Ecosystem Service Benefits of a Cleaner Chesapeake Bay

被引:11
|
作者
Phillips, Spencer [1 ]
McGee, Beth [2 ]
机构
[1] Key Log Econ LLC, Charlottesville, VA USA
[2] Chesapeake Bay Fdn, 6 Herndon Ave, Annapolis, MD 21403 USA
关键词
benefit-transfer; Chesapeake Bay; economics; ecosystem services; water quality; CLIMATE-CHANGE; UNITED-STATES; CONSERVATION; WILDERNESS; WILDNESS; FISH;
D O I
10.1080/08920753.2016.1160205
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Information on the economic benefits of natural resource improvement is an important, yet often overlooked, consideration in environmental decision-making. In 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency established the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) that set regulatory limits for nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment needed to restore the Chesapeake Bay. Meanwhile, the Bay jurisdictions developed implementation plans to achieve these limits. Environmental benefits of achieving the TMDL would accrue due to on-the-ground changes in land use and land management that improve the health, and therefore productivity, of land and water in the watershed. These changes occur both due to the outcomes of achieving the TMDL (i.e., cleaner water) and as a result of the measures taken to achieve those outcomes. This study quantified these changes, then translated them into dollar values for various ecosystem services, including water supply, food production, recreation, and aesthetics. We estimate the total economic benefit of implementing the TMDL at $22.5 billion per year (in 2013 dollars), as measured as the improvement over current conditions, or at $28.2 billion per year (in 2013 dollars), as measured as the difference between the TMDL and a business-as-usual scenario. These considerable benefits should be considered alongside the costs of restoring the Chesapeake Bay.
引用
收藏
页码:241 / 258
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] 'At Chesapeake Bay'
    Reading, P
    TLS-THE TIMES LITERARY SUPPLEMENT, 1997, (4942): : 6 - 6
  • [22] Landscape indicators of ecosystem service benefits
    Boyd, J
    Wainger, L
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2002, 84 (05) : 1371 - 1378
  • [23] Fate of the bay (Chesapeake Bay)
    McConnico, Beverly
    SMITHSONIAN, 2007, 38 (04) : 12 - 12
  • [24] Integrated analysis of ecosystem interactions with land use change: The Chesapeake Bay watershed
    Goetz, SJ
    Jantz, CA
    Prince, SD
    Sinith, AJ
    Varlyguin, D
    Wright, RK
    ECOSYSTEMS AND LAND USE CHANGE, 2004, 153 : 263 - 275
  • [25] Paleoecology and ecosystem restoration: case studies from Chesapeake Bay and the Florida Everglades
    Willard, Debra A.
    Cronin, Thomas M.
    FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, 2007, 5 (09) : 491 - 498
  • [26] Dynamics of an estuarine ecosystem: The influence of flow patterns on phytoplankton trends in the Chesapeake Bay
    Marshall, HG
    Alden, RW
    OCEANOLOGICA ACTA, 1997, 20 (01) : 109 - 117
  • [27] Sustainable exploitation and management of autogenic ecosystem engineers: application to oysters in Chesapeake Bay
    Wilberg, Michael J.
    Wiedenmann, John R.
    Robinson, Jason M.
    ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 2013, 23 (04) : 766 - 776
  • [28] Individual, population, and ecosystem effects of hypoxia on a dominant benthic bivalve in Chesapeake Bay
    Long, W. Christopher
    Seitz, Rochelle D.
    Brylawski, Bryce J.
    Lipcius, Romuald N.
    ECOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS, 2014, 84 (02) : 303 - 327
  • [29] Tidal effects on ecosystem variability in the Chesapeake Bay from MODIS-Aqua
    Shi, Wei
    Wang, Menghua
    Jiang, Lide
    REMOTE SENSING OF ENVIRONMENT, 2013, 138 : 65 - 76
  • [30] Climate co-benefits of water quality trading in the Chesapeake Bay watershed
    Gasper, Rebecca R.
    Selman, Mindy
    Ruth, Matthias
    WATER POLICY, 2012, 14 (05) : 758 - 765