scholarly journals Soil indicators to assess the effectiveness of restoration strategies in dryland ecosystems

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 3645-3687 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. A. C. Costantini ◽  
C. Branquinho ◽  
A. Nunes ◽  
G. Schwilch ◽  
I. Stavi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Function Analysis ◽  
Rooting Depth ◽  
Spatial And Temporal Scales ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Dryland Ecosystems ◽  
Clear Identification ◽  
Restoration Strategies ◽  
Soil Indicators

Abstract. Soil indicators may be used for assessing both land suitability for restoration and the effectiveness of restoration strategies in restoring ecosystem functioning and services. In this review paper, several soil indicators, which can be used to assess the effectiveness of restoration strategies in dryland ecosystems at different spatial and temporal scales, are discussed. The selected indicators represent the different viewpoints of pedology, ecology, hydrology, and land management. The recovery of soil capacity to provide ecosystem services is primarily obtained by increasing soil rooting depth and volume, and augmenting water accessibility for vegetation. Soil characteristics can be used either as indicators of suitability, that is, inherently slow-changing soil qualities, or as indicators for modifications, namely dynamic, thus "manageable" soil qualities. Soil organic matter forms, as well as biochemistry, micro- and meso-biology, are among the most utilized dynamic indicators. On broader territorial scales, the Landscape Function Analysis uses a functional approach, where the effectiveness of restoration strategies is assessed by combining the analysis of spatial pattern of vegetation with qualitative soil indicators. For more holistic and comprehensive projects, effective strategies to combat desertification should integrate soil indicators with biophysical and socio-economic evaluation and include participatory approaches. The integrated assessment protocol of Sustainable Land Management developed by the World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies network is thoroughly discussed. Two overall outcomes stem from the review: (i) the success of restoration projects relies on a proper understanding of their ecology, namely the relationships between soil, plants, hydrology, climate, and land management at different scales, which is particularly complex due to the heterogeneous pattern of ecosystems functioning in drylands, and (ii) the selection of the most suitable soil indicators follows a clear identification of the different and sometimes competing ecosystem services that the project is aimed at restoring.

scholarly journals Soil indicators to assess the effectiveness of restoration strategies in dryland ecosystems

Solid Earth ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 397-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edoardo A. C. Costantini ◽  
Cristina Branquinho ◽  
Alice Nunes ◽  
Gudrun Schwilch ◽  
Ilan Stavi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Land Management ◽  
Ecosystem Functioning ◽  
Review Paper ◽  
Proper Understanding ◽  
Spatial And Temporal Scales ◽  
Dryland Ecosystems ◽  
Clear Identification ◽  
Restoration Strategies ◽  
Soil Indicators ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract. Soil indicators may be used for assessing both land suitability for restoration and the effectiveness of restoration strategies in restoring ecosystem functioning and services. In this review paper, several soil indicators, which can be used to assess the effectiveness of ecological restoration strategies in dryland ecosystems at different spatial and temporal scales, are discussed. The selected indicators represent the different viewpoints of pedology, ecology, hydrology, and land management. Two overall outcomes stem from the review. (i) The success of restoration projects relies on a proper understanding of their ecology, namely the relationships between soil, plants, hydrology, climate, and land management at different scales, which are particularly complex due to the heterogeneous pattern of ecosystems functioning in drylands. (ii) The selection of the most suitable soil indicators follows a clear identification of the different and sometimes competing ecosystem services that the project is aimed at restoring.

scholarly journals Land-Management Options for Greenhouse Gas Removal and Their Impacts on Ecosystem Services and the Sustainable Development Goals

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 255-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pete Smith ◽  
Justin Adams ◽  
David J. Beerling ◽  
Tim Beringer ◽  
Katherine V. Calvin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Wetland Restoration ◽  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Gas Removal ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Greenhouse Gas Removal

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.

Can process-based modelling and economic valuation of ecosystem services inform land management policy at a catchment scale?

2020 ◽  
Vol 96 ◽  
pp. 104636
Author(s):  
Jane Lusardi ◽  
Timothy John Sunderland ◽  
Andrew Crowe ◽  
Bethanna Marie Jackson ◽  
Glyn Jones
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Economic Valuation ◽  
Management Policy ◽  
Catchment Scale ◽  
Valuation Of Ecosystem Services ◽  
Land Management Policy

scholarly journals Modelling land management for ecosystem services

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 563-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luuk Fleskens ◽  
Klaus Hubacek
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Land Management

scholarly journals Global ecosystem thresholds driven by aridity

Science ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 367 (6479) ◽  
pp. 787-790 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel Berdugo ◽  
Manuel Delgado-Baquerizo ◽  
Santiago Soliveres ◽  
Rocío Hernández-Clemente ◽  
Yanchuang Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Soil Fertility ◽  
Plant Cover ◽  
Plant Productivity ◽  
Abrupt Changes ◽  
Dryland Ecosystems ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Ecosystem Changes ◽  
Three Phases

Aridity, which is increasing worldwide because of climate change, affects the structure and functioning of dryland ecosystems. Whether aridification leads to gradual (versus abrupt) and systemic (versus specific) ecosystem changes is largely unknown. We investigated how 20 structural and functional ecosystem attributes respond to aridity in global drylands. Aridification led to systemic and abrupt changes in multiple ecosystem attributes. These changes occurred sequentially in three phases characterized by abrupt decays in plant productivity, soil fertility, and plant cover and richness at aridity values of 0.54, 0.7, and 0.8, respectively. More than 20% of the terrestrial surface will cross one or several of these thresholds by 2100, which calls for immediate actions to minimize the negative impacts of aridification on essential ecosystem services for the more than 2 billion people living in drylands.

‘Payments for Ecosystem Services’ and Property: The Expansion of Exclusionary Land Management Practices in Costa Rica

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-54
Author(s):  
Brett Sylvester Matulis
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Payments For Ecosystem Services ◽  
Private Ownership ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
The Social ◽  
Ownership Rights

The practice of making “payments for ecosystem services” (PES) is about the formation of new social relations between land managers and the human beneficiaries of functioning ecological systems. More specifically, it is about establishing economic relations that (theoretically) transfer financial resources from “users” of services to “producers” who institute prescribed land management practices. Interpreted as a form of “neoliberal conservation”, this approach to environmental governance can be seen as a driving force in the commodification, marketization, and financialization of nature. Hinging on “clearly defined and enforced” property rights, it can also be seen as a factor in the expansion of individualized private ownership. Troubled by this renewed prospect of privatization, critical scholars have done well to challenge the new enclosures of land and resources. But what about when PES operates in areas where private ownership rights are robust and widespread? Are we to believe that the tendency towards privatization poses no threat because those areas are already “lost” to private ownership? This paper considers how the social relationships that constitute property are shifting under the prescribed management practices of PES. I present evidence from Costa Rica's national PES program to suggest that, even on lands that are ostensibly already privately owned, these new practices are resulting in an expansion of exclusionary management. The objective is to demonstrate some of the reasons why financialized approaches to conservation are a problem in “already neoliberal” economies and to offer some conceptual tools for challenging the uncritical assumption that PES is harmless in areas where private ownership is already well established.

scholarly journals Assessment of Green Infrastructure in Riparian Zones Using Copernicus Programme

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (24) ◽  
pp. 2967
Author(s):  
Laura Piedelobo ◽  
Andrea Taramelli ◽  
Emma Schiavon ◽  
Emiliana Valentini ◽  
José-Luis Molina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Green Infrastructure ◽  
Riparian Zones ◽  
Soil Protection ◽  
Drought Risk ◽  
Riparian Areas ◽  
Po River ◽  
Condition Indicators ◽  
Restoration Strategies ◽  
Using Data

This article presents an approach to identify Green Infrastructure (GI), its benefits and condition. This information enables environmental agencies to prioritise conservation, management and restoration strategies accordingly. The study focuses on riparian areas due to their potential to supply Ecosystem Services (ES), such as water quality, biodiversity, soil protection and flood or drought risk reduction. Natural Water Retention Measures (NWRM) related to agriculture and forestry are the type of GI considered specifically within these riparian areas. The approach is based on ES condition indicators, defined by the European Environment Agency (EEA) to support the policy targets of the 2020 Biodiversity Strategy. Indicators that can be assessed through remote sensing techniques are used, namely: capacity to provide ecosystem services, proximity to protected areas, greening response and water stress. Specifically, the approach uses and evaluates the potential of freely available products from the Copernicus Land Monitoring Service (CLMS) to monitor GI. Moreover, vegetation and water indices are calculated using data from the Sentinel-2 MSI Level-2A scenes and integrated in the analysis. The approach has been tested in the Italian Po river basin in 2018. Firstly, agriculture and forest NWRM were identified in the riparian areas of the river network. Secondly, the Riparian Zones products from the CLMS local component and the satellite-based indices were linked to the aforementioned ES condition indicators. This led to the development of a pixel-based model that evaluates the identified GI according to: (i) its disposition to provide riparian regulative ES and (ii) its condition in the analysed year. Finally, the model was used to prioritise GI for conservation or restoration initiatives, based on its potential to deliver ES and current condition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document