4.7 Review

A review and application of the evidence for nitrogen impacts on ecosystem services

期刊

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 76-88

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.09.001

关键词

Ecosystem function; Air pollution; Impact pathway; Policy; Valuation; Biodiversity

资金

  1. UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) [NE0117]
  2. UKREATE programme
  3. Natural Environment Research Council
  4. Natural Environment Research Council [ceh010010] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Levels of reactive nitrogen (N) in the atmosphere have declined by around 25% in Europe since 1990. Ecosystem services provide a framework for valuing N impacts on the environment, and this study provides a synthesis of evidence for atmospheric N deposition effects on ecosystem services. We estimate the marginal economic value of the decline in N deposition on six ecosystem services in the UK. This decline resulted in a net benefit (Equivalent Annual Value) of 65 pound m (5 pound m to 123 pound m, 95% CI). There was a cost (loss of value) for provisioning services: timber and livestock production of -6.2 pound m (-3.5 pound m to -9.2 pound m, 95% CI). There was a cost for CO2 sequestration and a benefit for N2O emissions which combined amounted to a cost for greenhouse gas regulation of -15.7 pound in (-4.5 pound m to -30.6 pound m). However, there were benefits for the cultural services of recreational fishing and appreciation of biodiversity, which amounted to 87.7 pound m (13.1 pound m to 163.0 pound m), outweighing costs to provisioning and regulating services. Knowledge gaps in both the under pinning science and in the value transfer evidence prevent economic valuation of many services, particularly for cultural services, providing only a partial picture of N impacts which may underestimate the benefits of reducing N deposition. Crown Copyright (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier B.V. Open access under CC BY-NC-SA license.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据