Abstract
Abstract. Land use change can result in variations in ecosystem services (ESS) and their relationships. Studying the temporal dynamics of ESS and their relationships can support scenario analyses that provide the theoretical basis for policy decisions and regional ecosystem management in any context. Understanding the spatiotemporal changes in land use and land cover change helps understand ESS management. In this study, the InVEST model was applied to assess carbon sequestration from 1999 to 2018 and to construct two simulated scenarios that represented different land use strategies. The results showed a spatial increase in the cropland class from the stipulated years with a corresponding increase in carbon within the area. It is assumed that the relationship between these two phenomena can affect agricultural policies as a large portion of South Africa depends on it for livelihood betterment. The Spearman’s Correlation Coefficient was used to assess the relationship between the two ESS. The result showed a highly significant correlation that means a change in policy from a governmental level is required. This paper subtly aims to provide data towards the South African context and more scenarios and research is needed to fully deduce effective land use management policies and decisions.
Highlights
The capacity of ecosystems to provide services is determined by many different direct and indirect driving forces operating at the local to global levels (MEA, 2005; Alcamo et al, 2016)
Some studies demonstrated that trade-offs occur between regulating and provisioning services, while synergies are more likely to be generated by regulating services (Jia et al, 2014; Zheng et al, 2014; Lin et al, 2018)
The results of this study arrived at the conclusion that tradeoffs occur between these two services
Summary
The capacity of ecosystems to provide services is determined by many different direct and indirect driving forces operating at the local to global levels (MEA, 2005; Alcamo et al, 2016). Trade-offs and interactions between different ecosystem services are typical relationships between ESS and their supply and demand, (Yang et al, 2018). Tradeoffs involve non-economic and extremely difficult to evaluate values such as cultural identity, employment and the wellbeing of the poor or even an ecosystem structure (Feng et al, 2013). A trade-off from one perception may appear as a synergy from another (Kareiva et al, 2007) This is usually the case to conceal or reveal trade-offs based on what ecosystem service outcomes are valued and from whose perspective (Kareiva et al, 2007)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
