A global meta-analysis on the monetary valuation of dryland ecosystem services: The role of socio-economic, environmental and methodological indicators

Schild, Johanna; Vermaat, Jan E.; Groot, R.S. de; Quatrini, Simone; Bodegom, Peter M. van

doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.06.004

Cited by 49 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there is no comprehensive assessment of ecosystem service functions for dryland ecosystem services in this study. To address this limitations, Schild et al (2018) have identified and compiled a comprehensive database to estimate the ESV in arid areas. However, their findings indicate that there are still important limitations in the valuation of ESV in arid region.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use/land cover changes in Central Asia from 1995–2035

Chen

Zhang

et al. 2019

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acute farmland expansion and rapid urbanization in Central Asia have accelerated land use/land cover changes, which have substantial effects on ecosystem services. However, the spatiotemporal variations in ecosystem service values (ESVs) in Central Asia are not well understood. Here, based on land use products with 300-m resolution for the years 1995, 2005 and 2015 and transfer methodology, we predicted land use and land cover (LULC) for 2025 and 2035 using CA-Markov, assessed changes in ESVs in response to LULC dynamics, and explored the elasticity of the response of ESV to LULC changes. We found significant expansions of cropland (+22.10%) and urban areas (+322.40%) and shrinking of water bodies (−38.43%) and bare land (−9.42%) during 1995–2035. The combined value of ecosystem services of water bodies, cropland, and grassland accounted for over 90% of the total ESVs. Our study showed that cropland ecosystem services value increased by 93.45 billion US$ from 1995 to 2035, which was mainly caused by the expansion of cropland area. However, the area of water bodies decreased sharply during 1995–2035, causing a loss of 64.38 billion US$. Biodiversity, food production and water regulation were major ecosystem service functions, accounting for 80.52% of the total ESVs. Our results demonstrated that effective land-use policies should be made to control farmland expansion and protect water bodies, grassland and forestland for more sustainable ecosystem services.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use/land cover changes in Central Asia from 1995–2035

Chen

Zhang

et al. 2019

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A 21st century stewardship strategy must explicitly address the marginal socioeconomic status of the human inhabitants of rangelands (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005; Schild, Vermaat, de Groot, Quatrini, & van Bodegom, 2018; United Nations, 2015). Accelerating global drivers have seriously challenged the sustainability of pastoral systems, as evidenced by declining ecological and social conditions (Boone et al, 2018; Coppock, 2016; Galvin, 2009).…”

Section: A 21st Century Stewardship Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies for global rangeland stewardship: Assessment through the lens of the equilibrium–non‐equilibrium debate

Briske¹,

Coppock

Illius

et al. 2020

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Review assesses the adequacy of current stewardship strategies to address the accelerating challenges confronting global rangeland systems. The assessment was conducted through the lens of the rangeland ecology debate that was initiated in the late 1980s to determine whether equilibrial or non‐equilibrial models more accurately represented the ecological dynamics of rangeland systems. The following lessons have emerged from this prolonged debate: (a) equilibrial and non‐equilibrial dynamics among plants and herbivores always coexist in individual systems; (b) herbivore persistence is strongly influenced by functional resource heterogeneity; (c) biotic feedbacks are highly dependent upon spatial and temporal scale; (d) multiple stable states separated by nonlinear trajectories may coexist on individual ecological sites and (e) management and policy decisions can have important consequences for rangeland systems despite high environmental stochasticity. These lessons demonstrate that scale and functional heterogeneity were critical ‘blind spots’ within the traditional rangeland profession. In contrast, pastoral strategies recognized these system variables as essential for exploitation of heterogeneous resource distribution, rather than assuming stable, uniform resource distribution. These divergent perceptions of scale and heterogeneity in grazed ecosystems largely explain the disparate interpretations of ecological carrying capacity that was central to the debate. Programmes supporting supplemental feeding and infrastructure development have created an anthropogenic category of non‐equilibrial dynamics by sustaining large numbers of livestock during droughts. These programmes decouple livestock and rangeland resources to create an additional stewardship dilemma regarding complex trade‐offs between livestock production and the capacity of systems to provision a broad array of global ecosystem services. Synthesis and applications. The fundamental challenge facing the global rangeland community may not be identification of a unified model of rangeland ecology—as assumed during the rangeland debate. Rather, the challenge may be how to best transform rangeland social–ecological systems to provide optimal combinations of ecosystem services to meet the needs of global citizens, while improving the well‐being of millions of rangeland residents who are highly dependent upon provisioning services. A comprehensive accounting of rangeland ecosystem services, supported by institutional governance and delivered as state–community partnerships, may provide the foundation for an alternative stewardship strategy to pursue this critical goal.

show abstract

“…Izzo et al, 2013;Zhou et al, 2015;Jiang et al, 2019) or add projections of population densities (e.g. Salvati and Bajocco, 2011;Schild et al, 2018).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The integration of socio-economic and bio-physical factors is included in several assessment frameworks such as the Dryland Development Paradigm (Reynolds et al, 2007;Stringer et al, 2017), the Monitoring and Assessment Indicator System (Zucca et al, 2012), Global Drylands Observing System (Verstraete et al, 2011;Bestelmeyer et al, 2015) and monitoring Sustainable Land Management (Thomas, 2008;Hamidov et al, 2016). Focus on the integration of a particular component into a joint biophysical and socio-economic system is further elaborated for economic analysis (Salvati et al, 2008;Requier-Desjardins et al, 2011;Schild et al, 2018), institutional knowledge (Stringer et al, 2009) and mainstreaming policies on degradation (Akhtar-Schuster et al, 2011). Eliciting the underlying factors that cause drought and desertification is a prerequisite to the further establishment of a monitoring and assessment systems to support decision-making on land and water management.…”

Section: ;mentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial indicators for desertification in south-east Vietnam

Hiền¹,

Gobin²,

Hương³

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Desertification is influenced by different factors that relate to climate, soil, topography, geology, vegetation, human pressure and land and water management. The quantification of these factors into spatially explicit indicators and subsequent evaluation provides for a framework that allows to identify areas currently at risk of desertification and to evaluate important contributing bio-physical and socio-economic factors. Applied to south-east Vietnam, a baseline 2010 map showed that 14.4 % of the area, mainly along the coast and in the north east, is desertified with another 35.4 % at severe risk of desertification. The Ministry of Environment has defined the area with a ratio of rainfall to evapotranspiration smaller or equal to 0.65, which equals 1,233 km2 or 15 % of the province, as desertified area. The developed framework allows for decision support in a what if structure, and for the projection of potentially vulnerable areas under future scenarios. With projected climate change and current population growth the desertified area is expected to increase with 122 % (or 137,850 ha) towards 2050. The methodology can be extended to neighbouring provinces that experience similar sensitivities to desertification.

show abstract

A global meta-analysis on the monetary valuation of dryland ecosystem services: The role of socio-economic, environmental and methodological indicators

Cited by 49 publications

References 71 publications

Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use/land cover changes in Central Asia from 1995–2035

Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use/land cover changes in Central Asia from 1995–2035

Strategies for global rangeland stewardship: Assessment through the lens of the equilibrium–non‐equilibrium debate

Spatial indicators for desertification in south-east Vietnam

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About