Does landscape-scale conservation management enhance the provision of ecosystem services?

Abstract

Biodiversity conservation approaches are increasingly being implemented at the landscape-scale to support the maintenance of metapopulations and metacommunities. However, the impact of such interventions on the provision of ecosystem services is less well defined. Here we examine the potential impacts of landscape-scale conservation initiatives on ecosystem services, through analysis of five case study areas in England and Wales. The provision of multiple ecosystem services was projected according to current management plans and compared with a baseline scenario. Multicriteria analysis indicated that in most cases landscape-scale approaches lead to an overall increase in service provision. Consistent increases were projected in carbon storage, recreation and aesthetic value, as well as biodiversity value. However, most study areas provided evidence of trade-offs, particularly between provisioning services and other types of service. Results differed markedly between study areas, highlighting the importance of local context. These results suggest that landscape-scale conservation approaches are likely to be effective in increasing ecosystem service provision, but also indicate that associated costs can be significant, particularly in lowland areas.

Soil “Ecosystem” Services and Natural Capital: Critical Appraisal of Research on Uncertain Ground

“…By contrast, the ESF apprehends nature a single ecosystem (e.g., wetland, tundra, forest, estuary) at a time, or as a collection or mosaic of juxtaposed ecosystems, as is also the case in many landscape management practices (Burkhard et al, 2009;Willemen et al, 2012;van Wensem, 2013;Hodder et al, 2014). O'Neill (2001) argues that, in ecology, such ecosystems have often tended to be viewed tacitly as stable, closed, spatially homogeneous, and self-regulating systems to which humans are considered external (except in the special case of agroecosystems).…”

“…A number of articles published by ecologists in the last decade (e.g., Hodder et al, 2014;Lamarque et al, 2014;Crouzat et al, 2015) give the impression that for general ecosystem services, including some directly related to soils, quantification does not present any particular difficulty. The recent article by Crouzat et al (2015) is a case in point.…”

Identifying robust response options to manage environmental change using an Ecosystem Approach: A stress-testing case study for the UK XXX

“…natural flood management; green/blue infrastructure) were also identified as being particularly beneficial for enhancement of regulating ES but with likely reductions in provisioning ES, although there is some evidence that trade-offs could be minimised with integrated landscape-scale planning to better coordinate modified land use practices (e.g. Hodder et al, 2014;Reed et al, 2014).…”

“…Such adaptive management would have increased opportunity to enhance overall system resilience (including ecosystem integrity, functioning, and supporting ES) in this scenario although realisation of this would also be likely to require larger-scale and more integrated planning than occurs at present in the UK (e.g. Hodder et al, 2014).…”

Avaliação da influência dos pagamentos por serviços ambientais sobre a estrutura da paisagem

“…Devido à substituição das áreas florestais por outros usos da terra, como agricultura e pastagem, em 2009 restavam cerca de 11,4 a 16% da cobertura florestal original de Mata Atlântica, distribuídas de forma isolada na paisagem agrícola, geralmente em pequenos fragmentos florestais (RANTA et al, 1998;RIBEIRO et al, 2009;METZGER, 2009 O fornecimento dos serviços ecossistêmicos está diretamente atrelado à composição e configuração espacial da paisagem (JONES et al, 2012;HODDER et al, 2014;BÜRGI et al, 2015), uma vez que há dependência espacial entre as unidades da paisagem e as propriedades ecossistêmicas (FORMAN; GODRON, 1981;URBAN et al, 2000;METZGER, 2001;TURNER, 2010;WU, 2013). Então, mudanças na estrutura da paisagem podem afetar a movimentação dos organismos (LAUTENBACH et al, 2011;SCHIPPERS et al, 2014), posto que a distribuição dos fragmentos florestais na paisagem afeta de forma significativa a conservação da biodiversidade e a provisão dos SE (METZGER, 1999;METZGER, 2001 O monitoramento deve diagnosticar as mudanças ocorridas em relação à linha de base e servir como auxilio aos tomadores de decisão, entretanto, a maioria dos esquemas de PSA não constrói uma linha de base para futuras avaliações e detecção de adicionalidade (NAEEM et al, 2015).…”