不同生态恢复方式下生态系统服务与生物多样性恢复效果的整合分析

全球范围内关键生态系统服务的减少使人类社会面临巨大的威胁,生物多样性是生态系统提供各种产品和服务的基础。生态恢复工程对退化的生态系统服务和生物多样性进行修复,对于缓解人类环境压力具有非常重要的意义。长期的理论和实践工作形成了多种生态恢复措施:(1)单纯基于生态系统自我设计的自然恢复方式,(2)人为设计对环境条件进行干预,反馈影响生态系统的自我设计,(3)人为设计对目标种群和生态系统进行直接干预和重建。这3类恢复方式可以在不同程度上定向的影响生态系统的恢复进程,反映了人类对生态系统的低度、中度和高度介入。哪种恢复方式和介入程度能够实现更好的恢复效果,是生态恢复学中的一个关键问题,但到目前为止,虽广有争议,却无定量的分析和结论。针对这个空白,通过对ISI Web of Knowledge数据库中生态恢复相关文献的整合分析,基于数学统计的方法定量比较在不同条件下低度介入(自然恢复)、中度介入(环境干预)和高度介入(直接干预)3种恢复方式对生态系统服务与生物多样性的恢复效果。论文从4个方面展开研究:(1)低度、中度、高度介入生态恢复方式的划分,(2)比较3大类介入方式对生态系统服务和生物多样性恢复效果的差异,(3)不同气候条件、生态系统类型和恢复时间等背景因素的影响,(4)生物多样性恢复和生态系统服务恢复之间的关系。研究结果揭示了不同生态恢复方式的适用条件,以及对生物多样性和生态系统恢复相互关系的作用,对生态恢复实践中恢复方式的选择有指导作用。对未来的研究也有启示意义,如针对特定生态系统服务或具体研究问题进一步探索低度、中度和高度介入生态恢复方式的作用规律和机制;将地区的社会经济水平、生态系统的受损程度等因素纳入生态恢复方式的考察,以最优化生态恢复成本-效率等。     

生态功益:自然生态过程对人类的贡献

大自然是维系人类社会生存和维持文明发展的生命之舟,为人们的物质和精神生活提供必不可少的资源和环境条件及生态服务。生态功益是这些由自然生物过程产生和维持的环境资源方面的条件和服务的统称。本文从自然生产,维持生物多样性,调节气象过程、气候变化和地球化学物质循环,调节水循环和减缓旱涝灾害,改善与保持土壤,净化环境,为作物与自然植物传粉播种,控制病虫害,维护改善人的身心健康和激发人的精神文化追求等方面探讨和介绍生态功益及生态功益的经济评价。迅猛的人口增长、社会变化和技术发展已使承载人类社会的生命之舟受到严重破坏和巨大威胁。减少这些破坏和威胁是整个社会,特别是生态学エ作者面临的重大挑战.     

Remote sensing of biodiversity: what to measure and monitor from space to species?

Global biodiversity monitoring systems through remote sensing can support consistent assessment, monitoring, modelling and reporting on biodiversity which are key activities intended for sustainable management. This work presents an overview of biodiversity monitoring components, i.e. biodiversity levels, essential biodiversity variables, biodiversity indicators, scale, biodiversity inventory, biodiversity models, habitat, ecosystem services, vegetation health and biogeochemical heterogeneity and discusses what remote sensing through Earth Observations has contributed to the study of biodiversity. The technological advancements in remote sensing have enabled information-rich data on biodiversity. Remote sensing data are making a strong contribution in providing unique information relevant to various biodiversity research and conservation applications. The extensive use of Earth observation data are not yet realized in biodiversity assessment, monitoring and conservation. The development of direct remote sensing approaches and the techniques for quantifying biodiversity at the community to species level is likely to be a great challenge for comprehensive earth observation-based monitoring strategy.

     

Indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services: a synthesis across ecosystems and spatial scales

According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, common indicators are needed to monitor the loss of biodiversity and the implications for the sustainable provision of ecosystem services. However, a variety of indicators are already being used resulting in many, mostly incompatible, monitoring systems. In order to synthesise the different indicator approaches and to detect gaps in the development of common indicator systems, we examined 531 indicators that have been reported in 617 peer‐reviewed journal articles between 1997 and 2007. Special emphasis was placed on comparing indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services across ecosystems (forests, grass‐ and shrublands, wetlands, rivers, lakes, soils and agro‐ecosystems) and spatial scales (from patch to global scale). The application of biological indicators was found most often focused on regional and finer spatial scales with few indicators applied across ecosystem types. Abiotic indicators, such as physico‐chemical parameters and measures of area and fragmentation, are most frequently used at broader (regional to continental) scales. Despite its multiple dimensions, biodiversity is usually equated with species richness only. The functional, structural and genetic components of biodiversity are poorly addressed despite their potential value across habitats and scales. Ecosystem service indicators are mostly used to estimate regulating and supporting services but generally differ between ecosystem types as they reflect ecosystem‐specific services. Despite great effort to develop indicator systems over the past decade, there is still a considerable gap in the widespread use of indicators for many of the multiple components of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and a need to develop common monitoring schemes within and across habitats. Filling these gaps is a prerequisite for linking biodiversity dynamics with ecosystem service delivery and to achieving the goals of global and sub‐global initiatives to halt the loss of biodiversity.     

Representation of Ecosystem Services by Terrestrial Protected Areas: Chile as a Case Study

Protected areas are increasingly considered to play a key role in the global maintenance of ecosystem processes and the ecosystem services they provide. It is thus vital to assess the extent to which existing protected area systems represent those services. Here, for the first time, we document the effectiveness of the current Chilean protected area system and its planned extensions in representing both ecosystem services (plant productivity, carbon storage and agricultural production) and biodiversity. Additionally, we evaluate the effectiveness of protected areas based on their respective management objectives. Our results show that existing protected areas in Chile do not contain an unusually high proportion of carbon storage (14.9%), agricultural production (0.2%) or biodiversity (11.8%), and also represent a low level of plant productivity (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index of 0.38). Proposed additional priority sites enhance the representation of ecosystem services and biodiversity, but not sufficiently to attain levels of representation higher than would be expected for their area of coverage. Moreover, when the species groups were assessed separately, amphibians was the only one well represented. Suggested priority sites for biodiversity conservation, without formal protection yet, was the only protected area category that over-represents carbon storage, agricultural production and biodiversity. The low representation of ecosystem services and species’ distribution ranges by the current protected area system is because these protected areas are heavily biased toward southern Chile, and contain large extents of ice and bare rock. The designation and management of proposed priority sites needs to be addressed in order to increase the representation of ecosystem services within the Chilean protected area system.     

Linking biodiversity indicators,ecosystem functioning,provision of services and human well-being in estuarine systems: Application of a conceptual framework

Assuming that human well-being strongly relies on the services provided by well-functioning ecosystems, changes in the ecological functioning of any system can have direct and indirect effects on human welfare. Intensive land use and tourism have expanded in recent decades along coastal ecosystems, together with increasing demands for water, food and energy; all of these factors intensify the exploitation of natural resources. Many of the interrelations between ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services (ES) still require quantification in estuarine systems. A conceptual framework to assess such links in a spatially and temporally explicit manner is proposed and applied to the Mondego estuary (Portugal). This framework relies on three consecutive steps and discriminates among biodiversity structural components, ecosystem functioning and stability and the services provided by the ecosystem.Disturbances in abiotic factors were found to have a direct effect on biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ES. The observed changes in the species composition of communities had a positive effect on the ecosystem's productivity and stability. Moreover, the observed changes in the estuarine ES provision are likely to arise from changing structural and abiotic factors and in the present case from the loss or decline of locally abundant species. This study also indicates that linear relationships between biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and services provision are unlikely to occur in estuarine systems. Instead, cumulative and complex relations are observed between factors on both temporal and spatial scales. In this context, the results suggest several additional conclusions: (1) biodiversity and ecosystem functioning interaction with human well-being need to be incorporated into decision-making processes aimed at the conservative management of systems; (2) the institutional use of research results must be part of the design and implementation of sustainable management activities; and (3) more integrative tools/studies are required to account for the interactions of estuarine ecosystems with surrounding socio-economic activities. Therefore, when performing integrated assessments of ecosystem dynamics, it becomes essential to consider not only the effects of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning on services provision but also the effects that human well-being and ES provision may have on estuarine biodiversity and ecosystem functioning.The proposed framework implies taking into account both the functional and the commodities points of view upon natural ecosystems and by this representing a line of thought which will deserve further research to explore more in detail the conceptual links between biodiversity–ecosystem functioning–services provided.     

生物多样性与生态系统服务评估指标与方法

评估、模拟和预测全球生物多样性和生态系统服务的状态、趋势及其对人类福祉的影响,是当前生物多样性和生态系统服务研究领域的重要任务。指标和数据、模型和情景是推动生物多样性与生态系统服务评估研究理论建设和方法集成的重要工具。但是,目前对生物多样性和生态系统服务评估的指标体系和技术方法的综合对比研究相对缺乏。因而,系统评述了生物多样性和生态系统服务评估的概念框架、评估指标以及各类评估模型和方法的最新进展。生物多样性—生态系统功能—生态系统服务—人类福祉的级联框架是极具逻辑性的生物多样性和生态系统服务评估框架。现有的评估指标体系和模型方法还存在很多的问题和挑战,难以充分揭示生态系统服务的形成和影响机制、服务之间的联系和作用机理,有效地指导生态系统服务管理和决策制定。然而,这些评估指标和方法可为构建生物多样性与生态系统服务综合集成模型研究的框架提供重要的切入点。基于此,提出了生物多样性与生态系统服务综合集成模型研究的核心内容:i)目的:基于自然—社会综合特征的情景分析确定所解决的科学问题,输出生态系统服务管理和决策制定方案;ii)内容:尺度、生态系统服务类型、生物多样性的层次结构、组分间相互关系、驱动要素、多源数据的综合分析;iii)方法:对现有的各类模型和模型组合进行比较和不确定性分析,建立符合区域实际需求的生物多样性与生态系统服务综合制图模型库。在此基础上,建议我国应尽快发展适合中国区域特点的标准化指标体系和综合评估模型系统,定期对生物多样性和生态系统服务进行综合评估,掌握生物多样性和生态系统服务的变化趋势,提升我国在生物多样性和生态系统服务研究领域的国际地位和话语权。     

Biodiversity loss and the taxonomic bottleneck: emerging biodiversity science

Human domination of the Earth has resulted in dramatic changes to global and local patterns of biodiversity. Biodiversity is critical to human sustainability because it drives the ecosystem services that provide the core of our life-support system. As we, the human species, are the primary factor leading to the decline in biodiversity, we need detailed information about the biodiversity and species composition of specific locations in order to understand how different species contribute to ecosystem services and how humans can sustainably conserve and manage biodiversity. Taxonomy and ecology, two fundamental sciences that generate the knowledge about biodiversity, are associated with a number of limitations that prevent them from providing the information needed to fully understand the relevance of biodiversity in its entirety for human sustainability: (1) biodiversity conservation strategies that tend to be overly focused on research and policy on a global scale with little impact on local biodiversity; (2) the small knowledge base of extant global biodiversity; (3) a lack of much-needed site-specific data on the species composition of communities in human-dominated landscapes, which hinders ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation; (4) biodiversity studies with a lack of taxonomic precision; (5) a lack of taxonomic expertise and trained taxonomists; (6) a taxonomic bottleneck in biodiversity inventory and assessment; and (7) neglect of taxonomic resources and a lack of taxonomic service infrastructure for biodiversity science. These limitations are directly related to contemporary trends in research, conservation strategies, environmental stewardship, environmental education, sustainable development, and local site-specific conservation. Today’s biological knowledge is built on the known global biodiversity, which represents barely 20% of what is currently extant (commonly accepted estimate of 10 million species) on planet Earth. Much remains unexplored and unknown, particularly in hotspots regions of Africa, South Eastern Asia, and South and Central America, including many developing or underdeveloped countries, where localized biodiversity is scarcely studied or described. "Backyard biodiversity", defined as local biodiversity near human habitation, refers to the natural resources and capital for ecosystem services at the grassroots level, which urgently needs to be explored, documented, and conserved as it is the backbone of sustainable economic development in these countries. Beginning with early identification and documentation of local flora and fauna, taxonomy has documented global biodiversity and natural history based on the collection of "backyard biodiversity" specimens worldwide. However, this branch of science suffered a continuous decline in the latter half of the twentieth century, and has now reached a point of potential demise. At present there are very few professional taxonomists and trained local parataxonomists worldwide, while the need for, and demands on, taxonomic services by conservation and resource management communities are rapidly increasing. Systematic collections, the material basis of biodiversity information, have been neglected and abandoned, particularly at institutions of higher learning. Considering the rapid increase in the human population and urbanization, human sustainability requires new conceptual and practical approaches to refocusing and energizing the study of the biodiversity that is the core of natural resources for sustainable development and biotic capital for sustaining our life-support system. In this paper we aim to document and extrapolate the essence of biodiversity, discuss the state and nature of taxonomic demise, the trends of recent biodiversity studies, and suggest reasonable approaches to a biodiversity science to facilitate the expansion of global biodiversity knowledge and to create useful data on backyard biodiversity worldwide towards human sustainability.     

Human transformation of ecosystems: Comparing protected and unprotected areas with natural baselines

Protected areas serve as reserves of biological diversity and conserve the naturalness of characteristic regional ecosystems. Numerous approaches have been applied to estimate the level of transformation of ecosystems and to compare trends inside and outside of protected areas. In this study, we apply aggregate indicators of anthropogenic pressures on ecosystems and biodiversity in a fine-scale spatial analysis to compare the level of human influence within protected and unprotected areas. The actual state of ecosystems is compared to a natural baseline that is intact or potential natural state. The results show that in a non-protected Central-European landscape, humans appropriate a considerable share of natural ecosystem productivity and carbon stocks, and significantly reduce natural biodiversity and ecosystem services. Human appropriation of net primary production reached more than 60% in total, humans reduced original biodiversity levels by 69%, and net carbon storage was considerably decreased by intensive types of land use. All three indicators significantly differed between protected areas and unprotected areas, suggesting that protected areas maintain higher biodiversity levels, store more carbon and are in total less influenced by human exploitation than average non-protected landscape. Furthermore, we bring evidence that human appropriation of net primary production is negatively related both to biodiversity and ecosystem services indicated by mean species abundance and net carbon storage at the national level. Our results contribute to the quantitative evidence of the impacts of anthropogenic transformation of natural ecosystems on the ecosystem condition, supporting the hypothesis that protected areas significantly reduce anthropogenic pressures and contribute to maintaining critical ecosystem services and biodiversity.     

Interactions of ecosystem properties,ecosystem integrity and ecosystem service indicators—A theoretical matrix exercise

The ecosystem service concept is becoming more and more acknowledged in science and decision-making, resulting in several applications in different case studies and in environmental management, but still it is developing in terms of definitions, typologies and understanding its complexity. By examining the interrelations between ecosystem properties, ecosystem integrity, biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being qualitatively, the mutual influences on each constituent of the ‘ecosystem service cascade’ are illuminated, giving an impulse for further discussions and improvements for a better understanding of the complexity of human–environmental systems. Results of the theoretical interactions are among others the assumption that provisioning services exclude or compete with each other, while the role of biodiversity was found to be supporting for regulating services and cultural services. Ecosystem services meet the criteria of being adequate human–environmental system indicators and therefore, they are an appropriate instrument for decision-making and management.     

Multifunctional floodplain management and biodiversity effects: a knowledge synthesis for six European countries

Floodplain ecosystems are biodiversity hotspots and supply multiple ecosystem services. At the same time they are often prone to human pressures that increasingly impact their intactness. Multifunctional floodplain management can be defined as a management approach aimed at a balanced supply of multiple ecosystem services that serve the needs of the local residents, but also those of off-site populations that are directly or indirectly impacted by floodplain management and policies. Multifunctional floodplain management has been recently proposed as a key concept to reconcile biodiversity and ecosystem services with the various human pressures and their driving forces. In this paper we present biophysics and management history of floodplains and review recent multifunctional management approaches and evidence for their biodiversity effects for the six European countries Ireland, the Netherlands, Germany, Slovakia, Hungary and the Ukraine. Multifunctional use of floodplains is an increasingly important strategy in some countries, for instance in the Netherlands and Hungary, and management of floodplains goes hand in hand with sustainable economic activities resulting in flood safety and biodiversity conservation. As a result, biodiversity is increasing in some of the areas where multifunctional floodplain management approaches are implemented. We conclude that for efficient use of management resources and ecosystem services, consensual solutions need to be realized and biodiversity needs to be mainstreamed into management activities to maximize ecosystem service provision and potential human benefits. Multifunctionality is more successful where a broad range of stakeholders with diverse expertise and interests are involved in all stages of planning and implementation.     

Urban ecosystem services assessment along a rural–urban gradient: A cross-analysis of European cities

The main objective of this paper is to present an assessment approach for ecosystem services in an urban context covering the local and the regional scale. It was applied to different European cities. A set of indicators representing important urban ecosystem goods and services – local climate regulation, air cooling and recreation – was tested using spatial data along an urban–rural gradient. The results show that there is neither a typical rural–urban gradient in terms of urban ecosystem service provisioning nor a uniform urban spatial pattern of service provisioning that can serve as a generic model for cities. The results demonstrate that (1) core cities do not necessarily provide fewer ecosystem services compared to their regions and (2) there were no patches found within the four case study cities where all of the indicators report very high performance values. The analysis further shows that a high degree of imperviousness does not necessarily entail low ecosystem service provisioning if an urban structure contains a considerable amount of mature trees which support carbon storage and biodiversity. The results of the present paper provide insights into potentials and trade-offs between different urban ecosystem services that should be considered during urban planning when setting targets and establishing thresholds to protect environmental resources, ecosystem services and biodiversity for residents.     

黄淮海湿地生态系统服务与生物多样性保护格局的耦合性

研究生物多样性格局与生态系统服务格局之间的空间耦合效应,探讨以生物多样性保育为核心目标的自然保护体系同时能多大程度满足对生态系统服务功能的维护和支撑,已成为自然保护领域新的热点关注问题。目前研究多限于陆域生态系统,其方法难以适用于湿地生态系统。以黄淮海湿地——这一高强度人类活动的区域为研究区,基于湿地生态系统的横向连接度、纵向连接度(2D)以及结合地下水的垂向连接度(3D),对黄淮海地区湿地具有的生态系统服务功能进行了空间评估和分析,识别出具有重要意义的生态系统服务功能区域,结合现有保护区分布情况进行空间分析,评价现有保护区对生态系统服务功能的支持程度,即生物多样性保护与生态系统服务功能重点区域的空间耦合性。研究结果表明:目前湿地保护区并未有效覆盖湿地生态系统关键区域,湿地生态系统服务关键格局也存在大量明显的保护空缺。同时,随着2D到3D延伸,保护区对生态系统服务功能的支持程度也稍有提高,这与系统保护规划中选择不同保护目标后保护规划格局发生变化的情况类似,而生态系统服务功能的"热点地区"(重要区域)与保护生物学中所指的物种保护的热点地区类似,这表明生态系统服务功能的规划和保护也可以借鉴保护生物学中系统保护规划的理论和方法,为后续研究提供参照。     

Natural disturbance impacts on ecosystem services and biodiversity in temperate and boreal forests

In many parts of the world forest disturbance regimes have intensified recently, and future climatic changes are expected to amplify this development further in the coming decades. These changes are increasingly challenging the main objectives of forest ecosystem management, which are to provide ecosystem services sustainably to society and maintain the biological diversity of forests. Yet a comprehensive understanding of how disturbances affect these primary goals of ecosystem management is still lacking. We conducted a global literature review on the impact of three of the most important disturbance agents (fire, wind, and bark beetles) on 13 different ecosystem services and three indicators of biodiversity in forests of the boreal, cool‐ and warm‐temperate biomes. Our objectives were to (i) synthesize the effect of natural disturbances on a wide range of possible objectives of forest management, and (ii) investigate standardized effect sizes of disturbance for selected indicators via a quantitative meta‐analysis. We screened a total of 1958 disturbance studies published between 1981 and 2013, and reviewed 478 in detail. We first investigated the overall effect of disturbances on individual ecosystem services and indicators of biodiversity by means of independence tests, and subsequently examined the effect size of disturbances on indicators of carbon storage and biodiversity by means of regression analysis. Additionally, we investigated the effect of commonly used approaches of disturbance management, i.e. salvage logging and prescribed burning. We found that disturbance impacts on ecosystem services are generally negative, an effect that was supported for all categories of ecosystem services, i.e. supporting, provisioning, regulating, and cultural services (P < 0.001). Indicators of biodiversity, i.e. species richness, habitat quality and diversity indices, on the other hand were found to be influenced positively by disturbance (P < 0.001). Our analyses thus reveal a ‘disturbance paradox’, documenting that disturbances can put ecosystem services at risk while simultaneously facilitating biodiversity. A detailed investigation of disturbance effect sizes on carbon storage and biodiversity further underlined these divergent effects of disturbance. While a disturbance event on average causes a decrease in total ecosystem carbon by 38.5% (standardized coefficient for stand‐replacing disturbance), it on average increases overall species richness by 35.6%. Disturbance‐management approaches such as salvage logging and prescribed burning were neither found significantly to mitigate negative effects on ecosystem services nor to enhance positive effects on biodiversity, and thus were not found to alleviate the disturbance paradox. Considering that climate change is expected to intensify natural disturbance regimes, our results indicate that biodiversity will generally benefit from such changes while a sustainable provisioning of ecosystem services might come increasingly under pressure. This underlines that disturbance risk and resilience require increased attention in ecosystem management in the future, and that new approaches to addressing the disturbance paradox in management are needed.     

The importance of small waterbodies for biodiversity and ecosystem services: implications for policy makers

Small waterbodies, including ponds and small lakes, low-order streams, ditches and springs, are the most numerous freshwater environments globally, are critical for freshwater biodiversity and are increasingly recognised for their role in ecosystem service delivery. Small waters often represent the best remaining examples of intact freshwater habitats and are the most likely to remain unpolluted, often being a refuge for species which have disappeared from larger, more damaged, waterbodies. Practically all water-related ecosystem services are initially mediated by small waters and some, such as carbon cycling, may be dominated by them. Small waters are exposed to all the threats affecting larger waters, and some experienced only by small waters. Despite this, small waters remain the least investigated part of the water environment and are largely excluded from water management planning. We identify the priorities for research to underpin better protection of small waters and recommend policy actions needed to better integrate small waters into the management of catchments and landscapes. The primary requirements are to identify reliable monitoring programmes for small waters, develop effective measures to protect the biodiversity and ecosystem services they provide and ensure that regulators take full account of this critical part of the water environment.     

Ecosystem service benefits of contrasting conservation strategies in a human-dominated region

The hope among policy-makers and scientists alike is that conservation strategies designed to protect biodiversity also provide direct benefits to people by protecting other vital ecosystem services. The few studies that have examined the delivery of ecosystem services by existing conservation efforts have concentrated on large, ‘wilderness’-style biodiversity reserves. However, such reserves are not realistic options for densely populated regions. Here, we provide the first analyses that compare representation of biodiversity and three other ecosystem services across several contrasting conservation strategies in a human-dominated landscape (England). We show that small protected areas and protected landscapes (restrictive zoning) deliver high carbon storage and biodiversity, while existing incentive payment (agri-environment) schemes target areas that offer little advantage over other parts of England in terms of biodiversity, carbon storage and agricultural production. A fourth ecosystem service—recreation—is under-represented by all three strategies. Our findings are encouraging as they illustrate that restrictive zoning can play a major role in protecting natural capital assets in densely populated regions. However, trade-offs exist even among the four ecosystem services we considered, suggesting that a portfolio of conservation and sustainability investments will be needed to deliver both biodiversity and the other ecosystem services demanded by society.     

Examining the Links between Biodiversity and Human Health: An Interdisciplinary Research Initiative at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s mission to protect human health and the environment, the agency seeks to conduct research on the structure and function of ecosystems and to improve our understanding of the processes that contribute to the sustained health of the nation’s ecosystems and the well-being of human populations. Changes in biodiversity can profoundly impact the ability of ecosystems to provide clean water, energy, food, recreation, and other services that contribute to human well-being. In addition, changes in biodiversity can affect the transmission of infectious disease to humans, particularly vectorborne diseases such as malaria and Lyme disease. The Environmental Protection Agency’s new initiative supports interdisciplinary research to characterize the mechanisms that link biodiversity and human health and to use this knowledge to develop integrative tools and approaches for quantifying and predicting these relationships. Research on these links can have an important impact on our view of biodiversity and how we manage resources to protect human and ecosystem health. Disclaimer: This work was funded in part under Grant #CX3-832328 with the American Association for the Advance of Science (AAAS). The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of the Environmental Protection Agency.     

Sustainable Coastal Development: The Dual Mandate and a Recommendation for "Commerce Managed Areas"

Pitting the dynamicism and uncertainty inherent in undisturbed coastal ecosystems against the stability and predictability required of human‐dominated landscapes creates the paradox of the dual mandate. We describe a gradient of estuarine types ranging from systems that experience little human intrusion—conservation estuaries—to those that are dominated by people or extractive uses—production and urban‐industrial estuaries. Future approaches to managing these estuarine resources will require a division of the concept of marine protected areas into at least two subcategories: “conservation” managed areas (C_ConservationMAs) and “commerce” managed areas (C_CommerceMAs). The latter includes conditions where humans are not only a core feature of the landscape but also where extractive uses drive a large part of the local, regional, and even national economy. System reliability and predictability of ecosystem services are integral components of any management scheme in C_CommerceMAs. By recognizing this division managers can construct appropriate baselines that encompass the biodiversity and ecological integrity inherent in relatively undisturbed estuaries (or portions thereof), or the ecosystem health and system reliability that characterize urban‐industrial systems. The terms ecosystem restoration and ecosystem rehabilitation are also distinguished; the former term is used to describe practices that return ecosystems to optimum biological integrity, whereas the latter term is applied to the health of human‐dominated estuaries where the goal is to manage natural processes and functions. Our proposed approach does not mean that ecosystem quality is sacrificed in urban‐industrial or production systems; to the contrary, contaminant source control, suitable sediment and water quality, and the human endeavors to address them are just as important to sustaining commercial activity as they are to the well‐being of extant biota. So too, are the conservation and preservation of existing critical habitat (proximate reservoirs of biodiversity) in urban‐industrial systems, and rehabilitation of habitats that support species coadapted to the presence of humans.     

Conservation planning for ecosystem services

Despite increasing attention to the human dimension of conservation projects, a rigorous, systematic methodology for planning for ecosystem services has not been developed. This is in part because flows of ecosystem services remain poorly characterized at local-to-regional scales, and their protection has not generally been made a priority. We used a spatially explicit conservation planning framework to explore the trade-offs and opportunities for aligning conservation goals for biodiversity with six ecosystem services (carbon storage, flood control, forage production, outdoor recreation, crop pollination, and water provision) in the Central Coast ecoregion of California, United States. We found weak positive and some weak negative associations between the priority areas for biodiversity conservation and the flows of the six ecosystem services across the ecoregion. Excluding the two agriculture-focused services—crop pollination and forage production—eliminates all negative correlations. We compared the degree to which four contrasting conservation network designs protect biodiversity and the flow of the six services. We found that biodiversity conservation protects substantial collateral flows of services. Targeting ecosystem services directly can meet the multiple ecosystem services and biodiversity goals more efficiently but cannot substitute for targeted biodiversity protection (biodiversity losses of 44% relative to targeting biodiversity alone). Strategically targeting only biodiversity plus the four positively associated services offers much promise (relative biodiversity losses of 7%). Here we present an initial analytical framework for integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services in conservation planning and illustrate its application. We found that although there are important potential trade-offs between conservation for biodiversity and for ecosystem services, a systematic planning framework offers scope for identifying valuable synergies.     

集成生态系统服务与生物多样性的系统保护规划

生物多样性和生态系统服务的保护与可持续管理是当今世界面临的重大挑战之一,但如何判识与优化集成生态系统服务与生物多样性保护对象的保护优先区网络,相关研究还很有限。针对“三江并流”区,选取珍稀濒危与特有动植物物种和自然植被类型作为生物多样性保护对象,以调节服务(碳存储、固碳和土壤保持)、文化服务(自然游憩)和供给服务(水源供给)为生态系统服务保护对象。应用系统保护规划方法,首先判识出单一生物多样性和生态系统服务保护优先区;然后,分析这些保护优先区间的相关关系,并选择与生物多样性正相关的生态系统服务类型,判识集成生态系统服务与生物多样性的保护优先区;最后,评估了集成生态系统服务与生物多样性保护优先区在六类已建保护地中的保护状况。结果表明：(1)“三江并流”区多情景规划得到的生物多样性与生态系统服务保护优先区之间均呈正相关关系;(2)与分别针对生态系统服务和生物多样性的规划情景相比,集成生态系统服务与生物多样性保护优先区能够同时对两类保护对象提供最高的保护覆盖率;(3)集成生态系统服务和生物多样性保护优先区占研究区总面积的48.9%,其已建保护地覆盖率为32.5%,说明现有保护地体系仍存在保护...