IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i11p7564-7585d41734.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Planning Landscape Corridors in Ecological Infrastructure Using Least-Cost Path Methods Based on the Value of Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • Jung A Lee

    (Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, MS 5F2, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA
    Institute of Life Science and Natural Resources, College of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Korea University, 145 Anamro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 136-713, Korea)

  • Jinhyung Chon

    (Division of Environmental Science and Ecological Engineering, College of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Korea University, 145 Anamro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 136-713, Korea)

  • Changwoo Ahn

    (Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, MS 5F2, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA)

Abstract

Ecosystem service values have rarely been incorporated in the process of planning ecological infrastructure for urban areas. Urban ecological infrastructure is a network system of natural lands and waters that provides ecosystem services. The purpose of this study was to design landscape corridors that maximize the value of ecosystem services in ecological infrastructure planning. We explored the optimal corridors to enhance the connectivity among landscape elements to design an ecological infrastructure for the city of Gwacheon, South Korea, as an example of a small urban area. We calculated the value of ecosystem services using standardized estimation indices based on an intensive review of the relevant literature and employed the least-cost path method to optimize the connectivity of landscape structural elements. The land use type in the city with the highest estimated value of ecosystem services was the riparian zone ( i.e. , 2011 US$7,312.16/ha). Given areal coverage of all land use types, the estimated value of developed area open spaces was 2011 US$899,803.25, corresponding to the highest contribution to the total value of ecosystem services. Therefore, the optimal configured dispersal corridors for wildlife were found from the riparian zones (source area) to the developed area open spaces (destination area) in the city. Several challenges remain for improving the estimation of the value of ecosystem services and incorporating these ecosystems in ecological infrastructure planning. Nonetheless, the approaches taken to estimate the value of ecosystem services and design landscape corridors in this study may be of value to future efforts in urban ecological infrastructure planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Jung A Lee & Jinhyung Chon & Changwoo Ahn, 2014. "Planning Landscape Corridors in Ecological Infrastructure Using Least-Cost Path Methods Based on the Value of Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-22, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:11:p:7564-7585:d:41734
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/11/7564/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/11/7564/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    2. Richard S. J. Tol, 1999. "The Marginal Costs of Greenhouse Gas Emissions," The Energy Journal, , vol. 20(1), pages 61-81, January.
    3. Yang, Wu & Chang, Jie & Xu, Bin & Peng, Changhui & Ge, Ying, 2008. "Ecosystem service value assessment for constructed wetlands: A case study in Hangzhou, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 116-125, December.
    4. Sutton, Paul C. & Costanza, Robert, 2002. "Global estimates of market and non-market values derived from nighttime satellite imagery, land cover, and ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 509-527, June.
    5. Johnson, Kris A. & Polasky, Stephen & Nelson, Erik & Pennington, Derric, 2012. "Uncertainty in ecosystem services valuation and implications for assessing land use tradeoffs: An agricultural case study in the Minnesota River Basin," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 71-79.
    6. 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.
    7. Troy, Austin & Wilson, Matthew A., 2006. "Mapping ecosystem services: Practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 435-449, December.
    8. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    9. Samuel Fankhauser, 1994. "The Social Costs of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: An Expected Value Approach," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 157-184.
    10. Bergstrom, John C. & Taylor, Laura O., 2006. "Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 351-360, December.
    11. Maddison, David, 1995. "A cost-benefit analysis of slowing climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4-5), pages 337-346.
    12. Garrod, G. D. & Willis, K. G., 1997. "The non-use benefits of enhancing forest biodiversity: A contingent ranking study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 45-61, April.
    13. Azar, Christian & Sterner, Thomas, 1996. "Discounting and distributional considerations in the context of global warming," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 169-184, November.
    14. Roughgarden, Tim & Schneider, Stephen H., 1999. "Climate change policy: quantifying uncertainties for damages and optimal carbon taxes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 415-429, July.
    15. Amigues, Jean-Pierre & Boulatoff (Broadhead), Catherine & Desaigues, Brigitte & Gauthier, Caroline & Keith, John E., 2002. "The benefits and costs of riparian analysis habitat preservation: a willingness to accept/willingness to pay contingent valuation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 17-31, November.
    16. Mendoza-González, G. & Martínez, M.L. & Lithgow, D. & Pérez-Maqueo, O. & Simonin, P., 2012. "Land use change and its effects on the value of ecosystem services along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 23-32.
    17. Tianhong, Li & Wenkai, Li & Zhenghan, Qian, 2010. "Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use changes in Shenzhen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1427-1435, May.
    18. C L Lant & R S Roberts, 1990. "Greenbelts in the Cornbelt: Riparian Wetlands, Intrinsic Values, and Market Failure," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 22(10), pages 1375-1388, October.
    19. R. Turner & G. Daily, 2008. "The Ecosystem Services Framework and Natural Capital Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(1), pages 25-35, January.
    20. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Stanley, Tom D., 2006. "Measurement, generalization, and publication: Sources of error in benefit transfers and their management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 372-378, December.
    21. Hougner, Cajsa & Colding, Johan & Soderqvist, Tore, 2006. "Economic valuation of a seed dispersal service in the Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 364-374, September.
    22. Brent L. Mahan & BStephen Polasky & Richard M. Adams, 2000. "Valuing Urban Wetlands: A Property Price Approach," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(1), pages 100-113.
    23. Kreuter, Urs P. & Harris, Heather G. & Matlock, Marty D. & Lacey, Ronald E., 2001. "Change in ecosystem service values in the San Antonio area, Texas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 333-346, December.
    24. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    25. Ayres, Robert U. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2005. "A theory of economic growth with material/energy resources and dematerialization: Interaction of three growth mechanisms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 96-118, October.
    26. Krausmann, Fridolin & Gingrich, Simone & Eisenmenger, Nina & Erb, Karl-Heinz & Haberl, Helmut & Fischer-Kowalski, Marina, 2009. "Growth in global materials use, GDP and population during the 20th century," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2696-2705, August.
    27. Plambeck, Erica L & Hope, Chris, 1996. "PAGE95 : An updated valuation of the impacts of global warming," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(9), pages 783-793, September.
    28. Marc O. Ribaudo & Donald J. Epp, 1984. "The Importance of Sample Discrimination in Using the Travel Cost Method to Estimate the Benefits of Improved Water Quality," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 60(4), pages 397-403.
    29. Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Discounting the distant future: how much do uncertain rates increase valuations?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 52-71, July.
    30. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    31. William D. Nordhaus & David Popp, 1997. "What is the Value of Scientific Knowledge? An Application to Global Warming Using the PRICE Model," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 1-45.
    32. Hope, Chris & Maul, Philip, 1996. "Valuing the impact of CO2 emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 211-219, March.
    33. LaRue, Michelle A. & Nielsen, Clayton K., 2008. "Modelling potential dispersal corridors for cougars in midwestern North America using least-cost path methods," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 212(3), pages 372-381.
    34. Ram Shrestha & John Loomis, 2003. "Meta-Analytic Benefit Transfer of Outdoor Recreation Economic Values: Testing Out-of-Sample Convergent Validity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(1), pages 79-100, May.
    35. John Reilly & Kenneth Richards, 1993. "Climate change damage and the trace gas index issue," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(1), pages 41-61, February.
    36. K. G. Willis & G. D. Garrod, 1991. "An Individual Travel‐Cost Method Of Evaluating Forest Recreation," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1), pages 33-42, January.
    37. Ko, Jae-Young & Day, John W. & Lane, Robert R. & Day, Jason N., 2004. "A comparative evaluation of money-based and energy-based cost-benefit analyses of tertiary municipal wastewater treatment using forested wetlands vs. sand filtration in Louisiana," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 331-347, July.
    38. Bergstrom, John C. & Stoll, John R. & Titre, John P. & Wright, Vernon L., 1990. "Economic value of wetlands-based recreation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 129-147, June.
    39. Villa, Ferdinando & Wilson, Matthew A. & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Steven & Costanza, Robert & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "Designing an integrated knowledge base to support ecosystem services valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 445-456, June.
    40. Begona Alvarez-Farizo, 1999. "Estimating the Benefits of Agri-environmental Policy: Econometric Issues in Open-ended Contingent Valuation Studies," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 23-43.
    41. Michael Schauer, 1995. "Estimation of the greenhouse gas externality with uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 71-82, January.
    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. Yanyan Li & Xinhao Wang & Xiaofeng Dong, 2021. "Delineating an Integrated Ecological and Cultural Corridor Network: A Case Study in Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Linrun Qiu & Yuxiang Dong & Hai Liu, 2022. "Integrating Ecosystem Services into Planning Practice: Situation, Challenges and Inspirations," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, April.
    3. André Fonseca & Vera Zina & Gonçalo Duarte & Francisca C. Aguiar & Patricia María Rodríguez-González & Maria Teresa Ferreira & Maria Rosário Fernandes, 2021. "Riparian Ecological Infrastructures: Potential for Biodiversity-Related Ecosystem Services in Mediterranean Human-Dominated Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-21, September.
    4. Junga Lee & Christopher D. Ellis & Yun Eui Choi & Soojin You & Jinhyung Chon, 2015. "An Integrated Approach to Mitigation Wetland Site Selection: A Case Study in Gwacheon, Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-28, March.
    5. Angela Heymans & Jessica Breadsell & Gregory M. Morrison & Joshua J. Byrne & Christine Eon, 2019. "Ecological Urban Planning and Design: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-20, July.
    6. Mark T. Gibbs, 2016. "Applying the concept of State of Good Repair to the management of ecological infrastructure," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(6), pages 1091-1106, June.
    7. Long Zhou & Yao Wu & Tom Woodfin & Rong Zhu & Tian Chen, 2018. "An Approach to Evaluate Comprehensive Plan and Identify Priority Lands for Future Land Use Development to Conserve More Ecological Values," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, January.
    8. Dongwoo Lee & Kyushik Oh, 2019. "The Green Infrastructure Assessment System (GIAS) and Its Applications for Urban Development and Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-22, July.
    9. Zhengsong Lin & Xinyue Ye & Qian Wei & Fan Xin & Zhang Lu & Sonali Kudva & Qiwen Dai, 2017. "Ecosystem Services Value Assessment and Uneven Development of the Qingjiang River Basin in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-17, December.
    10. Federica Isola & Sabrina Lai & Federica Leone & Corrado Zoppi, 2022. "Strengthening a Regional Green Infrastructure through Improved Multifunctionality and Connectedness: Policy Suggestions from Sardinia, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.
    11. Haiyun Xu & Tobias Plieninger & Jørgen Primdahl, 2019. "A Systematic Comparison of Cultural and Ecological Landscape Corridors in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-32, February.
    12. Simone Valeri & Laura Zavattero & Giulia Capotorti, 2021. "Ecological Connectivity in Agricultural Green Infrastructure: Suggested Criteria for Fine Scale Assessment and Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, July.

    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. Richard S.J. Tol, 2021. "Estimates of the social cost of carbon have not changed over time," Working Paper Series 0821, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. Havranek, Tomas & Irsova, Zuzana & Janda, Karel & Zilberman, David, 2015. "Selective reporting and the social cost of carbon," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 394-406.
    3. Tol, Richard S. J., 2008. "The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 2, pages 1-22.
    4. Richard S. J. Tol, 2021. "Estimates of the social cost of carbon have increased over time," Papers 2105.03656, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    5. Richard S J Tol, 2018. "The Economic Impacts of Climate Change," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 4-25.
    6. Richard S.J. Tol, 2003. "The Marginal Costs Of Carbon Dioxide Emissions: An Assessment Of The Uncertainties," Working Papers FNU-19, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Apr 2003.
    7. Tol, Richard S. J., 2005. "The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: an assessment of the uncertainties," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2064-2074, November.
    8. Tol, Richard S.J., 2013. "Targets for global climate policy: An overview," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 911-928.
    9. 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).
    10. Ping Zhang & Liang He & Xin Fan & Peishu Huo & Yunhui Liu & Tao Zhang & Ying Pan & Zhenrong Yu, 2015. "Ecosystem Service Value Assessment and Contribution Factor Analysis of Land Use Change in Miyun County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-24, June.
    11. Léa Tardieu, 2017. "The need for integrated spatial assessments in ecosystem service mapping," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 173-200, December.
    12. Yushuo Zhang & Lin Zhao & Jiyu Liu & Yuli Liu & Cansong Li, 2015. "The Impact of Land Cover Change on Ecosystem Service Values in Urban Agglomerations along the Coast of the Bohai Rim, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-23, August.
    13. Vahid Amini Parsa & Esmail Salehi & Ahmad Reza Yavari & Peter M van Bodegom, 2019. "An improved method for assessing mismatches between supply and demand in urban regulating ecosystem services: A case study in Tabriz, Iran," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, August.
    14. Brown, Melanie G. & Quinn, John E., 2018. "Zoning does not improve the availability of ecosystem services in urban watersheds. A case study from Upstate South Carolina, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 254-265.
    15. Schägner, Jan Philipp & Brander, Luke & Maes, Joachim & Hartje, Volkmar, 2013. "Mapping ecosystem services' values: Current practice and future prospects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 33-46.
    16. Chaikumbung, Mayula & Doucouliagos, Hristos & Scarborough, Helen, 2016. "The economic value of wetlands in developing countries: A meta-regression analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 164-174.
    17. Jan Philipp Schägner & Luke Brander & Joachim Maes & Volkmar Hartje, 2012. "Mapping Ecosystem Services’ Values: Current Practice and Future Prospects," Working Papers 2012.59, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Marten, Alex L. & Newbold, Stephen C., 2012. "Estimating the social cost of non-CO2 GHG emissions: Methane and nitrous oxide," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 957-972.
    19. Turner, Katrine Grace & Anderson, Sharolyn & Gonzales-Chang, Mauricio & Costanza, Robert & Courville, Sasha & Dalgaard, Tommy & Dominati, Estelle & Kubiszewski, Ida & Ogilvy, Sue & Porfirio, Luciana &, 2016. "A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 319(C), pages 190-207.
    20. Mendoza-González, G. & Martínez, M.L. & Lithgow, D. & Pérez-Maqueo, O. & Simonin, P., 2012. "Land use change and its effects on the value of ecosystem services along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 23-32.

    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:6:y:2014:i:11:p:7564-7585:d:41734. 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.