Modern Approaches to Environmental and Economic Estimation of Damage From Soil Erosion

{"title":"Modern Approaches to Environmental and Economic Estimation of Damage From Soil Erosion","authors":"","doi":"10.26565/1992-4259-2020-22-01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Actuality. Despite a nearly century-old history of erosion damage assessments, this issue has not yet been finally resolved. If the economic component of losses can be relatively easily calculated, then environmental and socio-environmental damage are almost impossible to calculate. Purpose. To show the possibilities and limitations of using individual indicators for assessment of damage and the environmental and economic justification of anti-erosion measures based on analysis of the environmental, economic and social consequences of soil erosion, and world experience in assessing damage from erosion. Results. Losses from erosion today are most often estimated by the mass of washed soil (t / ha), the cost of restoring lost nutrients and organic matter, as well as the cost of agricultural products lost due to reduced yields on eroded soils and stop cultivation of hard eroded soils. Soil losses are usually estimated by mathematical modeling. Different approaches to the assessment of losses give a ten-fold difference in the estimates, which reduces the credibility of them when making decisions. Land users are not interested in investing in anti-erosion measures more than the cost of the crop, which they can additionally receive. In Ukraine, this leads to a de facto neglect of the problem of erosion, which, developing on the principle of positive feedback, leads to the deepening of socio-economic problems and the deterioration of the country's food security Conclusions. To justify anti-erosion measures at the level of land users, the only reliable source for quantifying the potential damage from erosion is the shortage of agricultural products and the loss of soil organic matter and fertilizers. The real damage from erosion lies in the plane of global environmental processes and food security, therefore, the problem of erosion should be addressed at the national level.","PeriodicalId":40624,"journal":{"name":"Visnyk of V N Karazin Kharkiv National University-Series Geology Geography Ecology","volume":"271 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Visnyk of V N Karazin Kharkiv National University-Series Geology Geography Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26565/1992-4259-2020-22-01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Actuality. Despite a nearly century-old history of erosion damage assessments, this issue has not yet been finally resolved. If the economic component of losses can be relatively easily calculated, then environmental and socio-environmental damage are almost impossible to calculate. Purpose. To show the possibilities and limitations of using individual indicators for assessment of damage and the environmental and economic justification of anti-erosion measures based on analysis of the environmental, economic and social consequences of soil erosion, and world experience in assessing damage from erosion. Results. Losses from erosion today are most often estimated by the mass of washed soil (t / ha), the cost of restoring lost nutrients and organic matter, as well as the cost of agricultural products lost due to reduced yields on eroded soils and stop cultivation of hard eroded soils. Soil losses are usually estimated by mathematical modeling. Different approaches to the assessment of losses give a ten-fold difference in the estimates, which reduces the credibility of them when making decisions. Land users are not interested in investing in anti-erosion measures more than the cost of the crop, which they can additionally receive. In Ukraine, this leads to a de facto neglect of the problem of erosion, which, developing on the principle of positive feedback, leads to the deepening of socio-economic problems and the deterioration of the country's food security Conclusions. To justify anti-erosion measures at the level of land users, the only reliable source for quantifying the potential damage from erosion is the shortage of agricultural products and the loss of soil organic matter and fertilizers. The real damage from erosion lies in the plane of global environmental processes and food security, therefore, the problem of erosion should be addressed at the national level.
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
土壤侵蚀损害环境与经济评估的现代方法
现状。尽管已有近百年的侵蚀损害评估历史,但这个问题尚未最终解决。如果损失的经济部分可以相对容易地计算出来,那么环境和社会环境损害几乎是不可能计算出来的。在分析土壤侵蚀的环境、经济和社会后果的基础上,结合世界上评估侵蚀损害的经验,说明使用单个指标评估损害的可能性和局限性,以及采取防侵蚀措施的环境和经济合理性。今天侵蚀造成的损失通常是通过被冲刷土壤的质量(吨/公顷)、恢复失去的养分和有机物的成本,以及由于侵蚀土壤产量下降和停止对硬侵蚀土壤的耕作而损失的农产品成本来估计的。土壤流失量通常用数学模型来估计。评估损失的不同方法导致估算结果相差10倍,这降低了决策时的可信度。土地使用者对在抗侵蚀措施上的投资比对作物成本的投资更感兴趣,因为他们可以获得额外的收益。在乌克兰,这导致事实上忽视了水土流失问题,这一问题在积极反馈原则的基础上发展,导致社会经济问题的加深和该国粮食安全的恶化。为了证明在土地使用者层面采取防侵蚀措施的合理性,量化侵蚀潜在损害的唯一可靠来源是农产品的短缺以及土壤有机质和肥料的损失。侵蚀的真正危害在于全球环境进程和粮食安全层面,因此,应在国家层面解决侵蚀问题。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
Regarding the publication of a collective monograph under the project of the International Vysegrad Fund National participant geospatial information system in urban planning Assessment of the prospects of creating new forests in Ternopil region Biotic homogenization of dendroflora in the conditions of the megapolis (Dnipro, Ukraine) Entropy approach to assessment of the ecological state of a water course
×
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