IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v60y2023ics2212041623000098.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping marine ecosystem services potential across an oceanic archipelago: Applicability and limitations for decision-making

Author

Listed:
  • Cordero-Penín, Víctor
  • Abramic, Andrej
  • García-Mendoza, Alejandro
  • Otero-Ferrer, Francisco
  • Haroun, Ricardo

Abstract

Understanding the multiple benefits (i.e. Ecosystem Services, ES) that marine habitats provide to society is key for adequate decision-making that maintains our well-being in the long-term. The main objective of this research was to map and assess, in the context of marine spatial planning, the ES supply of shallow and deep-sea habitats in the Canary Islands across biological zones and substrate types. An ES-matrix was developed through a literature review to evaluate the supply potential, complemented with the habitats’ total extension to assess the supply capacity of each resulting ES. The matrix linked 34 habitats in relation to 42 ES, over ca. 485,000 km2. Cultural ES were the most abundant in the archipelago. On average, shallow habitats supplied potentially 25 ES compared to 17 ES by deep-sea habitats. This is likely to be explained by limitations regarding the available information suggesting that both provisioning ES and ES supply potential of the deep-sea were underestimated. The supply capacity analysis showed that particularly certain regulating and maintenance services may be at risk in the face of habitat degradation. Results enabled the extrapolation of already existing ES monetization, e.g. for those accounted for Cymodocea nodosa generating 25,633,919 € y-1 in the Canary Islands. This study provided the first comprehensive spatial assessment of ES supply potential in the Canary Islands, filling a regional knowledge gap. This enables accounting for previously overlooked ES in the region, strengthening the idea that coastal communities’ well-being in small islands depends on their marine ecosystems. Finally, results were discussed in relation to their applicability and limitations to marine spatial planning and protected area design informing on the potentially large societal benefits that may be at risk when allocating maritime activities spatially.

Suggested Citation

  • Cordero-Penín, Víctor & Abramic, Andrej & García-Mendoza, Alejandro & Otero-Ferrer, Francisco & Haroun, Ricardo, 2023. "Mapping marine ecosystem services potential across an oceanic archipelago: Applicability and limitations for decision-making," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:60:y:2023:i:c:s2212041623000098
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101517
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000098
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101517?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Potschin-Young, Marion & Czúcz, Balint & Liquete, Camino & Maes, Joachim & Rusch, Graciela M. & Haines-Young, Roy, 2017. "Intermediate ecosystem services: An empty concept?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 124-126.
    2. Miriam von Thenen & Aurelija Armoškaitė & Víctor Cordero-Penín & Sara García-Morales & Josefine B. Gottschalk & Débora Gutierrez & Malena Ripken & Pascal Thoya & Kerstin S. Schiele, 2021. "The Future of Marine Spatial Planning—Perspectives from Early Career Researchers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-12, December.
    3. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    4. Couce-Montero, Lorena & Christensen, Villy & Castro, José J., 2015. "Effects of small-scale and recreational fisheries on the Gran Canaria ecosystem," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 312(C), pages 61-76.
    5. Tallis, Heather & Lester, Sarah E. & Ruckelshaus, Mary & Plummer, Mark & McLeod, Karen & Guerry, Anne & Andelman, Sandy & Caldwell, Margaret R. & Conte, Marc & Copps, Stephen & Fox, David & Fujita, Ro, 2012. "New metrics for managing and sustaining the ocean's bounty," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 303-306, January.
    6. Vatn Arild & Bromley Daniel W., 1994. "Choices without Prices without Apologies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 129-148, March.
    7. Klain, Sarah C. & Chan, Kai M.A., 2012. "Navigating coastal values: Participatory mapping of ecosystem services for spatial planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 104-113.
    8. Douvere, Fanny, 2008. "The importance of marine spatial planning in advancing ecosystem-based sea use management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 762-771, September.
    9. Potts, Tavis & Burdon, Daryl & Jackson, Emma & Atkins, Jonathan & Saunders, Justine & Hastings, Emily & Langmead, Olivia, 2014. "Do marine protected areas deliver flows of ecosystem services to support human welfare?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 139-148.
    10. Harrison, P.A. & Berry, P.M. & Simpson, G. & Haslett, J.R. & Blicharska, M. & Bucur, M. & Dunford, R. & Egoh, B. & Garcia-Llorente, M. & Geamănă, N. & Geertsema, W. & Lommelen, E. & Meiresonne, L. & T, 2014. "Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 191-203.
    11. Geange, Shane & Townsend, Michael & Clark, Dana & Ellis, Joanne I. & Lohrer, Andrew M., 2019. "Communicating the value of marine conservation using an ecosystem service matrix approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 150-163.
    12. Potschin-Young, M. & Haines-Young, R. & Görg, C. & Heink, U. & Jax, K. & Schleyer, C., 2018. "Understanding the role of conceptual frameworks: Reading the ecosystem service cascade," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 428-440.
    13. Jobstvogt, Niels & Watson, Verity & Kenter, Jasper O., 2014. "Looking below the surface: The cultural ecosystem service values of UK marine protected areas (MPAs)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 97-110.
    14. Armstrong, Claire W. & Foley, Naomi S. & Tinch, Rob & van den Hove, Sybille, 2012. "Services from the deep: Steps towards valuation of deep sea goods and services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 2-13.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Slater, Anne-Michelle & Irvine, Katherine N & Byg, Anja A. & Davies, Ian M. & Gubbins, Matt & Kafas, Andronikos & Kenter, Jasper & MacDonald, Alison & O'Hara Murray, Rory & Potts, Tavis & Tweddle, Jac, 2020. "Integrating stakeholder knowledge through modular cooperative participatory processes for marine spatial planning outcomes (CORPORATES)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    3. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.
    4. Bryce, Rosalind & Irvine, Katherine N. & Church, Andrew & Fish, Robert & Ranger, Sue & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Subjective well-being indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 258-269.
    5. Burdon, D. & Potts, T. & McKinley, E. & Lew, S. & Shilland, R. & Gormley, K. & Thomson, S. & Forster, R., 2019. "Expanding the role of participatory mapping to assess ecosystem service provision in local coastal environments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    6. Jernberg, Susanna & Kuosa, Harri & Boström, Christoffer & Burdon, Daryl & Haavisto, Fiia & Heiskanen, Anna-Stiina & Kiviluoto, Suvi & Kuningas, Sanna & Kunnasranta, Mervi & Uusitalo, Laura & Villnäs, , 2024. "Linking natural capital stocks with ecosystem services in the Northern Baltic Sea," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    7. Chakraborty, Shamik & Gasparatos, Alexandros & Blasiak, Robert, 2020. "Multiple values for the management and sustainable use of coastal and marine ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    8. Saarikoski, Heli & Jax, Kurt & Harrison, Paula A. & Primmer, Eeva & Barton, David N. & Mononen, Laura & Vihervaara, Petteri & Furman, Eeva, 2015. "Exploring operational ecosystem service definitions: The case of boreal forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 144-157.
    9. Qu, Yang & Hooper, Tara & Austen, Melanie C. & Papathanasopoulou, Eleni & Huang, Junling & Yan, Xiaoyu, 2023. "Development of a computable general equilibrium model based on integrated macroeconomic framework for ocean multi-use between offshore wind farms and fishing activities in Scotland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    10. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    11. Tonin, Stefania, 2018. "Citizens’ perspectives on marine protected areas as a governance strategy to effectively preserve marine ecosystem services and biodiversity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 189-200.
    12. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.
    13. Spash, Clive L. & Vatn, Arild, 2006. "Transferring environmental value estimates: Issues and alternatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 379-388, December.
    14. Hattam, Caroline & Broszeit, Stefanie & Langmead, Olivia & Praptiwi, Radisti A. & Ching Lim, Voon & Creencia, Lota A. & Duc Hau, Tran & Maharja, Carya & Wulandari, Prawesti & Mitra Setia, Tatang & Sug, 2021. "A matrix approach to tropical marine ecosystem service assessments in South east Asia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    15. Heink, Ulrich & Jax, Kurt, 2019. "Going Upstream — How the Purpose of a Conceptual Framework for Ecosystem Services Determines Its Structure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 264-271.
    16. Schaeffer, Y. & Dissart, J.-C., 2018. "Natural and Environmental Amenities: A Review of Definitions, Measures and Issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 475-496.
    17. Ainsworth, Gillian B. & Kenter, Jasper O. & O'Connor, Sebastian & Daunt, Francis & Young, Juliette C., 2019. "A fulfilled human life: Eliciting sense of place and cultural identity in two UK marine environments through the Community Voice Method," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    18. Aslaksen, Iulie & Nybø, Signe & Framstad, Erik & Garnåsjordet, Per Arild & Skarpaas, Olav, 2015. "Biodiversity and ecosystem services: The Nature Index for Norway," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 108-116.
    19. van den Belt, Marjan & Stevens, Sharon M., 2016. "Transformative agenda, or lost in the translation? A review of top-cited articles in the first four years of Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 60-72.
    20. Divinsky, Itai & Becker, Nir & Bar (Kutiel), Pua, 2017. "Ecosystem service tradeoff between grazing intensity and other services - A case study in Karei-Deshe experimental cattle range in northern Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 16-27.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:60:y:2023:i:c:s2212041623000098. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.