Reframing water-related ecosystem services flows

Transactions in Earth, Environment, and Sustainability

2022

Ecosystem services are the basis for human survival and development and act as a bridge between nature and society. In recent years, ecosystem service flows have become the focus and primary challenge of ecosystem service research, with development in research efforts toward quantification and spatialization. This review explains the necessity of ecosystem service flows, discusses the progress of research in this area over the last decade, and compares the theoretical and representative research approaches from two conceptual perspectives on ecosystem service flows. One of these approaches focuses on processes, treating ecosystem service flows as the spatiotemporal association between ecological service provision areas and service benefit areas, and the other emphasizes final utility, considering ecosystem service flows as the actual supply of ecosystem services to beneficiaries in different areas. On this basis, the research gaps in theoretical principles, assessment methods, and applications are summarized, and future research perspectives on ecosystem service flows are proposed, with a focus on optimizing ecosystem service benefits and promoting cooperative development of systemic human–nature relationships.

Section: Research Methods For Ecosystem Service Flowsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecosystem services assessment from capacity to flow: A review

Transactions in Earth, Environment, and Sustainability

2022

“…This method has been used for some specific ES. For example, the freshwater service flow has been quantified by coupling hydrological models (e.g., Variable Infiltration Capacity Macroscale Hydrologic Model, Hydrological Simulation Program Fortran, or freshwater yield algorithm—a sub-module of the InVEST model) for potential ES, a spatial flow algorithm (e.g., D8 [i.e., 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 and 128] or stream network) for spatial flow, and a statistical method for demand (Li et al, 2017; Lin et al, 2021; Zhang et al, 2021). The sand fixation service flow has been quantified by integrating the Revised Wind Erosion Equation for potential ES, the HSPLIT model for spatial flow and a statistical/spatial distribution of people method for demand (Su et al, 2020; Xu and Zang, 2022; Xu et al, 2019).…”

Section: Comprehensive Framework For Quantifying Esfmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In turn, these will influence the flow direction, flow amount and the realized amount of ESF. In addition, since ES are co-produced by ecosystems and people, it is important to distinguish the contributions of natural and human inputs in final ES (Bengtsson, 2015; Lin et al, 2021), which is the basis of accounting for nature’s contribution to people (Wang et al, 2022). Therefore, understanding how natural and human-made factors influence the spatial flow of ES is the first step to quantifying the whole process of ESF.…”

Section: Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gradually, researchers realized that ES can only occur when there is human demand. They found that there was usually a mismatch between the supply and demand of ES (Chen et al, 2019; Wang et al, 2019a) when it flows to beneficiaries to fulfill human demand (Lin et al, 2021). Accordingly, many researchers have tried to understand and define ESF (Figure 1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It shows how and how much natural ecosystems (e.g., forest, grassland and wetland) produce potential ES, how potential ES interact with human participation to deliver benefits, and then how delivered ES interact with different beneficiaries to fulfill human demand. Only by untangling the whole process of ESF can we take measures to protect and manage natural ecosystems and human-made capital to facilitate sustainable ESF management (Lin et al, 2021; Metzger et al, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A comprehensive framework for quantifying ecosystem service flow focusing on social-ecological processes

Transactions in Earth, Environment, and Sustainability

Zheng³

et al. 2023

Ecosystem service flow refers to the whole process of ecosystem service production, delivery and utilization, which is closely related to social-ecological processes. However, quantifying the entire ecosystem service flow process remains challenging, placing limits on the management of social-ecological systems to improve human wellbeing. Here, we explored the relationship between social-ecological processes (e.g., product transfer, matter cycling, energy flow and information delivery) and the spatial flow of ecosystem service. Then, we reviewed methods quantifying the spatial flow of ecosystem service. Finally, we proposed a comprehensive framework for quantifying the whole process of ecosystem service flow in terms of social-ecological processes. The framework consists of the quantification of ecosystem service supply and demand, the spatial flow of ecosystem service between suppliers and consumers, and the quantification of utilized ecosystem service. To better quantify the whole process of ecosystem service flow, we need to further understand the factors impacting ecosystem service flow, develop process-based models integrating beneficiaries and infrastructure, and establish social-ecological approaches to inform ecosystem service flow governance.

Optimizing landscape patterns to maximize ecological‐production benefits of water–food relationship: Evidence from the West Liaohe River basin, China

Lyu

et al. 2023

Land Degrad Dev

Watershed governance based on landscape pattern is a key research topic of watershed sustainable development, and the ecosystem services related to water resource management (WMESs) have become an important focus. The current research mainly focuses on the impact of land use type or landscape pattern on WMESs, while few studies focus on the relationship between WMESs and food production (FP), and the understanding of the impact of landscape pattern configuration on the water–food relationship is relatively limited. In this study, the West Liaohe River basin in China was selected as the research area. Based on the assessment of three WMESs (water yield, WY; soil loss by water, SW; and water purification, WP) and FP using models, we analyzed the influence mechanism of landscape pattern evolution on water–food relationship from 2000 to 2020. Then, the optimal allocation scheme of regional landscape patterns was discussed based on future land use scenario simulations. The results showed that the influence of landscape pattern evolution on the water–food relationship at the patch type level was higher than that at the landscape level, and the spatial configuration of landscape patterns can improve the water–food relationship. Promoting the intensive management of cropland and strengthening the construction of forest and grassland can improve the overall capacity of the WMESs and FP supply in the watershed. The study suggests that the natural development scenario, economic development scenario (EDS), and ecological protection scenario (EPS) should be implemented in counties A, B, and C, respectively. This indicates that counties with higher FP capacity are suitable for the EDS, while counties with lower FP capacity are suitable for the EPS, which will help maximize the benefits of FP and WMESs protection. The results of this study can provide a direct decision‐making basis for the maximization of ecological‐production benefits of the water–food relationship in watersheds and provide a scientific reference for land use policy regulation and ecological security protection of the watershed areas.