IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i3p309-d519280.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Soil Carbon Regulating Ecosystem Services in the State of South Carolina, USA

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)

  • Lili Lin

    (University Key Lab for Geomatics Technology and Optimized Resources Utilization in Fujian Province, No. 15 Shangxiadian Road, Fuzhou 350002, China)

  • Zhenbang Hao

    (University Key Lab for Geomatics Technology and Optimized Resources Utilization in Fujian Province, No. 15 Shangxiadian Road, Fuzhou 350002, China)

Abstract

Sustainable management of soil carbon (C) at the state level requires valuation of soil C regulating ecosystem services (ES) and disservices (ED). The objective of this study was to assess the value of regulating ES from soil organic carbon (SOC), soil inorganic carbon (SIC), and total soil carbon (TSC) stocks, based on the concept of the avoided social cost of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions for the state of South Carolina (SC) in the United States of America (U.S.A.) by soil order, soil depth (0–200 cm), region and county using information from the State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) database. The total estimated monetary mid-point value for TSC in the state of South Carolina was $124.36B (i.e., $124.36 billion U.S. dollars, where B = billion = 10 9 ), $107.14B for SOC, and $17.22B for SIC. Soil orders with the highest midpoint value for SOC were: Ultisols ($64.35B), Histosols ($11.22B), and Inceptisols ($10.31B). Soil orders with the highest midpoint value for SIC were: Inceptisols ($5.91B), Entisols ($5.53B), and Alfisols ($5.0B). Soil orders with the highest midpoint value for TSC were: Ultisols ($64.35B), Inceptisols ($16.22B), and Entisols ($14.65B). The regions with the highest midpoint SOC values were: Pee Dee ($34.24B), Low Country ($32.17B), and Midlands ($29.24B). The regions with the highest midpoint SIC values were: Low Country ($5.69B), Midlands ($5.55B), and Pee Dee ($4.67B). The regions with the highest midpoint TSC values were: Low Country ($37.86B), Pee Dee ($36.91B), and Midlands ($34.79B). The counties with the highest midpoint SOC values were Colleton ($5.44B), Horry ($5.37B), and Berkeley ($4.12B). The counties with the highest midpoint SIC values were Charleston ($1.46B), Georgetown ($852.81M, where M = million = 10 6 ), and Horry ($843.18M). The counties with the highest midpoint TSC values were Horry ($6.22B), Colleton ($6.02B), and Georgetown ($4.87B). Administrative areas (e.g., counties, regions) combined with pedodiversity concepts can provide useful information to design cost-efficient policies to manage soil carbon regulating ES at the state level.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:3:p:309-:d:519280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/3/309/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/3/309/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannes Lehmann & Markus Kleber, 2015. "The contentious nature of soil organic matter," Nature, Nature, vol. 528(7580), pages 60-68, December.
    2. United Nations, 2016. "The Sustainable Development Goals 2016," Working Papers id:11456, eSocialSciences.
    3. 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.
    4. Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2007. "An assessment of market-based approaches to providing ecosystem services on agricultural lands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 321-332, December.
    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. 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.
    2. Rui Zhao & Kening Wu, 2021. "Soil Health Evaluation of Farmland Based on Functional Soil Management—A Case Study of Yixing City, Jiangsu Province, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-27, June.
    3. 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.

    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. Saskia Keesstra & Gerben Mol & Jan De Leeuw & Joop Okx & Co Molenaar & Margot De Cleen & Saskia Visser, 2018. "Soil-Related Sustainable Development Goals: Four Concepts to Make Land Degradation Neutrality and Restoration Work," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, November.
    2. 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.
    3. GAO Tianming & Anna Ivolga & Vasilii Erokhin, 2018. "Sustainable Rural Development in Northern China: Caught in a Vice between Poverty, Urban Attractions, and Migration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Ecker, Olivier & Hatzenbuehler, Patrick L. & Mahrt, Kristi, 2018. "Transforming agriculture for improving food and nutrition security among Nigerian farm households," NSSP working papers 56, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Claudia Hanson & Sanni Kujala & Peter Waiswa & Tanya Marchant & Joanna Schellenberg, 2017. "Community-based approaches for neonatal survival: Meta-analyses of randomized trial data," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-137, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    6. Eugenia Ganea & Valentina Bodrug-Lungu, 2018. "Addressing Inequality in Vocational/ Technical Education by Eliminating Gender Bias," Revista romaneasca pentru educatie multidimensionala - Journal for Multidimensional Education, Editura Lumen, Department of Economics, vol. 10(4), pages 136-155, December.
    7. Gallopín, Gilberto, 2018. "Back to the future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 318-324.
    8. Pandey, Shanta, 2017. "Persistent nature of child marriage among women even when it is illegal: The case of Nepal," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 242-247.
    9. OGUNNOWO, Fatai Abiodun & Prof. F. A. OKWO & JULIUS, Deborah Nwanne, 2023. "Availability and Utilization of Security Facilities in Federal Tertiary Institutions of Enugu State, Nigeria," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 7(5), pages 931-941, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Victor Kasulo & Rochelle Holm & Mavuto Tembo & Wales Singini & Joshua Mchenga, 2020. "Enhancing sustainable sanitation through capacity building and rural sanitation marketing in Malawi," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 201-215, January.
    12. Fernanda Guedes & Alexandre Szklo & Pedro Rochedo & Frédéric Lantz & Leticia Magalar & Eveline Maria Vásquez Arroyo, 2018. "Climate-Energy-Water Nexus in Brazilian Oil Refineries," Working Papers hal-03188594, HAL.
    13. Alex. B. McBratney & Damien Field & Cristine L.S. Morgan & Jingyi Huang, 2019. "On Soil Capability, Capacity, and Condition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-11, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Tiantian Zhai, 2021. "Environmental Challenges, Opportunities, and Policy Implications to Materialize China’s Green Belt and Road Initiative," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-14, September.
    16. Elena A. Mikhailova & Garth R. Groshans & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Gregory C. Post, 2019. "Valuation of Soil Organic Carbon Stocks in the Contiguous United States Based on the Avoided Social Cost of Carbon Emissions," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Rolinski, Susanne & Prishchepov, Alexander V. & Guggenberger, Georg & Bischoff, Norbert & Kurganova, Irina & Schierhorn, Florian & Müller, Daniel & Müller, Christoph, 2021. "Dynamics of soil organic carbon in the steppes of Russia and Kazakhstan under past and future climate and land use," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 21(3).
    18. Wirapong Chansanam & Chunqiu Li, 2022. "Scientometrics of Poverty Research for Sustainability Development: Trend Analysis of the 1964–2022 Data through Scopus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    19. -, 2021. "The 2020 census round: challenges of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Sustainable Development Goals and the Montevideo Consensus on Population and Development," Población y Desarrollo 46727, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    20. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Nikolaidis, Nikolaos P. & Giannakis, Georgios V., 2019. "Tools for Sustainable Soil Management: Soil Ecosystem Services, EROI and Economic Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 109-119.

    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:309-:d:519280. 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.