skip to main content

Explore Research Products in the NSF-PAR

This content will become publicly available on January 25, 2025

Title: Unequal climate impacts on global values of natural capital
Abstract

Ecosystems generate a wide range of benefits for humans, including some market goods as well as other benefits that are not directly reflected in market activity1. Climate change will alter the distribution of ecosystems around the world and change the flow of these benefits2,3. However, the specific implications of ecosystem changes for human welfare remain unclear, as they depend on the nature of these changes, the value of the affected benefits and the extent to which communities rely on natural systems for their well-being4. Here we estimate country-level changes in economic production and the value of non-market ecosystem benefits resulting from climate-change-induced shifts in terrestrial vegetation cover, as projected by dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) driven by general circulation climate models. Our results show that the annual population-weighted mean global flow of non-market ecosystem benefits valued in the wealth accounts of the World Bank will be reduced by 9.2% in 2100 under the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway SSP2-6.0 with respect to the baseline no climate change scenario and that the global population-weighted average change in gross domestic product (GDP) by 2100 is −1.3% of the baseline GDP. Because lower-income countries are more reliant on natural capital, these GDP effects are regressive. Approximately 90% of these damages are borne by the poorest 50% of countries and regions, whereas the wealthiest 10% experience only 2% of these losses.

  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1924378
NSF-PAR ID:
10532828
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Nature
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Nature
Volume:
625
Issue:
7996
ISSN:
0028-0836
Page Range / eLocation ID:
722 to 727
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al ( , Biogeosciences)
    null (Ed.)
    Abstract. Soils in Arctic and boreal ecosystems store twice as much carbon as the atmosphere, a portion of which may be released as high-latitude soils warm. Some of the uncertainty in the timing and magnitude of the permafrost–climate feedback stems from complex interactions between ecosystem properties and soil thermal dynamics. Terrestrial ecosystems fundamentally regulate the response of permafrost to climate change by influencing surface energy partitioning and the thermal properties of soil itself. Here we review how Arctic and boreal ecosystem processes influence thermal dynamics in permafrost soil and how these linkages may evolve in response to climate change. While many of the ecosystem characteristics and processes affecting soil thermal dynamics have been examined individually (e.g., vegetation, soil moisture, and soil structure), interactions among these processes are less understood. Changes in ecosystem type and vegetation characteristics will alter spatial patterns of interactions between climate and permafrost. In addition to shrub expansion, other vegetation responses to changes in climate and rapidly changing disturbance regimes will affect ecosystem surface energy partitioning in ways that are important for permafrost. Lastly, changes in vegetation and ecosystem distribution will lead to regional and global biophysical and biogeochemical climate feedbacks that may compound or offset local impacts on permafrost soils. Consequently, accurate prediction of the permafrost carbon climate feedback will require detailed understanding of changes in terrestrial ecosystem distribution and function, which depend on the net effects of multiple feedback processes operating across scales in space and time. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al ( , Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)
    Gross domestic product (GDP) summarizes a vast amount of economic information in a single monetary metric that is widely used by decision makers around the world. However, GDP fails to capture fully the contributions of nature to economic activity and human well-being. To address this critical omission, we develop a measure of gross ecosystem product (GEP) that summarizes the value of ecosystem services in a single monetary metric. We illustrate the measurement of GEP through an application to the Chinese province of Qinghai, showing that the approach is tractable using available data. Known as the “water tower of Asia,” Qinghai is the source of the Mekong, Yangtze, and Yellow Rivers, and indeed, we find that water-related ecosystem services make up nearly two-thirds of the value of GEP for Qinghai. Importantly most of these benefits accrue downstream. In Qinghai, GEP was greater than GDP in 2000 and three-fourths as large as GDP in 2015 as its market economy grew. Large-scale investment in restoration resulted in improvements in the flows of ecosystem services measured in GEP (127.5%) over this period. Going forward, China is using GEP in decision making in multiple ways, as part of a transformation to inclusive, green growth. This includes investing in conservation of ecosystem assets to secure provision of ecosystem services through transregional compensation payments. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ( , Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)

    Sustainable development requires jointly achieving economic development to raise standards of living and environmental sustainability to secure these gains for the long run. Here, we develop a local-to-global, and global-to-local, earth-economy model that integrates the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP)-computable general equilibrium model of the economy with the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model of fine-scale, spatially explicit ecosystem services. The integrated model, GTAP–InVEST, jointly determines land use, environmental conditions, ecosystem services, market prices, supply and demand across economic sectors, trade across regions, and aggregate performance metrics like GDP. We use the integrated model to analyze the contribution of investing in nature for economic prosperity, accounting for the impact of four important ecosystem services (pollination, timber provision, marine fisheries, and carbon sequestration). We show that investments in nature result in large improvements relative to a business-as-usual path, accruing annual gains of $100 to $350 billion (2014 USD) with the largest percentage gains in the lowest-income countries. Our estimates include only a small subset of ecosystem services and could be far higher with inclusion of more ecosystem services, incorporation of ecological tipping points, and reduction in substitutability that limits economic adjustments to declines in natural capital. Our analysis highlights the need for improved environmental–economic modeling and the vital importance of integrating environmental information firmly into economic analysis and policy. The benefits of doing so are potentially very large, with the greatest percentage benefits accruing to inhabitants of the poorest countries.

     
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al ( , Ecological Applications)
    Abstract

    We use the Multiple Element Limitation (MEL) model to examine responses of 12 ecosystems to elevated carbon dioxide (CO2), warming, and 20% decreases or increases in precipitation. Ecosystems respond synergistically to elevated CO2, warming, and decreased precipitation combined because higher water‐use efficiency with elevated CO2and higher fertility with warming compensate for responses to drought. Response to elevated CO2, warming, and increased precipitation combined is additive. We analyze changes in ecosystem carbon (C) based on four nitrogen (N) and four phosphorus (P) attribution factors: (1) changes in total ecosystem N and P, (2) changes in N and P distribution between vegetation and soil, (3) changes in vegetation C:N and C:P ratios, and (4) changes in soil C:N and C:P ratios. In the combined CO2and climate change simulations, all ecosystems gain C. The contributions of these four attribution factors to changes in ecosystem C storage varies among ecosystems because of differences in the initial distributions of N and P between vegetation and soil and the openness of the ecosystem N and P cycles. The net transfer of N and P from soil to vegetation dominates the C response of forests. For tundra and grasslands, the C gain is also associated with increased soil C:N and C:P. In ecosystems with symbiotic N fixation, C gains resulted from N accumulation. Because of differences in N versus P cycle openness and the distribution of organic matter between vegetation and soil, changes in the N and P attribution factors do not always parallel one another. Differences among ecosystems in C‐nutrient interactions and the amount of woody biomass interact to shape ecosystem C sequestration under simulated global change. We suggest that future studies quantify the openness of the N and P cycles and changes in the distribution of C, N, and P among ecosystem components, which currently limit understanding of nutrient effects on C sequestration and responses to elevated CO2and climate change.

     
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ( , Progress in Energy)
    Abstract There is about to be an abrupt step-change in the use of coastal seas around the globe, specifically by the addition of large-scale offshore renewable energy (ORE) developments to combat climate change. Developing this sustainable energy supply will require trade-offs between both direct and indirect environmental effects, as well as spatial conflicts with marine uses like shipping, fishing, and recreation. However, the nexus between drivers, such as changes in the bio-physical environment from the introduction of structures and extraction of energy, and the consequent impacts on ecosystem services delivery and natural capital assets is poorly understood and rarely considered through a whole ecosystem perspective. Future marine planning needs to assess these changes as part of national policy level assessments but also to inform practitioners about the benefits and trade-offs between different uses of natural resources when making decisions to balance environmental and energy sustainability and socio-economic impacts. To address this shortfall, we propose an ecosystem-based natural capital evaluation framework that builds on a dynamic Bayesian modelling approach which accounts for the multiplicity of interactions between physical (e.g. bottom temperature), biological (e.g. net primary production) indicators and anthropogenic marine use (i.e. fishing) and their changes across space and over time. The proposed assessment framework measures ecosystem change, changes in ecosystem goods and services and changes in socio-economic value in response to ORE deployment scenarios as well as climate change, to provide objective information for decision processes seeking to integrate new uses into our marine ecosystems. Such a framework has the potential of exploring the likely outcomes in the same metrics (both ecological and socio-economic) from alternative management and climate scenarios, such that objective judgements and decisions can be made, as to how to balance the benefits and trade-offs between a range of marine uses to deliver long-term environmental sustainability, economic benefits, and social welfare. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email