THE VALUE OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS EXTENSION PROGRAMMING: AN APPLICATION OF CONTINGENT VALUATION

We use the contingent valuation method to estimate participant willingness to pay for agricultural economics extension programming. The data, collected as part of standard evaluation forms for the Ohio State University's 2001 Agricultural Outlook and Policy program series, and subsequent analysis suggest participant benefits exceeded departmental costs of conducting the program (benefit-cost ratios of 1.07 under conservative assumptions and 1.74 under moderate assumptions). We also use the data to explore the revenue generation potential from alternative program pricing and discuss the potential for developing differentiated programs to reach distinct audience segments. Additional research necessary before implementing alternative pricing or program differentiation plans is also discussed.Teaching/Communication/Extension/Profession,

BRENDA, the enzyme information system in 2011

The BRENDA (BRaunschweig ENzyme Database, http://www.brenda-enzymes.org) enzyme information system is the main collection of enzyme functional and property data for the scientific community. The majority of the data are manually extracted from the primary literature. The content covers information on function, structure, occurrence, preparation and application of enzymes as well as properties of mutants and engineered variants. The number of manually annotated references increased by 30% to more than 100 000, the number of ligand structures by 45% to almost 100 000. New query, analysis and data management tools were implemented to improve data processing, data presentation, data input and data access. BRENDA now provides new viewing options such as the display of the statistics of functional parameters and the 3D view of protein sequence and structure features. Furthermore a ligand summary shows comprehensive information on the BRENDA ligands. The enzymes are linked to their respective pathways and can be viewed in pathway maps. The disease text mining part is strongly enhanced. It is possible to submit new, not yet classified enzymes to BRENDA, which then are reviewed and classified by the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. A new SBML output format of BRENDA kinetic data allows the construction of organism-specific metabolic models

Seasonal, synoptic, and diurnal-scale variability of biogeochemical trace gases and O2 from a 300-m tall tower in central Siberia

We present first results from 19 months of semicontinuous concentration measurements of biogeochemical trace gases (CO2, CO, and CH4) and O2, measured at the Zotino Tall Tower Observatory (ZOTTO) in the boreal forest of central Siberia. We estimated CO2 and O2 seasonal cycle amplitudes of 26.6 ppm and 134 per meg, respectively. An observed west-east gradient of about -7 ppm (in July 2006) between Shetland Islands, Scotland, and ZOTTO reflects summertime continental uptake of CO2 and is consistent with regional modeling studies. We found the oceanic component of the O2 seasonal amplitude (Atmospheric Potential Oxygen, or APO) to be 51 per meg, significantly smaller than the 95 per meg observed at Shetlands, illustrating a strong attenuation of the oceanic O2 signal in the continental interior. Comparison with the Tracer Model 3 (TM3) atmospheric transport model showed good agreement with the observed phasing and seasonal amplitude in CO2; however, the model exhibited greater O2 (43 per meg, 32%) and smaller APO (9 per meg, 18%) amplitudes. This seeming inconsistency in model comparisons between O2 and APO appears to be the result of phasing differences in land and ocean signals observed at ZOTTO, where ocean signals have a significant lag. In the first 2 months of measurements on the fully constructed tower (November and December 2006), we observed several events with clear vertical concentration gradients in all measured species except CO. During “cold events” (below -30°C) in November 2006, we observed large vertical gradients in CO2 (up to 22 ppm), suggesting a strong local source. The same pattern was observed in CH4 concentrations for the same events. Diurnal vertical CO2 gradients in April to May 2007 gave estimates for average nighttime respiration fluxes of 0.04 ± 0.02 mol C m-2 d-1, consistent with earlier eddy covariance measurements in 1999–2000 in the vicinity of the tower

How the future of the global forest sink depends on timber demand, forest management, and carbon policies

Deforestation has contributed significantly to net greenhouse gas emissions, but slowing deforestation, regrowing forests and other ecosystem processes have made forests a net sink. Deforestation will still influence future carbon fluxes, but the role of forest growth through aging, management, and other silvicultural inputs on future carbon fluxes are critically important but not always recognized by bookkeeping and integrated assessment models. When projecting the future, it is vital to capture how management processes affect carbon storage in ecosystems and wood products. This study uses multiple global forest sector models to project forest carbon impacts across 81 shared socioeconomic (SSP) and climate mitigation pathway scenarios. We illustrate the importance of modeling management decisions in existing forests in response to changing demands for land resources, wood products and carbon. Although the models vary in key attributes, there is general agreement across a majority of scenarios that the global forest sector could remain a carbon sink in the future, sequestering 1.2–5.8 GtCO2e/yr over the next century. Carbon fluxes in the baseline scenarios that exclude climate mitigation policy ranged from −0.8 to 4.9 GtCO2e/yr, highlighting the strong influence of SSPs on forest sector model estimates. Improved forest management can jointly increase carbon stocks and harvests without expanding forest area, suggesting that carbon fluxes from managed forests systems deserve more careful consideration by the climate policy community

Global variation in the cost of increasing ecosystem carbon

Slowing the reduction, or increasing the accumulation, of organic carbon stored in biomass and soils has been suggested as a potentially rapid and cost-effective method to reduce the rate of atmospheric carbon increase(1). The costs of mitigating climate change by increasing ecosystem carbon relative to the baseline or business-as-usual scenario has been quantified in numerous studies, but results have been contradictory, as both methodological issues and substance differences cause variability(2). Here we show, based on 77 standardized face-to-face interviews of local experts with the best possible knowledge of local land-use economics and sociopolitical context in ten landscapes around the globe, that the estimated cost of increasing ecosystem carbon varied vastly and was perceived to be 16-27 times cheaper in two Indonesian landscapes dominated by peatlands compared with the average of the eight other landscapes. Hence, if reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) and other land-use mitigation efforts are to be distributed evenly across forested countries, for example, for the sake of international equity, their overall effectiveness would be dramatically lower than for a cost-minimizing distribution.Peer reviewe

Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Uses (Chapter 7)

The Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector encompasses managed ecosystems and offers significant mitigation opportunities while delivering food, wood and other renewable resources as well as biodiversity conservation, provided the sector adapts to climate change. Land-based mitigation measures represent some of the most important options currently available. They can both deliver carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and substitute for fossil fuels, thereby enabling emissions reductions in other sectors. The rapid deployment of AFOLU measures is essential in all pathways staying within the limits of the remaining budget for a 1.5°C target (high confidence). Where carefully and appropriately implemented, AFOLU mitigation measures are uniquely positioned to deliver substantial co-benefits and help address many of the wider challenges associated with land management. If AFOLU measures are deployed badly then, when taken together with the increasing need to produce sufficient food, feed, fuel and wood, they may exacerbate trade-offs with the conservation of habitats, adaptation, biodiversity and other services. At the same time the capacity of the land to support these functions may be threatened by climate change itself (high confidence)

Quantifying the effectiveness of climate change mitigation through forest plantations and carbon sequestration with an integrated land-use model

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Carbon plantations are introduced in climate change policy as an option to slow the build-up of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) concentrations. Here we present a methodology to evaluate the potential effectiveness of carbon plantations. The methodology explicitly considers future long-term land-use change around the world and all relevant carbon (C) fluxes, including all natural fluxes. Both issues have generally been ignored in earlier studies.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Two different baseline scenarios up to 2100 indicate that uncertainties in future land-use change lead to a near 100% difference in estimates of carbon sequestration potentials. Moreover, social, economic and institutional barriers preventing carbon plantations in natural vegetation areas decrease the physical potential by 75–80% or more.</p> <p>Nevertheless, carbon plantations can still considerably contribute to slowing the increase in the atmospheric CO₂concentration but only in the long term. The most conservative set of assumptions lowers the increase of the atmospheric CO₂concentration in 2100 by a 27 ppm and compensates for 5–7% of the total energy-related CO₂emissions. The net sequestration up to 2020 is limited, given the short-term increased need for agricultural land in most regions and the long period needed to compensate for emissions through the establishment of the plantations. The potential is highest in the tropics, despite projections that most of the agricultural expansion will be in these regions. Plantations in high latitudes as Northern Europe and Northern Russia should only be established if the objective to sequester carbon is combined with other activities.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Carbon sequestration in plantations can play an important role in mitigating the build-up of atmospheric CO₂. The actual magnitude depends on natural and management factors, social barriers, and the time frame considered. In addition, there are a number of ancillary benefits for local communities and the environment. Carbon plantations are, however, particularly effective in the long term. Furthermore, plantations do not offer the ultimate solution towards stabilizing CO₂concentrations but should be part of a broader package of options with clear energy emission reduction measures.</p

Setting priorities for land management to mitigate climate change

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>No consensus has been reached how to measure the effectiveness of climate change mitigation in the land-use sector and how to prioritize land use accordingly. We used the long-term cumulative and average sectorial C stocks in biomass, soil and products, C stock changes, the substitution of fossil energy and of energy-intensive products, and net present value (NPV) as evaluation criteria for the effectiveness of a hectare of productive land to mitigate climate change and produce economic returns. We evaluated land management options using real-life data of Thuringia, a region representative for central-western European conditions, and input from life cycle assessment, with a carbon-tracking model. We focused on solid biomass use for energy production.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In forestry, the traditional timber production was most economically viable and most climate-friendly due to an assumed recycling rate of 80% of wood products for bioenergy. Intensification towards "pure bioenergy production" would reduce the average sectorial C stocks and the C substitution and would turn NPV negative. In the forest conservation (non-use) option, the sectorial C stocks increased by 52% against timber production, which was not compensated by foregone wood products and C substitution. Among the cropland options wheat for food with straw use for energy, whole cereals for energy, and short rotation coppice for bioenergy the latter was most climate-friendly. However, specific subsidies or incentives for perennials would be needed to favour this option.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>When using the harvested products as materials prior to energy use there is no climate argument to support intensification by switching from sawn-wood timber production towards energy-wood in forestry systems. A legal framework would be needed to ensure that harvested products are first used for raw materials prior to energy use. Only an effective recycling of biomaterials frees land for long-term sustained C sequestration by conservation. Reuse cascades avoid additional emissions from shifting production or intensification.</p

Forest carbon sequestration:the impact of forest management

In this chapter, we describe alternative ways in which forests and forestry can help to mítigate climate change, along with the potential impact of these activities. The three carbon storage compartments should be considered inall impact estimates. Carbon content in living biomass is easily estimated via species-specific equations or by applying factors to oven-dry biomass weights (e.g.,lbañez et al.,2002, Herrero et al.,2011,Castaño and Bravo, 2012).Litter carbon content has been analysed in many studies on primary forest productivity, though information regarding the influence of forest management on litter carbon content is less abundant (Blanco et al., 2006). In the last decade,efforts have been made to assess soil carbon in forests, but studies on the effect of forest management on soils show discrepancies (Lindner and Karjalainen,2007).Hoover (2011), for example,found no difference in forest floor carbon stocks among stands subjected to partial or complete harvest treatments in the United States.Instituto Universitario de Gestión Forestal Sostenibl