Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33365228›Full record

ArticleEcosystem services2020

Testing ecosystem accounting in the United States: A case study for the Southeast.

Katherine J D Warnell, Marc Russell, Charles Rhodes, Kenneth J Bagstad, Lydia P Olander, David J Nowak, Rajendra Poudel, Pierre D Glynn, Julie L Hass, Satoshi Hirabayashi and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecosystem services, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Leveraging natural capital accounting to support businesses with nature-related risk assessments and disclosures.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Katherine J D WarnellNicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University.
Marc RussellU.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Charles RhodesTBD Economics.
Kenneth J BagstadUnited States Geological Survey, Geosciences & Environmental Change Science Center.
Lydia P OlanderNicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University.
David J NowakUnited States Forest Service.
Rajendra PoudelNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Pierre D GlynnUnited States Geological Survey, Water Cycle Branch.
Julie L HassBureau of Economic Analysis.
Satoshi HirabayashiThe Davey Institute.
Jane Carter IngramErnst & Young.
John MatuszakNational Council for Science and Environment.
Kirsten L L OlesonUniversity of Hawai'i Mānoa.
Stephen M PosnerCOMPASS.
Ferdinando VillaBasque Center for Climate Change.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecosystem accounts, as formalized by the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounts (SEEA EEA), have been compiled in a number of countries, yet there have been few attempts to develop them for the U.S. We explore the potential for U.S. ecosystem accounting by compiling ecosystem extent, condition, and ecosystem services supply and use accounts for a ten-state region in the Southeast. The pilot accounts address air quality, water quality, biodiversity, carbon storage, recreation, and pollination for selected years from 2001 to 2015. Results illustrate how information from ecosystem accounts can contribute to policy and decision-making. Using an example from Atlanta, we also show how ecosystem accounts can be considered alongside other SEEA accounts to give a more complete picture of a local area's environmental-economic trends. The process by which we determined where to place metrics within the accounting framework, which was strongly informed by the National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS), can provide guidance for future ecosystem accounts in the U.S. and other countries. Finally, we identify knowledge gaps that limit the inclusion of certain ecosystem services in the accounts and suggest future research that can close these gaps and improve future U.S. ecosystem accounts.

Indexed as

air quality regulationExperimental Ecosystem AccountingNational Ecosystem Services Classification Systempollinationrecreational birdingSystem of Environmental-Economic Accounts

Identifiers

PMID33365228
PMCPMC7751700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.