How much do we know about trade-offs in ecosystem services? A systematic review of empirical research observations

Aryal, Kishor; Maraseni, Tek; Apan, Armando

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151229

Cited by 90 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 105 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the long-term impacts of COVID-19 are highly uncertain, we recommend some forward-looking responses that will help address the cross-cutting impacts of the COVID pandemic: (1) improved environmental oversight and forest patrolling ( Brancalion et al, 2020 ), (2) stimulus packages of clean energy to reduce pressure on forest resources ( Aryal et al, 2022 , Gillingham et al, 2020 ), (3) economic incentives and enabling policies to build the resilience of supply chain of timber market ( FAO, 2020 ), and (4) improved access to local people through alternative income generation packages ( Golar et al, 2020 ) to counter the impacts of COVID-19 in the forestry sector for future. As forest-dependent communities are the hardest hit by the COVID-19 crisis, the national and subnational governments need to reaffirm their commitments to the sustainable management of all forests and trees outside of forests, as charted clearly in the UN Strategic Plan for Forests 2030 with its Global Forest Goals and in the 2030 Agenda with its Sustainable Development Goals ( Sen, 2020 ) for creating new green job under various post-COVID-19 recovery stimulus programs ( Marchetti and Palahí, 2020 ) and building the resilience of forest-dependent indigenous and local communities ( Sen, 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of COVID-19 in the forestry sector: A case of lowland region of Nepal

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of COVID-19 in the forestry sector: A case of lowland region of Nepal

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In sociology, Jericó-Daminello et al (2021) regarded ESs as ecosystem contributions combined with anthropogenic contributions, and they have impacts on ecosystems and benefit the social system [12]. Based on the understanding of the concept of ESs from multidisciplinary studies, it can be considered that ESs are the attributes, processes and functions of nature that directly or indirectly benefit human beings, through the functioning of ecosystem and natural assets [13,14]. In general, land use and land cover change are closely related to subsequent ESV change.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Landscape Pattern into Characterising and Optimising Ecosystem Services for Regional Sustainable Development

Zeng

Liu

et al. 2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans benefit from ecosystem services (ES) and profoundly influence the ecosystem in rapid urbanisation and large-scale urban sprawl contexts, especially at the landscape level. However, the impacts of landscape pattern, the driving mechanism of sub-ES and the spatially explicit regional optimisation, have been largely ignored. In response, to the present paper explores two primary aspects: the relationship among ES, landscape pattern, urban income and agricultural output, and the regional governance of optimised ES values (ESV), using the Wuhan urban agglomeration as a case study area. The survey method is employed in obtaining the adjusted magnitude matrix of land use and ecosystem services. Spatial regression analyses are conducted on each ES, including food provision, climate regulation and soil maintenance, with socio-economic indicators and landscape pattern index as explanatory variables. Finally, geographically weighted regression and scenario analyses are conducted on each sub-ESV to generate adjusted coefficients in each county for ESV regulation. The results show that urban per capita disposable income and agricultural output significantly contribute to ESV change, with the former being negative and the latter being positive. A highly aggregated landscape also produces reduced ESV, particularly in soil maintenance and gas and climate regulation. We summarise the ESV in 2020 and in the period after adjustment in different administrative counties. Provision, regulation and culture ecosystem benefits substantially increase when attempts are made to lower the landscape aggregation pattern by 1%. In general, counties and county-level cities have the largest ESV, with food provision as the optimum ecosystem benefit. Districts in the capital city show an immense growth in provision and regulation, and county-level cities show the highest growth rate in cultural service. Integrating the landscape pattern into characterising and optimising ES, provides references for regional governance on land-use planning and socio-economic development, which is vital to sustainable regional development.

show abstract

“…These organizations often engage in a range of conservation actions. Some such actions, like national Simmons et al, 2021;Wilkins et al, 2021) and around the world (Álvarez-Romero et al, 2021;Aryal et al, 2022;Mitchell et al, 2021;O'Connor et al, 2021). However, most have not considered critical decision-making factors that we seek to address here.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co‐benefits for terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystem services available from contrasting land protection policies in the contiguous United States

Vijay

Fisher

Armsworth

2022

Conservation Letters.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation organizations seek to achieve multiple benefits for biodiversity and ecosystem services through protected area expansion, necessitating an understanding of potential co‐benefits and trade‐offs. We use benefit functions derived from modeled and best‐available data to characterize five benefits (habitat area, total species richness, threatened species richness, carbon storage, and recreational use) and examine how trade‐off assessments are influenced by policy context, when controlling for the effect of cost and future conversion threat. We applied a pairwise correlation (broad actions) and a “best sites” approach (narrow actions) for land protection across the contiguous United States. We also considered the spatial footprint of regional and thematic policies. Nationally, we find strong potential for co‐benefits between biodiversity, habitat, and carbon storage. Scope for co‐benefits is weaker when including recreational use, an ecosystem service driven primarily by human population. Crucially, we show that the conclusions one would draw regarding scope for co‐benefits can change markedly depending on the context and spatial footprint of policy decisions.

show abstract

How much do we know about trade-offs in ecosystem services? A systematic review of empirical research observations

Cited by 90 publications

References 105 publications

Impact of COVID-19 in the forestry sector: A case of lowland region of Nepal

Impact of COVID-19 in the forestry sector: A case of lowland region of Nepal

Integrating Landscape Pattern into Characterising and Optimising Ecosystem Services for Regional Sustainable Development

Co‐benefits for terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystem services available from contrasting land protection policies in the contiguous United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About