IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v86y2019icp1-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Implications of urban growth and farmland loss for ecosystem services in the western United States

Author

Listed:
  • Narducci, Jenna
  • Quintas-Soriano, Cristina
  • Castro, Antonio
  • Som-Castellano, Rebecca
  • Brandt, Jodi S.

Abstract

A projected 60% of the world’s population will live in urban areas by 2030. Urbanization has major impacts on ecosystem services, and therefore human well-being, but not all groups within a community experience the impacts of urbanization on ecosystem services the same. It is important for decision-makers to understand the trade-offs that occur with urbanization, as it relates to ecosystem services provision, as well as the perceptions of importance of ecosystem services among a population. In this paper, we measured a) areas at environmental risk due to urban growth, b) differences in societal demand for ecosystem services between socio-demographic groups, c) perceptions of urban and agricultural impacts to ecosystem services, and d) public awareness of current ecosystem services trends, in the Boise, Idaho, metropolitan area, one of the fastest-growing areas in the United States. We applied urban growth projections to current land use-land cover, and found that agriculture is at highest risk of conversion. We then conducted over 400 face-to-face survey, measuring whether perceptions regarding ecosystem services from urban and agricultural land differ between socio-demographic groups. We found significant differences regarding perceived importance of ecosystem services. The general public placed higher importance on food production and alternative energy while experts placed higher importance on water quality and recreation. Overall, respondents perceived that urban land use negatively impacts more ecosystem services than agriculture land use. Urban areas were associated with positive impacts to local identity and recreation, while agriculture was positively associated with cultural heritage and food production. Both urban and agriculture land uses were negatively associated with water quality, air quality, and habitat for species with urban land having greater, negative impacts. Our results indicate a need to incorporate social demand for ecosystem services in urban planning, to ensure policy resilience and to appropriately address diverse perspectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Narducci, Jenna & Quintas-Soriano, Cristina & Castro, Antonio & Som-Castellano, Rebecca & Brandt, Jodi S., 2019. "Implications of urban growth and farmland loss for ecosystem services in the western United States," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-11.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:86:y:2019:i:c:p:1-11
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.04.029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718309761
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.04.029?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. Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & García-Llorente, Marina & Aguilera, Pedro A. & Montes, Carlos & Martín-López, Berta, 2014. "Socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services: uncovering the links between values, drivers of change, and human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 36-48.
    2. Antonio J. Castro & Cristina Quintas-Soriano & Jodi Brandt & Carla L. Atkinson & Colden V. Baxter & Morey Burnham & Benis N. Egoh & Marina García-Llorente & Jason P. Julian & Berta Martín-López & Feli, 2018. "Applying Place-Based Social-Ecological Research to Address Water Scarcity: Insights for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, May.
    3. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    4. Scholte, Samantha S.K. & van Teeffelen, Astrid J.A. & Verburg, Peter H., 2015. "Integrating socio-cultural perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: A review of concepts and methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 67-78.
    5. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    6. Jan Corfee-Morlot & Ian Cochran & Stéphane Hallegatte & Pierre-Jonathan Teasdale, 2011. "Multilevel risk governance and urban adaptation policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(1), pages 169-197, January.
    7. Acharya, Gayatri & Bennett, Lynne Lewis, 2001. "Valuing Open Space and Land-Use Patterns in Urban Watersheds," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2-3), pages 221-237, March-May.
    8. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Yiting Chen & Zhanbin Li & Peng Li & Yixin Zhang & Hailiang Liu & Jinjin Pan, 2022. "Impacts and Projections of Land Use and Demographic Changes on Ecosystem Services: A Case Study in the Guanzhong Region, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Kwadwo Kyenkyehene Kusi & Abdellatif Khattabi & Nadia Mhammdi, 2023. "Analyzing the impact of land use change on ecosystem service value in the main watersheds of Morocco," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 2688-2715, March.
    3. Min Song & Yuxin Ji & Mingdi Zhu & Junji Yue & Luping Yi, 2022. "Routes Determine Results? Comparing the Performance of Differentiated Farmland Conservation Policies in China Based on Farmers’ Perceptions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-20, September.
    4. Manman Han & Min Song, 2020. "Quantifying Ecological Well-Being Loss under Rural–Urban Land Conversion: A Study from Choice Experiments in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Daniel Sampaio Tavares & Fernando Brandão Alves & Isabel Breda Vásquez, 2021. "The Relationship between Intangible Cultural Heritage and Urban Resilience: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.
    6. Johnson, Kelsey K. & Parton, Lee & Nolte, Christoph & Williamson, Matt & Nogeire-McRae, Theresa & Paudel, Jayash & Brandt, Jodi, 2023. "Moving to the country: Understanding the effects of Covid-19 on property values and farmland development risk," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    7. Casanova Enault, Laure & Popoff, Tatiana & Debolini, Marta, 2021. "Vacant lands on French Mediterranean coastlines: Inventory, agricultural opportunities, and prospective scenarios," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    8. Xuege Wang & Fengqin Yan & Yinwei Zeng & Ming Chen & Bin He & Lu Kang & Fenzhen Su, 2021. "Ecosystem Services Changes on Farmland in Response to Urbanization in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area of China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-16, May.
    9. Congmou Zhu & Lixia Yang & Qiuyu Xu & Jinwei Fu & Yue Lin & Le Sun & Shan He & Shaofeng Yuan, 2022. "A Comparative Analysis of Farmland Occupation by Urban Sprawl and Rural Settlement Expansion in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Thiago Almeida Vieira & Thomas Panagopoulos, 2020. "Urban Forestry in Brazilian Amazonia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-19, April.
    11. Gennaro Punzo & Rosalia Castellano & Emma Bruno, 2021. "The determinants of land use in Italy from a spatial perspective: a re-interpretation at the time of covid-19," RIEDS - Rivista Italiana di Economia, Demografia e Statistica - The Italian Journal of Economic, Demographic and Statistical Studies, SIEDS Societa' Italiana di Economia Demografia e Statistica, vol. 75(2), pages 72-82, April-Jun.
    12. Yonghui Cheng & Qi Kang & Kewei Liu & Peng Cui & Kaixu Zhao & Jianwei Li & Xue Ma & Qingsong Ni, 2023. "Impact of Urbanization on Ecosystem Service Value from the Perspective of Spatio-Temporal Heterogeneity: A Case Study from the Yellow River Basin," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-27, June.
    13. Kurt Smith & Frederick Cubbage, 2024. "Land Fragmentation and Heirs Property: Current Issues and Policy Responses," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, April.
    14. Yanyan Wu & Zhaohui Luo & Zhifeng Wu, 2024. "Exploring the Relationship between Urbanization and Vegetation Ecological Quality Changes in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-25, August.
    15. Chaolei Yang & Jingyuan Li & Shuwen Jiang & Yufeng Tian & Canfeng Li & Wantao Yang & Haichuan Duan & Zong Wei & Yong Huang, 2024. "The Impacts of Land-Use Changes on Ecosystem Service Value in the Yunnan–Kweichow Plateau, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-24, January.

    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. Peck, Megan & Khirfan, Luna, 2021. "Improving the validity and credibility of the sociocultural valuation of ecosystem services in Amman, Jordan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    2. Schmidt, Katja & Walz, Ariane & Martín-López, Berta & Sachse, René, 2017. "Testing socio-cultural valuation methods of ecosystem services to explain land use preferences," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 270-288.
    3. Xiao, Lan & Haiping, Tang & Haoguang, Liang, 2017. "A theoretical framework for researching cultural ecosystem service flows in urban agglomerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 95-104.
    4. Nicolás Ruiz, Néstor & Suárez Alonso, María Luisa & Vidal-Abarca, María Rosario, 2021. "Contributions of dry rivers to human well-being: A global review for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    5. Kathryn Rodgman, Mary & Anguelovski, Isabelle & Pérez-del-Pulgar, Carmen & Shokry, Galia & Garcia-Lamarca, Melissa & Connolly, James J.T. & Baró, Francesc & Triguero-Mas, Margarita, 2024. "Perceived urban ecosystem services and disservices in gentrifying neighborhoods: Contrasting views between community members and state informants," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    6. Cuni-Sanchez, Aida & Ngute, Alain Senghor K. & Sonké, Bonaventure & Sainge, Moses Nsanyi & Burgess, Neil D. & Klein, Julia A. & Marchant, Rob, 2019. "The importance of livelihood strategy and ethnicity in forest ecosystem services’ perceptions by local communities in north-western Cameroon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    7. Turkelboom, Francis & Leone, Michael & Jacobs, Sander & Kelemen, Eszter & García-Llorente, Marina & Baró, Francesc & Termansen, Mette & Barton, David N. & Berry, Pam & Stange, Erik & Thoonen, Marijke , 2018. "When we cannot have it all: Ecosystem services trade-offs in the context of spatial planning," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 566-578.
    8. Pasimeni, Maria Rita & Petrosillo, Irene & Aretano, Roberta & Semeraro, Teodoro & De Marco, Antonella & Zaccarelli, Nicola & Zurlini, Giovanni, 2014. "Scales, strategies and actions for effective energy planning: A review," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 165-174.
    9. Constant, Natasha Louise & Taylor, Peter John, 2020. "Restoring the forest revives our culture: Ecosystem services and values for ecological restoration across the rural-urban nexus in South Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Malinauskaite, Laura & Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Ögmundardóttir, Helga, 2021. "Socio-cultural valuation of whale ecosystem services in Skjálfandi Bay, Iceland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    11. Yucong Duan & Jie Tang & Zhaoyang Li & Yao Yang & Ce Dai & Yunke Qu & Hang Lv, 2022. "Optimal Planning and Management of Land Use in River Source Region: A Case Study of Songhua River Basin, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-21, May.
    12. Zoeller, Kim C. & Gurney, Georgina G. & Heydinger, John & Cumming, Graeme S., 2020. "Defining cultural functional groups based on perceived traits assigned to birds," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    13. Xin Cheng & Sylvie Van Damme & Pieter Uyttenhove, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Park Renovations on Cultural Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, April.
    14. Lam, Sharon T. & Conway, Tenley M., 2018. "Ecosystem services in urban land use planning policies: A case study of Ontario municipalities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 641-651.
    15. Buchel, Sophie & Frantzeskaki, Niki, 2015. "Citizens’ voice: A case study about perceived ecosystem services by urban park users in Rotterdam, the Netherlands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 169-177.
    16. Larondelle, Neele & Lauf, Steffen, 2016. "Balancing demand and supply of multiple urban ecosystem services on different spatial scales," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 18-31.
    17. Solomon, Barry D. & Barnett, John Brad & Wellstead, Adam M. & Rouleau, Mark D., 2020. "Deciphering support for woody biomass production for electric power using an ecosystem service framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    18. Shah, Arpit & Garg, Amit, 2017. "Urban commons service generation, delivery, and management: A conceptual framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 280-287.
    19. Luederitz, Christopher & Brink, Ebba & Gralla, Fabienne & Hermelingmeier, Verena & Meyer, Moritz & Niven, Lisa & Panzer, Lars & Partelow, Stefan & Rau, Anna-Lena & Sasaki, Ryuei & Abson, David J. & La, 2015. "A review of urban ecosystem services: six key challenges for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 98-112.
    20. Xinyu Ouyang & Xiangyu Luo, 2022. "Models for Assessing Urban Ecosystem Services: Status and Outlooks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-20, April.

    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:lauspo:v:86:y:2019:i:c:p:1-11. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-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.