sokouti oskoee, R., besharati, H. (2022). A Review of Soil Economic Valuation. , 10(1), 1-16. doi: 10.22092/lmj.2019.123225.149
reza sokouti oskoee; hosein besharati. "A Review of Soil Economic Valuation". , 10, 1, 2022, 1-16. doi: 10.22092/lmj.2019.123225.149
sokouti oskoee, R., besharati, H. (2022). 'A Review of Soil Economic Valuation', , 10(1), pp. 1-16. doi: 10.22092/lmj.2019.123225.149
sokouti oskoee, R., besharati, H. A Review of Soil Economic Valuation. , 2022; 10(1): 1-16. doi: 10.22092/lmj.2019.123225.149

A Review of Soil Economic Valuation

مدیریت اراضی
Volume 10, Issue 1, May 2022, Pages 1-16    PDF (905.55 K)
Document Type: Research Paper
DOI: 10.22092/lmj.2019.123225.149
Authors
reza sokouti oskoee* 1; hosein besharati2
1Associate Professor, Division of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research; Western Azabayejan Institute of Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education; Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension Organization (AREEO), Urumia,
2Professor, Soil and Water Research Institute; Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
The present paper investigates soil valuation and explores the intricacies associated with the development of a standard framework for a sound soil valuation system. Drawing upon a review of studies conducted across the world, we identify the techniques commonly used in estimating the economic value of soil that best suits the conditions in Iran. The ‘ecosystem services’ and ‘total economic value’ (TEV) frameworks are being currently employed for economic valuation of environmental resources and that of soil as the main component of the environment. A variety of methods have been developed for estimating the economic profits of ecosystem services and the costs arising from ecosystem degradation. In most cases, base cost estimation involves replacement cost, opportunity cost, damage cost avoid, and replacement cost methods. Study of the implementation of these methods as well as their associated requirements including soil nutrient content and current land use as well as soil conservation and watershed management practices in use reveal that the above methods can be effectively implemented because not only the required infrastructure but also the necessary data are currently available at the state-level. A salient feature of these methods is that they guarantee more tangible and calculable advantages, basic significance for environmental resources, and non-recurrent concerns about environmental commodities; care must, however, be taken in the measurement system employed for the monetary value of resources during environmental assessment since only investment and labor revenues are taken into account while the revenues due to the exploitation of vital resources and services are ignored and never ever included in the absence of a pricing policy, which obviously causes the values of natural resources to remain unaccounted for in economic estimations.
Keywords
Soil economic value; Land use; Soil nutrients; Environment
References
  1. ابراهیمی، ر.، 1378. بررسی مقدار هدررفت عناصر غذایی پرمصرف NPKدر اثر فرسایش در اراضی چای‌کاری شرق گیلان. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس. 139 صفحه.
  2. آقارضی، ح.، قدوسی، ج.، 1380 . بررسی رابطه کاربری اراضی و شیب با فرسایش خاک و تولید رسوب، مجموعه مقالات همایش ملی مدیریت اراضی، فرسایش خاک و توسعه پایدار. اراک 2 تا 4 بهمن 1380 : 362-375.
  3. امیرنژاد، ح.، تعیین ارزش کل اقتصادی اکوسیستم جنگل‌های شمال ایران با تاکید بر ارزشگذاری زیست محیطی-اکولوژیکی و ارزش‌های حفاظتی، پایاننامه دکترای تخصصی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
  4. بختیاری، ف.، 1386. ارزش‌گذاری اقتصادی منابع خاک جنگل زاگرس، مطالعه موردی عرصه‌های جنگلی منتخب استان چهارمحال و بختیاری. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد رشته محیط‌زیست دانشکده منابع طبیعی دانشگاه تهران. 157 صفحه.
  5. بختیاری، ف.، پناهی، م.، کرمی، م.، قدوسی، ج.، مشایخی، ز.، پورزادی، م.، 1388 . ارزش گذاری اقتصادی کارکرد حفظ و نگهداشت عناصر غذایی خاک در جنگل های منطقۀ سبزکوه، مجله جنگل، دوره 1، شماره 1، اردیبهشت 1388، صفحه: 69-81.
  6. پناهی، م.، 1384. ارزش‌گذاری اقتصادی جنگل‌های خزری. مطالعه موردی در سه حوضه جنگلداری چوب و کاغذ مازندران خیرود کنار و چوب و کاغذ گیلان. رساله دکتری دانشکده منابع طبیعی دانشگاه تهران .294 صفحه.
  7. ترابی، س.، 1394 . آشنایی با ارزش‌گذاری اقتصادی مواهب طبیعی)مروری بر اقدامات پروژه منارید(، سازمان جنگل‌ها، مراتع و آبخیزداری کشور. 75 صفحه.
  8. حسینی، ص.، قربانی، م.، 1390 . اقتصاد فرسایش خاک، انتشارات دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، 128 ص.  
  9. سکوتی اسکویی، ر.، 1390. مقدمه‌ای بر فرسایش قابل قبول خاک و روش‌های اندازه‌گیری آن، انتشارات پلک،120 صفحه..
  10. سکوتی اسکوئی، ر.، غلام آزاد، س.، قائمیان، ن.، 1393 . ارزیابی تخریب خاک به روش GLASOD ، مطالعه موردی دشت ارومیه نشریه علمی-ترویجی مدیریت اراضی، دوره 2، شماره 2: 161-169
  11. گرشاسبی، پ.، رجب نژاد، س .، خانی، ش.، 1392 . بررسی نقش ارزش فرصت زمین در احیای حوزه‌های آبخیز، نشریه آبخیزداری، سال اول، شماره 1 : 19-26.
  12. ملکوتی، م.، ج.، طهرانی، م.، ج.، نقش ریزمغذی‌ها در افزایش عملکرد و بهبود کیفیت محصولات کشاورزی. انتشارات دانشگاه تربیت مدرس. تهران. 320 صفحه.
  13. نبی پی لشکریان، س.، 1379 . بررسی اثرات کاربری اراضی در فرسایش خاک و رسوبدهی حوزه آبخیز ماسوله رودخانه در گیلان، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان. 
  14. نور، ف.، نصری، م.، یگانه، ح.، مقیمی نژاد، ف.، قاسمی آریان، ی.، بنی نعمه، ج.، 1392 . برآورد تلفات اقتصادی فرسایش خاک مراتع با استفاده از روش جایگزینی مواد غذایی (NRCM) ، مجله علمی پژوهشی تحقیات مرتع و بیابان ایران، دوره 20، شماره 3، آذر 1392، صفحه 522-530.
  15. یگانه، ح.، آذرنیوند، ح.، صالح، ا .، ارزانی، ح.، امیرنژاد، ح.، 1395. برآورد ارزش اقتصادی کارکرد حفاظت خاک مطالعه موردی: تهم زنجان، نشریه تحقیقات مرتع و بیابان ایران، سال 1395، جلد 23 ، شماره 1: صفحه 176-161 .
  16. Ammour, T.; Windevoxhel, N., Sencion, G., 2000. Economic valuation of mangrove ecosystems and subtropical forests in Central America, in M. Dore and R. Guevara (eds), Sustainable Forest Management and Global Climate Change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 166- 197.
  17. Bandara, J.S., 2001. Environmental cost of soil erosion in Sri Lanka: tax/subsidy policy options. Environmental Modelling & Software. 16(6): 497-508.
  18. Bann, C., 1998. Turkey Forest Sector Review. Global Environmental Overlays Program. Final Report Washington DC: World Bank.
  19. Barbier, E.,. Bishop, J.T., 1995. Economic Values and Incentives Affecting Soil and Water Conservation in Developing Countries, Journal of Soil Water Conservation, 45 (4):133-137.
  20. Bennett, H.H., 1933. The cost of soil erosion. Journal of Ohio Society, 33:271-279.
  21. Bertol, , Cogo, N.P., Schick, J., Gudagnin J.C., Amaral, A.J. 2007. Financial aspects of nutrient losses by water erosion in different soil management systems. Revista Brasileira de Ciênciado Solo 31:133-142 (In Portuguese, with abstract in English).
  22. Birkeland, P., 1999 .Soils and Geomorphology, 3rd Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 430 p.
  23. Buol, S.W. 1990., Soil genesis and classification, Ames, Iowe: Iowa State University Press, pp. 36, doi:1081/E-ESS, ISBN0813828732.
  24. Chee, Y.E., 2004. An ecological perspective on the valuation of ecosystem services. Biological Conservation,. 120(4): 549-565.
  25. Chesworth, W. Encyclopedia of Soil Science, Berlin: Springer, ISBN: 978-1-4020-3994-2
  26. Cruz, W. Francisco, H. A., Conway T. 1988. The On-Site and Downstream Costs of Erosion in the Magat and Pantabangan Watershed, Journal of Philippines Development 26(25, 1): 85–111.
  27. Dexter, A., R., 2004. Soil physical quality. Part Theory, effects of soil texture, density and organic matter, and effects on root growth. Geoderma , 120:201–214.
  28. Doran, J., W., Coleman, D., C., Bezdicek, D., F., Stewart, B., A., 1994. Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment. SSSA Spec. Publ. No. 35, Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Inc. and Am. Soc. Agron., Inc., Madison, WI.
  29. Evans, D.A., Banzhaf, H.S., Burtraw, D., Krupnick, A.J. and Siikamäki, J., 2008. Valuing Benefits from Ecosystem Improvements Using Stated Preference Methods: an Example from Reducing Acidification in the Adirondacks Park. In Saving Biological Diversity (pp. 101-117). Springer, Boston, MA
  30. FAO, 1995. Agricultural investment to promote improved capture and use of rainfall in dry land farming, FAO Investment Center Technical paper No.10, Rome.
  31. Farley, J., Costanza, R., 2010. Payments for Ecosystem Services: from local to global. Ecological Economics 69 : 2060–2068.
  32. Glasener, K., M., 2002. Why is Soil Important, Soil Science Society of America, www. Soils. org.
  33. Gulati, A., Rai, S., C., 2014. Cost estimation of soil erosion and nutrient loss from a watershed of the Chotanagpur Plateau, India. Journal of Current Science, 106: 1-5.
  34. Guo, Z., Xiao, X., Gan, Y., Zheng, Y., 2001. Ecosystem functions, services and their values, a case study in Xingshan County of China, Ecological Economics, 38: 141-154.
  35. Hacisalihoglu, S., Toksoy, D., Kalca, A., 2010. Economic valuation of soil erosion in a semi arid area in Turkey, African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(1):1-6.
  36. Hein, L., 2007. Assessing the costs of land degradation: A case study for the Puentes catchment, southeast Spain. Journal of Land Degradation and Development, 18: 631-642.
  37. Hussain, S., A., Badola, R., 2008. Valuing mangrove ecosystem services: linking nutrient retention function of mangrove forests to enhanced agro ecosystem production, Journal of Soil Water Conservation, 32(8):120-130.
  38. Kumar, P., 2003. Economics of soil Erosion. Concept publishing company. New Delhi.
  39. Li, J., Ren, Z. Zhou, Z. 2006. Ecosystem services and their values: a case study in Qinba Mountains of China, Ecological Resources. 21:597-604.
  40. Martinez-Alier, J., Munda, G., O'Neill, J., 1998. Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics. Ecological Economics. 26(3): 277-286.
  41. Dimal, M.O.L., 2015. Integrating participation in estimating soil’s economic value. International journal of multidisciplinary sciences and engineering, 2018, pp.1-9.
  42. Middleton, N., Thomas, D., 1997. World Atlas of Desertification. Published for UNEP by Arnold Publ. 2nd. Edition. London. 182 pp.
  43. Montanarella, L., 2007. Trends in land degradation in Europe. In: Sivakumar, M.V.K., Ndiang’ui, N.,(eds.) Climate and land degradation. Springer, New York, NY, USA. 83-104 pp.
  44. Oldeman, L., R., Hakkeling R., T., A., Sombroek, W., G., 1990. World map of the status of human-induced soil degradation: An Explanatory note. ISRIC. Wageningen, the Netherlands.
  45. Plottu, E., Plottu, B., 2007. The Concept of Total Economic Value of Environment: A reconsideration within a hierarchical rationality. Ecological Economics, 61(1): 52-61.
  46. Richardson, C., King, K., W., 1996. Erosion and nutrient losses from zero tillage on a clay soil, journal of Agriculture Engineering Research, 61: 81-86.
  47. Rife, T., L., 2010. Modeling the value of ecosystem services: application to soil loss in Southeastern Allegheny County. M.Sc. thesis in Engineering. Youngstown State university, PP. 44.
  48. Rodrigues, W., 2005. Valoraçãoeconômica dos impactosambientais de tecnologias de plantioemregião de Cerrados. Rural Economics Sociol Rural, 43: 135-153 (In Portuguese).
  49. Sarcinelli, O., Marques, J., F., Romeiro, A., R., 2009. Custos e benefíciosdaadoção de práticas emedidasparaconservação do solo agrícola: Um estudo de casonamicrobaciahidrográfica docórregoOriçandinha. Infor. Economic, 39: 5-16 (In Portuguese, with abstract in English).
  50. Sarukhan, J., Alcamo, J., 2003. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment. 1 ed. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Series. Vol. XIV., Washington: Island Press. 212.
  51. Stocking, M., 1986. The Cost of soil erosion in Zimbabwein terms of the loss of three major nutrients. Rome, FAO, 986. 165p.
  52. Stocking, M., A., 1984. Erosion and soil productivity: A review. Norwich: Overseas Development Group, University of East Anglia.
  53. USDA-NRCS, 1999. U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS), National Soil Survey Handbook: Title 430-VI, U.S. Government printing office, Washington D.C.
  54. USDA, 2006. Soil Quality Institute. Natural resources conservation service. Available at http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/.
  55. Verstraeten, G., Poesen, J., 1999. The nature of small-scale flooding, muddy floods and retention pond sedimentation in central Belgium, Geomorphology, 29:275-292.
  56. Vonada, R.; Herbert, T., Wage, S., 2011. Introduction to Payments for Ecosystem Services: A Reference Book for Uganda. Prepared by Forest Trends & The Katoomba Group for The Government of Uganda’s National Environment Management Authority (NEMA)
  57. Voroney, R., P., 2006. The Soil Habitat in Soil Microbiology, Ecology and Biochemistry, Eldor A. Paul ed. ISBN:0125468075
  58. Ward, P., J., Renssen, H., Aerts, J., C., J., H., Van Balen, R., T., Vandenberghe, J., 2009. The impact of land use and climate change on late Holocene and future suspended sediment yield of the Meuse catchment, Journal of Geomorphology, 103: 389-400.
  59. Whichmeier, W., H., Smith, D., D., 1978. Predicting rainfall erosion losses -a guide to conservation Science, US Department of Agriculture Handbook, No. 537, Washington DC.
  60. Xue, D., Tisdell, C., 2001. Valuing ecological functions of biodiversity in Changbaishan Mountain Biosphere Reserve in Northeast China. Biodiversity and conservation 10: 467- 481.
  61. Zachar, D., 1982: Soil erosion. Developments in Soil Science 10. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific. 547 pp.
Statistics
Article View: 1,943
PDF Download: 898


counter
Journal management system. designed by sinaweb