- -

Assessment Method and Scale of Observation Influence Ecosystem Service Bundles

RiuNet: Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

Compartir/Enviar a

Citas

Estadísticas

  • Estadisticas de Uso

Assessment Method and Scale of Observation Influence Ecosystem Service Bundles

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre: Madrigal-Martínez ...
Tamaño: 2.757Mb
Formato: PDF
Descripción: Versión editorial
Abrir
dc.contributor.author Madrigal-Martínez, Santiago es_ES
dc.contributor.author Miralles García, José Luis es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2021-02-20T04:31:10Z
dc.date.available 2021-02-20T04:31:10Z
dc.date.issued 2020-10 es_ES
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/161979
dc.description.abstract [EN] The understanding of relationships between ecosystem services and the appropriate spatial scales for their analysis and characterization represent opportunities for sustainable land management. Bundles have appeared as an integrated method to assess and visualize consistent associations among multiple ecosystem services. Most of the bundle assessments focused on a static framework at a specific spatial scale. Here, we addressed the effects of applying two cluster analyses (static and dynamic) for assessing bundles of ecosystem services across four different scales of observation (two administrative boundaries and two sizes of grids) over 13 years (from 2000 to 2013). We used the ecosystem services matrix to model and map the potential supply of seven ecosystem services in a case study system in the central high-Andean Puna of Peru. We developed a sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of the matrix. The differences between the configuration, spatial patterns, and historical trajectories of bundles were measured and compared. We focused on two hypotheses: first, bundles of ecosystem services are mainly affected by the method applied for assessing them; second, these bundles are influenced by the scale of observation over time. For the first hypothesis, the results suggested that the selection of a method for assessing bundles have inferences on the interactions with land-use change. The diverse implications to management on ecosystem services support that static and dynamic assessments can be complementary to obtain better contributions for decision-making. For the second hypothesis, our study showed that municipality and grid-scales kept similar sensitivity in capturing the aspects of ecosystem service bundles. Then, in favorable research conditions, we recommend the combination of a municipal and a fine-grid scale to assure robustness and successfully land-use planning processes. es_ES
dc.language Inglés es_ES
dc.publisher MDPI AG es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof Land es_ES
dc.rights Reconocimiento (by) es_ES
dc.subject Ecosystem service bundles es_ES
dc.subject Cluster analysis es_ES
dc.subject Scale effects es_ES
dc.subject Spatiotemporal analysis es_ES
dc.subject Mountain agro-ecosystem es_ES
dc.subject Capacity matrix es_ES
dc.subject GIS es_ES
dc.subject Landscape planning es_ES
dc.subject Landscape management es_ES
dc.subject.classification URBANISTICA Y ORDENACION DEL TERRITORIO es_ES
dc.title Assessment Method and Scale of Observation Influence Ecosystem Service Bundles es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.3390/land9100392 es_ES
dc.rights.accessRights Abierto es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Departamento de Urbanismo - Departament d'Urbanisme es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Madrigal-Martínez, S.; Miralles García, JL. (2020). Assessment Method and Scale of Observation Influence Ecosystem Service Bundles. Land. 9(10):1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9100392 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod S es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion https://doi.org/10.3390/land9100392 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 1 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 19 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 9 es_ES
dc.description.issue 10 es_ES
dc.identifier.eissn 2073-445X es_ES
dc.relation.pasarela S\422172 es_ES
dc.description.references Liu, J., Mooney, H., Hull, V., Davis, S. J., Gaskell, J., Hertel, T., … Li, S. (2015). Systems integration for global sustainability. Science, 347(6225). doi:10.1126/science.1258832 es_ES
dc.description.references Abson, D. J., von Wehrden, H., Baumgärtner, S., Fischer, J., Hanspach, J., Härdtle, W., … Walmsley, D. (2014). Ecosystem services as a boundary object for sustainability. Ecological Economics, 103, 29-37. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.012 es_ES
dc.description.references Spellerberg, I., Vos, C. C., & Opdam, P. (1993). Landscape Ecology of a Stressed Environment. The Journal of Ecology, 81(3), 599. doi:10.2307/2261549 es_ES
dc.description.references Vihervaara, P., Rönkä, M., & Walls, M. (2010). Trends in Ecosystem Service Research: Early Steps and Current Drivers. AMBIO, 39(4), 314-324. doi:10.1007/s13280-010-0048-x es_ES
dc.description.references Lee, H., & Lautenbach, S. (2016). A quantitative review of relationships between ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators, 66, 340-351. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.02.004 es_ES
dc.description.references Mouchet, M. A., Lamarque, P., Martín-López, B., Crouzat, E., Gos, P., Byczek, C., & Lavorel, S. (2014). An interdisciplinary methodological guide for quantifying associations between ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 28, 298-308. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.07.012 es_ES
dc.description.references Cord, A. F., Bartkowski, B., Beckmann, M., Dittrich, A., Hermans-Neumann, K., Kaim, A., … Volk, M. (2017). Towards systematic analyses of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies: Main concepts, methods and the road ahead. Ecosystem Services, 28, 264-272. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.012 es_ES
dc.description.references Howe, C., Suich, H., Vira, B., & Mace, G. M. (2014). Creating win-wins from trade-offs? Ecosystem services for human well-being: A meta-analysis of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies in the real world. Global Environmental Change, 28, 263-275. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.07.005 es_ES
dc.description.references Deng, X., Li, Z., & Gibson, J. (2016). A review on trade-off analysis of ecosystem services for sustainable land-use management. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 26(7), 953-968. doi:10.1007/s11442-016-1309-9 es_ES
dc.description.references Renard, D., Rhemtulla, J. M., & Bennett, E. M. (2015). Historical dynamics in ecosystem service bundles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(43), 13411-13416. doi:10.1073/pnas.1502565112 es_ES
dc.description.references Madrigal-Martínez, S., & Miralles i García, J. L. (2019). Land-change dynamics and ecosystem service trends across the central high-Andean Puna. Scientific Reports, 9(1). doi:10.1038/s41598-019-46205-9 es_ES
dc.description.references Stürck, J., Schulp, C. J. E., & Verburg, P. H. (2015). Spatio-temporal dynamics of regulating ecosystem services in Europe – The role of past and future land use change. Applied Geography, 63, 121-135. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.06.009 es_ES
dc.description.references Hou, Y., Lü, Y., Chen, W., & Fu, B. (2017). Temporal variation and spatial scale dependency of ecosystem service interactions: a case study on the central Loess Plateau of China. Landscape Ecology, 32(6), 1201-1217. doi:10.1007/s10980-017-0497-8 es_ES
dc.description.references Xu, S., Liu, Y., Wang, X., & Zhang, G. (2017). Scale effect on spatial patterns of ecosystem services and associations among them in semi-arid area: A case study in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, China. Science of The Total Environment, 598, 297-306. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.009 es_ES
dc.description.references Raudsepp-Hearne, C., & Peterson, G. D. (2016). Scale and ecosystem services: how do observation, management, and analysis shift with scale—lessons from Québec. Ecology and Society, 21(3). doi:10.5751/es-08605-210316 es_ES
dc.description.references Rodríguez, L. C., Pascual, U., & Niemeyer, H. M. (2006). Local identification and valuation of ecosystem goods and services from Opuntia scrublands of Ayacucho, Peru. Ecological Economics, 57(1), 30-44. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.022 es_ES
dc.description.references Bennett, E. M., Peterson, G. D., & Gordon, L. J. (2009). Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecology Letters, 12(12), 1394-1404. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01387.x es_ES
dc.description.references Raudsepp-Hearne, C., Peterson, G. D., & Bennett, E. M. (2010). Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(11), 5242-5247. doi:10.1073/pnas.0907284107 es_ES
dc.description.references Tomscha, S. A., & Gergel, S. E. (2016). Ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies misunderstood without landscape history. Ecology and Society, 21(1). doi:10.5751/es-08345-210143 es_ES
dc.description.references Lavorel, S., Bayer, A., Bondeau, A., Lautenbach, S., Ruiz-Frau, A., Schulp, N., … Marba, N. (2017). Pathways to bridge the biophysical realism gap in ecosystem services mapping approaches. Ecological Indicators, 74, 241-260. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.11.015 es_ES
dc.description.references Li, T., Lü, Y., Fu, B., Hu, W., & Comber, A. J. (2019). Bundling ecosystem services for detecting their interactions driven by large-scale vegetation restoration: enhanced services while depressed synergies. Ecological Indicators, 99, 332-342. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.12.041 es_ES
dc.description.references Wei, H., Fan, W., Lu, N., Xu, Z., Liu, H., Chen, W., … Dong, X. (2019). Integrating Biophysical and Sociocultural Methods for Identifying the Relationships between Ecosystem Services and Land Use Change: Insights from an Oasis Area. Sustainability, 11(9), 2598. doi:10.3390/su11092598 es_ES
dc.description.references Hamann, M., Biggs, R., & Reyers, B. (2015). Mapping social–ecological systems: Identifying ‘green-loop’ and ‘red-loop’ dynamics based on characteristic bundles of ecosystem service use. Global Environmental Change, 34, 218-226. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.07.008 es_ES
dc.description.references Dou, H., Li, X., Li, S., & Dang, D. (2018). How to Detect Scale Effect of Ecosystem Services Supply? A Comprehensive Insight from Xilinhot in Inner Mongolia, China. Sustainability, 10(10), 3654. doi:10.3390/su10103654 es_ES
dc.description.references Cui, F., Tang, H., Zhang, Q., Wang, B., & Dai, L. (2019). Integrating ecosystem services supply and demand into optimized management at different scales: A case study in Hulunbuir, China. Ecosystem Services, 39, 100984. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100984 es_ES
dc.description.references Qiao, X., Gu, Y., Zou, C., Xu, D., Wang, L., Ye, X., … Huang, X. (2019). Temporal variation and spatial scale dependency of the trade-offs and synergies among multiple ecosystem services in the Taihu Lake Basin of China. Science of The Total Environment, 651, 218-229. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.135 es_ES
dc.description.references Roces-Díaz, J. V., Vayreda, J., Banqué-Casanovas, M., Díaz-Varela, E., Bonet, J. A., Brotons, L., … Martínez-Vilalta, J. (2018). The spatial level of analysis affects the patterns of forest ecosystem services supply and their relationships. Science of The Total Environment, 626, 1270-1283. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.01.150 es_ES
dc.description.references Spake, R., Lasseur, R., Crouzat, E., Bullock, J. M., Lavorel, S., Parks, K. E., … Eigenbrod, F. (2017). Unpacking ecosystem service bundles: Towards predictive mapping of synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 47, 37-50. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.08.004 es_ES
dc.description.references Dade, M. C., Mitchell, M. G. E., McAlpine, C. A., & Rhodes, J. R. (2018). Assessing ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies: The need for a more mechanistic approach. Ambio, 48(10), 1116-1128. doi:10.1007/s13280-018-1127-7 es_ES
dc.description.references Saidi, N., & Spray, C. (2018). Ecosystem services bundles: challenges and opportunities for implementation and further research. Environmental Research Letters, 13(11), 113001. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aae5e0 es_ES
dc.description.references Crouzat, E., Mouchet, M., Turkelboom, F., Byczek, C., Meersmans, J., Berger, F., … Lavorel, S. (2015). Assessing bundles of ecosystem services from regional to landscape scale: insights from the French Alps. Journal of Applied Ecology, 52(5), 1145-1155. doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12502 es_ES
dc.description.references Van der Biest, K., D’Hondt, R., Jacobs, S., Landuyt, D., Staes, J., Goethals, P., & Meire, P. (2014). EBI: An index for delivery of ecosystem service bundles. Ecological Indicators, 37, 252-265. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.04.006 es_ES
dc.description.references Egoh, B. N., Reyers, B., Rouget, M., & Richardson, D. M. (2011). Identifying priority areas for ecosystem service management in South African grasslands. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(6), 1642-1650. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.01.019 es_ES
dc.description.references Martín-López, B., Iniesta-Arandia, I., García-Llorente, M., Palomo, I., Casado-Arzuaga, I., Amo, D. G. D., … Montes, C. (2012). Uncovering Ecosystem Service Bundles through Social Preferences. PLoS ONE, 7(6), e38970. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038970 es_ES
dc.description.references Yang, G., Ge, Y., Xue, H., Yang, W., Shi, Y., Peng, C., … Chang, J. (2015). Using ecosystem service bundles to detect trade-offs and synergies across urban–rural complexes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 136, 110-121. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.12.006 es_ES
dc.description.references Queiroz, C., Meacham, M., Richter, K., Norström, A. V., Andersson, E., Norberg, J., & Peterson, G. (2015). Mapping bundles of ecosystem services reveals distinct types of multifunctionality within a Swedish landscape. AMBIO, 44(S1), 89-101. doi:10.1007/s13280-014-0601-0 es_ES
dc.description.references Turner, K. G., Odgaard, M. V., Bøcher, P. K., Dalgaard, T., & Svenning, J.-C. (2014). Bundling ecosystem services in Denmark: Trade-offs and synergies in a cultural landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, 89-104. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.02.007 es_ES
dc.description.references Kühne, O., & Duttmann, R. (2019). Recent Challenges of the Ecosystems Services Approach from an Interdisciplinary Point of View. Raumforschung und Raumordnung Spatial Research and Planning, 0(0). doi:10.2478/rara-2019-0055 es_ES
dc.description.references Birkhofer, K., Diehl, E., Andersson, J., Ekroos, J., Früh-Müller, A., Machnikowski, F., … Smith, H. G. (2015). Ecosystem services—current challenges and opportunities for ecological research. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 2. doi:10.3389/fevo.2014.00087 es_ES
dc.description.references Rieb, J. T., Chaplin-Kramer, R., Daily, G. C., Armsworth, P. R., Böhning-Gaese, K., Bonn, A., … Bennett, E. M. (2017). When, Where, and How Nature Matters for Ecosystem Services: Challenges for the Next Generation of Ecosystem Service Models. BioScience, 67(9), 820-833. doi:10.1093/biosci/bix075 es_ES
dc.description.references Vallet, A., Locatelli, B., Levrel, H., Wunder, S., Seppelt, R., Scholes, R. J., & Oszwald, J. (2018). Relationships Between Ecosystem Services: Comparing Methods for Assessing Tradeoffs and Synergies. Ecological Economics, 150, 96-106. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.002 es_ES
dc.description.references Zheng, Z., Fu, B., Hu, H., & Sun, G. (2014). A method to identify the variable ecosystem services relationship across time: a case study on Yanhe Basin, China. Landscape Ecology, 29(10), 1689-1696. doi:10.1007/s10980-014-0088-x es_ES
dc.description.references MADRIGAL-MARTINEZ, S., & MIRALLES I GARCIA, J. L. (2019). UNDERSTANDING LAND USE CHANGES IN THE CENTRAL HIGH-ANDEAN MOIST PUNA. The Sustainable City XIII. doi:10.2495/sc190161 es_ES
dc.description.references Young, K. R. (2009). ANDEAN LAND USE AND BIODIVERSITY: HUMANIZED LANDSCAPES IN A TIME OF CHANGE. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 96(3), 492-507. doi:10.3417/2008035 es_ES
dc.description.references Jacobs, S., Burkhard, B., Van Daele, T., Staes, J., & Schneiders, A. (2015). ‘The Matrix Reloaded’: A review of expert knowledge use for mapping ecosystem services. Ecological Modelling, 295, 21-30. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.08.024 es_ES
dc.description.references Campagne, C. S., Roche, P., Müller, F., & Burkhard, B. (2020). Ten years of ecosystem services matrix: Review of a (r)evolution. One Ecosystem, 5. doi:10.3897/oneeco.5.e51103 es_ES
dc.description.references Burkhard, B., Kandziora, M., Hou, Y., & Müller, F. (2014). Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands-concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification. Landscape Online, 34, 1-32. doi:10.3097/lo.201434 es_ES
dc.description.references Drescher, M., Perera, A. H., Johnson, C. J., Buse, L. J., Drew, C. A., & Burgman, M. A. (2013). Toward rigorous use of expert knowledge in ecological research. Ecosphere, 4(7), art83. doi:10.1890/es12-00415.1 es_ES
dc.description.references Roche, P. K., & Campagne, C. S. (2019). Are expert-based ecosystem services scores related to biophysical quantitative estimates? Ecological Indicators, 106, 105421. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.05.052 es_ES
dc.description.references INEI—National Institute of Statistics and Informatics National censushttps://www.inei.gob.pe/estadisticas/censos/ es_ES
dc.description.references Ryden, K. (1987). Environmental Systems Research Institute Mapping. The American Cartographer, 14(3), 261-263. doi:10.1559/152304087783875930 es_ES
dc.description.references Charrad, M., Ghazzali, N., Boiteau, V., & Niknafs, A. (2014). NbClust: AnRPackage for Determining the Relevant Number of Clusters in a Data Set. Journal of Statistical Software, 61(6). doi:10.18637/jss.v061.i06 es_ES
dc.description.references Hill, M. O. (1973). Diversity and Evenness: A Unifying Notation and Its Consequences. Ecology, 54(2), 427-432. doi:10.2307/1934352 es_ES
dc.description.references Jost, L. (2006). Entropy and diversity. Oikos, 113(2), 363-375. doi:10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.14714.x es_ES
dc.description.references Metzger, M. J., Rounsevell, M. D. A., Van den Heiligenberg, H. A. R. M., Pérez-Soba, M., & Soto Hardiman, P. (2010). How Personal Judgment Influences Scenario Development: an Example for Future Rural Development in Europe. Ecology and Society, 15(2). doi:10.5751/es-03305-150205 es_ES
dc.description.references De Groot, R. S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., & Willemen, L. (2010). Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity, 7(3), 260-272. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006 es_ES
dc.description.references Stürck, J., & Verburg, P. H. (2016). Multifunctionality at what scale? A landscape multifunctionality assessment for the European Union under conditions of land use change. Landscape Ecology, 32(3), 481-500. doi:10.1007/s10980-016-0459-6 es_ES
dc.description.references Zen, M., Candiago, S., Schirpke, U., Egarter Vigl, L., & Giupponi, C. (2019). Upscaling ecosystem service maps to administrative levels: beyond scale mismatches. Science of The Total Environment, 660, 1565-1575. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.01.087 es_ES
dc.description.references Turner, M. G., O’Neill, R. V., Gardner, R. H., & Milne, B. T. (1989). Effects of changing spatial scale on the analysis of landscape pattern. Landscape Ecology, 3(3-4), 153-162. doi:10.1007/bf00131534 es_ES
dc.description.references Verhagen, W., Van Teeffelen, A. J. A., Baggio Compagnucci, A., Poggio, L., Gimona, A., & Verburg, P. H. (2016). Effects of landscape configuration on mapping ecosystem service capacity: a review of evidence and a case study in Scotland. Landscape Ecology, 31(7), 1457-1479. doi:10.1007/s10980-016-0345-2 es_ES
dc.description.references Scholes, R., Reyers, B., Biggs, R., Spierenburg, M., & Duriappah, A. (2013). Multi-scale and cross-scale assessments of social–ecological systems and their ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(1), 16-25. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2013.01.004 es_ES
dc.description.references Felipe-Lucia, M. R., Comín, F. A., & Bennett, E. M. (2014). Interactions Among Ecosystem Services Across Land Uses in a Floodplain Agroecosystem. Ecology and Society, 19(1). doi:10.5751/es-06249-190120 es_ES
dc.description.references Trabucchi, M., Comín, F. A., & O’Farrell, P. J. (2013). Hierarchical priority setting for restoration in a watershed in NE Spain, based on assessments of soil erosion and ecosystem services. Regional Environmental Change, 13(4), 911-926. doi:10.1007/s10113-012-0392-4 es_ES
dc.description.references Pandeya, B., Buytaert, W., Zulkafli, Z., Karpouzoglou, T., Mao, F., & Hannah, D. M. (2016). A comparative analysis of ecosystem services valuation approaches for application at the local scale and in data scarce regions. Ecosystem Services, 22, 250-259. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.10.015 es_ES
dc.description.references Hein, L., van Koppen, C. S. A. (Kris), van Ierland, E. C., & Leidekker, J. (2016). Temporal scales, ecosystem dynamics, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystems services. Ecosystem Services, 21, 109-119. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.008 es_ES
dc.description.references Hou, Y., Burkhard, B., & Müller, F. (2013). Uncertainties in landscape analysis and ecosystem service assessment. Journal of Environmental Management, 127, S117-S131. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.12.002 es_ES
dc.description.references Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Müller, F., & Windhorst, W. (2009). Landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services - A concept for land-cover based assessments. Landscape Online, 15, 1-22. doi:10.3097/lo.200915 es_ES
dc.description.references Bolliger, J., & Mladenoff, D. J. (2005). Quantifying spatial classification uncertainties of the historical Wisconsin landscape (USA). Ecography, 28(2), 141-156. doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005.03955.x es_ES
dc.subject.ods 15.- Proteger, restaurar y promover la utilización sostenible de los ecosistemas terrestres, gestionar de manera sostenible los bosques, combatir la desertificación y detener y revertir la degradación de la tierra, y frenar la pérdida de diversidad biológica es_ES


Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem