scholarly journals Quantifying Trade-Offs Among Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity, and Agricultural Returns in an Agriculturally Dominated Landscape Under Future Land‑Management Scenarios

Author(s):  
Emma C. Underwood ◽  
◽  
Rachel A. Hutchinson ◽  
Joshua A. Viers ◽  
Kelsey T. Rodd ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
SOPHIE CARPENTIER ◽  
ELISE FILOTAS ◽  
I. TANYA HANDA ◽  
CHRISTIAN MESSIER

SUMMARYManaging for multiple ecosystem services is a growing issue for forest managers. As trade-offs arise between conflicting management objectives, stakeholders must be informed of the possible outcomes of alternative choices in order to facilitate decision-making. We modelled stand dynamics under single-management and functional zoning multiple-management (TRIAD; i.e. three-zone) scenarios in different forest types typical of eastern North America with the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS). Timber production, carbon stocking and habitat quality ecosystem services were calculated with simulation outputs. Habitat quality was measured using a habitat suitability index that integrated stand structural indicators. A multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) was performed in order to rank scenarios. We show that the most intensive management yielded greater timber volumes but resulted in the weakest carbon and habitat quality scores. The TRIAD scenarios in sugar maple–beech stands offered the best compromise in services compared to single management. In shade-intolerant deciduous stands, there was a loss of timber production with TRIAD scenarios, but greater carbon stock and habitat quality were observed. Our study contrasts alternative management scenarios for ecosystem services in woodlots of different forest types. It confirms that multiple harvest systems better achieve multiple services. The coupling of simulation modelling with MCDA offers a simple and flexible method to help stakeholders and managers make sound decisions.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 67-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xi Pang ◽  
Eva-Maria Nordström ◽  
Hannes Böttcher ◽  
Renats Trubins ◽  
Ulla Mörtberg

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 3844 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Zarrineh ◽  
Karim Abbaspour ◽  
Ann Van Griensven ◽  
Bernard Jeangros ◽  
Annelie Holzkämper

In agroecosystem management, conflicts between various services such as food provision and nutrient regulation are common. This study examined the trade-offs between selected ecosystem services such as food provision, water quantity and quality, erosion and climate regulations in an agricultural catchment in Western Switzerland. The aim was to explore the existing land use conflicts by a shift in land use and management strategy following two stakeholder-defined scenarios based on either land sparing or land sharing concepts. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) was used to build an agro-hydrologic model of the region, which was calibrated and validated based on daily river discharge, monthly nitrate and annual crop yield, considering uncertainties associated with land management set up and model parameterization. The results show that land sparing scenario has the highest agricultural benefit, while also the highest nitrate concentration and GHG emissions. The land sharing scenario improves water quality and climate regulation services and reduces food provision. The management changes considered in the two land use scenarios did not seem to reduce the conflict but only led to a shift in trade-offs. Water quantity and erosion regulation remain unaffected by the two scenarios.


<i>Abstract</i>.—A growing variety and intensity of human activities threaten the health of marine ecosystems and the sustained delivery of services provided by oceans and coasts. The Gulf of Maine (GoM) is no exception to this trend, and as such, an ecosystem- based approach to managing the region has gained traction in recent years. The ultimate aim of marine ecosystem-based management (EBM) is to maintain ecosystem health (i.e., structure and function) and to sustain the full suite of ecosystem services on which people rely. Maintaining ecosystem health and sustaining services are related goals, both from a scientific and management perspective, yet in some cases, the interplay between the two is not well understood. Here, we examine relationships between attributes of ecosystem health and ecosystem services. In particular, we explore how outputs from ecosystem models, originally developed for ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM), can be used to quantify and value services of particular relevance to the GoM environments and human populations. We highlight services, such as the provisioning of food from fisheries, that ecosystem models are well equipped to inform and reveal where more work is needed to value other services, such as the protection from erosion and inundation afforded by coastal habitats. EBM also requires knowledge about the costs and benefits of management decisions for humans and ecosystems. We demonstrate how ecosystem models can be used to explicitly illustrate trade-offs between attributes of ecosystem health and ecosystem services that result from alternative management scenarios. By bridging the gap between models developed for EBFM and ecosystem service models, we identify existing science and future needs for informing an ecosystem approach to managing the GoM.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bin Fu ◽  
Pei Xu ◽  
Yukuan Wang ◽  
Yingman Guo

Ecological management based on the ecosystem approach promotes ecological protection and the sustainable use of natural resources. We developed a quantitative approach to identify the ecological function zones at the country-scale, through integrating supply and demand of ecosystem services. We selected the biologically diverse hotspot of Baoxing County, which forms a part of the Sichuan Giant Panda World Heritage Site, to explore the integration of ecosystem services supply and demand for ecosystem management. Specifically, we assessed the various support, provision, regulating, and cultural services as classified by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. We applied the InVEST (Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Trade-offs) model to spatially map habitat quality, water retention, and carbon sinks, and used statistical data to evaluate food products, animal husbandry, and product supply services. We then quantified the demands for these services in terms of population, protected species, hydropower, water, and land use. The relationship between areas of supply and areas of demand was discussed for each township, and the spatial variability in the supply–demand relationship was also considered. As a result, we spatially divided the county into six ecological functional areas, and the linkages between each region were comprehensively discussed. This study thus provides a detailed methodology for the successful implementation of an ecosystem management framework on a county-scale based on the spatial partitioning of supply and demand.


2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 255-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pete Smith ◽  
Justin Adams ◽  
David J. Beerling ◽  
Tim Beringer ◽  
Katherine V. Calvin ◽  
...  

Land-management options for greenhouse gas removal (GGR) include afforestation or reforestation (AR), wetland restoration, soil carbon sequestration (SCS), biochar, terrestrial enhanced weathering (TEW), and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). We assess the opportunities and risks associated with these options through the lens of their potential impacts on ecosystem services (Nature's Contributions to People; NCPs) and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We find that all land-based GGR options contribute positively to at least some NCPs and SDGs. Wetland restoration and SCS almost exclusively deliver positive impacts. A few GGR options, such as afforestation, BECCS, and biochar potentially impact negatively some NCPs and SDGs, particularly when implemented at scale, largely through competition for land. For those that present risks or are least understood, more research is required, and demonstration projects need to proceed with caution. For options that present low risks and provide cobenefits, implementation can proceed more rapidly following no-regrets principles.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document