Understanding Spatiotemporal Lags in Ecosystem Services to Improve Incentives

Fremier, Alexander K.; DeClerck, Fabrice; Bosque‐Pérez, Nilsa A.; Carmona, Natalia Estrada; Hill, Renee F.; Joyal, Taylor; Keesecker, Levi; Klos, P. Zion; Martínez‐Salinas, Alejandra; Niemeyer, R. J.; Sanfiorenzo, Andre; Welsh, Kristen; Wulfhorst, J. D.

doi:10.1525/bio.2013.63.6.9

Cited by 72 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings have important implications for ecosystem service management of all RUSLE factors, C is the most easily managed factor . Ecosystem service-based interventions (Fremier et al 2013;Mandal & Sharda 2013) and landscape planning (de Groot et al 2010) can facilitate and guide targeted soil conservation efforts to greatly reduce extremely high soil loss rates (Cerda et al 2009;Galdino et al 2015).…”

Section: Rusle Sensitivity Across Datasetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, there is a pressing need to guide science-based policy Adhikari & Nadella 2011). A range of tools is needed to help untangle relationships between management decisions, ecosystem processes and ecosystem services, particularly at the scale at which ecosystem services are produced and consumed (Bagstad et al 2013;Fremier et al 2013).…”

Section: Rusle Sensitivity Across Datasetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantifying model uncertainty to improve watershed-level ecosystem service quantification: a global sensitivity analysis of the RUSLE

Carmona

Harper

DeClerck³

et al. 2016

International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Servic

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem service-support tools are commonly used to guide natural resource management. Often, empirically based models are preferred due to low data requirements, simplicity and clarity. Yet, uncertainty produced by local context or parameter estimation remains poorly quantified and documented. We assessed model uncertainty of the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation -RUSLE developed mainly from US data. RUSLE is the most commonly applied model to assess watershed-level soil loss. We performed a global sensitivity analysis (GSA) on RUSLE with four dissimilar datasets to understand uncertainty and to provide recommendations for data collection and model parameterization. The datasets cover varying spatial levels (plot, watershed and continental) and environmental conditions (temperate and tropical). We found cover management and topography create the most uncertainty regardless of environmental conditions or data parameterization techniques. The importance of other RUSLE factors varies across contexts. We argue that model uncertainty could be reduced through better parameterization of cover management and topography factors while avoiding severe soil losses by targeting soil conservation practices in areas where both factors interact and enhance soil loss. We recommend incorporating GSA to assess empirical models' uncertainty, to guide model parameterization and to target soil conservation efforts. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Rusle Sensitivity Across Datasetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Rusle Sensitivity Across Datasetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying model uncertainty to improve watershed-level ecosystem service quantification: a global sensitivity analysis of the RUSLE

Carmona

Harper

DeClerck³

et al. 2016

International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Servic

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The framework allows two modes of interaction between soil management (key pressure) and impacts: soil-borne interactions via changes in soil processes and soil functions (solid arrow in Figure 1) and management-induced interactions irrespective of changes in the soil system (thin arrows in sufficiently wide to account for an improvement or deterioration of soil functions and ecosystem services through management, which often only emerge after considerable time lags (Fremier et al, 2013).…”

Section: Analytical Framework For Impact Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing soil functions for a sustainable bioeconomy—Assessment framework and state of the art

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioeconomy strategies have been adopted in many countries around the world. Their sustainable implementation requires a management of soils that maintains soil functions and avoids land degradation. Only then, ecosystem services can be maintained and resources used efficiently. We present an analytical framework for impact assessment that links policy and technology driving forces for soil management decisions to soil processes, soil functional changes, and their impacts on ecosystem services and resource use efficiency, both being targets that have been set by society and are anchored in bioeconomy policy strategies and sustainable development goals. Although the resource use efficiency concept has a long-term tradition, most studies of agricultural management do not address the role of soils in their efficiency assessment. The concept of ecosystem services has received increasing attention over the last years; however, its link to soil functions and soil management practices is still not well established. This study is the first to conceptually link the socioeconomic processes of external drivers for soil management with the natural processes of soil functions and connect them back to impacts on the social system. Application of the framework helps strengthen the science-policy interface and to systemically assess and compare the opportunities and threats of soil management practices from the perspective of goals set by society at different spatial and temporal scales. Insights gained in this way can be applied in stakeholder decisionmaking processes and used to inform the design of governance instruments aimed at sustainable soil management within a bioeconomy. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

“…Correctly identifying the ecological and spatial scales at which ecosystem services are provided, and matching these to appropriate jurisdictional extents is critical for sound ecosystem service management [29]. A cross-scale and cross-level approach [30] provides an opportunity for nested management, where ecosystem service management at one level can be integrated with management at coarser levels in ways that might not be identifiable without cross-level analysis.…”

Section: Core Principle 3: Cross-scale and Cross-level Interactions Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Agricultural ecosystems and their services: the vanguard of sustainability?

DeClerck

Jones

Attwood³

et al. 2016

Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A major opportunity exists in the transition from the disciplinary Millennium Development Goals (MDG's) to the more interdisciplinary Sustainable Development Goals (SDG's) to transform the dialogue around the environment from its current conceptualization as a constraining factor towards its utilization an enabling force for sustainable development.Agricultural ecosystems are the ecosystems closest to human well-being providing 31% of global employment, and the sustenance for the entirety of the global population. Despite this central contribution, agricultural systems or agroecosystems are responsible for driving significant environmental pressures while failing to provide sustainable diets for a world that is increasing either under-or malnourished. Agriculture's dual change is often presented as a trade-off between conservation and development objectives. However, an increasing body of research demonstrates that agricultural systems are both wholly dependent on, and potentially net providers of ecosystem services beyond food production. Recognizing this dual role allows for greater convergence between conservation and development objectives and leverages environmental management of agricultural system as a means to achieving global sustainability goals. We propose a simple framework for ecosystem services and resilience in agricultural landscapes to better capture and operationalize interactions between ecosystem services provided to agriculture, and those provided from agriculture. We discuss how such a perspective influences definitions of production ecosystem services and emphasize the need for greater focus on resilience and regulating services. We argue for better applications of resilience-based approaches and call for refocusing ecosystem service research on human well-being outcomes articulated in the social targets of the SDGs, in addition to the more traditional biophysical and conservation based outcomes.

show abstract

Understanding Spatiotemporal Lags in Ecosystem Services to Improve Incentives

Cited by 72 publications

References 43 publications

Quantifying model uncertainty to improve watershed-level ecosystem service quantification: a global sensitivity analysis of the RUSLE

Quantifying model uncertainty to improve watershed-level ecosystem service quantification: a global sensitivity analysis of the RUSLE

Managing soil functions for a sustainable bioeconomy—Assessment framework and state of the art

Agricultural ecosystems and their services: the vanguard of sustainability?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About