Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Review Articles

Vol. 12 No. 3 (2025)

Valuing nature: A comprehensive review of ecosystem services in India

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.6382
Submitted
27 November 2024
Published
10-05-2025 — Updated on 21-08-2025
Versions

Abstract

The concept of ecosystem services (ES) has garnered global recognition due to its substantial impact on human well-being. Biodiversity loss, driven by both direct and indirect factors, has led to a decrease in the lifespan of ecosystems and their ability to offer ecosystem services. On a global scale, ES assessments are increasingly utilised by academicians to develop sustainable and environmentally focused policies. In India, ES-related research has been steadily expanding to capture the various benefits, both tangible and intangible, provided by numerous ecosystems. This study analyses 71 research articles to evaluate the increasing trend of ecosystem research and examine their methodological approaches. The gaps in existing research and literature have been extensively examined. The study reveals that while ecosystem services obtained from woods have been extensively studied, blue water ecosystems have not been adequately researched. Additionally, there is a lack of research on both the immediate and long-term impacts of global warming and other environmental concerns on the availibity of ecosystem services. A comprehensive evaluation of environmental sustainability necessitates the integration of interdisciplinary approaches. Future ES assessments should incorporate both conventional and indigenous knowledge systems within the evaluation framework to develop practical and long-lasting policy recommendations.

References

  1. 1. Adla K, Dejan K, Neira D, Dragana S. Degradation of ecosystems and loss of ecosystem services. In: One health. Academic Press; 2022. p. 281–327 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-822794-7.00008-3
  2. 2. Mohammed SM, Ahmed MO. Destruction of the ecosystems for road widening–a negative approach. Ind J Appli and Pure Biol. 2013;27(1):49–51.
  3. 3. Hassan R. Millenium ecosystem assessment series: Ecosystems and human well-being: Current state and trends; findings of the condition and trends working group. Island Press; 2005 https://www.millenniumassessment.org
  4. 4. Gunn JM, Conroy N, Lautenbach WE, Pearson DA, Puro MJ, Shorthouse JD, et al. From restoration to sustainable ecosystems. In: Restoration and recovery of an industrial region: Progress in restoring the smelter-damaged landscape near Sudbury, Canada. Springer; 1995. p. 335–44 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2520-1_26
  5. 5. Costanza R, d’Arge R, De Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature. 1997;387(6630):253–60. https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
  6. 6. Teeb RO. Mainstreaming the Economics of nature. TEEB Geneva, Switzerland; 2010 https://www.iges.or.jp/jp/publication_documents/pub/translation/jp/13140/teeb_synthesis_j.pdf
  7. 7. Burton M. Ecosystems, from life, to the Earth, to the Galaxy. arXiv preprint astro-ph/0110694.2001 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0110694
  8. 8. Oguh CE, Obiwulu ENO, Umezinwa OJ, Ameh SE, Ugwu CV, Sheshi IM. Ecosystem and ecological services; need for biodiversity conservation-a critical review. Asian J Biol. 2021;11(4):1–14. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajob/2021/v11i430146
  9. 9. Ram Y, Smith MK. An assessment of visited landscapes using a cultural ecosystem services framework. Tourism Geographies- An Intern J Tourism Space, Place and Environ. 2022; 24(4-5):523‒48. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2018.1522545
  10. 10. Schreckenberg K, Mace G, Poudyal M. (Eds.). Ecosystem services for human wellbeing. Ecosystem services and poverty alleviation (open access): Trade-offs and Governance (1st ed.). Routledge; 2018;305 https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429507090
  11. 11. Armatas CA, Campbell RM, Watson AE, Borrie WT, Christensen N, Venn TJ. An integrated approach to valuation and tradeoff analysis of ecosystem services for national forest decision-making. Ecosystem Services. 2018;33:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.07.007
  12. 12. Shrestha K, Shakya B, Adhikari B, Nepal M, Shaoliang Y. Ecosystem services valuation for conservation and development decisions: A review of valuation studies and tools in the Far Eastern Himalaya. Ecosystem Services. 2023;61:101526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101526
  13. 13. Tinch R, Beaumont N, Sunderland T, Ozdemiroglu E, Barton D, Bowe C, et al. Economic valuation of ecosystem goods and services: a review for decision makers. J Environ Economics and Policy. 2019;8(4):359–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2019.1623083
  14. 14. Kornatowska B, Sienkiewicz J. Forest ecosystem services–assessment methods. Folia Forestalia Polonica. 2018;60(4):248–60. https://doi.org/10.2478/ffp-2018-0026
  15. 15. Barbier EB, Hacker SD, Kennedy C, Koch EW, Stier AC, Silliman BR. The value of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services. Ecological Monographs. 2011;81(2):169–93. https://doi.org/10.1890/10-1510.1
  16. 16. Masiero M, Pettenella D, Boscolo M, Barua SK, Animon I, Matta JR. Valuing forest ecosystem services: a training manual for planners and project developers. Vol. 11. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); 2019 http://www.fao.org/3/ca2886en/CA2886EN.pdf
  17. 17. Zhao W, Yin C. Promote ecosystem services for sustainable development goals. Copernicus Meetings; 2023 https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-4341
  18. 18. Bitoun RE, David G, Devillers R. Strategic use of ecosystem services and co‐benefits for sustainable development goals. Sustainable Development. 2023;31(3):1296–310. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2448
  19. 19. MoEFCC GIZ. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity TEEB India initiative: interim report—working document; 2014 https://indianwetlands.in/wp-content/uploads/library/TEEB-INDIA-INITIATIVE-Interim-Report.pdf
  20. 20. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  21. 21. Millennium ecosystem assessment MEA. Ecosystems and human well-being. Vol. 5. Island press Washington, DC; 2005 https://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.356.aspx.pdf
  22. 22. Sinha B, Mishra S. Ecosystem services valuation for enhancing conservation and livelihoods in a sacred landscape of the Indian Himalayas. Intern J Biodiversity Sci, Ecosystem Services and Management. 2015;11(2):156–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2015.1030693
  23. 23. Mohamed KS, Kripa V, Narayankumar R, Prema D, Venkatesan V, Malayilethu V, et al. Assessment of eco-labelling as tool for conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in Ashtamudi Lake, Kerala. India a biodiversity hotspot Draft Report. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity India Initiative, GIZ India; 2016 https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.25549.69600
  24. 24. Venkatachalam L. Willingness to pay (WTP) for improved ecosystem services of Pallikaranai Marshland: a contingent valuation approach. Review of Development and Change. 2016;21(1):89–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972266120160105
  25. 25. Kadaverugu R, Dhyani S, Dasgupta R, Kumar P, Hashimoto S, Pujari P. Multiple values of Bhitarkanika mangroves for human well-being: synthesis of contemporary scientific knowledge for mainstreaming ecosystem services in policy planning. J Coastal Conserv. 2021;25:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-021-00819-2
  26. 26. Singh SP, Thadani R. Valuing ecosystem services flowing from the Indian Himalayan states for incorporation into national accounting. In: Treetops at risk: Challenges of global canopy ecology and conservation. Springer, New York; 2013. p. 423–34 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7161-5_45
  27. 27. Bahuguna VK, Bisht NS. Valuation of ecosystem goods and services from forests in India; 2013 https://doi.org/10.36808/if/2013/v139i1/29126
  28. 28. Chaudhry P. Valuing ecosystem services: a case study of Pakke Tiger Reserve of Arunachal Pradesh, India. J Regional Development and Planning. 2016;5(1):1–14. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ris:jrdpin:0040
  29. 29. Gopal B, Marothia DK. Economics of biodiversity and ecosystem services of rivers for sustainable management of water resources. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity India Initiative, GIZ India; 2016 https://2023.snrd-asia.org/download/Economics-of-Ecosystem-Services-and-Biodiversity-for-Conservation-and-Sustainable-Management-of-Inland-Wetlands.pdf
  30. 30. Dixit AM, Bandyopadhyaya S, Kumar L, Bedamatta S. Economic valuation of landscape level wetland ecosystem and its services in Little Rann of Kachchh, Gujarat. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity India Initiative, GIZ India; 2016 https://indianwetlands.in/wp-content/uploads/library/TEEB-Kachchh.pdf
  31. 31. Murali R, Redpath S, Mishra C. The value of ecosystem services in the high altitude Spiti Valley, Indian Trans-Himalaya. Ecosystem Services. 2017;28:115–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.018
  32. 32. Menon A, Rai ND. The mismeasure of nature: the political ecology of economic valuation of Tiger Reserves in India. J Political Ecol. 2019;26(1):652–65. https://doi.org/10.2458/v26i1.23194
  33. 33. Das M, Das A. Estimation of ecosystem services (EESs) loss due to transformation of local climatic zones (LCZs) in Sriniketan-Santiniketan planning area (SSPA) West Bengal, India. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2019;47:101474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101474
  34. 34. Sannigrahi S, Chakraborti S, Joshi PK, Keesstra S, Sen S, Paul SK, et al. Ecosystem service value assessment of a natural reserve region for strengthening protection and conservation. J Environ Manag. 2019;244:208–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.04.095
  35. 35. Tripathi R, Moharana KC, Nayak AD, Dhal B, Shahid M, Mondal B, et al. Ecosystem services in different agro-climatic zones in eastern India: impact of land use and land cover change. Environ Monitoring and Assessment. 2019;191:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-7224-7
  36. 36. Praveen B. Dynamics of ecosystem services (ESs) in response to land use land cover (LU/LC) changes in the lower Gangetic plain of India; 2020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106121
  37. 37. Sharma S, Nahid S, Sharma M, Sannigrahi S, Anees MM, Sharma R, et al. A long-term and comprehensive assessment of urbanization-induced impacts on ecosystem services in the capital city of India. City and Environ Interactions. 2020;7:100047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cacint.2020.100047
  38. 38. Sharma S, Anees MM, Sharma M, Joshi PK. Longitudinal study of changes in ecosystem services in a city of lakes, Bhopal, India. Energy, Ecol and Environ. 2021;6(5):408–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40974-020-00199-7
  39. 39. Shakya B, Uddin K, Yi S, Bhatta LD, Lodhi MS, Htun NZ, et al. Mapping of the ecosystem services flow from three protected areas in the far-eastern Himalayan Landscape: An impetus to regional cooperation. Ecosystem Services. 2021;47:101222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101222
  40. 40. Kubiszewski I, Anderson SJ, Costanza R, Sutton PC. The future of ecosystem services in Asia and the Pacific. Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies. 2016;3(3):389–404. https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.147
  41. 41. Ghosh N, Ghose D, Areendran G, Mehra D, Paliwal A, Raj K, et al. Valuing ecosystem services at the scale of a large mammal landscape: the case of the terai arc landscape in Uttarakhand, Policy Research and Innovation Division, WWF-India, New Delhi. New Delhi: WWF-India; 2016 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1894-8_10
  42. 42. Kumar S, Chaudhry P. Ecosystem services valuation of the forests of Arunachal Pradesh State, India. Brazilian J Biol Sci. 2015;2(4):369–75.
  43. 43. Dwarapureddi BK, Dash S, Vara S. Ecosystem services for environmental sustainability. In: Handbook of research on sustainable development goals, climate change and digitalization. IGI Global; 2022. p. 12–30 https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8482-8.ch002
  44. 44. Hussain S, Sharma S, Singh AN. Evaluation of ecosystem supply services and calculation of economic value in Kargil district, India. Regional Sustain. 2022;3(2):157–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsus.2022.07.004
  45. 45. Ramachandra TV, Sincy V, Asulabha KS. Accounting of ecosystem services of wetlands in Karnataka state, India. J Resources, Energy and Development. 2021;18(1–2):1–26. https://doi.org/10.3233/RED-181201
  46. 46. Pandit A, Ekka A, Sharma AP, Bhattacharjya BK, Katiha PK, Biswas DK. Economic valuation of natural ecosystems—An empirical study in a stretch of Bramhaputra River in Assam, North-East India. Ind J Fisheries. 2015;62(3):107–12. https://epubs.icar.org.in/index.php/IJF/article/view/38106
  47. 47. Jahanifar K, Amirnejad H, Abedi Z, Vafaeinejad A. Estimation of the value of forest ecosystem services to develop conservational strategy management (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats); 2017 https://doi.org/10.17221/137/2016-JFS
  48. 48. Islam MA, Quli SMS. The role of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) in tribal economy of Jharkhand, India. Intern J Curr Microbiol and Appli Sci. 2017;6(10):2184–95. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.610.259
  49. 49. Dash M, Behera B. Determinants of household collection of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) and alternative livelihood activities in Similipal Tiger Reserve, India. Forest Policy and Economics. 2016;73:215–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.09.012
  50. 50. Nayak AK, Shahid M, Nayak AD, Dhal B, Moharana KC, Mondal B, et al. Assessment of ecosystem services of rice farms in eastern India. Ecological Processes. 2019;8:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-019-0189-1
  51. 51. Dhyani S. Impact of forest leaf litter harvesting to support traditional agriculture in Western Himalayas. Tropical Ecology. 2018;59(3):473–88. http://216.10.241.130/pdf/open/PDF_59_3/7%20Shalini%20Dhyani.pdf
  52. 52. Chowdhury K, Behera B. Economic significance of provisioning ecosystem services of traditional water bodies: empirical evidences from West Bengal, India. Resourc, Environ and Sustain. 2021;5:100033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resenv.2021.100033
  53. 53. Balasubramanian M, Sangha KK. Valuing ecosystem services applying indigenous perspectives from a global biodiversity hotspot, the Western Ghats, India. Front Ecol and Evolution. 2023;11:1026793. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2023.1026793
  54. 54. Dhyani S, Dhyani D. Significance of provisioning ecosystem services from moist temperate forest ecosystems: lessons from upper Kedarnath valley, Garhwal, India. Energy, Ecol and Environ. 2016;1:109–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40974-016-0008-9
  55. 55. Mohammed J. The role of genetic diversity to enhance ecosystem service. American J Biol and Environ Statistics. 2019;5(3):46–51. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajbes.20190503.13
  56. 56. Ali S, Islam A, Ojasvi PR. Modeling water dynamics for assessing and managing ecosystem services in India. Enhancing agricultural research and precision management for subsistence farming by integrating system models with experiments; 2022. 69–103 https://doi.org/10.1002/9780891183891.ch5
  57. 57. Stoycheva V, Geneletti D. A review of regulating ecosystem services in the context of urban planning. J Bulgarian Geographical Society. 2023;2023:27–42. https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/jbgs.e93499
  58. 58. Pannure A. Bee pollinators decline: Perspectives from India. Intern Res J Nat and Appli Sci. 2016;3(5):2349–4077. https://doi.org/10.5958/0976-1926.2022.00108.5
  59. 59. Kumar V. Impact of non timber forest produces (NTFPs) on food and livelihood security: An economic study of tribal economy in Dang’s District of Gujarat, India. Intern J Agric, Environ and Biotechnol. 2015;8(2):387–404. https://doi.org/10.5958/2230-732X.2015.00047.9
  60. 60. Banerjee S, Banerjee A, Palit D. Ecosystem services and impact of industrial pollution on urban health: evidence from Durgapur, West Bengal, India. Environ Monitoring and Assessment. 2021;193(11):744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09526-9
  61. 61. Chaturvedi A, Kamble R, Patil NG, Chaturvedi A. City–forest relationship in Nagpur: One of the greenest cities of India. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening. 2013;12(1):79–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2012.09.003
  62. 62. Vailshery LS, Jaganmohan M, Nagendra H. Effect of street trees on microclimate and air pollution in a tropical city. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening. 2013;12(3):408–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2013.03.002
  63. 63. Tripathi P. Flood disaster in India: an analysis of trend and preparedness. Interdisciplinary J Contemporary Res. 2015;2(4):91–98.
  64. 64. Ramachandra TV, Soman D, Naik AD, Chandran MS. Appraisal of forest ecosystems goods and services: challenges and opportunities for conservation. J Biodiversity. 2017;8(1):12–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09766901.2017.1346160
  65. 65. Pandey R, Mehta D, Kumar V, Pradhan RP. Quantifying soil erosion and soil organic carbon conservation services in indian forests: A RUSLE-SDR and GIS-based assessment. Ecological Indicators. 2024;163:112086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112086
  66. 66. Bruhwiler L, Basu S, Butler JH, Chatterjee A, Dlugokencky E, Kenney MA, et al. Observations of greenhouse gases as climate indicators. Climatic Change. 2021;165(1):12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03001-7
  67. 67. Salunkhe O, Khare PK, Sahu TR, Singh S. Above ground biomass and carbon stocking in tropical deciduous forests of State of Madhya Pradesh, India. Taiwania. 2014;59(4): https://doi.org/10.6165/tai.2014.59.4.353
  68. 68. Joshi RK, Dhyani S. Biomass, carbon density and diversity of tree species in tropical dry deciduous forests in Central India. Acta Ecologica Sinica. 2019;39(4):289–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chnaes.2018.09.009
  69. 69. IPBES. The assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science- Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on pollinators, pollination and food production. In: Potts SG, Imperatriz-Fonseca VL, Ngo HT (eds) Secretariat of the Intergovernmental. Bonn, Germany.: Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; 2016 https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/519227
  70. 70. Chaudhary OP, Chand R. Economic benefits of animal pollination to Indian agriculture. Ind J Agric Sci. 2017;87(9):1117–38. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v87i9.73903
  71. 71. Meena DC, Pal S, Chand P. Assessment of watershed management ecosystem services in India: a meta-analysis. Curr Sci. 2022;1352–58. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v123/i11/1352-1358
  72. 72. Pandey A. A literary analogy of the contributions of “Cultural Services” to the ecosystem services provided by the Sacred Groves. Magna Scientia Advanced Res and Reviews. 2022;6(1):008–30. https://doi.org/10.30574/msarr.2022.6.1.0061
  73. 73. Dasgupta R, Hashimoto S, Basu M, Okuro T, Johnson BA, Kumar P, et al. Spatial characterization of non-material values across multiple coastal production landscapes in the Indian Sundarban delta. Sustain Sci. 2022;1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-020-00899-3
  74. 74. Gandherva D, Bhattacharya R, Bhattacharya P. Assessment of user’s perception towards urban green spaces: a case study of Delhi India. J Ecol and Nat Resourc. 2019;3(1):15. https://doi.org/10.23880/jenr-16000156
  75. 75. Singh RK, Hussain SM, Riba T, Singh A, Padung E, Rallen O, et al. Classification and management of community forests in Indian Eastern Himalayas: implications on ecosystem services, conservation and livelihoods. Ecological Processes. 2018;7:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-018-0137-5
  76. 76. Singh SP, Rajput USG, Bramhyya C. Role of gram Panchayat in the development of Baiga tribal community: An empirical study with special reference to Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh. Indira Gandhi National Tribal University, Amarkantak, Madhya Pradesh-484886; 2019 http://hdl.handle.net/10603/316722
  77. 77. Varah F. Role of traditional homegardens in biodiversity conservation and socioecological significance in Tangkhul community in Northeast India. Tropical Ecol. 2018;59(3):533–39.
  78. 78. Balasubramanian M, Sangha KK. Integrating capabilities and ecosystem services approaches to evaluate indigenous connections with nature in a global biodiversity hotspot of Western Ghats, India. Global Ecol and Conserv. 2021;27:e01546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01546
  79. 79. Gupta AK, Yadav VK, Bhushan A. Recreational services valuation of Asiatic elephants in developing countries: a case study of Rajaji National Park, India. Indian for. 2015;141:1034–41. https://doi.org/10.36808/if/2015/v141i10/80628
  80. 80. Lahoti S, Lahoti A, Saito O. Benchmark assessment of recreational public Urban Green space provisions: A case of typical urbanizing Indian City, Nagpur. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening. 2019;44:126424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126424
  81. 81. Vijayan A, Job E. Recreational value of Vellayani lake in South India: a travel cost approach. Intern J Scientific Res. 2015;4:156–58.
  82. 82. Chaudhary S, Kumar A, Pramanik M, Negi MS. Land evaluation and sustainable development of ecotourism in the Garhwal Himalayan region using geospatial technology and analytical hierarchy process. Environ, Development and Sustain. 2022;1–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01528-4
  83. 83. Goodwin RD, Chaudhary SK. Eco-tourism dimensions and directions in India: An empirical study of Andhra Pradesh. J Commerce and Management Thought. 2017;8(3):436–51. https://doi.org/10.5958/0976-478X.2017.00026.X
  84. 84. Singh R, Tiwari AK, Sharma A, Patel SK, Singh GS. Valuing ecosystem services of sacred natural sites in the anthropocene: a case study of Varanasi, India. Anthropocene Sci. 2022;1(1):121–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44177-022-00012-6
  85. 85. Devakumar A, Srinath K, Khaple A, Devagiri GM. Role of community conserved sacred groves in biodiversity conservation and climate resilience. Forest Res and Engineer: Intern J. 2018;2(5):276–82. https://doi.org/10.15406/freij.2018.02.00060
  86. 86. Ballullaya UP, Reshmi KS, Rajesh TP, Manoj K, Lowman M, Sinu PA. Stakeholder motivation for the conservation of sacred groves in south India: An analysis of environmental perceptions of rural and urban neighbourhood communities. Land Use Policy. 2019;89:104213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104213
  87. 87. Robinson DA, Hockley N, Cooper DM, Emmett BA, Keith AM, Lebron I, et al. Natural capital and ecosystem services, developing an appropriate soils framework as a basis for valuation. Soil Biol and Biochem. 2013;57:1023–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.09.008
  88. 88. Nayak RK, Chandra AB, Patel NR, Dadhwal VK. Terrestrial net primary productivity and net ecosystem productivity over India. Report by National Remote Sensing Centre, Balanagar, Hyderabad; 2016
  89. 89. Deb Burman PK, Sarma D, Williams M, Karipot A, Chakraborty S. Estimating gross primary productivity of a tropical forest ecosystem over north-east India using LAI and meteorological variables. J Earth System Sci. 2017;126:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-017-0874-3
  90. 90. Sharma DK, Rana DS. Productivity, response to nitrogen and nutrient cycling of sole jatropha (Jatropha curcas) and intercropping system with baby corn (Zea mays) in India. Ind J Agric Sci. 2014;84(12):1502–07. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v84i12.45249
  91. 91. Gogoi B, Borah N, Baishya A, Nath DJ, Dutta S, Das R, et al. Enhancing soil ecosystem services through sustainable integrated nutrient management in double rice-cropping system of North-East India. Ecological Indicators. 2021;132:108262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108262
  92. 92. Pande VC, Kurothe RS, Rao BK, Kumar G, Parandiyal AK, Singh AK, et al. Economic analysis of bamboo plantation in three major ravine systems of India. Agric Economics Res Rev. 2013;25(1):49–59. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261946331

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.