IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i2p454-d198277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Crises of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Satoyama Landscape of Japan: A Review on the Role of Management

Author

Listed:
  • Yuanmei Jiao

    (School of Tourism and Geography Science, Yunnan Normal University, Kunming 650092, China)

  • Yinping Ding

    (School of Tourism and Geography Science, Yunnan Normal University, Kunming 650092, China)

  • Zhiqin Zha

    (School of Tourism and Geography Science, Yunnan Normal University, Kunming 650092, China)

  • Toshiya Okuro

    (Laboratory of Landscape Ecology and Planning, Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan)

Abstract

Satoyama is a Japanese term used to describe the traditional rural landscape in Japan. It has changed continuously from overuse to underuse stages under the development of economy and society, which caused the loss of both biodiversity and ecosystem services. In this paper, we summarized the interactions of biodiversity and ecosystem services affected by human management in Satoyama landscape. The results indicate: (1) the concepts of Satoyama forests and Satoyama landscape varied with researchers and their objectives. The most popular one is a mosaic landscape consisting of Satoyama (secondary) forests, rice paddies, grassland, ponds, irrigating systems, and rural settlements; (2) traditional management regimes on Satoyama landscape were the disturbing mechanisms to provide multiple ecosystem services, as well as a series of semi-natural habitats for species; (3) due to significant progress in economy and technology in Japan, the aging problems of farmers, industrialized agriculture, the import of ecosystem services and goods from international markets, and global climate changes eventually caused the simplification of crop plants, the invasion of alien species, the fragmentation of habitats, and the decreasing of ecosystem services; (4) future research should pay more attention to the complex mechanisms of biodiversity crises and ecosystem services at the landscape scale, considering pattern-process relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuanmei Jiao & Yinping Ding & Zhiqin Zha & Toshiya Okuro, 2019. "Crises of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Satoyama Landscape of Japan: A Review on the Role of Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:454-:d:198277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/454/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/454/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sara Palomo-Campesino & José A. González & Marina García-Llorente, 2018. "Exploring the Connections between Agroecological Practices and Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, 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. Mariana Filipe & Angela Lomba & João Pradinho Honrado & Andreia Saavedra Cardoso, 2023. "City-Region Food Systems and Biodiversity Conservation: The Case Study of the Entre-Douro-e-Minho Agrarian Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-23, March.
    2. Sheryl Rose C. Reyes & Aya Miyazaki & Evonne Yiu & Osamu Saito, 2020. "Enhancing Sustainability in Traditional Agriculture: Indicators for Monitoring the Conservation of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-28, July.
    3. Yuan Pan, 2020. "Human–Nature Relationships in East Asian Animated Films," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, April.
    4. Nobuo Imai & Hinata Otokawa & Atsumi Okamoto & Kaito Yamazaki & Takuya Tamura & Tsubasa Sakagami & Shingo Ishizaka & Hijiri Shimojima, 2023. "Abandonment of Cropland and Seminatural Grassland in a Mountainous Traditional Agricultural Landscape in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, May.
    5. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Ileana Iocola & Frederique Angevin & Christian Bockstaller & Rui Catarino & Michael Curran & Antoine Messéan & Christian Schader & Didier Stilmant & Florence Van Stappen & Paul Vanhove & Hauke Ahneman, 2020. "An Actor-Oriented Multi-Criteria Assessment Framework to Support a Transition towards Sustainable Agricultural Systems Based on Crop Diversification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-29, July.
    3. Rosa-Schleich, Julia & Loos, Jacqueline & Ferrante, Marco & Mußhoff, Oliver & Tscharntke, Teja, 2024. "Mixed farmers' perception of the ecological-economic performance of diversified farming," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    4. Dardonville, Manon & Legrand, Baptiste & Clivot, Hugues & Bernardin, Claire & Bockstaller, Christian & Therond, Olivier, 2022. "Assessment of ecosystem services and natural capital dynamics in agroecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    5. Inga C. Melchior & Jens Newig, 2021. "Governing Transitions towards Sustainable Agriculture—Taking Stock of an Emerging Field of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.
    6. Silvia Novelli & Francesca Moino & Patrizia Borsotto, 2022. "External Benefits of Irrigation in Mountain Areas: Stakeholder Perceptions and Water Policy Implications," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Palomo-Campesino, Sara & García-Llorente, Marina & Hevia, Violeta & Boeraeve, Fanny & Dendoncker, Nicolas & González, José A., 2022. "Do agroecological practices enhance the supply of ecosystem services? A comparison between agroecological and conventional horticultural farms," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    8. Sandra Volken & Patrick Bottazzi, 2024. "Sustainable farm work in agroecology: how do systemic factors matter?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(3), pages 1037-1052, September.
    9. Gomathy Sethuraman & Nurul Amalina Mohd Zain & Sumiani Yusoff & Yin Mei Ng & Niranjan Baisakh & Acga Cheng, 2021. "Revamping Ecosystem Services through Agroecology—The Case of Cereals," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, March.
    10. Alexia Stokes & Géraldine Bocquého & Pascal Carrère & Raphaël Conde Salazar & Marc Deconchat & Léo Garcia & Antoine Gardarin & Christian Gary & Cédric Gaucherel & Mamadou Gueye & Mickael Hedde & Franç, 2023. "Services provided by multifunctional agroecosystems : Questions, obstacles and solutions," Post-Print hal-04056486, HAL.
    11. Tittonell, Pablo, 2020. "Assessing resilience and adaptability in agroecological transitions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Simon-Rojo, Marian, 2023. "The role of ecosystem services in the design of agroecological transitions in Spain," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    13. Dardonville, Manon & Urruty, Nicolas & Bockstaller, Christian & Therond, Olivier, 2020. "Influence of diversity and intensification level on vulnerability, resilience and robustness of agricultural systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    14. Sipesihle Booi & Syden Mishi & Oddgeir Andersen, 2022. "Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Review of Provisioning and Cultural Ecosystem Services in Estuaries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-29, June.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:454-:d:198277. 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.