Balancing Tradeoffs in Climate-Smart Agriculture: Will Selling Carbon Credits Offset Potential Losses in the Net Yield Income of Small-Scale Soybean (Glycine max L.) Producers in the Mid-Southern United States?

IF 2.5 4区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT Decision Analysis Pub Date : 2023-05-22 DOI:10.1287/deca.2023.0478
Adrienne L. Contasti, A. G. Firth, B. H. Baker, J. Brooks, M. Locke, D. Morin
{"title":"Balancing Tradeoffs in Climate-Smart Agriculture: Will Selling Carbon Credits Offset Potential Losses in the Net Yield Income of Small-Scale Soybean (Glycine max L.) Producers in the Mid-Southern United States?","authors":"Adrienne L. Contasti, A. G. Firth, B. H. Baker, J. Brooks, M. Locke, D. Morin","doi":"10.1287/deca.2023.0478","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is a need to achieve sustainable agricultural production to secure food, fiber, and fuel for a growing global population. Climate-smart (CS) actions (no-till and cover crops) can reduce carbon emissions and promote soil organic carbon (SOC) storage. Contemporary voluntary carbon markets provide producers with a monetary incentive to adopt CS actions. However, SOC–yield dynamics under CS actions are not well known, making it difficult for producers to judge whether additional income from carbon credits will offset potential losses to yield income. We designed a SOC–yield framework that captures SOC–yield–income dynamics under traditional (reduced tillage, no cover crops) and CS actions. Using a modified structured decision-making approach, we applied the framework to a case study in which producers aim to increase income by selling carbon credits after adopting CS actions. Specifically, we demonstrated how to balance tradeoffs between yield and carbon credit income that arise from tillage and winter cover crop actions (cereal rye, Secale cereale L. and crimson clover, Trifolium incarnatum L.) in a soybean (Glycine max L.) production system in Mississippi. Results indicated that a producer could minimize losses to net yield income by adopting no-till if already using cover crops. There was also evidence that carbon credit income could offset losses to yield income when adopting CS in place of traditional actions. Identifying risks to yield income and SOC storage can help design carbon neutrality policies that have minimum impact on a producer’s income. History: This paper has been accepted for the Decision Analysis Special Issue on Further Environmental Sustainability. Funding: This work was supported by the USDA-ARS [Grants 58-0200-0-002 (Advancing Agricultural Research) and 58-6001-8-003] and the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture [McIntire Stennis Project 1020959]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2023.0478 .","PeriodicalId":46460,"journal":{"name":"Decision Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Decision Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2023.0478","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

There is a need to achieve sustainable agricultural production to secure food, fiber, and fuel for a growing global population. Climate-smart (CS) actions (no-till and cover crops) can reduce carbon emissions and promote soil organic carbon (SOC) storage. Contemporary voluntary carbon markets provide producers with a monetary incentive to adopt CS actions. However, SOC–yield dynamics under CS actions are not well known, making it difficult for producers to judge whether additional income from carbon credits will offset potential losses to yield income. We designed a SOC–yield framework that captures SOC–yield–income dynamics under traditional (reduced tillage, no cover crops) and CS actions. Using a modified structured decision-making approach, we applied the framework to a case study in which producers aim to increase income by selling carbon credits after adopting CS actions. Specifically, we demonstrated how to balance tradeoffs between yield and carbon credit income that arise from tillage and winter cover crop actions (cereal rye, Secale cereale L. and crimson clover, Trifolium incarnatum L.) in a soybean (Glycine max L.) production system in Mississippi. Results indicated that a producer could minimize losses to net yield income by adopting no-till if already using cover crops. There was also evidence that carbon credit income could offset losses to yield income when adopting CS in place of traditional actions. Identifying risks to yield income and SOC storage can help design carbon neutrality policies that have minimum impact on a producer’s income. History: This paper has been accepted for the Decision Analysis Special Issue on Further Environmental Sustainability. Funding: This work was supported by the USDA-ARS [Grants 58-0200-0-002 (Advancing Agricultural Research) and 58-6001-8-003] and the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture [McIntire Stennis Project 1020959]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2023.0478 .
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
气候智能型农业的平衡权衡:出售碳信用额能否抵消小规模大豆净收益的潜在损失(甘氨酸max L.)美国中南部的生产商?
有必要实现可持续的农业生产,为不断增长的全球人口提供粮食、纤维和燃料。气候智能型(CS)行动(免耕和覆盖作物)可以减少碳排放并促进土壤有机碳(SOC)储存。当代自愿碳市场为生产者提供了采取减排行动的金钱激励。然而,ccs行动下的soc产量动态并不为人所知,这使得生产者很难判断碳信用额的额外收入是否会抵消产量收入的潜在损失。我们设计了一个soc -产量框架,以捕捉传统(减少耕作,不种植覆盖作物)和CS行动下的soc -产量-收入动态。使用一种改进的结构化决策方法,我们将该框架应用于一个案例研究,在该案例研究中,生产者的目标是在采取碳减排行动后通过出售碳信用额来增加收入。具体来说,我们展示了如何在密西西比州的大豆(甘氨酸max L.)生产系统中平衡耕作和冬季覆盖作物活动(谷物黑麦,黑麦和深红色三叶草,三叶草)产生的产量和碳信用收入之间的权衡。结果表明,如果农户已经采用覆盖作物,则采用免耕可以最大限度地减少净产量损失。也有证据表明,当采用碳信用代替传统行动时,碳信用收入可以抵消损失,从而产生收入。识别产量收入和SOC存储的风险可以帮助设计对生产者收入影响最小的碳中和政策。历史:本文已被《进一步环境可持续性决策分析特刊》接受。资助:本研究由USDA- ars[赠款58-0200-0-002(推进农业研究)和58-6001-8-003]和美国农业部国家粮食和农业研究所[麦金泰尔·斯坦尼斯项目1020959]支持。补充材料:在线附录可在https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2023.0478上获得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Decision Analysis
Decision Analysis MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
21.10%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
Measuring and Mitigating the Risk of Advanced Cyberattackers On the Value of Information Across Decision Problems Curbing the Opioid Crisis: Optimal Dynamic Policies for Preventive and Mitigating Interventions From the Editor: 2023 Clemen–Kleinmuntz Decision Analysis Best Paper Award A Behavioral Model of Responsible Sourcing in Supply Chains: The Role of Dual-Sourcing Bias
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1