Progress 01/01/13 to 12/31/17
Outputs
Target Audience:The primary target audience include policy makers, analysts, and the interested public. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Two graduate students worked on nutrient trading issues over the course of the project. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results have been dissemnated to USDA (Office of Environmental Markets), state and regional water quality managers, and to agricultural economic professionals. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
This project evaluated a number of important issues related to nutrient trading programs in the Chesapeake Bay. The project produced three general findings. 1) The study estimated the administrative costs for agricultural producers to create nutrient credits. This research found that credit creation and verification costs were highest for annual, nonstructural best management practices (BMPs). These practices include cover crops and conservation tillage. The relatively high administrative costs offset low installation costs. These adminstrative costs are a barrier producing nutrient reduction credits from agricultural working lands. 2) Nutrient trading programs have yet to produce viable trading opportunities for agricultural producers in the Chesapeake Bay region and across the country. Buyers of nutrient reduction credits have expressed very little interest in purchasing nutrient credits from working agricultural operations. The most active nutrient trading program involves agricultural producers paying landowners to permanently convert agricultural land to forest. 3) Enhancing the nutrient assimilative capacity of the aquatic environment may provide higher quality nutrient credits than nonpoint source credits that reduce nutrient runoff. Nutrient assimilative credits can be produced by removing nutrients already in the ambient water through bioharvest (algal harvest, aquaculture shellfish, etc) or through bioprocess (enhanced denitrification through constructed wetlands, stream restoration, or denitrifying bioreactors). In many cases, nutrient removal can be directly monitored, measured, and verified. Nonpoint source credits are based on modelled outcomes rather than direct observation.
Publications
- Type:
Other
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Stephenson, K. and C. Hershner. 2017. "Consideration of BMP Performance Uncertainty in the Chesapeake Bay Expert Panel Process". Background paper prepared for the Chesapeake Bay Program, Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee Workshop, "Consideration of BMP Performance Uncertainty in Chesapeake Bay Program Implementation", November 14-15, 2017. 16pp.
|
Progress 10/01/16 to 09/30/17
Outputs
Target Audience:Professionals and academics working in the field of pollution policy and management. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Research data was shared with the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee Chesapeake Bay Program. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?This year results have been mostly disseminated through journal articles. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Next year plans include submitting proposals to investigate incentives for adopting nutrient reducing bioreactors.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
This year several publications were produced that documented the limitations nutrient trading programs have in incentivizing reductions in nonpoint sources. In addition, I facilitated work on evaluating how nutrient reducing "biofilters" can be utilized to achieve nutrient reduction goals in the Chesapeake Bay.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Stephenson, K and L. Shabman. 2017. Where Did all the Agricultural Nonpoint Source Trades Go?: Lessons from Virginia Nutrient Trading Programs. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 53 (5):1178-1194.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Stephenson, K. and L. Shabman 2017. Can Water Quality Trading Fix the Agricultural Nonpoint Source Problem? Annual Review of Resource Economics 9: 95-116.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2017
Citation:
Deboe, G., E. Bock, K. Stephenson, and Z. Easton. 2017. Nutrient Biofilters in the Virginia Coastal Plain: Nitrogen Removal, Cost, and Potential Adoption Pathways Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 72(2):139-149; doi:10.2489/jswc.72.2.139
|
Progress 10/01/15 to 09/30/16
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audiance for my efforts this year was regulatory agencies tasked with implementing nutrient trading programs, academic economists working on nutrient trading issues, and policy participants interested in nutrient trading programs. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Several undergraduate students helped co-author a public outreach document (Virginia Cooperative Extension) explaining how Virginia is using environment credit trading programs to implement environmental regualtory programs. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?A Virginia Cooperative Extension publication was produced on the use of environmental credit trading programs in Virginia. Several publications were also distributed to interested parties upon request. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Several publications are being finalized that examinethe limits of nutrient trading programs to make progress in reducing nonpoint source pollution. Nonpoint sources, particularly from agricultural services, remain the single largest impediment to achieving the Chesapeake Bay nutrient reduction goals.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
A critical issue in the development of nutrient trading programs is the cost of buyers and sellers to participate in the market. Research conducted this year found that the administrative costs ("transaction costs") for farmers and agricultural landowners to develop and sell nutrient credits from agricultural best management practices can be substantial. The research raised awareness about the implication of trading design on the costs of farmers to supply nutrient reduction credits. In addition, regulated parties are interested in expanding compliance options. This reporting period, I published a paper that evaluated the water quality effectiveness of using nutrient assimilation credits in nutrient trading programs. People can create nutrient assimilation credits by implementing projects that remove nutrients directly from ambient waters. The paper was requested by a Cheaspeake Bay expert who is participating in an effort to evaluate oyster aquaculture's role in removing nutrients from ambient waters.
Publications
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Gwendolen Deboe and Kurt Stephenson. 2016. Transactions Costs of Expanding Nutrient Trading to Agricultural Working Lands: A Virginia Case Study Ecological Economics130 (Oct 2016):176-185
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Kurt Stephenson and Leonard Shabman. Nutrient Assimilation Services for Water Quality Credit Trading Programs: A Comparative Analysis with Nonpoint Source Credits; forthcoming Coastal Management.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Bott, C., M. Brush, E. Canuel, M. Johnston, P. Kangas, S. Lane, P. May, W. Mulbry, M. Mulholland, D. Sample, K. Sellner, and K. Stephenson. 2015. Nutrient and Sediment Reductions from Algal Flow-way Technologies: Recommendations to the Chesapeake Bay Programs Water Quality Goal Implementation Team from the Algal Flow-way Technologies BMP Expert Panel October 21, 2015. Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis MD.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Stephenson, K., S. Chase-Walsh, A. Lindrose, J. Worley, and J. Ignosh. 2016. Citizens Guide Virginia Citizens Guide to Environmental Credit Trading Programs: An Overview. Virginia Cooperative Extension Publication ANR-173P.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Kurt Stephenson. 2016. "Financial Incentives to Adopt Stormwater Control Practices in the Chesapeake Bay Region". Center for Watershed Protection, National Webinar, September 14th.
|
Progress 10/01/14 to 09/30/15
Outputs
Target Audience:Target audiences include policy makers, analysts, and the interested public. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?The graduate student working on these efforts was able to interact with USDA staff and environmental professionals. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Presentations were given at a number of conferences including the Ecosystem Markets ACES Conference (Washington DC December 2014) Virginia Environment Conference (Lexington VA, April 2015) and the USDA National Workshop on Water Quality Markets (Lincoln Nebraska, September 2015). The Virginia conference is attended by state environmental agency staff, NGOs, and academics. An extension publication series on environmental markets in Virginia was initiated in 2015. The first publication in the series will appear in print early next year as a numbered extension publication. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Research will be finalized that examines the demand for nonpoint source nutrient credits in Virginia.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
A critical issue in the development of nutrient trading programs is the cost of buyers and sellers to participate in the market. Research conducted this year found that the administrative costs ("transaction costs") for farmers and agricultural landowners to develop and sell nutrient credits from agricultural best management practices can be substantial. The research raised awareness about the implication of trading design on the costs of farmers to supply nutrient reduction credits.
Publications
- Type:
Theses/Dissertations
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Gwendolen Jayne Rees. Two analyses of costs of agricultural nonpoint source pollution: Transactions costs of water quality trading programs and Impacts of transactions costs and differential BMP adoption rates on the cost of reducing agricultural NPS pollution in Virginia
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Stephenson, K. and L. Shabman. 2015. "Nutrient Assimilation Services for Water Quality Credit Trading Programs". Resources for the Future, Discussion paper 15-33. Washington DC
- Type:
Book Chapters
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Rose, J., S. Becker, S. Deonarine, J. Ferreira, T. Getchis, J. Grant, J. Kim, J. Krumholz, G. Kraemer, K. Stephenson, G. Wikfors, and C. Yarnish. 2015. "Nutrient Bioextraction". In Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology, Springer, New York.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Rees, G. and K. Stephenson. 2014. Transaction costs of nonpoint source water quality credits" Implications for trading programs in the Chesapeake. USDA Office of Environmental Markets, November Bay Watershed
|
Progress 10/01/13 to 09/30/14
Outputs
Target Audience: The target audience for this proposal is policy-makers (primarily agency staff), nutrient trading market participants, and the interested public. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? A briefing was given to the USDA Office of Environmental Markets in September. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Publish the results of the transaction cost report in a peer-reviewed journal. I also plan to submit a paper for publication that evaluates the use of nutrient assimilation technologies (biomass harvesting, nutrient cycling) in nutrient trading programs. A new project will also explore how to certify nutrient credits from algal harvesting technologies.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Virginia has developed a number of nutrient trading options for regulated entities to comply with nutrient control requirements under the Chesapeake Bay TMDL. To date, Virginia DEQ has certified permanent phosphorus reduction credits. Land developers can use these credits to meet some of their phosphorus control requirements associated with land development activities. Since land development is considered a "permanent" land use change, Virginia requires permanent offsets for any additional phosphorus load created by the land development project. Credit suppliers create permanent phosphorus credits largely by converting agricultural land to less intensive nutrient uses such as forest. The cost of certifying and monitoring the creation of these nonpoint source credits for the state and credit suppliers has beenmodest. If the nutrient and trading program expands, these administrative costs can become more costly. The state of Virginia recently developed procedures to require municipal stormwater systems to meet numeric nutrient control requirements in their 5 year permits. Municipal stormwater programs will be allowed to purchase nonpoint source credits, including those from agriculture, to meet the nutrient control requirements. Thus municipal stormwater managers could elect to purchase shorter term nonpoint source credits. This opportunity would allow agricultural producers and landowners at least in concept to generate nutrient reduction credits from working lands. Reseach conducted under this project notes that expanding credit creation to working agricultural lands will raise the administrative costs of the program. Certification costs will increase because many working land best management practices (BMPs) are more complex to implement and verify than land conversion. Furthermore, monitoring costs will also go up. The magnitude of the increase, however, depends critically on the type of monitoring regime trading program managers adopt.
Publications
- Type:
Other
Status:
Submitted
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Rees, Gwen and Kurt Stephenson. "Transactions costs of nonpoint source water quality credits: Implications for trading programs in the Chesapeake Bay watershed" Report for USDA's Office of Environmental Markets.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Ribaudo, Marc, Charlie Abdalla, Kurt Stephenson, and Lisa Wainger. "Critical Issues in Implementing Nutrient Trading Programs in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Chesapeake Bay Program, Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee, Workshop report, publication CRC# 14-002.
|
Progress 01/01/13 to 09/30/13
Outputs
Target Audience: The target audience for this proposal is policy-makers (primarily agency staff), nutrient trading market participants, and the interested public. A technical report was distributed to agency staff and a presentation was given to interested public in April. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? One presentation was given at the state's most important environmental conference. Approximately 40 people attended the presentation. A technical report on how manure conversion technologes (anaerobic digesters, waste to energy projects etc.) can be credited in a nutrient trading program was also distributed to agency staff. The report is also available to the general public via the Department of Agricutlural and Applied Economics website. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? A paper is under development that evaluates the use of nutrient assimilation technologies (biomass harvesting, nutrient cycling) in nutrient trading programs. A new project will also explore how certify nutrient credits from algal harvesting technologies.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
A comprehensive technical report was completed. The objective of this report was to review and synthesize the technical basis and uncertainties for quantifying the nutrient load change of manure conversion/treatment projects for use in a nutrient credit trading program. The report identifed a conceptual framework for calculating the nutrient credits (net nutrient reductions with versus without a project) for general classes of nutrient conversion projects (biological conversion such as digesters and thermal combustion). The report also synthesized the current state of scientific and technical knowledge and uncertainties surrounding implementation of a nutrient crediting procedure for manure conversion projects.
Publications
|
|