IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v73y2017icp52-60.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are ecosystem service hotspots located in protected areas? Results from a study in Southern Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Spanò, Marinella
  • Leronni, Vincenzo
  • Lafortezza, Raffaele
  • Gentile, Francesco

Abstract

Ecosystems are essential in providing multiple services to society. However, understanding ecosystem services (ESS) in terms of spatial distribution and trade-offs still remains a challenge for landscape planners and natural resource managers. In this paper, we analyzed the supply of a set of ESS – carbon storage, soil erosion protection, biodiversity, and recreation – within the landscape surrounding the city of Bari in Southern Italy. Through an analysis of this landscape, which includes natural protected areas, such as Natura 2000 Network sites, national and regional parks and nature reserves, and in view of the recent Fitness Check of the Nature Directives, we aimed to provide answers to the following questions: (i) Where are the areas of high and low supply of individual ecosystem services located?; (ii) Where do ecosystem service trade-offs (i.e., ‘hotspots’ and ‘coldspots’) occur?; and (iii) To what extent are ecosystem service hotspots and coldspots located within or outside of natural protected areas? Results show that most of the landscape in the study area supplied at least one of the selected ESS and that ESS hotspots were mostly located within forested and/or natural areas. Hotspots occupied 8.0% of the total landscape, with 23.7% located in natural protected areas. Coldspots were scarce and equal to 2.4%; they constituted only 0.1% of natural protected areas. Almost all of the landscape (89.6%) consists of intermediate areas (i.e., between hotspots and coldspots); 76.2% of natural protected areas consists of intermediate areas. This latter finding is relevant because the high intermediate classes are potentially high-performing areas, which lie mainly on the borders of protected spaces; they can positively influence ecological processes and thus enhance a wide-ranging provision of ESS. Our results highlight the importance of analyzing landscapes to facilitate the selection of priority areas where management efforts would yield maximum benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Spanò, Marinella & Leronni, Vincenzo & Lafortezza, Raffaele & Gentile, Francesco, 2017. "Are ecosystem service hotspots located in protected areas? Results from a study in Southern Italy," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 52-60.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:73:y:2017:i:c:p:52-60
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901117300837
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.008?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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).
    2. Riccardo D'Alberto & Francesco Pagliacci & Matteo Zavalloni, 2023. "A socioeconomic impact assessment of three Italian national parks," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 114-147, January.
    3. Maria Carmela Aprile & Gennaro Punzo, 2023. "Young People and Nature: What Drives Underlying Behavioural Intentions towards Protected Areas Conservation?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-27, August.
    4. Yu, Chaoyue & Zhang, Zhonghao & Jeppesen, Erik & Gao, Yang & Liu, Yuexin & Liu, Yongjie & Lu, Qingling & Wang, Chenxu & Sun, Ximan, 2024. "Assessment of the effectiveness of China’s protected areas in enhancing ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    5. Zheng, Liang & Wang, Ying & Li, Jiangfeng, 2023. "Quantifying the spatial impact of landscape fragmentation on habitat quality: A multi-temporal dimensional comparison between the Yangtze River Economic Belt and Yellow River Basin of China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    6. Cecilia Arnaiz-Schmitz & Cristina Herrero-Jáuregui & María F. Schmitz, 2021. "Recreational and Nature-Based Tourism as a Cultural Ecosystem Service. Assessment and Mapping in a Rural-Urban Gradient of Central Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, March.

    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:enscpo:v:73:y:2017:i:c:p:52-60. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    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.