Abstract
Sustainable management of soil carbon (C) at the state level requires valuation of soil C regulating ecosystem services (ES) and disservices (ED). The objective of this study was to assess the value of regulating ES from soil organic carbon (SOC), soil inorganic carbon (SIC), and total soil carbon (TSC) stocks, based on the concept of the avoided social cost of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions for the state of South Carolina (SC) in the United States of America (U.S.A.) by soil order, soil depth (0–200 cm), region and county using information from the State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) database. The total estimated monetary mid-point value for TSC in the state of South Carolina was $124.36B (i.e., $124.36 billion U.S. dollars, where B = billion = 109), $107.14B for SOC, and $17.22B for SIC. Soil orders with the highest midpoint value for SOC were: Ultisols ($64.35B), Histosols ($11.22B), and Inceptisols ($10.31B). Soil orders with the highest midpoint value for SIC were: Inceptisols ($5.91B), Entisols ($5.53B), and Alfisols ($5.0B). Soil orders with the highest midpoint value for TSC were: Ultisols ($64.35B), Inceptisols ($16.22B), and Entisols ($14.65B). The regions with the highest midpoint SOC values were: Pee Dee ($34.24B), Low Country ($32.17B), and Midlands ($29.24B). The regions with the highest midpoint SIC values were: Low Country ($5.69B), Midlands ($5.55B), and Pee Dee ($4.67B). The regions with the highest midpoint TSC values were: Low Country ($37.86B), Pee Dee ($36.91B), and Midlands ($34.79B). The counties with the highest midpoint SOC values were Colleton ($5.44B), Horry ($5.37B), and Berkeley ($4.12B). The counties with the highest midpoint SIC values were Charleston ($1.46B), Georgetown ($852.81M, where M = million = 106), and Horry ($843.18M). The counties with the highest midpoint TSC values were Horry ($6.22B), Colleton ($6.02B), and Georgetown ($4.87B). Administrative areas (e.g., counties, regions) combined with pedodiversity concepts can provide useful information to design cost-efficient policies to manage soil carbon regulating ES at the state level.
Highlights
Framework is often used in connection with United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) because it is focused on the economic valuation of benefits (ES) and/or disservices (ED) people obtain from nature [2]
The analysis showed that states have different types of soils with various soil C types (e.g., Maryland is dominated by soil organic carbon (SOC), state of New Mexico is dominated by Soil inorganic carbon (SIC)) [11], which requires soiland carbon-specific management strategies
This study examined the application of soil diversity concepts and its measures to value soil C regulating ecosystem services (ES)/ED in the state of South Carolina (U.S.A.), its administrative units, and the systems of soil classification (e.g., U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Taxonomy, Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database) to be considered in territorial planning
Summary
Economic valuation of soil carbon is vital for achieving the United Nations (UN). Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), especially SDG 13: “Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts on future climate” [1]. Framework is often used in connection with UN SDGs because it is focused on the economic valuation of benefits (ES) and/or disservices (ED) people obtain from nature [2]. The ES framework includes three general categories of services: provisioning, regulating/maintenance, and cultural supporting services [2]. TSC is composed of SOC and SIC, only SOC is currently included in the list of soil properties important for ES [3]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
