Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Charles Rhodes

Publications and source records attributed to Charles Rhodes.

11 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2025

Natural capital accounting on forested lands: An application to the Colorado River basin

This paper creates a first set of forest natural capital accounts and demonstrates how these accounts can be integrated with general equilibrium models of the economy. Focusing on the Colorado River Basin, we show that deforestation has direct implications for the forest industry and indirect impacts on the economy through water treatment costs and carbon stock. 327,000 acres of forest are projected to be lost to development by 2100, representing a loss of 1.3 million tons of carbon stored in forests. The direct economic impacts associated with forest loss are estimated to be over $30 million, with $28 million of that coming directly from the value of lost carbon.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2023

Flood damage costs beyond buildings—A Lake Champlain case study

Introduction Floods account for more than 75 percent of Federal disaster declarations and lead other natural disasters in economic costs. Early-warning systems have lowered flood-related fatalities, but costs continue to rise as flood-prone areas continue to be urbanized (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006). A Lake Champlain case study shows that at moderate flood heights, the economic costs of non-structural damages or losses—such as temporary lodging, residential debris removal, commercial revenue losses, and road repair—can be greater than economic damages to buildings. For unprecedented flood heights, non-structural damages can still total more than 10 percent of structural damage costs.

New York, Vermont↗
USGS2022

Value of information and decision pathways: Concepts and case studies

Information used in decision making arises from the structuring of observations and data. The collection, dissemination, and use of information has monetary and non-monetary costs (e.g., competition for attention) and necessitates trade-offs. Understanding the benefits of having information (i.e., the value of information, VOI), including resulting societal outcomes, is useful to information producers/funders and decision makers. Using theory, use cases, and hypotheticals, we describe how information (e.g., geospatial information) is valued and incorporated in decisions and actions related to managing natural resources, environments, and the impacts of natural and anthropogenic hazards. We discuss the nature of information and how it relates to models (conceptual, mental, scientific), beliefs, knowledge, and economic analyses. VOI approaches and behavioral factors that potentially affect information use and value are summarized. Framing of information and VOI through data to decision pathways (DDPs) at first simplifies understanding, then illustrates the benefits of information, and the human and societal challenges encountered in valuing and using it. We present approaches to overcome these challenges. Our transdisciplinary analysis concludes with a summary of critical issues affecting DDPs and VOI, and suggestions for improving both economic analyses and the actionability and use of information.

Frontiers in Environmental Science (Environmental ↗
USGS2022

Value of information: Exploring behavioral and social factors

There is growing interest within and beyond the economics community in assessing the value of information (VOI) used in decision making. VOI assessments often do not consider the complex behavioral and social factors that affect the perception, valuation, and use of information by individuals and groups. Additionally, VOI assessments frequently do not examine the full suite of interactions and outcomes affecting different groups or individuals. The behavioral and social factors that we mention are often (but not always) innately-derived, less-than-conscious influences that reflect human and societal adaptations to the past. We first discuss these concepts in the context of the recognition and use of information for decision making. We then find fifteen different aspects of value and information pertinent to VOI assessments. We examine methodologies and issues related to current VOI estimation practices in economics. Building on this examination, we explore the perceptions, social factors, and behavioral factors affecting information sharing, prioritization, valuation, and discounting. Information and valuation issues are then considered in the context of information production, information trading and controls, and information communication pathologies. Lastly, we describe issues relating to information useability and actionability. Our examples mention the value and use of geospatial information, and more generally concern societal issues relating to the management of natural resources, environments, and natural and anthropogenic hazards. Our paper aims to be instrumentally relevant to anyone interested in the use and value of science.

Frontiers in Environmental Science↗
USGS2022

Opportunities for businesses to use and support development of SEEA-aligned natural capital accounts

Global understanding of the interconnections between the environment and economy has increased, driving the development of frameworks and standards that support the measurement and valuation of natural capital and ecosystem services by both governments and businesses. This paper outlines how businesses can use natural capital accounts (NCA) aligned to the System of Environmental Economic Accounting (SEEA) standard described in this special issue to support identification, management, and valuation of natural capital not typically listed on corporate balance sheets. Such accounts have direct applications for business strategic planning, investment decisions, supply chain management , operations management, risk management, and corporate reporting. Businesses also have important roles to play in advancing SEEA-aligned NCA by providing information that would be useful to include in the accounts and by helping to shape accounts to provide decision-relevant information for both the private and the public sectors. Current pilot SEEA-aligned NCA data and analyses developed for the United States can help address some of the common challenges that businesses face in using natural capital data such as accessibility, quality, and credibility, important for business decision making. However, improvements are needed to fill data gaps and produce more frequent and timely estimates aligned to the temporal resolution needed by businesses.

Ecosystem Services↗
USGS2021

Piloting urban ecosystem accounting for the United States

In this study, we develop urban ecosystem accounts in the U.S., using the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA) framework. Most ecosystem accounts focus on regional and national scales, which are appropriate for many ecosystem services. However, ecosystems provide substantial services in cities, improving quality of life and contributing to resiliency for substantial parts of the population. Our models estimate energy savings for indoor cooling resulting from heat mitigated by trees and rainfall intercepted by trees. Both models cover major cities in the contiguous U.S. and report the results through physical supply and use tables for multiple accounting periods (2011 and 2016). Using conservative assumptions, urban trees provide substantial heat mitigation (4,098 and 4,229 GWh, valued at $523 and $539 million in 2011 and 2016, respectively) and rainfall interception (2,422 and 2,627 million m 3 , valued at $434 and $425 million for 2011 and 2016, respectively). Interannual differences largely reflect variations in weather patterns. Our work shows how Earth observation data can support urban ecosystem accounting. We provide model code within a public repository to facilitate model runs elsewhere, enabling the SEEA EEA and Earth observation user communities to reuse our models and provide feedback for improvement.

Ecosystem Services↗
USGS2021

Lessons learned from development of natural capital accounts in the United States and European Union

The United States and European Union (EU) face common challenges in managing natural capital and balancing conservation and resource use with consumption of other forms of capital. This paper synthesizes findings from 11 individual application papers from a special issue of Ecosystem Services on natural capital accounting (NCA) and their application to the public and private sectors in the EU and U.S. NCA is inherently a data-integration centered exercise, aiming to draw new insights by realigning environmental and economic data into a consistent framework. Drawing primarily on papers from the special issue and other key NCA literature, we identify lessons learned and gaps remaining for NCA’s development and application to decision making. In doing so, we identify eight key similarities and three major differences in NCA development, status, and application between the U.S. and EU. NCA can be highly policy relevant: special issue papers address critical issues including agriculture, water, conservation/land-use planning, climate, and corporate decision making. In both the U.S. and EU, further application is needed to drive demand for the accounts’ production. Based on these experiences, the U.S. and EU can be important leaders in cross-sector, international collaboration toward next-generation environmental economic accounts that advance global NCA practice.

Ecosystem Services↗
USGS2020

Testing ecosystem accounting in the United States: A case study for the Southeast

Ecosystem accounts, as formalized by the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounts (SEEA EEA), have been compiled in a number of countries, yet there have been few attempts to develop them for the U.S. We explore the potential for U.S. ecosystem accounting by compiling ecosystem extent, condition, and ecosystem services supply and use accounts for a ten-state region in the Southeast. The pilot accounts address air quality, water quality, biodiversity, carbon storage, recreation, and pollination for selected years from 2001 to 2015. Results illustrate how information from ecosystem accounts can contribute to policy and decision-making. Using an example from Atlanta, we also show how ecosystem accounts can be considered alongside other SEEA accounts to give a more complete picture of a local area’s environmental-economic trends. The process by which we determined where to place metrics within the accounting framework, which was strongly informed by the National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS), can provide guidance for future ecosystem accounts in the U.S. and other countries. Finally, we identify knowledge gaps that limit the inclusion of certain ecosystem services in the accounts and suggest future research that can close these gaps and improve future U.S. ecosystem accounts.

Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississi↗
USGS2018

The natural capital accounting opportunity: Let's really do the numbers

The nation’s economic accounts provide objective, regular, and standardized information routinely relied upon by public and private decision makers. But they are incomplete. The U.S. and many other nations currently do not account for the natural capital — such as the wildlife, forests, grasslands, soils, and water bodies—upon which all other economic activity rests. By creating formal natural capital accounts (NCA) and ecosystem goods and services (EGS) accounts, governments and businesses can better understand the past, peer into the future, innovate, conserve, and plan for environmental shocks. They would standardize, regularly repeat, and aggregate diverse natural resource, environmental, and social and economic data and could thereby play a significant role in advancing the science of coupled biophysical and social systems.

BioScience↗