Trade-offs across Space, Time, and Ecosystem Services

Abstract

Ecosystem service (ES) trade-offs arise from management choices made by humans, which can change the type, magnitude, and relative mix of services provided by ecosystems. Trade-offs occur when the provision of one ES is reduced as a consequence of increased use of another ES. In some cases, a trade-off may be an explicit choice; but in others, trade-offs arise without premeditation or even awareness that they are taking place. Trade-offs in ES can be classified along three axes: spatial scale, temporal scale, and reversibility. Spatial scale refers to whether the effects of the trade-off are felt locally or at a distant location. Temporal scale refers to whether the effects take place relatively rapidly or slowly. Reversibility expresses the likelihood that the perturbed ES may return to its original state if the perturbation ceases. Across all four Millennium Ecosystem Assessment scenarios and selected case study examples, trade-off decisions show a preference for provisioning, regulating, or cultural services (in that order). Supporting services are more likely to be "taken for granted." Cultural ES are almost entirely unquantified in scenario modeling; therefore, the calculated model results do not fully capture losses of these services that occur in the scenarios. The quantitative scenario models primarily capture the services that are perceived by society as more important-provisioning and regulating ecosystem services-and thus do not fully capture tradeoffs of cultural and supporting services. Successful management policies will be those that incorporate lessons learned from prior decisions into future management actions. Managers should complement their actions with monitoring programs that, in addition to monitoring the short-term provisions of services, also monitor the long-term evolution of slowly changing variables. Policies can then be developed to take into account ES trade-offs at multiple spatial and temporal scales. Successful strategies will recognize the inherent complexities of ecosystem management and will work to develop policies that minimize the effects of ES trade-offs.Ecology and Society 11(1): 28 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art28/ Ecology and Society 11(1): 28 two anonymous reviewers, and the many others who commented on previous versions of the "trade-offs working group" documents. Figures 2 and 4 were kindly prepared by Kathryn M. Rodríguez-Clark.

A review on trade-off analysis of ecosystem services for sustainable land-use management

“…Trade-offs at time scale arises when policy-makers make choices between current and future benefits. Identifying such trade-offs can help policy-makers understand that management decisions should consider the long-term effects of preferring the short-term provision of one ecosystem services at the expense of future use of this same service or other services (Rodríguez et al, 2006). Rodríguez et al (2005) elaborated a broad topic about the temporal trade-offs during decision makings, which revealed that there would be many important trade-offs between current use of nonrenewable resources and their future use.…”

“…It is commonly acknowledged that ecosystem services trade-offs occur at different spatial and temporal scale (Rodríguez et al, 2006;Power, 2010) and vary across both space and time (Holland et al, 2011), which increase more uncertainty to be managed. In addition, trade-off analysis from other perspectives are also proposed to be of great significance to land-use management and decision making, such as trade-offs among different stakeholders (Ring et al, 2010) and the reversibility of ecosystem services (Rodríguez et al, 2006).…”

“…Ecosystem services trade-offs among stakeholders mean that some stakeholders win while others lose, that is, one benefits from a particular ecosystem service at the cost of other individuals (Rodríguez et al, 2006). The UK National Ecosystem Assessment (UKNEA) defined such trade-offs as two outcomes: one is that the quality or quantity of an ecosystem service being utilized by one stakeholder was reduced or deteriorated due to others' utilization of that or other ecosystem services; the other one is that the utilization of ecosystem services by one stakeholder would lead to the decline of others' wellbeing (UKNEA, 2011).…”

“…Trade-offs will arise if particular land-use management decisions are made, which will result in changes of the types, magnitudes and interactions of ecosystem services. In addition, since each ecosystem service is not independent, but instead exhibits complex interactions, which will further lead to different environmental or socioeconomic outcomes related to different individuals or groups (Rodríguez et al, 2006). Over time, in spite of the great progress and success in the assessment of ecosystem services trade-offs, the practical application in land-use management decision is limited (Daily et al, 2009).…”

Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services in Costa Rica

“…However, if the ES concept is to become a fully operational planning tool, it is necessary to move beyond this simplistic perception. Important trade-offs have been recognized between ecosystem management for extracting tangible products (such as food and fibre) versus maintaining intangible services (for example water regulation) (MEA 2005;Rodríguez et al 2006), but less attention has been given to the relationships between intangible ES (Daw et al 2011).…”