DOCSLIB.ORG

Silvopasture References

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Silvopasture References SILVOPASTURE REFERENCES Abberton, M., Conant, R., and Batello, C. (2010). Plant Production and Protection Division Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 342. Albrecht, A., and Kandji, S.T. (2003). Carbon sequestration in tropical agroforestry systems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 99, 15–27. Andrade, H.J., Brook, R., and Ibrahim, M. (2008). Growth, production and carbon sequestration of silvopastoral systems with native timber species in the dry lowlands of Costa Rica. Plant Soil 308, 11–22. Benavides, R., Douglas, G.B., and Osoro, K. (2009). Silvopastoralism in New Zealand: review of effects of evergreen and deciduous trees on pasture dynamics. Agrofor. Syst. 76, 327–350. Calle, A. (2008). Using PES and technical assistance to promote silvopastoral systems in Quindío, Colombia: Attitude change as a key to permanent adoption. MES Thesis Yale Univ. Sch. For. Environ. Stud. N. Hav. CT. Calle, A., Montagnini, F., and Zuluaga, A.F. (2009). Le Point sur... Systemes Silvo-Pastoraux: Farmer’s perceptions of silvopastoral system promotion in Quindío, Colombia. Covey, K.R., Wood, S.A., Warren, R.J., Lee, X., and Bradford, M.A. (2012). Elevated methane concentrations in trees of an upland forest. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39. Cubbage, F., Balmelli, G., Bussoni, A., Noellemeyer, E., Pachas, A.N., Fassola, H., Colcombet, L., Rossner, B., Frey, G., Dube, F., et al. (2012). Comparing silvopastoral systems and prospects in eight regions of the world. Agrofor. Syst. 86, 303–314. De Pinto, A. (2017). Cropland Restoration as an Essential Component to the Forest Landscape Restoration Approach—Global Effects of Wide-Scale Adoption (IFPRI). Dixon, A.P., Faber-Langendoen, D., Josse, C., Morrison, J., and Loucks, C.J. (2014). Distribution mapping of world grassland types. J. Biogeogr. 41, 2003–2019. Dong, H., Mangino, J., McAllister, T., and Have, D. (2006). Chapter 10: Emissions from livestock and manure management. In 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, (Hayama, Japan: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies), p. DRAWDOWN.ORG — FEBRUARY 2020 PAGE 1 OF 4 Dube, F., Thevathasan, N.V., Zagal, E., Gordon, A.M., Stolpe, N.B., and Espinosa, M. (2011). Carbon sequestration potential of silvopastoral and other land use systems in the Chilean Patagonia. In Carbon Sequestration Potential of Agroforestry Systems, (Springer), pp. 101–127. FAO (2016). FAO Statistical Service Online. Feliciano et al (2018). Which agroforestry options give the greatest soil and above ground carbon benefits in different world regions? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 254, 117–129. Fernández-Núñez, E., Rigueiro-Rodríguez, A., and Mosquera-Losada, M.R. (2010). Carbon allocation dynamics one decade after afforestation with Pinus radiata D. Don and Betula alba L. under two stand densities in NW Spain. Ecol. Eng. 36, 876–890. Harvey, C.A., Chacón, M., Donatti, C.I., Garen, E., Hannah, L., Andrade, A., Bede, L., Brown, D., Calle, A., Chará, J., et al. (2014). Climate-Smart Landscapes: Opportunities and Challenges for Integrating Adaptation and Mitigation in Tropical Agriculture: Climate-smart landscapes. Conserv. Lett. 7, 77–90. den Herder, et al. (2017). Current extent and trends of agroforestry in the EU27. Holmann, F., Rivas, L., Argel, P., and Pérez, E. (2004). Impact of the adoption of Brachiaria grasses: Central America and Mexico. Livest. Res. Rural Dev. 16, 1–13. Houghton, R.A., and Nassikas, A.A. (2017). Global and regional fluxes of carbon from land use and land cover change 1850-2015: Carbon Emissions From Land Use. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 31, 456–472. Ibrahim, M., Chacón, M., Cuartas, C., Naranjo, J., Ponce, G., Vega, P., Casasola, F., and Rojas, J. (2007). Almacenamiento de carbono en el suelo y la biomasa arbórea en sistemas de usos de la tierra en paisajes ganaderos de Colombia, Costa Rica y Nicaragua. 10. IPCC (2006) 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Chapter 10 Emissions from Livestock and Manure Management. https://www.ipcc- nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/4_Volume4/V4_10_Ch10_Livestock.pdf Karki, U., and Goodman, M.S. (2015). Microclimatic differences between mature loblolly-pine silvopasture and open-pasture. Agrofor. Syst. 89, 319–325. Lal, R., Smith, P., Jungkunst, H.F., Mitsch, W.J., Lehmann, J., Nair, P.K.R., McBratney, A.B., de Moraes Sá, J.C., Schneider, J., Zinn, Y.L., et al. (2018). The carbon sequestration potential of terrestrial ecosystems. J. Soil Water Conserv. 73, 145A-152A. Lasco (2006). 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories - Volume 5. DRAWDOWN.ORG — FEBRUARY 2020 PAGE 2 OF 4 Lorenz, K., and Lal, R. (2018). Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Ecosystems (Cham: Springer International Publishing). Machmuller, M.B., Kramer, M.G., Cyle, T.K., Hill, N., Hancock, D., and Thompson, A. (2015). Emerging land use practices rapidly increase soil organic matter. Nat. Commun. 6. Mercer, D.E., Frey, G.E., and Cubbage, F.W. (2014). Economics of Agroforestry. 22. Montagnini, F. (2015). Función de los sistemas agroforestales en la adaptación y mitigación del cambio climático. In Sistemas Agroforestales: Funciones Productivas, Socioeconómicas y Ambientales, (Turrialba, Costa Rica: CATIE), pp. 269–298. Montagnini, F., Ibrahim, M., and Murgueitio Restrepo, E. (2013). Silvopastoral systems and climate change mitigation in Latin America. Bois Forets Trop. 316. Mosquera-Losada, M., Rigueiro-Rodríguez, A., McAdam, J., and others (2005). Silvopastoralism and sustainable land management. Proceedings of an international congress on silvopastoralism and sustainable management held in Lugo, Spain, April 2004. In Silvopastoralism and Sustainable Land Management. Proceedings of an International Congress on Silvopastoralism and Sustainable Management Held in Lugo, Spain, April 2004., (CABI Publishing), p. Nair (2012). Climate Change Mitigation: A Low-Hanging Fruit of Agroforestry. In Agroforestry - The Future of Global Land Use, Nair, and D. Garrity, eds. (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), pp. 31–67. Nair, Kumar, and Nair (2009). Agroforestry as a strategy for carbon sequestration. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 172, 10–23. Orefice, J., Carroll, J., Conroy, D., and Ketner, L. (2017). Silvopasture practices and perspectives in the Northeastern United States. Agrofor. Syst. 91, 149–160. Oviedo, J.L., Ovando, P., Forero, L., Huntsinger, L., Álvarez, A., Mesa, B., and Campos, P. (2013). The Private Economy of Dehesas and Ranches: Case Studies. In Mediterranean Oak Woodland Working Landscapes, P. Campos, L. Huntsinger, J.L. Oviedo Pro, P.F. Starrs, M. Diaz, R.B. Standiford, and G. Montero, eds. (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), pp. 389–424. Paciullo, D.S.C., de Castro, C.R.T., Gomide, C.A. de M., Maurício, R.M., Pires, M. de F.Á., Müller, M.D., and Xavier, D.F. (2011). Performance of dairy heifers in a silvopastoral system. Livest. Sci. 141, 166–172. Pagiola, S., Ramírez, E., Gobbi, J., de Haan, C., Ibrahim, M., Murgueitio, E., and Ruíz, J.P. (2007). Paying for the environmental services of silvopastoral practices in Nicaragua. Ecol. Econ. 64, 374–385. DRAWDOWN.ORG — FEBRUARY 2020 PAGE 3 OF 4 Pimentel, D., Cerasale, D., Stanley, R.C., Perlman, R., Newman, E.M., Brent, L.C., Mullan, A., and Chang, D.T.-I. (2012). Annual vs. perennial grain production. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 161, 1–9. Pinheiro, F.M., and Nair, P.K.R. (2018). Silvopasture in the Caatinga biome of Brazil: A review of its ecology, management, and development opportunities. For. Syst. 27, eR01S. Rocha, C., Cardenas, C.A., and Mora Delgado, J. (2013). Costos de establecimiento de un sistema silvopastoril de sauco (Sambucus nigra) y Kikuyo (Penisetum clandestinum) en Roncesvalles (Tolima). Agroforestería Neotropical 3, 9. Rosenstock, T., Wilkes, A., Jallo, C., Namoi, N., Bulusu, M., Suber, M., Bernard, F., and Mboi, D. (2018). Making Trees Count (CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS)). Schoeneberger, M.M. (2009). Agroforestry: working trees for sequestering carbon on agricultural lands. Agrofor. Syst. 75, 27–37. Somarriba, E., Beer, J., Alegre-Orihuela, J., Andrade, H.J., Cerda, R., DeClerck, F., Detlefsen, G., Escalante, M., Giraldo, L.A., Ibrahim, M., et al. (2012). Mainstreaming Agroforestry in Latin America. In Agroforestry - The Future of Global Land Use, P.K.R. Nair, and D. Garrity, eds. (Springer Netherlands), pp. 429–453. Thornton, P.K., and Herrero, M. (2010). Potential for reduced methane and carbon dioxide emissions from livestock and pasture management in the tropics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 19667–19672. Toensmeier, E. (2016). The carbon farming solution: a global toolkit of perennial crops and regenerative agriculture practices for climate change mitigation and food security (White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing). Toensmeier, E. (2017). Perennial Staple Crops and Agroforestry for Climate Change Mitigation. In Integrating Landscapes: Agroforestry for Biodiversity Conservation and Food Sovereignty, F. Montagnini, ed. (Cham: Springer International Publishing), pp. 439–451. Yamamoto, W., Dewi, I.A., and Ibrahim, M. (2007). Effects of silvopastoral areas on milk production at dual-purpose cattle farms at the semi-humid old agricultural frontier in central Nicaragua. Agric. Syst. 94, 368–375. Zomer, R.., Trabucco A, Coe, R., Place, F., van Noordwijk, M., and Xu, J.. (2014). Trees on farms: an update and reanalysis of agroforestry’s global extent and socio-ecological characteristics (World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF)). Zomer, R.J., Trabucco, A., Coe, R., and Place, F. (2009). Trees on Farm: Analysis of Global Extent and Geographic Patterns of Agroforestry (Nairobi, Kenya: World Agroforestry Centre). DRAWDOWN.ORG — FEBRUARY 2020 PAGE 4 OF 4 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Environmental Advisory Board Annual Report FY19 ______
    To: Mayor and City Council Members From: Environmental Advisory Board Date: 11/14/2019 Re: Environmental Advisory Board Annual Report FY19 ________________________________________________________________________ It is with great pleasure that we submit this summary of the work that the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB) has accomplished over the past year. Our FY2019 work plan included five overarching objectives that have guided our monthly discussions and actions. The following report provides a summary of our work in these areas. Highlights: 1. Hosted the 12th Annual Environmental Awards Celebration 2. Reviewed and evaluated programs, conducted additional research, participated in facility tours and prepared a report on recycling programs for Raleigh (see attached report) 3. Continued to support pollinator habitat through our Raleigh Bee City USA membership 4. Participated in activities and learned about Raleigh’s Greenhouse Gas emissions and plans for the upcoming Community-wide Climate Action Plan (CCAP) 5. Participated in the GardenCorps project in support of ongoing urban agriculture and healthy living initiatives 1. Hosted the 12th Annual Environmental Awards Celebration In April 2019, the EAB hosted another successful Environmental Awards ceremony, at Market Hall. This was the 12th celebration of the environment with impressive winners that helped to showcase the innovative people and organizations that tirelessly work to improve the environment in Raleigh. We continue to attract new individuals and businesses each year who come to support their colleagues and friends who receive awards. The Board would like to express our gratitude to the City staff who organize the Awards Ceremony and ensure that it is always a successful event that reflects well on the City of Raleigh.
    [Show full text]
  • Living Building Challengesm 3.0
    LIVING BUILDING CHALLENGE SM LIVING BUILDING CHALLENGESM 3.0 A Visionary Path to a Regenerative Future LIVING BUILDING CHALLENGESM 3.0 A Visionary Path to a Regenerative Future LIVING BUILDING CHALLENGE SM Printed in Canada NOTIFICATION Copyright © 2014 by International Living Future Institute The Institute grants substantial limited uses in order to encourage a wide distribution, including the following: © 2006, 2008, 2009, 2012 previous versions. • This particular document may be printed and distributed in its entirety by any organization for the purposes of education or adoption of the Challenge. This stipulation does not apply International Living Building Institute, International Living to other Living Building Challenge or Living Future Challenge Future Institute and Cascadia Green Building Council. documents or other related documents unless expressly All rights reserved. No part of this document may be modified, specified. However it should be noted that the Institute does nor elements of this document used out of existing context provide pre-printed, professionally bound copies on FSC without written permission. paper of the Standard for purchase at a reasonable price. For information, address: • This document may be transmitted in PDF form only— The International Living Future Institute without any modifications made—to any individual or 1501 East Madison Street, Suite 150 organization for the purposes of education or adoption Seattle, WA 98122 of the Challenge. Living Building Challenge is a trademark of the International • This document may be posted on websites in its Living Future Institute (the Institute). The terms “Living entirety and unmodified in PDF form for the purposes of Buildings” and “Living Building” and “Living Building Leader” education or to encourage the adoption of the Challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Drawdown
    ISSUE BRIEF : Q4 2020 PROJECT DRAWDOWN AN ACTIONABLE PLAN TO STOP CLIMATE CHANGE QUICKLY, SAFELY, AND EQUITABLY INTRODUCTION Business Forward has organized hundreds of briefings across the country on clean energy, climate change, and energy security. These briefings have included two Secretaries of Energy, two EPA Administrators, dozens of U.S. Senators and Congressmen, and hundreds of other officials. At these briefings, business leaders invariably ask, “Can we afford to fix it?” Answering that question requires an understanding of which activities generate the most greenhouse gas pollution and how much reducing that activity might cost. We need apples-to-apples ROI comparisons of, say, electrifying our auto fleets versus reducing deforestation. If you want to understand options for stopping climate change and have time for only one book, we recommend The Drawdown Review, a comprehensive, accessible, and relatable look at the three-piece climate puzzle. “Drawdown” is the future point in time when levels of greenhouse gases 2.5 in the atmosphere stop climbing and start to steadily decline. To achieve Baseline this, Project Drawdown explains the individual and collective impact of hundreds of reforms to (1) reduce greenhouse gas pollution, (2) support and enhance the sinks of carbon dioxide found in nature, and (3) help ) 2.0 society achieve broader transformations. By comparing the ROI of each Drawdown of these reforms, Project Drawdown makes it easier for policymakers Scenario to achieve drawdown “quickly, safely, and equitably.” 1.5 This issue brief summarizes Project Drawdown’s findings. We encourage you to learn more at www.drawdown.org 1.0 Change in Temperature (ºC 0.5 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2070 2 10 KEY INSIGHTS 1.
    [Show full text]
  • California Climate Policy Fact Sheet: Drawdown Marin
    CALIFORNIA CLIMATE POLICY FACT SHEET: DRAWDOWN MARIN California’s landmark environmental laws, including Assembly Bill 32 (Health & Safety Code § 38500 et seq.), address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions at the state level. Yet local California communities have also begun to implement tailored climate policies that contribute to the state’s environmental progress. One such community, Marin County in northern California, is implementing a community-driven response to climate change through its Drawdown Marin campaign. Introduced in 2017, Drawdown Marin is aligned with Project Drawdown, a nonprofit organization and coalition of stakeholders interested in achieving “drawdown” – the point in the future where GHG emissions start to steadily decline. This California Climate Policy Fact Sheet provides a foundational understanding of Drawdown Marin as an example of local initiatives that complement California’s efforts towards reducing emissions across the state. Overview of Drawdown Marin Drawdown Marin was launched as a countywide climate action campaign to achieve two goals in Marin County: 1. A 60% reduction of GHG emissions below 2005 levels by 2030; and 2. A 100% or greater reduction of GHG emissions by 2045. Drawdown Marin aims to go through a step-by-step process, from information gathering to the development of focus areas and stakeholder groups, to implement local climate solutions that address six categories: renewable energy, transportation, buildings and infrastructure, carbon sequestration, local food and food waste, and climate resilient communities. Primary stakeholder groups include an executive steering committee to guide the campaign, stakeholder collaboratives to develop recommended priority solutions and measure progress, and a community partnership council to engage and empower Marin County residents.
    [Show full text]
  • References SILVOPASTURE
    SILVOPASTURE Drawdown Technical Assessment References Abberton, Michael, Richard Conant, Caterina Batello, and others. “Grassland Carbon Sequestration: Management, Policy and Economics.” Integrated Crop Management 11 (2010). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.454.3291&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Albrecht, A., & Kandji, S. T. (2003). Carbon sequestration in tropical agroforestry systems. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 99(1), 15-27. Andrade, Hernán J., Robert Brook, and Muhammad Ibrahim. “Growth, Production and Carbon Sequestration of Silvopastoral Systems with Native Timber Species in the Dry Lowlands of Costa Rica.” Plant and Soil 308, no. 1–2 (May 28, 2008): 11–22. doi:10.1007/s11104-008-9600-x. Benavides, Raquel, Grant B. Douglas, and Koldo Osoro. “Silvopastoralism in New Zealand: Review of Effects of Evergreen and Deciduous Trees on Pasture Dynamics.” Agroforestry Systems 76, no. 2 (October 26, 2008): 327–50. doi:10.1007/s10457-008-9186-6. Calle, Alisia, Florencia Montagnini, Andrés Felipe Zuluaga, and others. “Farmers’ Perceptions of Silvopastoral System Promotion in Quindío, Colombia.” Bois et Forets Des Tropiques 300, no. 2 (2009): 79–94. Clason, Terry R., and Steven H. Sharrow. “Silvopastoral Practices.” North American Agroforestry: An Integrated Science and Practice. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI, 2000, 119–147. Covey, Kristofer R., Stephen A. Wood, Robert J. Warren, Xuhui Lee, and Mark A. Bradford. “Elevated Methane Concentrations in Trees of an Upland Forest.” Geophysical Research Letters 39, no. 15 (August 16, 2012): L15705. doi:10.1029/2012GL052361. Cubbage, Frederick, Gustavo Balmelli, Adriana Bussoni, Elke Noellemeyer, Anibal Pachas, Hugo Fassola, Luis Colcombet, et al. “Comparing Silvopastoral Systems and Prospects in Eight Regions of the World.” Agroforestry Systems 86, no.
    [Show full text]
  • Drawdown: Marin Local Solutions for Climate Change
    Drawdown: Marin Local Solutions for Climate Change We are on Coast Miwok land. Imagine that by 2030... POLL: Are you willing to pay a tax or fee to fund projects that create a better future? Fund Secure on-going, long-term funding Implement Drawdown: Marin Solutions We Implement can create Empower the community to share priorities and participate in this future! Empower existing and new programs that reduce GHG emissions, increase community resilience, and address inequities Create a governance structure that combines resources from Collaborate across the County What is Drawdown: Marin? Community driven planning and implementation process to identify local solutions to climate change that dramatically reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions beyond zero. Our Vision: Marin reverses its impacts on climate change by implementing local solutions as we create a thriving, equitable, and resilient future for all. Our Process •2017 - Kick-off event + Board of Supervisors (BOS) pass resolution •2018 - 2-year planning process started; 150+ people involved; designed solutions and engaged the community •2020 - Strategic Plan will be presented to the BOS Who's Involved? 6 Stakeholder Collaboratives Renewable Energy Buildings + Transportation Infrastructure Carbon Sequestration Local Food + Food Climate Resilient Waste Communities GHG Reduction Goals 60% reduction of GHG emissions below 2005 by Marin County by 2030 Drawdown GHG emissions by Marin County below zero by 2045 Marin Countywide Emissions by Sector, 2018 1,435,431 MTCO2e Projected Countywide
    [Show full text]
  • Why Dairy Farming and Silvopastoral Agroforestry Could Be The
    IFB0219 ISSUE 1.qxp_Layout 1 07/03/2019 13:30 Page 1 TEAT CLIMATE FINANCE DISINFECTANT CHANGE CHANGING HOW TO SELECT SOLUTIONS FARM FROM 100 COW TOILET: STRUCTURES PRODUCTS FACT OR FANTASY? >> SEE PAGE 22 >> SEE PAGE 46 >> SEE PAGE 38 I R I S H VVolumeolume 67 IIssuessue 12 SAutumnpring 2 0/ 1Winter9 Editi o2020n Edition FPPricerice €4.953a.95 / ££4.502.95 ( (Stg)Strg) m BusiDnA eI R YsI NsG PARLOUR PROTOCOLS HELP THE COW & THE MILKING PERSONNEL FARM DESIGN TIMEDEVELOP A MACHINESLONG-TERM PLAN FORYOUR FARM Saving You Time And Money PG 30 HOW GOOD IS YOUR WHICH PHONE IS BEST HOUSEKEEPING FOR SILAGE? FOR FARMERS DAIRY FARMERS PG 24 PG 14 PG 10 IFB0219 ISSUE 1.qxp_Layout 1 07/03/2019 13:30 Page 1 TEAT CLIMATE FINANCE DISINFECTANT CHANGE CHANGING HOW TO SELECT SOLUTIONS FARM FROM 100 COW TOILET: STRUCTURES PRODUCTS FACT OR FANTASY? Foreword/Contents/Credits >> SEE PAGE 22 >> SEE PAGE 46 >> SEE PAGE 38 I R I S H VVolumeolume 67 IIssuessue 12 SAutumnpring 2 0/ 1Winter9 Editi o2020n Edition FPPricerice €4.953a.95 £4.50 £2.95 (Stg) (Strg ) m BusiDnA eI R YsI NsG Features 10 Housekeeping For Dairy Farmers Aidan Kelly of ADPS outlines a list of items that need checking before housing cattle full-time and in particular before the onslaught of the calving period. Planning will make life easier and more safe. PARLOUR PROTOCOLS HELP THE COW & THE MILKING PERSONNEL 14 Which Phone is best for Dairy Farmers? With the increasing reliance on Apps in farming what should you look for in a phone so that it will suit your particular needs? By Dr Diarmuid McSweeney an expert in agri- 10 26 technology.
    [Show full text]
  • References COMPOSTING.Pdf
    COMPOSTING Drawdown Technical Assessment References Adhikari, B. K., Barrington, S., & Martinez, J. (2006). Predicted growth of world urban food waste and methane production. Waste Management & Research, 24(5), 421–433. http://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X06067767 Barton, J. R., Issaias, I., & Stentiford, E. I. (2008). Carbon – Making the right choice for waste management in developing countries. Waste Management, 28(4), 690–698. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2007.09.033 BASF. (2012). These maps show how the world composts. Retrieved from http://qz.com/216261/these- maps-show-how-the-world-composts/ Bernal, M. P., Sánchez-Monedero, M. A., Paredes, C., & Roig, A. (1998). Carbon mineralization from organic wastes at different composting stages during their incubation with soil. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 69(3), 175–189. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(98)00106-6 Bernstad, A., & la Cour Jansen, J. (2012). Review of comparative LCAs of food waste management systems – Current status and potential improvements. Waste Management, 32(12), 2439–2455. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.07.023 Bogner, J., Pipatti, R., Hashimoto, S., Diaz, C., Mareckova, K., Diaz, L., … Gregory, R. (2008). Mitigation of global greenhouse gas emissions from waste: conclusions and strategies from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report. Working Group III (Mitigation). Waste Management & Research, 26(1), 11–32. http://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X07088433 Bourgeais, V. (2015, March 26). Each person in the EU generated 481 kg of municipal waste in 2013. Eurostat Press Office. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/6757479/8- 26032015-AP-EN.pdf/a2982b86-9d56-401c-8443-ec5b08e543cc Brown, S., Kruger, C., & Subler, S.
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling the Economic Potential of Silvopasture in Eastern North
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Sonia Rose Bruck for the degree of Master of Science in Forest Ecosystems and Society presented June 13, 2016. Title: Modeling the Economic Potential of Silvopasture in Eastern North Carolina and Northeastern Oregon and Exploring Eligibility of Silvopasture to Enroll in Carbon Markets in the United States Abstract Approved: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Badege Bishaw ABSTRACT Silvopasture is the planned and managed agroforestry system in which forage, livestock, and trees or shrubs are integrated in order to enhance individual components. Silvopasture has been identified as the most promising agroforestry system for the Pacific Northwest and Southeast United States. However, there have been few studies describing the economic viability of silvopasture in these regions. There are two objectives explored in this study: first, to determine the potential for silvopasture as an economically viable income source to farmers in eastern North Carolina and northeastern Oregon by calculating the Land Expectation Value (LEV), Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), and Annual Expectation Value (AEV), of realistic silvopastoral management regimes, compared to traditionally managed timber or livestock farms; second, to explore whether silvopasture can store as much or more carbon than a traditionally stocked timber plantation, and whether profits from sequestered carbon are possible at this time in the United States. The most profitable silvopasture regimes for eastern North Carolina were cool season grasses combined with loblolly pine at a four percent real discount rate (LEV = $1,025 per acre) and cool season grasses combined with longleaf pine at a four percent real discount rate (LEV = $285 per acre).
    [Show full text]
  • Shadows and Ghosts: Lost Woods in the Landscape
    Wild Thing?? Managing Landscape Change and Future Ecologies 9th to 11th September 2015 Conference Abstracts With the Ancient Tree Forum and the European Society for Environmental History ************************************************************************************ Visit our website: www.ukeconet.org The South Yorkshire ECONET (Biodiversity Research Group) ch/0915 1 ch/0915 2 Issues of perceptions, history & science in severance & wilding Professor Ian Rotherham, Dept. of Natural & Built Environment - Sheffield Hallam University, [email protected] Summary Following seminal texts by Adams1 (Future Nature: a vision for conservation), Peter Taylor2 (Beyond Conservation), and Vera3 (2000), there has been renewed interest in addressing conservation problems through radical new approaches. Indeed, there is a growing feeling that conservation has failed to deliver and in the age of politically enforced austerity, the situation will worsen. In this context, ‘wilding’ and ‘wilder’ landscapes, applied effectively and sensitively, offer huge, exciting benefits for biodiversity, heritage, and amenity. However, there are significant pitfalls if implementation lacks careful planning and design. The ‘eco-cultural nature’5 of landscape, resulting from long-term, intimate interactions between people and ecologies is important, and across Europe particularly, twenty-first century depopulation means rural landscapes abandoned’ not ‘wilded’. Ecology, communities, and economies are potentially devastated4. Alongside urbanisation of rural landscapes, these socio-economic and demographic changes cause ‘cultural severance’6,7, with long-term, often rapid, declines in biodiversity and landscape quality. Furthermore, from urban to remote, rural areas, attitudes to, and perceptions of, ‘alien’ invasive species challenge to attempts to ‘wild’ the landscape. Feral species, exotic plants and animals, and invasive natives forming recombinant biodiversity5,8, but ‘re-wilding’ discussions rarely mention feral and exotic.
    [Show full text]
  • Silvopasture
    Regenerative Agriculture Practices Fact Sheet Silvopasture Silvopasture is an agroforestry practice that intentionally integrates trees, and pasture and forage crops into a single system for raising livestock. Research shows that pastures with trees sequester five to ten times as much carbon in biomass and in the soil as same-size operations that have no trees. They also provide multiple benefits to farmers in terms of providing shade for the animals and diverse food sourc- es, added income through the production of nuts, fruit, timber, and forest products like mushrooms, improved soil fertility and biodiversity. The animals and land seem to be healthier with higher meat and dairy yields, and the farms are more resilient due to the diversity of income possibilities. There are challenges in this approach, however, that require relearning how farming is done. In particular, it is important to incorporate managed grazing techniques where the animals rotate through different sec- tions of the land for true success. Benefits Potential Considerations • Increases biodiversity • May need to learn a new approach to • Improves ecosystem function and farming that embraces diverse practices resiliency • Expense to add trees and paddocks if not • Trees provides a windbreak, preventing there already erosion • Research and time to learn what will • Provides shelter and food for livestock work on your particular property • Can provide an additional cash crop • Increased ongoing management needs— • Increases carbon sequestration rotational grazing should be considered • Lowers risk through diversification a requirement Regenerative Agriculture Practices Fact Sheet Resources Six key principles for a Silvopasture—National Agro- Silvopasture: An Agroforestry successful silvopasture forestry Center, USDA Practice Tips by Steve Gabriel of the Multiple silvopasture resources Guide to Silvopasture practice Cornell small farms program.
    [Show full text]
  • Mass Transit
    ALTERNATIVE MOBILITY OVERVIEW OF A HIGH-IMPACT DRAWDOWN SOLUTION Replacing emissions-intensive vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) with zero- or low-carbon alternatives such as bicycling, walking, or tele-working can reduce GHG emissions. This bundle includes the following Drawdown Georgia solutions: bike infrastructure, walkable cities, telepresence, and e-bikes, with a specific focus on replacing short- distance vehicle trips with these alternatives. TECHNOLOGY AND MARKET READINESS These technologies are mature and market ready. Telecommuting and alternative mobility solutions such as bicycles are already widely used around the world and have some presence in Georgia. Given the minimal current presence of biking and alternative mobility, there is significant potential to reduce CO2 emissions by replacing CO2- intensive car trips with low-carbon alternatives. Telecommuting has even greater potential. With advances in video-conferencing and teleworking solutions, there is significant potential to reduce VMT by implementing teleworking policies, and many businesses and organizations already employ teleworking as a strategy to improve employee satisfaction and reduce operation costs. LOCAL EXPERIENCE AND DATA AVAILABILITY The Federal Highway Administration’s National Transportation Survey has detailed data for VMT at the state level, which can be used to estimate reduction in VMT resulting from more widespread use of alternative mobility measures. Several cities around the state are planning or have already started implementing improvements to bicycling and walking infrastructure, such as the Transportation Alternative Program (TAP), Georgia Commute Options (GCO), and the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC). Challenges include a lack of data relating to existing biking and telecommuting data as well as historical trends of these data.
    [Show full text]