IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v9y2020i10p379-d424875.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Ecosystem Services into Land-Use Modeling to Assess the Effects of Future Land-Use Strategies in Northern Ghana

Author

Listed:
  • Hongmi Koo

    (Department of Sustainable Landscape Development, Institute for Geosciences and Geography, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Von-Seckendorff-Platz 4, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany)

  • Janina Kleemann

    (Department of Sustainable Landscape Development, Institute for Geosciences and Geography, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Von-Seckendorff-Platz 4, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany)

  • Christine Fürst

    (Department of Sustainable Landscape Development, Institute for Geosciences and Geography, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Von-Seckendorff-Platz 4, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany)

Abstract

In West Africa, where the majority of the population relies on natural resources and rain-fed agriculture, regionally adapted agricultural land-use planning is increasingly important to cope with growing demand for land-use products and intensifying climate variability. As an approach to identify effective future land-use strategies, this study applied spatially explicit modeling that addresses the spatial connectivity between the provision of ecosystem services and agricultural land-use systems. Considering that the status of ecosystem services varies with the perception of stakeholders, local knowledge, and characteristics of a case study area, two adjoining districts in northern Ghana were integrated into an assessment process of land-use strategies. Based on agricultural land-management options that were identified together with the local stakeholders, 75 future land-use strategies as combinations of multiple agricultural practices were elaborated. Potential impacts of the developed land-use strategies on ecosystem services and land-use patterns were assessed in a modeling platform that combines Geographic Information System (GIS) and Cellular Automaton (CA) modules. Modeled results were used to identify best land-use strategies that could deliver multiple ecosystem services most effectively. Then, local perception was applied to determine the feasibility of the best land-use strategies in practice. The results presented the different extent of trade-offs and synergies between ecosystem services delivered by future land-use strategies and their different feasibility depending on the district. Apart from the fact that findings were context-specific and scale-dependent, this study revealed that the integration of different local characteristics and local perceptions to spatially explicit ecosystem service assessment is beneficial for determining locally tailored recommendations for future agricultural land-use planning.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:9:y:2020:i:10:p:379-:d:424875
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/10/379/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/10/379/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard E. Klosterman, 2013. "Lessons Learned About Planning," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 79(2), pages 161-169, April.
    2. Johan Rockström & Malin Falkenmark, 2015. "Agriculture: Increase water harvesting in Africa," Nature, Nature, vol. 519(7543), pages 283-285, March.
    3. Chen, Nengwang & Li, Huancheng & Wang, Lihong, 2009. "A GIS-based approach for mapping direct use value of ecosystem services at a county scale: Management implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2768-2776, September.
    4. repec:asi:ajosrd:2012:p:76-95 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Martin, D.M. & Mazzotta, M., 2018. "Non-monetary valuation using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: Using a strength-of-evidence approach to inform choices among alternatives," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PB), pages 124-133.
    6. 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.
    7. Yang Bai & Christina P. Wong & Bo Jiang & Alice C. Hughes & Min Wang & Qing Wang, 2018. "Developing China’s Ecological Redline Policy using ecosystem services assessments for land use planning," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Sumarga, Elham & Hein, Lars & Edens, Bram & Suwarno, Aritta, 2015. "Mapping monetary values of ecosystem services in support of developing ecosystem accounts," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 71-83.
    9. Jock R. Anderson, 2004. "Agricultural Extension: Good Intentions and Hard Realities," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 19(1), pages 41-60.
    10. Samuel Z Bonye & Kpieta B Alfred & Godfred Seidu Jasaw, 2012. "Promoting Community-based Extension Agents as an Alternative Approach to Formal Agricultural Extension Service Delivery in Northern Ghana," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 2(1), pages 76-95.
    11. Jacobs, Sander & Dendoncker, Nicolas & Martín-López, Berta & Barton, David Nicholas & Gomez-Baggethun, Erik & Boeraeve, Fanny & McGrath, Francesca L. & Vierikko, Kati & Geneletti, Davide & Sevecke, Ka, 2016. "A new valuation school: Integrating diverse values of nature in resource and land use decisions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 213-220.
    12. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    13. Martin, D.M. & Mazzotta, M., 2018. "Non-monetary valuation using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: Sensitivity of additive aggregation methods to scaling and compensation assumptions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 13-22.
    14. Christie, Mike & Fazey, Ioan & Cooper, Rob & Hyde, Tony & Kenter, Jasper O., 2012. "An evaluation of monetary and non-monetary techniques for assessing the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services to people in countries with developing economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 67-78.
    15. Boumans, Roelof & Roman, Joe & Altman, Irit & Kaufman, Les, 2015. "The Multiscale Integrated Model of Ecosystem Services (MIMES): Simulating the interactions of coupled human and natural systems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 30-41.
    16. 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.
    17. Kleemann, Janina & Celio, Enrico & Fürst, Christine, 2017. "Validation approaches of an expert-based Bayesian Belief Network in Northern Ghana, West Africa," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 365(C), pages 10-29.
    18. Mukul, Sharif A. & Sohel, Md. Shawkat I. & Herbohn, John & Inostroza, Luis & König, Hannes, 2017. "Integrating ecosystem services supply potential from future land-use scenarios in protected area management: A Bangladesh case study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 355-364.
    19. Abednego Kiwia & David Kimani & Rebbie Harawa & Bashir Jama & Gudeta W. Sileshi, 2019. "Sustainable Intensification with Cereal-Legume Intercropping in Eastern and Southern Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, May.
    20. Bonye, Samuel Z. & Alfred, Kpieta B. & Jasaw, Godfred Seidu, 2012. "Promoting Community-Based Extension Agents as an Alternative Approach to Formal Agricultural Extension Service Delivery in Northern Ghana," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society (AESS), vol. 2(01), pages 1-21, March.
    21. Eric de Noronha Vaz & Peter Nijkamp & Marco Painho & Mario Gaetano, 2011. "A Multi-Scenario Forecast of Urban Change: A Study on Urban Growth in the Algarve," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 11-142/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    22. Hongmi Koo & Janina Kleemann & Christine Fürst, 2018. "Land Use Scenario Modeling Based on Local Knowledge for the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Northern Ghana," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21, May.
    23. Adekola, Olalekan & Mitchell, Gordon & Grainger, Alan, 2015. "Inequality and ecosystem services: The value and social distribution of Niger Delta wetland services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 42-54.
    24. Till Hermanns & Katharina Helming & Katharina Schmidt & Hannes Jochen König & Heiko Faust, 2015. "Stakeholder Strategies for Sustainability Impact Assessment of Land Use Scenarios: Analytical Framework and Identifying Land Use Claims," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-29, September.
    25. Ayambire, Raphael Anammasiya & Amponsah, Owusu & Peprah, Charles & Takyi, Stephen Appiah, 2019. "A review of practices for sustaining urban and peri-urban agriculture: Implications for land use planning in rapidly urbanising Ghanaian cities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 260-277.
    26. Mensah, Sylvanus & Veldtman, Ruan & Assogbadjo, Achille Ephrem & Ham, Cori & Glèlè Kakaï, Romain & Seifert, Thomas, 2017. "Ecosystem service importance and use vary with socio-environmental factors: A study from household-surveys in local communities of South Africa," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 1-8.
    27. McPhearson, Timon & Andersson, Erik & Elmqvist, Thomas & Frantzeskaki, Niki, 2015. "Resilience of and through urban ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 152-156.
    28. Yiridoe, Emmanuel K. & Langyintuo, Augustine S. & Dogbe, Wilson, 2006. "Economics of the impact of alternative rice cropping systems on subsistence farming: Whole-farm analysis in northern Ghana," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 91(1-2), pages 102-121, November.
    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. Zhiyin Wang & Jiansheng Cao, 2021. "Assessing and Predicting the Impact of Multi-Scenario Land Use Changes on the Ecosystem Service Value: A Case Study in the Upstream of Xiong’an New Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Riccardo Beltramo & Giovanni Peira & Alessandro Bonadonna, 2021. "Creating a Tourism Destination through Local Heritage: The Stakeholders’ Priorities in the Canavese Area (Northwest Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, March.

    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. Hongmi Koo & Janina Kleemann & Christine Fürst, 2018. "Land Use Scenario Modeling Based on Local Knowledge for the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Northern Ghana," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Kieslich, Marcus & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2021. "Implementation context and science-policy interfaces: Implications for the economic valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    4. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2020. "Assessing the financial contribution and carbon emission pattern of provisioning ecosystem services in Siwalik forests in Nepal: Valuation from the perspectives of disaggregated users," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    5. Remme, Roy P. & Meacham, Megan & Pellowe, Kara E. & Andersson, Erik & Guerry, Anne D. & Janke, Benjamin & Liu, Lingling & Lonsdorf, Eric & Li, Meng & Mao, Yuanyuan & Nootenboom, Christopher & Wu, Tong, 2024. "Aligning nature-based solutions with ecosystem services in the urban century," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    6. Drakou, E.G. & Crossman, N.D. & Willemen, L. & Burkhard, B. & Palomo, I. & Maes, J. & Peedell, S., 2015. "A visualization and data-sharing tool for ecosystem service maps: Lessons learnt, challenges and the way forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 134-140.
    7. Rode, Julian & Le Menestrel, Marc & Cornelissen, Gert, 2017. "Ecosystem Service Arguments Enhance Public Support for Environmental Protection - But Beware of the Numbers!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 213-221.
    8. Yangang Xing & Phil Jones & Iain Donnison, 2017. "Characterisation of Nature-Based Solutions for the Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    9. 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).
    10. Matthias Bürgi & Panna Ali & Afroza Chowdhury & Andreas Heinimann & Cornelia Hett & Felix Kienast & Manoranjan Kumar Mondal & Bishnu Raj Upreti & Peter H. Verburg, 2017. "Integrated Landscape Approach: Closing the Gap between Theory and Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-13, August.
    11. 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.
    12. Palola, Pirta & Bailey, Richard & Wedding, Lisa, 2022. "A novel framework to operationalise value-pluralism in environmental valuation: Environmental value functions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    13. 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).
    14. Dehghani Pour, Milad & Barati, Ali Akbar & Azadi, Hossein & Scheffran, Jürgen & Shirkhani, Mehdi, 2023. "Analyzing forest residents' perception and knowledge of forest ecosystem services to guide forest management and biodiversity conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    15. Chandni Singh & James Ford & Debora Ley & Amir Bazaz & Aromar Revi, 2020. "Assessing the feasibility of adaptation options: methodological advancements and directions for climate adaptation research and practice," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(2), pages 255-277, September.
    16. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Krause, T. & Marbà, N., 2018. "The use of sociocultural valuation in sustainable environmental management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 158-167.
    17. De Valck, Jeremy & Beames, Alistair & Liekens, Inge & Bettens, Maarten & Seuntjens, Piet & Broekx, Steven, 2019. "Valuing urban ecosystem services in sustainable brownfield redevelopment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 139-149.
    18. 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.
    19. Schmidt, Stefan & Seppelt, Ralf, 2018. "Information content of global ecosystem service databases and their suitability for decision advice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 22-40.
    20. Claron, Charles & Mikou, Mehdi & Levrel, Harold & Tardieu, Léa, 2022. "Mapping urban ecosystem services to design cost-effective purchase of development rights programs: The case of the Greater Paris metropolis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(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:gam:jlands:v:9:y:2020:i:10:p:379-:d:424875. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.