Stephen C. Newbold

Potential Biodiversity Benefits from International Programs to Reduce Carbon Emissions from Deforestation

Deforestation is the second largest anthropogenic source of carbon dioxide emissions and options for its reduction are integral to climate policy. In addition to providing potentially low cost and near-term options for reducing global carbon emissions, reducing deforestation also could support biodiversity conservation. However, current understanding of the potential benefits to biodiversity from forest carbon offset programs is limited. We compile spatial data on global forest carbon, biodiversity, deforestation rates, and the opportunity cost of land to examine biodiversity conservation benefits from an international program to reduce carbon emissions from deforestation. Our results indicate limited geographic overlap between the least-cost areas for retaining forest carbon and protecting biodiversity. Therefore, carbon-focused policies will likely generate substantially lower benefits to biodiversity than a more biodiversity-focused policy could achieve. These results highlight the need to systematically consider co-benefits, such as biodiversity in the design and implementation of forest conservation programs to support international climate policy.

Prioritizing conservation activities using reserve site selection methods and population viability analysis

In recent years a large literature on reserve site selection (RSS) has developed at the interface between ecology, operations research, and environmental economics. Reserve site selection models use numerical optimization techniques to select sites for a network of nature reserves for protecting biodiversity. In this paper, we develop a population viability analysis (PVA) model for salmon and incorporate it into an RSS framework for prioritizing conservation activities in upstream watersheds. We use spawner return data for three closely related salmon stocks in the upper Columbia River basin and estimates of the economic costs of watershed protection from NOAA to illustrate the framework. We compare the relative cost-effectiveness of five alternative watershed prioritization methods, based on various combinations of biological and economic information. Prioritization based on biological benefit-economic cost comparisons and accounting for spatial interdependencies among watersheds substantially outperforms other more heuristic methods. When using this best-performing prioritization method, spending 10% of the cost of protecting all upstream watersheds yields 79% of the biological benefits (increase in stock persistence) from protecting all watersheds, compared to between 20% and 64% for the alternative methods. We also find that prioritization based on either costs or benefits alone can lead to severe reductions in cost-effectiveness.

Incremental CH4 and N2O mitigation benefits consistent with the US Government's SC-CO2 estimates

Benefit–cost analysis can serve as an informative input into the policy-making process, but only to the degree it characterizes the major impacts of the regulation under consideration. Recently, the US, amongst other nations, has begun to use estimates of the social cost of CO2 (SC-CO2) to develop analyses that more fully capture the climate change impacts of GHG abatement. The SC-CO2 represents the aggregate willingness to pay to avoid the damages associated with an additional tonne of CO2 emissions. In comparison, the social costs of non-CO2 GHGs have received little attention from researchers and policy analysts, despite their non-negligible climate impact. This article addresses this issue by developing a set of social cost estimates for two highly prevalent non-CO2 GHGs, methane and nitrous oxide. By extending existing integrated assessment models, it is possible to develop a set of social cost estimates for these gases that are consistent with the SC-CO2 estimates currently in use by the US federal government.Policy relevanceWithin the benefit–cost analyses that inform the design of major regulations, all Federal agencies within the US Government (USG) use a set of agreed upon SC-CO2 estimates to value the impact of CO2 emissions changes. However, the value of changes in non-CO2 GHG emissions has not been included in USG policy analysis to date. This article addresses that omission by developing a set of social cost estimates for two highly prevalent non-CO2 GHGs, methane and nitrous oxide. These new estimates are designed to be compatible with the USG SC-CO2 estimates currently in use and may therefore be directly applied to value emissions changes for these non-CO2 gases within the benefit–cost analyses used to evaluate future policies.

ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF DENSITY-INDEPENDENT MORTALITY: APPLICATION TO COOLING-WATER WITHDRAWALS

A wide variety of environmental stresses can cause density-independent mortality in species populations. One example is cooling-water withdrawals, which kill or injure many aquatic organisms near power plants and other industrial facilities. In the United States alone, hundreds of facilities withdraw trillions of gallons from inland and coastal waters every year to cool turbines and other manufacturing equipment. A number of detailed, site-specific studies of the effects of such cooling-water withdrawals have been conducted over the last 30 years, but only a few generalizations have been proposed in the peer-reviewed literature. In this paper we use a series of basic theoretical models to investigate the potential effects of density-independent mortality on species populations and ecosystems, with particular focus on the effects of cooling-water withdrawals on fish populations, fisheries, and aquatic communities. Among other results, we show that the effects of cooling-water withdrawals on a species will depend on the magnitude of other co-occurring stressors, environmental variability, the nature of the management regime in the associated fisheries, and the position of the species in the food web. The general models in this paper can provide a starting point for further empirical case studies and some preliminary conceptual guidance for decision makers who must choose between alternative policy options for controlling cooling-water withdrawals.

FURTHER COMMENT ON "A RAPID ASSESSMENT MODEL FOR UNDERSTANDING THE SOCIAL COST OF CARBON"

In this reply to the comment by Gerlagh, we confirm an error in our estimate of the certainty-equivalent social cost of carbon (SCC) reported in Newbold et al. (2013), and we discuss the underlying conceptual difficulties that arise in conducting a social welfare analysis when preferences are heterogeneous or uncertain. The certainty-equivalent SCC depends crucially on the reference level of per capita consumption used to normalize marginal utility across possible preference parameters, and our estimate of the certainty-equivalent SCC was driven largely by an arbitrary choice of measurement units. All other results from our rapid assessment model are based on the deterministic SCC or its simulated probability distribution, which does not depend on the reference level of per capita consumption.