ArticleJournal of environmental management2024
Cost-effectiveness of erosion mitigation to meet water clarity targets in the Manawatū-Whanganui Region of New Zealand.
Article in Journal of environmental management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Soil erosion is a significant environmental issue worldwide. It affects water quality, biodiversity, and land productivity. New Zealand government agencies and regional councils work to mitigate soil erosion through policies, management programmes, and funding for soil conservation projects. Information about cost-effectiveness is crucial for planning, targeting, and implementing erosion mitigation to achieve improvements in sediment-related water quality. While there is a good understanding of the costs of erosion mitigation measures, there is a dearth of literature on their cost-effectiveness in reducing sediment loads and improving water quality at the catchment level. In this study, we estimate the cost-effectiveness of erosion mitigation measures in meeting visual water clarity targets. The analysis utilizes the spatially explicit SedNetNZ erosion process and sediment budget modelling in the Manawatū-Whanganui Region and region-specific mitigation costs. The erosion mitigation measures considered in the analysis include afforestation, bush retirement, riparian retirement, space-planted trees, and gully tree planting. We modelled two scenarios with on-farm erosion mitigation implemented across the region from 2021 to 2100, resulting in a 48% and 60% reduction of total sediment load. We estimate the marginal costs to achieve the visual national bottom line for water clarity, as assessed by the length of waterways that meet the clarity targets. We also estimate the marginal costs of improving average water clarity, which can be linked with non-market valuation studies when conducting a cost-benefit analysis. We find that gully tree planting and space-planted trees are the most cost-effective mitigation measures and that riparian retirement is the least cost-effective. Moreover, cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on current land use and the biophysical features of the landscape. Our estimates can be used in cost-benefit analysis to plan and prioritize soil erosion mitigation at the catchment and regional levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.