The increasing pressure from land cover change exacerbates the negative effect on ecosystems and ecosystem services (ES). One approach to inform holistic and sustainable management is to quantify the ES provided by the landscape. Using the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model, this study quantified the sediment retention capacity and water yield potential of different land cover in the Santee River Basin Network in South Carolina, USA. Results showed that vegetated areas provided the highest sediment retention capacity and lowest water yield potential. Also, the simulations demonstrated that keeping the offseason crop areas vegetated by planting cover crops improves the monthly ES provision of the landscape. Retaining the soil within the land area prevents possible contamination and siltation of rivers and streams. On the other hand, low water yield potential translates to low occurrence of surface runoff, which indicates better soil erosion control, regulated soil nutrient absorption and gradual infiltration. The results of this study can be used for landscape sustainability management to assess the possible tradeoffs between ecological conservation and economic development. Furthermore, the generated map of ES can be used to pinpoint the areas where ES are best provided within the landscape.

Cover crops are becoming more accepted as a viable best management practice because of their ability to provide important environmental and soil health benefits. Because of these benefits, many land managers are strongly encouraging the use of cover crops. Additionally, there is limited information on farmers′ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of implementing cover crops. Many farmers state that they do not have enough money or time to implement cover crops. In an attempt to gather more data about the adoption rate and perceptions of cover crops in South Carolina, a survey was sent to 3000 row crop farmers across the state. Farmers were asked whether they implement cover crops and their perceptions of the benefits and challenges associated with implementation. Furthermore, questions were asked regarding the impact of row cropping on their environment to gauge farmer′s education level on environmental impacts. Responses showed many people are implementing cover crops; however, there are still differences in perceptions about benefits and challenges between those who are adopting cover crops and those who are not. This research assesses these differences and aims to provide a baseline for focusing cover crop programs to tackle these certain challenges and promote the benefits.

South Carolina (SC) has a variety of different forest types, and they all have potential to sequester a certain amount of carbon. Private forest landowners control a significant portion of the overall forestland in SC, and their management efforts can maintain or improve forest carbon stocks. Currently, the second largest carbon market in the world is the California Carbon Market, which gives a monetary value to sequestered carbon. One carbon credit is equal to one metric ton of carbon and is currently worth around $15.00. Forest management plans are geared toward increasing carbon sequestration over time. This study aims to educate forest landowners about various forest management practices that contribute to increasing carbon stocks by looking at various forest types and locations in SC and their current and projected carbon stocks. Forest Inventory Analysis (FIA) data were utilized in the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) to project carbon sequestration for 100 years for 130 plots. A variety of management practices were employed to see the variance in carbon sequestration. Results showed that carbon sequestration would increase for certain management practices such as thinning and prescribed fire. Clear cutting over time was harmful to sequestration. This data will be beneficial for forest landowners interested in a carbon project and those interested in seeing how different management practices affect carbon sequestration.

Over half of lakes, reservoirs, and ponds in the United States are threatened or impaired, mostly by nutrients. One policy to improve water quality is water quality trading (WQT). While the concept is appealing, adoption of conservation practices in these programs has been anemic at best. Using a case study in the newly-formed WQT market in Jordan Lake, North Carolina, we propose that part of the problem is a large adoption premium (AP) for this program. AP is the amount that farmers require over and above direct adoption costs to participate. In this study, farmers were asked at in-person interviews about their willingness to accept (WTA) a payment to adopt a particular conservation practice (riparian buffers) in order to generate and sell credits. We compared farmers’ WTA to their direct cost of participation, which allowed us to estimate an AP. On average, the AP more than doubles the cost of purchasing credits. The AP sums all of the known indirect costs already cited in the literature, and more, into a single value and is relatively simple to estimate. Knowing the AP would improve the ability of policy makers to accurately estimate what is needed to boost adoption rates in WQT programs and other conservation programs as well.

Attracting forestland owners to participate in carbon markets can be challenging for several reasons including offset price volatility, legislative uncertainties, high costs of offset project development, long contract lengths, and landowners’ risk preferences. In this article, we elicit risk preferences and investigate Myopic Loss Aversion (MLA) of forestland owners using an economic experiment. The economic experiment is a betting game and we find that forestland owners exhibit MLA because they bet higher when returns from their investments are evaluated less frequently. Our results provide valuable information for developing carbon market protocols, especially in setting optimal evaluation periods of forest carbon offset projects.