@proceedings {JRN55419,
	title = {The economic costs of wind erosion in the United States},
	year = {2022},
	month = {12-9 to14-2022},
	address = {Chicago, IL},
	abstract = {Wind erosion negatively impacts many aspects of society, but its socioeconomic costs in the United States were last assessed comprehensively during the 1990s. It has been over three decades since and both the climate and society have changed greatly. Solar panel and wind turbine usage have risen drastically, and an infectious disease known as Valley fever that is linked to soil (and thus likely dust) has been growing in incidence. Windblown dust has also caused an increase in transportation fatalities. Due to these and other changes, we decided to re-assess the previous estimate of $10 billion annual cost of wind erosion from Pimentel et al. (1995). We examined existing literature on past cost estimates and used domestic research data when possible. Some cost estimates, such as dust morbidity, were directly taken from past studies and adjusted for inflation if necessary. Other estimates, such as loss estimates from renewable energy generation, Valley fever, and transportation costs were built from the ground up. Values for energy generation, Valley fever cases, and transportation costs were drawn from their respective government sources, such as the Department of Energy, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Department of Transportation. The data were then modified by findings from other studies (i.e. percentage of loss attributed to dust), enabling total costs to be calculated with the cost per increment, such as the cost of one KWh of wind energy or the cost per motor vehicle crash. We found that with the most conservative parameters, windblown dust cost the U.S. at least $69 billion in the year 2017. This $69 billion estimate is likely an underestimate as other factors were not accounted for, such as airport delays and increased desertification. This study serves as an updated baseline estimate for the cost of wind erosion, but further detailed research needs to be conducted to create a more complete cost estimate for the United States. },
	keywords = {economic costs, renewable energy, society, solar panel, turbine, valley fever, wind erosion},
	author = {Irene Feng and Daniel Tong and Thomas E. Gill and Scott Van Pelt and Nicholas Webb}
}
@proceedings {50535,
	title = {Rangelands and Global Change},
	year = {2005},
	note = {Global Issue Paper},
	month = {July 1, 2005},
	pages = {11},
	publisher = {Society for Range Management},
	address = {Lakewood, CO},
	abstract = {GLOBAL CHANGE is any change in the global environment that may alter the capacity of the Earth to sustain life. Included are changes in changes in LAND USE and PRODUCTIVITY, ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY, CLIMATE, WATER RESOURCES and ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS (U.S. Global Change Research Act 1990). These changes can be attributed primarily to the growth in human population (\&gt;6 billion in 1999) and their use of natural resources. There are two forms of responding to global change: mitigation and adaptation. Mitigation are actions taken to reduce the amount of change that occurs, while adaptation refers to actions that are taken to reduce the impact of change. RANGELANDS are lands on which the indigenous vegetation is predominantly grasses, grass-like plants, forbs or shrubs and is managed as a natural ecosystem and include grasslands, savannas, shrublands, deserts, tundras, marshes and meadows (Forage and Grazing Terminology Committee 1991). In the United States, over one-third (770 million acres) of the land area is classified as rangeland. Over half of rangelands are privately owned. In general, rangelands west of the Rocky Mountains are dominated by federal ownership, while those east of the Rockies are predominately privately-owned. There are notable exceptions, particularly along the west coast, where productivity is high enough to warrant private ownership. The significance of ownership is not in how rangelands should be treated in response to global change, but in the policies and programs that must be crafted and implemented to achieve those treatments. (<a href="http://www.rangelands.org/pdf/Global_Issue_Paper.pdf">http://www.rangelands.org/pdf/Global_Issue_Paper.pdf</a>)},
	keywords = {atmospheric, change, chemistry, global, issue paper, land use, management, producivity, range, society},
	url = {/files/bibliography/05-009.pdf},
	author = {Joel R. Brown and Blake, R.R. and McPherson, G.R. and Tate, K.W.}
}
@conference {50677,
	title = {Making ecology relevant to sustainability: Trends, lessons, and challenges for stronger links between ecology, society, and policy},
	booktitle = {89th Annual Meeting, Ecological Society of America},
	year = {2004},
	month = {August 1-6, 2004},
	pages = {Abstract p. 271},
	address = {Portland, OR},
	abstract = {Rangeland degradation has become an environmental problem of enormous proportions worldwide and is commonly the result of unsustainable livestock production. Degradation threatens not only the ecological integrity of grasslands, shrublands, and savannas, but also the social and economic viability of pastoralist communities that depend on them. Rangeland ecology can provide much of the information necessary to assess, restore, and manage degraded rangeland, but implementing sustainable land use strategies will ultimately depend on integrating the ecological information with social, economic, and policy considerations. In this paper we discuss common challenges that arise in developing and implementing plans for sustainable rangeland use. We break these challenges down into categories of ecological, social, economic, and policy issues and present some important principles that can help promote the role of ecological information in resolving those issues. Within the field of rangeland ecology itself, we focus upon the utility of models for understanding degradation and the necessity of incorporating land restoration or rehabilitation into sustainable land-use strategies. In terms of the social challenges, we focus on the importance of pastoralist education and participation in the ecological aspects of sustainable land management, because of the importance of self-reliance to the long-term success of a project and also because traditional ecological knowledge may not always be adequate or relevant for lands that are degraded far beyond their historical condition. Economically, we explain how the ecological condition of rangelands can be directly linked to economic benefits for pastoralists, but also how perverse incentives can arise to disrupt that linkage. Finally, we discuss the role of local, national, and international policy in the promotion of sustainable land-use systems. We compare the effectiveness of grass-roots and top-down approaches to rangeland management programs and argue for greater involvement in policy advocacy by rangeland ecologists. We will illustrate these trends, lessons and challenges with summaries of global case studies.},
	keywords = {challenges, ecology, lessons, policy, rangelands, society, sustainable land use, trends},
	author = {King, E.G. and Roberts, M. and Jeffrey E. Herrick}
}
