Linwood Pendleton

Estimating Global “Blue Carbon” Emissions from Conversion and Degradation of Vegetated Coastal Ecosystems

Recent attention has focused on the high rates of annual carbon sequestration in vegetated coastal ecosystems—marshes, mangroves, and seagrasses—that may be lost with habitat destruction (‘conversion’). Relatively unappreciated, however, is that conversion of these coastal ecosystems also impacts very large pools of previously-sequestered carbon. Residing mostly in sediments, this ‘blue carbon’ can be released to the atmosphere when these ecosystems are converted or degraded. Here we provide the first global estimates of this impact and evaluate its economic implications. Combining the best available data on global area, land-use conversion rates, and near-surface carbon stocks in each of the three ecosystems, using an uncertainty-propagation approach, we estimate that 0.15–1.02 Pg (billion tons) of carbon dioxide are being released annually, several times higher than previous estimates that account only for lost sequestration. These emissions are equivalent to 3–19% of those from deforestation globally, and result in economic damages of

Valuing coral reef protection

US 6–42 billion annually. The largest sources of uncertainty in these estimates stems from limited certitude in global area and rates of land-use conversion, but research is also needed on the fates of ecosystem carbon upon conversion. Currently, carbon emissions from the conversion of vegetated coastal ecosystems are not included in emissions accounting or carbon market protocols, but this analysis suggests they may be disproportionally important to both. Although the relevant science supporting these initial estimates will need to be refined in coming years, it is clear that policies encouraging the sustainable management of coastal ecosystems could significantly reduce carbon emissions from the land-use sector, in addition to sustaining the well-recognized ecosystem services of coastal habitats.

Environmental quality and recreation demand in a caribbean coral reef

Past economic valuations of tropical marine parks inaccurately measure their economic benefits because they value the resource protected and not the protection provided. Instead, the economic benefit of a marine park should be measured as the savings from avoided losses in reef value that would result in the absence of park protection, net of any costs of protection. Proponents of marine parks posit that reef quality will decline in the absence of active park protection. The economic benefit of the marine park is the value of avoided reef degradation. An economic framework is developed to show how marine parks and protected areas ought to be valued. An example using data from the Bonaire Marine Park is given.

Multiple Stressors and Ecological Complexity Require a New Approach to Coral Reef Research

A study of reef attributes and scuba diver behavior in Roatan, Honduras, shows that marine environmental quality, measured as percent live coral cover, is a significant predictor of dive site visitation. Regression analysis shows that the reef quality is an economic “good”; while transit time from the resort to the dive site is an economic “bad. “ The regression results support a simple utility maximization model that demonstrates how coral reef degradation can reduce diver welfare and harm local economies.

Estimating the Economic Benefits of Regional Ocean Observing Systems

Ocean acidification, climate change, and other environmental stressors threaten coral reef ecosystems and the people who depend upon them. New science reveals that these multiple stressors interact and may affect a multitude of physiological and ecological processes in complex ways. The interaction of multiple stressors and ecological complexity may mean that the negative effects on coral reef ecosystems will happen sooner and be more severe than previously thought. Yet, most research on the effects of global change on coral reefs focus on one or few stressors and pathways or outcomes (e.g. bleaching). Based on a critical review of the literature, we call for a regionally targeted strategy of mesocosm-level research that addresses this complexity and provides more realistic projections about coral reef impacts in the face of global environmental change. We believe similar approaches are needed for other ecosystems that face global environmental change.

Coral Reefs and People in a High-CO2 World: Where Can Science Make a Difference to People?

This article introduces a theme issue of the Coastal Management Journal comprising a set of articles on the potential economic benefits from new investments in coastal ocean observing systems. We describe a methodology to estimate these benefits, and apply this methodology to generate preliminary estimates of such benefits. The approach focuses on coastal ocean observing information within ten geographic regions encompassing all coastal waters of the United States, and within a wide range of industrial and recreational activities including recreational fishing and boating, beach recreation, maritime transportation, search and rescue operations, spill response, marine hazards prediction, offshore energy, power generation, and commercial fishing. Our findings suggest that annual benefits to users are likely to run in the multiple

The Economics of Using Ocean Observing Systems to Improve Beach Closure Policy

100s of millions of dollars. The project results should be considered first-order estimates that are subject to considerable refinement as the parameters of regional observing systems are better defined, and as our understanding of user sectors improves.

Erratum to: The impact of climate change on California's ecosystem services

Reefs and People at Risk Increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere put shallow, warm-water coral reef ecosystems, and the people who depend upon them at risk from two key global environmental stresses: 1) elevated sea surface temperature (that can cause coral bleaching and related mortality), and 2) ocean acidification. These global stressors: cannot be avoided by local management, compound local stressors, and hasten the loss of ecosystem services. Impacts to people will be most grave where a) human dependence on coral reef ecosystems is high, b) sea surface temperature reaches critical levels soonest, and c) ocean acidification levels are most severe. Where these elements align, swift action will be needed to protect people’s lives and livelihoods, but such action must be informed by data and science. An Indicator Approach Designing policies to offset potential harm to coral reef ecosystems and people requires a better understanding of where CO2-related global environmental stresses could cause the most severe impacts. Mapping indicators has been proposed as a way of combining natural and social science data to identify policy actions even when the needed science is relatively nascent. To identify where people are at risk and where more science is needed, we map indicators of biological, physical and social science factors to understand how human dependence on coral reef ecosystems will be affected by globally-driven threats to corals expected in a high-CO2 world. Western Mexico, Micronesia, Indonesia and parts of Australia have high human dependence and will likely face severe combined threats. As a region, Southeast Asia is particularly at risk. Many of the countries most dependent upon coral reef ecosystems are places for which we have the least robust data on ocean acidification. These areas require new data and interdisciplinary scientific research to help coral reef-dependent human communities better prepare for a high CO2 world.

Measuring the human ‘so what’ of large-scale coral reef loss?

Beach closure policies in the United States suffers from two shortcomings. Type I errors, in which clean beaches are closed, results when managers resort to extensive beach closures because they are unsure of the spatial extent of water contamination. Type II errors, in which contaminated beaches remain open, occur because the time from sampling to public notification can be between two and nine days. Coastal Ocean Observing Systems (COOS) could reduce the impact of both Type I and II errors. The COOS could reduce the spatial extent of beach closures by better predicting the fate of contaminants in coastal waters. An improved COOS also could reduce the time from sampling to public notification of contamination events. I estimate the lost recreational value associated with Type I errors (unnecessary closures) and the public health costs associated with Type II errors (unnecessary exposure to waterborne illnesses) for beaches in Southern California.

Signed Peer Reviews as a Means to Improve Scholarly Publishing

Ecosystem services play a crucial role in sustaining human well-being and economic viability. People benefit substantially from the delivery of ecosystem services, for which substitutes usually are costly or unavailable. Climate change will substantially alter or eliminate certain ecosystem services in the future. To better understand the consequences of climate change and to develop effective means of adapting to them, it is critical that we improve our understanding of the links between climate, ecosystem service production, and the economy. This study examines the impact of climate change on the terrestrial distribution and the subsequent production and value of two key ecosystem services in California: (1) carbon sequestration and (2) natural (i.e. nonirrigated) forage production for livestock. Under various scenarios of future climate change, Climatic Change DOI 10.1007/s10584-011-0313-4 M. R. Shaw (*) : D. R. Cameron :K. Klausmeyer : J. MacKenzie : E. Haunreiter The Environmental Defense Fund, 123 Mission Street 28th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105, USA e-mail: rshaw@edf.org L. Pendleton The Nicholas Institute, Duke University, P.O. Box 90335, Durham, NC 27708, USA e-mail: linwood.pendleton@duke.edu B. Morris Environmental Defense Fund, 1107 9th Street, suite 1070, Sacramento, CA 95814, USA D. Bachelet : J. Lenihan USDA Forest Service, Oregon State University, Corvallis, USA D. R. Conklin : C. Daly Conservation Biology Institute, Corvallis, USA D. R. Conklin e-mail: david.conklin@lifeboatearth.org G. N. Bratman Stanford University, Stanford, USA P. R. Roehrdanz University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, USA we predict that the provision and value of ecosystem services decline under most, but not all, future greenhouse gas trajectories. The predicted changes would result in decreases in the economic output for the state and global economy and illustrate some of the hidden costs of climate change. Since existing information is insufficient to conduct impact analysis across most ecosystem services, a comprehensive research program focused on estimating the impacts of climate change on ecosystem services will be important for understanding, mitigating and adapting to future losses in ecosystem service production and the economic value they provide.