Combinations Of Ecosystem Services Research Articles

Incorporating Bioclimatic Zones into Informing Ecological Networks for Better Biodiversity Conservation

Building ecological networks can effectively enhance the quality and stability of ecosystems and better conserve biodiversity. Previous studies mainly determined ecological corridors based on selecting ecological sources at a regional scale (e.g., an administrative area), without considering the bioclimatic heterogeneity within the study area. Here, we propose a novel integrating approach involving bioclimatic zoning and selecting ecological sources from various bioclimatic zones to design ecological corridors. Taking Xi’an City, China, as an example, key bioclimatic variables were first chosen, and we partitioned the study area based on its bioclimatic characteristics through a combination of K-means clustering and variance inflation factor (VIF). Ecological sources were then identified from the combination of ecosystem services and habitats of 36 endangered species. Subsequently, the minimum cumulative resistance (MCR) model was used to build ecological networks within different bioclimatic zones and across the entire region. We found the following: (1) In Xi’an city, a total of 49 source areas and 117 corridors were identified. The identified network can protect 97.77% of species, facilitating connectivity between 30.50% of ecosystems and 35.5% of species-rich areas. (2) The integrating approach protects 12.26% more species richness and 10.95% more ecosystem services than the average value of the regional and bioregional approaches. Compared to regional and bioregional methods, integrating approaches demonstrate greater advantages in preserving species richness and ecosystem services. This study introduces a novel approach to constructing regional ecological networks, which integrates the impact of bioclimatic zoning into the process of network construction to improve ecosystem services and protect species habitats.

Estimating the nonlinear response of landscape patterns to ecological resilience using a random forest algorithm: Evidence from the Yangtze River Delta

Ecological resilience (ER) is considered a key factor in resolving complex human and natural systems conflicts and managing risk during the period of rapid development. However, the importance of landscape patterns for ER is not given enough attention in previous studies. Therefore, we selected the Yangtze River Delta region as the study area, incorporated landscape patterns into the assessment of ER and proposed the way for identifying ecological sources based on the combination of ecosystem services and landscape patterns. Combining the multidimensional ecological resilience assessment indicators system, we calculated the ER for the Yangtze River Delta region and explored the importance and nonlinear effects of landscape patterns on the ER using a random forest regression model. The results showed that the comparative analysis of ecosystem services and landscape patterns enhanced the scientificity of ecological source identification. We identified 94 ecological sources mainly in the southern of the Yangtze River Delta region, including important mountain ranges and water bodies. In addition, the ER was significantly strengthened by considering the landscape patterns. The random forest regression results indicated the nonlinear relationship between the landscape patterns and the other elements in terms of ER. This study can contribute to a comprehensive and integrated approach to the identification of ecological sources and the evaluation of ER, which can promote the conservation of regional ecological functions.

A Review of Ecosystem Services Research Focusing on China against the Background of Urbanization

The change in landscape patterns caused by urbanization is one of the main reasons for the degradation of global ecosystem services. Reducing the negative impact of rapid urbanization on ecosystems and promoting the coordinated development of cities and ecosystems have become a hot topic around the world. Based on Web of Science Core Collection and CNKI database papers, this study conducts a bibliometric analysis of ecosystem services research against the background of global urbanization from 2000 to 2022. At the same time, the research hot spots, regional distribution, research trends, and research contents are summarized by taking China as the key research area. The results show that: (1) the research hot spots of ecosystem services against the background of urbanization are generally the same in China and the world. Both of them are based on landscape pattern or land use; the research scale is from macro to micro; and the research method is from static to dynamic. (2) From the perspective of ecosystem service types, the four types of ecosystem service have been studied in China and other parts of the world, but there are differences in the specific types, quantity, and regional distribution. (3) Whether in China or other regions of the world, the studies on the trade-offs of ecosystem services against the background of urbanization are mainly at medium and large scales. Finally, ecosystem service bundles research, systematic thinking, and the combination of ecosystem services and territorial spatial planning against the background of urbanization are pointed out as key aspects of future research.

Response of multiple mountain ecosystem services on environmental gradients: How to respond, and where should be priority conservation?

As an important part of terrestrial ecosystem and the most sensitive to environmental changes, mountainous areas are rich in biodiversity and high value of ecosystem productivity. However, due to the unsustainable exploitation of natural resources, most of the world’s mountain ecosystems are being subjected to soil erosion and biodiversity is rapidly being lost, so the establishment of mountain ecological reserves is of great importance. In view of this, this paper used the Qinling-Daba Mountain, Qinling Mountain and Daba Mountain of China as the research area. On the basis of various simulated ecosystem service from 2000 to 2015, the root mean square deviation analysis and ordered weighted averaged model were used to determine the spatial changes of ecosystem service on environmental gradients, the tradeoff between ecosystem services and the selection of optimal protection areas. Our results proved that ① net primary production, soil conservation and habitat quality were increase significantly with increasing altitude and vegetation cover fraction gradient, but were weaken water yield and grain production. ② The change in the trade-off between multiple pairs of ecosystem services in the Daba Mountain was stronger than in the Qinling-Daba Mountain and the Qinling Mountain, especially the trade-off relationship related to water yield. ③ Considering various scenarios and conservation efficiency, it was found that scenario 7 was the best solution. The net primary production, soil conservation, habitat quality, grain production, and water yield protection efficiency were 1.261, 4.845, 1.059, 1.333, and 1.390 respectively. Priority conservation areas were mainly distributed in mid-altitude, high-vegetation, and high-mean annual precipitation areas. In this study, the combination of ecosystem services and priority conservation areas can play an important role in the management of the Qinling-Daba Mountain, and provides a meaningful reference for the selection of nature reserves.

Bright spots in agricultural landscapes: Identifying areas exceeding expectations for multifunctionality and biodiversity

Abstract Agriculture's influence on humanity is a dichotomy of promise and peril. Research on the food‐environment dilemma has highlighted the environmental consequences of food production, yet the identification of management solutions is an ongoing challenge. We suggest “bright spots” as a promising tool to identify levers of change by finding areas that exceed expectations for goals, such as agricultural landscape multifunctionality and biodiversity. We identified bright, dark and average spots within a complex agricultural landscape and explored the associated socioeconomic patterns. We found that areas exceeding expectations for biodiversity and landscape multifunctionality were neither spatially congruent nor in conflict. It was more common for areas to underperform (dark spots) for both biodiversity and multifunctionality than over perform for both (bright spots). While dark spots for multifunctionality were alike in their ecosystem service composition, bright spots were bright in multiple, diverse ways. The socioeconomic attributes that characterize bright and darks spots included both farm characteristics as well as farming practices, suggesting that both have potential to be levers of change. Synthesis and applications. Our results suggest that while biodiversity and landscape multifunctionality show similar spatial patterns due to underlying biophysical drivers, managing for biodiversity or landscape multifunctionality alone will not implicitly achieve the other in this system. Bright spots (areas exceeding expectations) in multifunctionality were associated with many different combinations of ecosystem services, but dark spots were uniquely agricultural intensive areas devoted to maximizing crop production at the expense of all other services. From a management perspective, specific farm characteristics and farming practices may impact the potential for multifunctionality: increased mechanization, increased agricultural inputs and larger farm size and capital were associated with dark spots, while smaller farms with potentially greater space for innovation were associated with bright spots.

Economic Governance to Expand Commercial Wetlands: Within- and Cross-Scale Challenges

Commercial wetlands are defined as wetlands directed by an entrepreneur with the intention of making a profit. The combination of ecosystem services that commercial wetlands can provide seems to be an attractive societal perspective. Nevertheless, these wetlands are not developed on a large scale in the Netherlands. This paper discusses different types of economic governance that could facilitate the development of new commercial wetlands and addresses challenges that have to be overcome. We conclude that developing governance solutions that address ecosystem services with different scales is crucial for the introduction of commercial wetlands. Also, distinct and autonomous property rights of entrepreneurs need to be addressed.

Integrating Multiple Ecosystem Services Into Ecological Site Descriptions

Site Descriptions (ESDs) represent an emerging tool to assist land managers and owners in understanding their landscapes and how they work, or function, in an ecological context. Ecosystem services are those resources and processes supplied by natural ecosystems and sites that can be viewed as benefits to society and, conceptually, natural capital assets with the capacity to be assigned economic values.1 The definitions of ecosystem services were formalized by the United Nations 2004 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA),2 which is a report resulting from a four-year study involving more than 1,300 scientists worldwide. This report grouped ecosystem services into four broad categories: provisioning, such as the production of food and water; regulating, such as the control of climate and disease; supporting, such as nutrient cycles and crop pollination; and cultural, such as spiritual and recreational benefits. Despite the recognition provided in the MA report, there are numerous examples in which the values of ecosystem services go unrecognized, leading to great economic, cultural, biologic, and aesthetic loss. A notable example of a lack of recognition of ecosystem services can be seen in American wetland ecosystems. From the time North America was settled by Europeans until the passage of the Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 (which made the destruction and conversion of many wetland types illegal), wetlands were drained, filled, and otherwise converted, for use of agricultural production, mining, timber harvest, dam construction, and urban development on immense scales. Events leading to the passage of the CWA resulted in the recognition that those swampy, mosquito infested, mucky bogs actually did have value for something besides frogs and the occasional duck. Aided by the proclamation of No Net Loss of wetlands by President George Bush in 1989, the American public became aware of the long list of values and ecosystem services provided by wetlands, including groundwater discharge, flood attenuation, sediment stabilization, sediment/ toxicant retention, nutrient removal/transformation, aquatic and wildlife diversity/abundance and habitat, and a wide array of recreation opportunities. Here, we highlight, in examples from the American West, the strong role key wildlife species play in effecting transitions of ecological character and function on specific ecological sites and the services provided by those ecosystems. It is in this intersection where landscape, the potential for transition to or from desired states, the subsequent ecosystem services proffered or reduced, and the often-controversial role of certain wildlife species collide. Understanding how ecological sites can transition from one state to another is poorly understood in many cases. Our interest is in integrating wildlife conceptually and practically into the identification of ESDs; determining how some wildlife can effect transitions is another interest. Wildlife can influence our understanding of sites and their dynamics. Finally, we frame both the potential utility of the ecosystem services concept and its limitations, using examples from key ecological sites. The ecosystem service literature is large and growing, concerning itself with water cycles, energy flow, clean air and water, nutrient cycling, and other ecosystem processes. Here, we will consider ecosystem services more narrowly in the context of transitions among states and wildlife activities, briefly described below. The dynamics of soil-vegetation interactions on ecological sites are described in state-and-transition models (STMs) (Fig. 1). These STMs evaluate how sites in a particular condition, or state, can change, or transition, to very different states, in both biological and physical dimensions. Different states or community phases on the same site, in principle, could provide a very different combination of ecosystem services. Across much of the western United States, the majority of existing ecosystems no longer represent historical conditions. This broadly is true because of altered ecosystem processes (changes in drivers such as climate and land use)