Oskar Englund & Ioannis Dimitriou & Virginia H. Dale & Keith L. Kline & Blas Mola‐Yudego & Fionnuala Murphy & Burton English & John McGrath & Gerald Busch & Maria Cristina Negri & Mark Brown & Kevin G, 2020. "Multifunctional perennial production systems for bioenergy: performance and progress," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(5), September.
    18. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    19. Yutong Zhang & Wei Zhou & Danxue Luo, 2023. "The Relationship Research between Biodiversity Conservation and Economic Growth: From Multi-Level Attempts to Key Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
    20. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

    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:10:y:2021:i:3:p:288-:d:515398. 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.