Redefining marginal land for bioenergy crop production

Madhu Khanna; Luoye Chen; Bruno Basso; Ximing Cai; John L. Field; Kaiyu Guan; Chongya Jiang; Tyler J. Lark; Tom L. Richard; Seth A. Spawn-Lee; Pan Yang; Katherine Y. Zipp

doi:10.1111/gcbb.12877

Redefining marginal land for bioenergy crop production

Madhu Khanna, Luoye Chen, Bruno Basso, Ximing Cai, John L. Field, Kaiyu Guan, Chongya Jiang, Tyler J. Lark, Tom L. Richard, Seth A. Spawn-Lee, Pan Yang, Katherine Y. Zipp

Bioresource Science and Engineering

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

61 Scopus citations

Abstract

Marginal land has received wide attention for its potential to produce bioenergy feedstocks while minimizing diversion of productive agricultural land from food crop production. However, there has been no consensus in the literature on how to define or identify land that is marginal for food crops and beneficial for bioenergy crops. Studies have used different definitions to quantify the amount of such land available; these have largely been based on assumed biophysical thresholds for soil quality and productivity that are unchanging over space and time. We discuss the limitations of these definitions and the rationale for considering economic returns and environmental outcomes in classifying land as marginal. We then propose the concept of “socially” marginal which is defined as land that is earning close to zero returns after accounting for the monetized costs of environmental externalities generated. We discuss a broad set of criteria for classifying land as socially marginal for food crops and suitable for bioenergy crops; with these criteria, this classification depends on spatially varying and time-varying factors, such as climate and market conditions and policy incentives. While there are challenges related to identifying this marginal land, satellite and other large-scale datasets increasingly enable such analysis at a fine spatial resolution. We also discuss reasons why landowners might choose not to convert bioenergy-suitable land to bioenergy crops, and thus the need for policy incentives to support conversion of land that is socially beneficial for bioenergy crop production.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1590-1609
Number of pages	20
Journal	GCB Bioenergy
Volume	13
Issue number	10
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12877
State	Published - Oct 2021

Funding

This work was funded by the DOE Center for Advanced Bioenergy and Bioproducts Innovation (US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research under Award Number DE-SC0018420) to M.K., L.C., X.C., K.G., C.J., and P.Y.; the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (award number DE-SC0018409) to B.B., T.J.L., and S.A.S.; the Center for Bioenergy Innovation, a US Department of Energy Research Center supported by the Office of Biological and Environmental Research in the DOE Office of Science (award number DE-AC05-00OR22725) to J.L.F and T.L.R. J.L.F acknowledges partial support from US Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture USDA/NIFA grant# 2017-67019-26327. T.L.R. acknowledges partial support from US Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture USDA/NIFA grant# 2020-68012-31824. K.Y.Z acknowledges support from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture and Multistate Hatch Appropriations under Project # PEN04631 and Accession #1014400. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the US Department of Energy. This manuscript has been authored in part by UT-Battelle, LLC, under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the US Department of Energy (DOE). The US government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the US government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for US government purposes. DOE will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan (http://energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan). This manuscript has been authored in part by UT‐Battelle, LLC, under contract DE‐AC05‐00OR22725 with the US Department of Energy (DOE). The US government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the US government retains a non‐exclusive, paid‐up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for US government purposes. DOE will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan ( http://energy.gov/downloads/doe‐public‐access‐plan ). This work was funded by the DOE Center for Advanced Bioenergy and Bioproducts Innovation (US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research under Award Number DE‐SC0018420) to M.K., L.C., X.C., K.G., C.J., and P.Y.; the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (award number DE‐SC0018409) to B.B., T.J.L., and S.A.S.; the Center for Bioenergy Innovation, a US Department of Energy Research Center supported by the Office of Biological and Environmental Research in the DOE Office of Science (award number DE‐AC05‐00OR22725) to J.L.F and T.L.R. J.L.F acknowledges partial support from US Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture USDA/NIFA grant# 2017‐67019‐26327. T.L.R. acknowledges partial support from US Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture USDA/NIFA grant# 2020‐68012‐31824. K.Y.Z acknowledges support from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture and Multistate Hatch Appropriations under Project # PEN04631 and Accession #1014400. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the US Department of Energy.

Funders	Funder number
DOE Center for Advanced Bioenergy and Bioproducts Innovation
DOE Public Access Plan
US Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture USDA
US Department of Energy Research Center
U.S. Department of Energy
National Institute of Food and Agriculture	2020‐68012‐31824, PEN04631, 1014400, 2017‐67019‐26327
Office of Science	DE‐AC05‐00OR22725
Biological and Environmental Research	DE‐SC0018420
Center for Bioenergy Innovation
Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center	DE‐SC0018409

Keywords

bioenergy
biofuels
economically marginal
ecosystem services
land quality
marginal land
returns to land
socially marginal

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1111/gcbb.12877

Cite this

@article{daf125b964324e2d971e4dd567243021,

title = "Redefining marginal land for bioenergy crop production",

abstract = "Marginal land has received wide attention for its potential to produce bioenergy feedstocks while minimizing diversion of productive agricultural land from food crop production. However, there has been no consensus in the literature on how to define or identify land that is marginal for food crops and beneficial for bioenergy crops. Studies have used different definitions to quantify the amount of such land available; these have largely been based on assumed biophysical thresholds for soil quality and productivity that are unchanging over space and time. We discuss the limitations of these definitions and the rationale for considering economic returns and environmental outcomes in classifying land as marginal. We then propose the concept of “socially” marginal which is defined as land that is earning close to zero returns after accounting for the monetized costs of environmental externalities generated. We discuss a broad set of criteria for classifying land as socially marginal for food crops and suitable for bioenergy crops; with these criteria, this classification depends on spatially varying and time-varying factors, such as climate and market conditions and policy incentives. While there are challenges related to identifying this marginal land, satellite and other large-scale datasets increasingly enable such analysis at a fine spatial resolution. We also discuss reasons why landowners might choose not to convert bioenergy-suitable land to bioenergy crops, and thus the need for policy incentives to support conversion of land that is socially beneficial for bioenergy crop production.",

keywords = "bioenergy, biofuels, economically marginal, ecosystem services, land quality, marginal land, returns to land, socially marginal",

author = "Madhu Khanna and Luoye Chen and Bruno Basso and Ximing Cai and Field, {John L.} and Kaiyu Guan and Chongya Jiang and Lark, {Tyler J.} and Richard, {Tom L.} and Spawn-Lee, {Seth A.} and Pan Yang and Zipp, {Katherine Y.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 The Authors. GCB Bioenergy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.",

year = "2021",

month = oct,

doi = "10.1111/gcbb.12877",

language = "English",

volume = "13",

pages = "1590--1609",

journal = "GCB Bioenergy",

issn = "1757-1693",

publisher = "Wiley Open Access",

number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Redefining marginal land for bioenergy crop production

AU - Khanna, Madhu

AU - Chen, Luoye

AU - Basso, Bruno

AU - Cai, Ximing

AU - Field, John L.

AU - Guan, Kaiyu

AU - Jiang, Chongya

AU - Lark, Tyler J.

AU - Richard, Tom L.

AU - Spawn-Lee, Seth A.

AU - Yang, Pan

AU - Zipp, Katherine Y.

PY - 2021/10

Y1 - 2021/10

N2 - Marginal land has received wide attention for its potential to produce bioenergy feedstocks while minimizing diversion of productive agricultural land from food crop production. However, there has been no consensus in the literature on how to define or identify land that is marginal for food crops and beneficial for bioenergy crops. Studies have used different definitions to quantify the amount of such land available; these have largely been based on assumed biophysical thresholds for soil quality and productivity that are unchanging over space and time. We discuss the limitations of these definitions and the rationale for considering economic returns and environmental outcomes in classifying land as marginal. We then propose the concept of “socially” marginal which is defined as land that is earning close to zero returns after accounting for the monetized costs of environmental externalities generated. We discuss a broad set of criteria for classifying land as socially marginal for food crops and suitable for bioenergy crops; with these criteria, this classification depends on spatially varying and time-varying factors, such as climate and market conditions and policy incentives. While there are challenges related to identifying this marginal land, satellite and other large-scale datasets increasingly enable such analysis at a fine spatial resolution. We also discuss reasons why landowners might choose not to convert bioenergy-suitable land to bioenergy crops, and thus the need for policy incentives to support conversion of land that is socially beneficial for bioenergy crop production.

AB - Marginal land has received wide attention for its potential to produce bioenergy feedstocks while minimizing diversion of productive agricultural land from food crop production. However, there has been no consensus in the literature on how to define or identify land that is marginal for food crops and beneficial for bioenergy crops. Studies have used different definitions to quantify the amount of such land available; these have largely been based on assumed biophysical thresholds for soil quality and productivity that are unchanging over space and time. We discuss the limitations of these definitions and the rationale for considering economic returns and environmental outcomes in classifying land as marginal. We then propose the concept of “socially” marginal which is defined as land that is earning close to zero returns after accounting for the monetized costs of environmental externalities generated. We discuss a broad set of criteria for classifying land as socially marginal for food crops and suitable for bioenergy crops; with these criteria, this classification depends on spatially varying and time-varying factors, such as climate and market conditions and policy incentives. While there are challenges related to identifying this marginal land, satellite and other large-scale datasets increasingly enable such analysis at a fine spatial resolution. We also discuss reasons why landowners might choose not to convert bioenergy-suitable land to bioenergy crops, and thus the need for policy incentives to support conversion of land that is socially beneficial for bioenergy crop production.

KW - bioenergy

KW - biofuels

KW - economically marginal

KW - ecosystem services

KW - land quality

KW - marginal land

KW - returns to land

KW - socially marginal

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85109822418&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/gcbb.12877

DO - 10.1111/gcbb.12877

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85109822418

SN - 1757-1693

VL - 13

SP - 1590

EP - 1609

JO - GCB Bioenergy

JF - GCB Bioenergy

IS - 10

ER -

Redefining marginal land for bioenergy crop production

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this