IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v69y2024ics2212041624000597.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Implications of landscape changes for ecosystem services and biodiversity: A national assessment in Ecuador

Author

Listed:
  • Koo, Hongmi
  • Kleemann, Janina
  • Cuenca, Pablo
  • Noh, Jin Kyoung
  • Fürst, Christine

Abstract

Ecuadorian ecosystems experience high pressure due to anthropogenic activities and climate change. Despite the need of regular monitoring of biodiversity and ecosystem services (BES), attempts to assess the current and future interdependencies of BES and landscape changes are still lacking. This study suggests a spatial assessment of the capacity of ecosystems/land use types to provide BES as status quo and its future development under scenarios of deforestation and climate change. To address data scarcity and improve legitimacy, spatial modeling was combined with participatory approaches. Specifically, changes in landscape pattern were simulated using a modeling platform that combines Geographic Information System (GIS) and Cellular Automaton (CA) modules. Experts in ecosystem conservation and management participated through surveys and workshops. Food, drinking water, service water, soil erosion control, water flow regulation, pollination/seed dispersal, regulation of macro climate, and landscape aesthetic/amenity were identified as the most relevant ES. Among the forest ecosystems, Páramo-related ecosystems were regarded to provide multiple ES with high capacities. Compared to the current status, the deforestation scenario showed to decrease most BES by 20–25 %, while increasing food provision by 5 %, as a trade-off. Regarding the climate change scenarios, the “Representative Concentration Pathways” (RCP) by 2070 were simulated with an increase in temperature of 2 °C (RCP 2.6) and of 4 °C (RCP 6.0). RCP 6.0 showed more noticeable impact than RCP 2.6, which caused a decrease in most BES whereas an increase in food provision due to the possible expansion of arable land into higher altitudes. The results of the spatial assessment also indicated high and low potential areas for BES provision. Such information can support decision-making for BES management e.g., priority areas for actions. Furthermore, the applied spatially explicit assessment could be a starting point for a regular assessment of BES, which has not yet been implemented in Ecuador.

Suggested Citation

  • Koo, Hongmi & Kleemann, Janina & Cuenca, Pablo & Noh, Jin Kyoung & Fürst, Christine, 2024. "Implications of landscape changes for ecosystem services and biodiversity: A national assessment in Ecuador," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:69:y:2024:i:c:s2212041624000597
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101652
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000597
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101652?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. Karimi, Azadeh & Yazdandad, Hossein & Fagerholm, Nora, 2020. "Evaluating social perceptions of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and land management: Trade-offs, synergies and implications for landscape planning and management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    2. Itf, 2022. "Monitoring Progress in Urban Road Safety: 2022 Update," International Transport Forum Policy Papers 108, OECD Publishing.
    3. Carlos Quiroz Dahik & Patricio Crespo & Bernd Stimm & Felipe Murtinho & Michael Weber & Patrick Hildebrandt, 2018. "Contrasting Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Pine Plantations in the Páramo Ecosystem of Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-23, May.
    4. Kusi, Kwadwo Kyenkyehene & Khattabi, Abdellatif & Mhammdi, Nadia & Lahssini, Said, 2020. "Prospective evaluation of the impact of land use change on ecosystem services in the Ourika watershed, Morocco," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Solveig Höfer & Alex Ziemba & Ghada El Serafy, 2020. "A Bayesian approach to ecosystem service trade-off analysis utilizing expert knowledge," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 67-83, March.
    6. Simo Sarkki & Jari Niemelä & Rob Tinch & Sybille van den Hove & Allan Watt & Juliette Young, 2014. "Balancing credibility, relevance and legitimacy: A critical assessment of trade-offs in science–policy interfaces," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 194-206.
    7. Saarikoski, Heli & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Antunes, Paula & Aszalós, Réka & Baró, Francesc & Berry, Pam & Blanko, Gemma Garcia & Goméz-Baggethun, Erik & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, Jan , 2018. "Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 579-598.
    8. Janina Kleemann & Camilo Zamora & Alexandra Belen Villacis-Chiluisa & Pablo Cuenca & Hongmi Koo & Jin Kyoung Noh & Christine Fürst & Michael Thiel, 2022. "Deforestation in Continental Ecuador with a Focus on Protected Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-26, February.
    9. Belén Fadrique & Selene Báez & Álvaro Duque & Agustina Malizia & Cecilia Blundo & Julieta Carilla & Oriana Osinaga-Acosta & Lucio Malizia & Miles Silman & William Farfán-Ríos & Yadvinder Malhi & Kenne, 2018. "Widespread but heterogeneous responses of Andean forests to climate change," Nature, Nature, vol. 564(7735), pages 207-212, December.
    10. I. Díaz-Reviriego & E. Turnhout & S. Beck, 2019. "Participation and inclusiveness in the Intergovernmental Science–Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 2(6), pages 457-464, June.
    11. Christine Fürst & Katrin Pietzsch & Anke Witt & Susanne Frank & Lars Koschke & Franz Makeschin, 2012. "How to better consider sectoral planning information in regional planning: example afforestation and forest conversion," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(7), pages 855-883, October.
    12. Tanya Hayes & Felipe Murtinho & Hendrik Wolff & María Fernanda López-Sandoval & Joel Salazar, 2022. "Effectiveness of payment for ecosystem services after loss and uncertainty of compensation," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 5(1), pages 81-88, January.
    13. Price, Jessica & Silbernagel, Janet & Miller, Nicholas & Swaty, Randy & White, Mark & Nixon, Kristina, 2012. "Eliciting expert knowledge to inform landscape modeling of conservation scenarios," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 76-87.
    14. Cristina Ross & Stephen Fildes & Andrew Millington, 2017. "Land‐Use and Land‐Cover Change in the Páramo of South‐Central Ecuador, 1979–2014," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-20, June.
    15. Carlos Mestanza-Ramón & Maritza Sanchez Capa & Hilter Figueroa Saavedra & Juana Rojas Paredes, 2019. "Integrated Coastal Zone Management in Continental Ecuador and Galapagos Islands: Challenges and Opportunities in a Changing Tourism and Economic Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-17, November.
    16. Lippe, Melvin & Rummel, Lisa & Günter, Sven, 2022. "Simulating land use and land cover change under contrasting levels of policy enforcement and its spatially-explicit impact on tropical forest landscapes in Ecuador," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    17. Ramel, Cindy & Rey, Pierre-Louis & Fernandes, Rui & Vincent, Claire & Cardoso, Ana R. & Broennimann, Olivier & Pellissier, Loïc & Pradervand, Jean-Nicolas & Ursenbacher, Sylvain & Schmidt, Benedikt R., 2020. "Integrating ecosystem services within spatial biodiversity conservation prioritization in the Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    18. Kathleen A. Farley & Leah L. Bremer, 2017. "“Water Is Life”: Local Perceptions of Páramo Grasslands and Land Management Strategies Associated with Payment for Ecosystem Services," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(2), pages 371-381, March.
    19. 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.
    20. Hai Cheng & Ashish Sinha & Francisco W. Cruz & Xianfeng Wang & R. Lawrence Edwards & Fernando M. d’Horta & Camila C. Ribas & Mathias Vuille & Lowell D. Stott & Augusto S. Auler, 2013. "Climate change patterns in Amazonia and biodiversity," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 4(1), pages 1-6, June.
    21. Kragt, Marit E. & Robertson, Michael J., 2014. "Quantifying ecosystem services trade-offs from agricultural practices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 147-157.
    22. Pascua, Pua‘ala & McMillen, Heather & Ticktin, Tamara & Vaughan, Mehana & Winter, Kawika B., 2017. "Beyond services: A process and framework to incorporate cultural, genealogical, place-based, and indigenous relationships in ecosystem service assessments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 465-475.
    23. Juanita, Aldana-Domínguez & Ignacio, Palomo & Jorgelina, Gutiérrez-Angonese & Cecilia, Arnaiz-Schmitz & Carlos, Montes & Francisco, Narvaez, 2019. "Assessing the effects of past and future land cover changes in ecosystem services, disservices and biodiversity: A case study in Barranquilla Metropolitan Area (BMA), Colombia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    24. Pablo Cuenca & Cristian Echeverria, 2017. "How do protected landscapes associated with high biodiversity and population levels change?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, July.
    25. Hongmi Koo & Janina Kleemann & Christine Fürst, 2020. "Integrating Ecosystem Services into Land-Use Modeling to Assess the Effects of Future Land-Use Strategies in Northern Ghana," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-24, October.
    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. Tusznio, Joanna & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Rechciński, Marcin & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2020. "Application of the ecosystem services concept at the local level – Challenges, opportunities, and limitations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    2. Uehara, Takuro & Hidaka, Takeshi & Tsuge, Takahiro & Sakurai, Ryo & Cordier, Mateo, 2021. "An adaptive social-ecological system management matrix for guiding ecosystem service improvements," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    3. Mohammadyari, Fatemeh & Tavakoli, Mohsen & Zarandian, Ardavan & Abdollahi, Sedighe, 2023. "Optimization land use based on multi-scenario simulation of ecosystem service for sustainable landscape planning in a mixed urban - Forest watershed," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 483(C).
    4. Havinga, Ilan & Bogaart, Patrick W. & Hein, Lars & Tuia, Devis, 2020. "Defining and spatially modelling cultural ecosystem services using crowdsourced data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    5. Jen Iris Allan & Graeme Auld & Timothy Cadman & Hayley Stevenson, 2022. "Comparative Fortunes of Ecosystem Services as an International Governance Concept," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(1), pages 62-75, February.
    6. Jax, Kurt & Furman, Eeva & Saarikoski, Heli & Barton, David N. & Delbaere, Ben & Dick, Jan & Duke, Guy & Görg, Christoph & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Harrison, Paula A. & Maes, Joachim & Pérez-Soba, Mart, 2018. "Handling a messy world: Lessons learned when trying to make the ecosystem services concept operational," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 415-427.
    7. Wen Zhou & Yantao Xi & Liang Zhai & Cheng Li & Jingyang Li & Wei Hou, 2023. "Zoning for Spatial Conservation and Restoration Based on Ecosystem Services in Highly Urbanized Region: A Case Study in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, March.
    8. Tugjamba, Navchaa & Walkerden, Greg, 2021. "Traditional and modern ecosystem services thinking in nomadic Mongolia: Framing differences, common concerns, and ways forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    9. Kong, Inhye & Sarmiento, Fausto O., 2022. "Utilizing a crowdsourced phrasal lexicon to identify cultural ecosystem services in El Cajas National Park, Ecuador," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    10. Li-Pei Peng & Wei-Ming Wang, 2020. "Hybrid Decision-Making Evaluation for Future Scenarios of Cultural Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
    11. Marre, Jean-Baptiste & Billé, Raphaël, 2019. "A demand-driven approach to ecosystem services economic valuation: Lessons from Pacific island countries and territories," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    12. Adams, Clare & Frantzeskaki, Niki & Moglia, Magnus, 2023. "Mainstreaming nature-based solutions in cities: A systematic literature review and a proposal for facilitating urban transitions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    13. Shuting Bai & Jiuchun Yang & Yubo Zhang & Fengqin Yan & Lingxue Yu & Shuwen Zhang, 2022. "Evaluating Ecosystem Services and Trade-Offs Based on Land-Use Simulation: A Case Study in the Farming–Pastoral Ecotone of Northern China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, July.
    14. González-García, Alberto & Palomo, Ignacio & González, José A. & López, César A. & Montes, Carlos, 2020. "Quantifying spatial supply-demand mismatches in ecosystem services provides insights for land-use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    15. Kekuhi Kealiikanakaoleohaililani & Natalie Kurashima & Kainana S. Francisco & Christian P. Giardina & Renee Pualani Louis & Heather McMillen & C. Kalā Asing & Kayla Asing & Tabetha A. Block & Mililani, 2018. "Ritual + Sustainability Science? A Portal into the Science of Aloha," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, September.
    16. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    17. Bernard Fosu Frimpong & Frank Molkenthin, 2021. "Tracking Urban Expansion Using Random Forests for the Classification of Landsat Imagery (1986–2015) and Predicting Urban/Built-Up Areas for 2025: A Study of the Kumasi Metropolis, Ghana," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    18. Beichen Ge & Congjin Wang & Yuhong Song, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Research in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    19. Evan Elderbrock & Chris Enright & Kathryn A. Lynch & Alexandra R. Rempel, 2020. "A Guide to Public Green Space Planning for Urban Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Muradian, Roldan & Pascual, Unai, 2020. "Ecological economics in the age of fear," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).

    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:69:y:2024:i:c:s2212041624000597. 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.