An ecosystem services-based SWOT analysis is proposed in order to identify and quantify internal and external factors supporting or threatening the conservation effectiveness of protected areas. The proposed approach concerns both the ecological and the social perspective. Strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats were evaluated based on 12 selected environmental and socio-economic indicators for all terrestrial Italian protected areas, belonging to the Natura 2000 network, and for their 5-km buffer area. The indicators, used as criteria within a multi-criteria assessment, include: core area, cost-distance between protected areas, changes in ecosystem services values, intensification of land use, and urbanization. The results were aggregated for three biogeographical regions, Alpine, Continental, and Mediterranean, indicating that Alpine sites have more opportunities and strengths than Continental and Mediterranean sites. The results call attention to where connectivity and land-use changes may have stronger influence on protected areas, in particular, whereas urbanization or intensification of agriculture may hamper conservation goals of protected areas. The proposed SWOT analysis provides helpful information for a multiple scale perspective and for identifying conservation priorities and for defining management strategies to assure biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services provision.
Agricultural land is a very important ecosystem that provides a range of services like food, maintenance of soil structure, and hydrological services with high ecological value to human wellbeing Ecosystem Services (ESs). Understanding the contribution of different agricultural practices to supply ESs would help inform choices about the most beneficial land use management. Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are defined by IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) as actions to protect, sustainably manage and restore natural or modified ecosystems, which address societal challenges (e.g., climate change, food and water security, or natural disasters) effectively and adaptively, while simultaneously providing human wellbeing and biodiversity benefits. Some actions farmers can implement in the new Rural Development Programs (RDP 2021–2022 and 2023–2027) can be considered as NbS and could affect the quantity, quality, and time of some ESs related to water regulation and supply, N adsorption and erosion protection. This study aims to evaluate these ESs in different scenarios in the upper Foglia river basin (Italy) and at a local scale (farming), and to highlight the issue to compensate farmers for the production of public goods which benefit the whole society (ESs) by the implementation of RDP’s actions. These scenarios highlight how actions have positive effects on ecosystem services and their economic value related to land use management, on maintaining agricultural practices by integrating Water Frame Directive (2000/60/EC), Directive 2007/60/EC on the management of flood risks and highlighting the potential role of farmers in a high diversity landscape. This study highlights a new way to evaluate the processes of natural capital in the production of public goods, which benefits the whole society (ESs), by emphasizing the economic and environmental role of farmers in producing them and putting on the table data to trigger a PES (Payment for Ecosystem Services) mechanism. To facilitate decision making, robust decision support tools are needed, underpinned by comprehensive cost-benefit analyses and spatially modeling in which agriculture can be a strategic sector to optimize food production and environmental protection in harmony with the Farm to Fork (F2F) strategy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.