Historical dynamics in ecosystem service bundles

Abstract

Managing multiple ecosystem services (ES), including addressing trade-offs between services and preventing ecological surprises, is among the most pressing areas for sustainability research. These challenges require ES research to go beyond the currently common approach of snapshot studies limited to one or two services at a single point in time. We used a spatiotemporal approach to examine changes in nine ES and their relationships from 1971 to 2006 across 131 municipalities in a mixed-use landscape in Quebec, Canada. We show how an approach that incorporates time and space can improve our understanding of ES dynamics. We found an increase in the provision of most services through time; however, provision of ES was not uniformly enhanced at all locations. Instead, each municipality specialized in providing a bundle (set of positively correlated ES) dominated by just a few services. The trajectory of bundle formation was related to changes in agricultural policy and global trends; local biophysical and socioeconomic characteristics explained the bundles' increasing spatial clustering. Relationships between services varied through time, with some provisioning and cultural services shifting from a trade-off or no relationship in 1971 to an apparent synergistic relationship by 2006. By implementing a spatiotemporal perspective on multiple services, we provide clear evidence of the dynamic nature of ES interactions and contribute to identifying processes and drivers behind these changing relationships. Our study raises questions about using snapshots of ES provision at a single point in time to build our understanding of ES relationships in complex and dynamic socialecological systems.ecosystem services | historical ecology | bundles | ecosystem service interactions | spatiotemporal analysis M anaging multiple ecosystem services (ES) simultaneously, including addressing trade-offs between services and preventing ecological surprises, is among the most pressing concerns of sustainability research (1-3). However, most ES research to date cannot truly address these critical challenges because it has focused primarily on quantifying and mapping the delivery of only a few services at a single point in time (4). In this study, we analyze nine ES at five-year intervals from 1971 to 2006 to show how a spatiotemporal approach can enhance our understanding of ES dynamics.The adoption of a historical perspective has made important contributions in other areas of ecology (5-8). For example, time has been revealed to be as important as space for understanding patterns of species richness and distribution (6, 9). Historical ecology has shed light on the persistent effects of human activity on landscapes (10) and ecosystem function (11)(12)(13). This field has also provided the temporal perspective needed to understand the underlying causes and rates of change in ecosystems as context for the future, including the likelihood of unexpected regime shifts (14-16), and the potential for conservation, restoration, and management of eco...

Ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies misunderstood without landscape history

“…The suite (or bundles) of ES produced by a landscape throughout these different phases also differs (Foley et al 2005). Because ES interactions change through time (Renard et al 2015), capturing only a snapshot of ES interactions at different phases of these transitions may lead to contrasting characterizations of ES interactions, as our work demonstrated for the agricultural to urban development transition. Although a temporal approach is fundamental to understanding ES interactions, it can also add to our understanding of ES bundles, which to date has largely been spatial (Renard et al 2015).…”

“…Because ES interactions change through time (Renard et al 2015), capturing only a snapshot of ES interactions at different phases of these transitions may lead to contrasting characterizations of ES interactions, as our work demonstrated for the agricultural to urban development transition. Although a temporal approach is fundamental to understanding ES interactions, it can also add to our understanding of ES bundles, which to date has largely been spatial (Renard et al 2015). Bundles (or sets of co-occurring ES) are often identified using cluster analysis on static maps (Raudsepp-Hearne et al 2010).…”

“…Unfortunately, inferring trade-offs and synergies using broad-scale spatial correlations among ES ignores several fundamental assumptions of a spacefor-time approach, including assumptions that landscape history is unimportant and that drivers of change are the same across large areas. Recent studies have shown that landscape history plays a critical role in modern ES (Dallimer et al 2015), and interactions change over time (Renard et al 2015). Furthermore, across a large study area, drivers of ES change are often heterogeneous.…”

“…Bundles (or sets of co-occurring ES) are often identified using cluster analysis on static maps (Raudsepp-Hearne et al 2010). Temporal change in ES bundles has rarely been considered until recently (Renard et al 2015). A space-for-time approach may be missing the dynamics of ES bundles, and key future work should address these dynamics.…”

“…Ecosystem service interactions may involve time lags whereby historical decisions influence current provisioning of ES (Dallimer et al 2015). A landscape baseline can be used as a reference point against which current landscape ES can be measured and compared, but rarely have baselines been used to understand the context of ES interactions (but see Haines-Young et al 2012, Renard et al 2015. Ecosystem baselines have been used in landscape ecology to better understand changes in ecosystems over time and under different scenarios (Bull et al 2014).…”