Macrosystems ecology is an effort to understand ecological processes and interactions at the broadest spatial scales and has potential to help solve globally important social and ecological challenges. It is important to understand the intellectual legacies underpinning macrosystems ecology: How the subdiscipline fits within, builds upon, differs from and extends previous theories. We trace the rise of macrosystems ecology with respect to preceding theories and present a new hypothesis that integrates the multiple components of macrosystems theory. The spatio-temporal anthropogenic rescaling (STAR) hypothesis suggests that human activities are altering the scales of ecological processes, resulting in interactions at novel space-time scale combinations that are diverse and predictable. We articulate four predictions about how human actions are "expanding", "shrinking", "speeding up" and "slowing down" ecological processes and interactions, and thereby generating new scaling relationships for ecological patterns and processes. We provide examples of these rescaling processes and describe ecological consequences across terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems. Rescaling depends in part on characteristics including connectivity, stability and heterogeneity. Our STAR hypothesis challenges traditional assumptions about how the spatial and temporal scales of processes and interactions operate in different types of ecosystems and provides a lens through which to understand macrosystem-scale environmental change.
Sustaining wildlife populations, which provide both ecosystem services and disservices, represents a worldwide conservation challenge. The ecosystem services and Ostrom's social–ecological systems frameworks have been adopted across natural and social sciences to characterize benefits from nature. Despite their generalizability, individually they do not include explicit tools for addressing the sustainable management of many wildlife populations. For instance, Ostrom's framework does not specifically address competing perspectives on wildlife, whereas the ecosystem services framework provides a limited representation of the social and governance context wherein such competing perspectives are embedded. We developed a unified social–ecological framework of ecosystem disservices and services (SEEDS) that advances both frameworks by explicitly acknowledging the importance of competing wildlife perspectives embedded in the social and governance contexts. The SEEDS framework emulates the hierarchical structure of Ostrom's social–ecological systems, but adds subsystems reflecting heterogeneous stakeholder views and experiences of wildlife‐based services and disservices. To facilitate operationalizing SEEDS and further broader analyses across human–wildlife systems, we devised a list of variables to describe SEEDS subsystems, such as types and level of services and disservices, cost and benefit sharing, and social participation of stakeholders. Steps to implement SEEDS involve engaging local communities and stakeholders to define the subsystems, analyze interactions and outcomes, and identify leverage points and actions to remedy unwanted outcomes. These steps connect SEEDS with other existing approaches in social–ecological research and can guide analyses across systems or within individual systems to provide new insights and management options for sustainable human–wildlife coexistence.
Many biodiversity-ecosystem services studies omit cultural ecosystem services (CES) or use species richness as a proxy and assume that more species confer greater CES value. We studied wildflower viewing, a key biodiversity-based CES in amenitybased landscapes, in Southern Appalachian Mountain forests and asked (i) How do aesthetic preferences for wildflower communities vary with components of biodiversity, including species richness?; (ii) How do aesthetic preferences for wildflower communities vary across psychographic groups?; and (iii) How well does species richness perform as an indicator of CES value compared with revealed social preferences for wildflower communities? Public forest visitors (n = 293) were surveyed during the summer of 2015 and asked to choose among images of wildflower communities in which flower species richness, flower abundance, species evenness, color diversity, and presence of charismatic species had been digitally manipulated. Aesthetic preferences among images were unrelated to species richness but increased with more abundant flowers, greater species evenness, and greater color diversity. Aesthetic preferences were consistent across psychographic groups and unaffected by knowledge of local flora or value placed on wildflower viewing. When actual wildflower communities (n = 54) were ranked based on empirically measured flower species richness or wildflower viewing utility based on multinomial logit models of revealed preferences, rankings were broadly similar. However, designation of hotspots (CES values above the median) based on species richness alone missed 27% of wildflower viewing utility hotspots. Thus, conservation priorities for sustaining CES should incorporate social preferences and consider multiple dimensions of biodiversity that underpin CES supply. discrete choice | aesthetics | biodiversity | wildflowers | amenity-based landscape
Increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) are causing global climate change and decreasing the stability of the climate system. Long-term solutions to climate change will require reduction in GHG emissions as well as the removal of large quantities of GHGs from the atmosphere. Natural climate solutions (NCS), i.e., changes in land management, ecosystem restoration, and avoided conversion of habitats, have substantial potential to meet global and national greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets and contribute to the global drawdown of GHGs. However, the relative role of NCS to contribute to GHG reduction at subnational scales is not well known. We examined the potential for 12 NCS activities on natural and working lands in Oregon, USA to reduce GHG emissions in the context of the state's climate mitigation goals. We evaluated three alternative scenarios wherein NCS implementation increased across the applicable private or public land base, depending on the activity, and estimated the annual GHG reduction in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO 2 e) attributable to NCS from 2020 to 2050. We found that NCS within Oregon could contribute annual GHG emission reductions of 2.7 to 8.3 MMT CO 2 e by 2035 and 2.9 to 9.8 MMT CO 2 e by 2050. Changes in forest-based activities including deferred timber harvest, riparian reforestation, and replanting after wildfires contributed most to potential GHG reductions (76 to 94% of the overall annual reductions), followed by changes to agricultural management through no-till, cover crops, and nitrogen management (3 to 15% of overall annual reductions). GHG reduction benefits are relatively high per unit area for avoided conversion of forests (125-400 MT CO 2 e ha-1). However, the existing land use policy in Oregon limits the current geographic extent of active conversion of natural lands and thus, avoided conversions results in modest overall potential GHG reduction benefits (i.e., less than 5% of the overall annual reductions). Tidal wetland restoration, which has high per unit area carbon sequestration benefits (8.8 MT CO 2 e ha-1 yr-1), also has limited possible geographic extent resulting in low potential (< 1%) of state-level GHG reduction contributions. However, cobenefits such as improved habitat and water quality delivered by restoration NCS pathways are substantial. Ultimately, reducing GHG emissions and increasing carbon sequestration to combat climate change will require actions across multiple sectors. We demonstrate that
Biodiversity-based cultural ecosystem services (CES), such as birdwatching, are strongly influenced by biotic community dynamics. However, CES models are largely static, relying on single estimates of species richness or land-use/land-cover proxies, and may be inadequate for landscape management of CES supply. Using bird survey data from the Appalachian Mountains (USA), we developed spatial-temporal models of five CES indicators (total bird species richness, and richness of migratory, infrequent, synanthrope, and resident species), reflecting variation in birdwatcher preferences. We analyzed seasonal shifts in birdwatching supply and how those shifts impacted public access to projected birdwatching hotspots. Landscape patterns of CES supply differed substantially among indicators, leading to opposing conclusions about locations of highest birdwatching supply. Total species richness hotspots seldom overlapped with hotspots of migratory or infrequent species. Public access to CES hotspots varied seasonally. Our study suggests that simple, static biodiversity metrics may overlook spatial dynamics important to CES users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.