Stakeholders' expectations on ecosystem services affect the assessment of ecosystem services hotspots and their congruence with biodiversity

Gos, Pierre

doi:10.1080/21513732.2011.646303

Cited by 39 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4). A high percentage of overlapping hotspots was also described in other studies (Egoh et al 2009, Bai et al 2011, Gos and Lavorel 2012, but see Anderson et al 2009), suggesting that carbon stocks support biodiversity and vice versa. However, the selection of areas for strategic planning can vary greatly depending on the level of analysis, that is, from regions to subclimates.…”

Section: And B Hotspots and Coldspots Distribution And Characterizasupporting

confidence: 75%

The Positive Carbon Stocks–Biodiversity Relationship in Forests: Co‐Occurrence and Drivers Across Five SubClimates

Lecina‐Diaz¹,

Álvarez²,

Regos³

et al. 2018

Bulletin Ecologic Soc America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: And B Hotspots and Coldspots Distribution And Characterizasupporting

confidence: 75%

The Positive Carbon Stocks–Biodiversity Relationship in Forests: Co‐Occurrence and Drivers Across Five SubClimates

Lecina‐Diaz¹,

Álvarez²,

Regos³

et al. 2018

Bulletin Ecologic Soc America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…, Bai et al. , Gos and Lavorel , but see Anderson et al. ), suggesting that carbon stocks support biodiversity and vice versa.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The positive carbon stocks–biodiversity relationship in forests: co‐occurrence and drivers across five subclimates

Lecina‐Diaz

Álvarez

Regos

et al. 2018

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon storage in forests and its ability to offset global greenhouse gas emissions, as well as biodiversity and its capacity to support ecosystem functions and services, are often considered separately in landscape planning. However, the potential synergies between them are currently poorly understood. Identifying the spatial patterns and factors driving their co-occurrence across different climatic zones is critical to more effectively conserve forest ecosystems at the regional level. Here, we integrated information of National Forest Inventories and Breeding Bird Atlases across Europe and North America (Spain and Quebec, respectively), covering five subclimates (steppe, dry Mediterranean, humid Mediterranean, boreal, and temperate). In particular, this study aimed to (1) determine the spatial patterns of both forest carbon stocks and biodiversity (bird richness, tree richness, and overall biodiversity) and the factors that influence them; (2) establish the relationships between forest carbon stocks and biodiversity; and (3) define and characterize the areas of high (hotspots) and low (coldspots) values of carbon and biodiversity, and ultimately quantify their spatial overlap. Our results show that the factors affecting carbon and biodiversity vary between regions and subclimates. The highest values of carbon and biodiversity were found in northern Spain (humid Mediterranean subclimate) and southern Quebec (temperate subclimate) where there was more carbon as climate conditions were less limiting. High density and structural diversity simultaneously favored carbon stocks, tree, and overall biodiversity, especially in isolated and mountainous areas, often associated with steeper slopes and low accessibility. In addition, the relationship between carbon stocks and biodiversity was positive in both regions and all subclimates, being stronger where climate is a limiting factor for forest growth. The spatial overlap between hotspots of carbon and biodiversity provides an excellent opportunity for landscape planning to maintain carbon stocks and conserve biodiversity. The variables positively affecting carbon and biodiversity were also driving the hotspots of both carbon and biodiversity, emphasizing the viability of "win-win" solutions. Our results highlight the need to jointly determine the spatial patterns of ecosystem services and biodiversity for an effective and sustainable planning of forest landscapes that simultaneously support conservation and mitigate climate change.

show abstract

“…In addition, experts' opinions will depend on their backgrounds and values. Different stakeholder or expert groups can weight factors differently, set different thresholds of service supply, or disagree on the relationships between indicators and services (Bryan et al 2011;Gos and Lavorel 2012;Nahuelhual et al 2013;Plieninger et al 2013;Scolozzi, Morri, and Santolini 2012;Sherrouse, Clement, and Semmens 2011).…”

Section: Expert Judgmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial data, analysis approaches, and information needs for spatial ecosystem service assessments: a review

Andrew

Wulder

Nelson

et al. 2015

GIScience & Remote Sensing

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Operational use of the ecosystem service (ES) concept in conservation and planning requires quantitative assessments based on accurate mapping of ESs. Our goal is to review spatial assessments of ESs, with an emphasis on the socioecological drivers of ESs, the spatial datasets commonly used to represent those drivers, and the methodological approaches used to spatially model ESs. We conclude that diverse strategies, integrating both spatial and aspatial data, have been used to map ES supply and human demand. Model parameters representing abiotic ecosystem properties can be supported by use of well-developed and widely available spatial datasets. Land-cover data, often manipulated or subject to modeling in a GIS, is the most common input for ES modeling; however, assessments are increasingly informed by a mechanistic understanding of the relationships between drivers and services. We suggest that ES assessments are potentially weakened by the simplifying assumptions often needed to translate between conceptual models and widely used spatial data. Adoption of quantitative spatial data that more directly represent ecosystem properties may improve parameterization of mechanistic ES models and increase confidence in ES assessments.

show abstract

Stakeholders' expectations on ecosystem services affect the assessment of ecosystem services hotspots and their congruence with biodiversity

Cited by 39 publications

References 44 publications

The Positive Carbon Stocks–Biodiversity Relationship in Forests: Co‐Occurrence and Drivers Across Five SubClimates

The Positive Carbon Stocks–Biodiversity Relationship in Forests: Co‐Occurrence and Drivers Across Five SubClimates

The positive carbon stocks–biodiversity relationship in forests: co‐occurrence and drivers across five subclimates

Spatial data, analysis approaches, and information needs for spatial ecosystem service assessments: a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About