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.     

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.     

Residents’ valuation of ecosystem services in a Mediterranean coastal dune ecosystem: The case of the Ritoque dunes in central Chile

Coastal dunes provide a variety of cultural and ecological ecosystem services to local communities. However, most of these ecosystems are globally threatened by anthropic factors. Chile is home to important dune ecosystems such as the emblematic Ritoque coastal dunes located in the hotspot for biodiversity conservation in central Chile where there is a delicate relationship between conservation and human development interests, among local communities and authorities. Here, we performed a choice experiment study to determined willingness to implement conservation measures in the Ritoque dunes. In particular, we assessed residents’ preferences for improvements of the current state of local ecosystem services such as scenic beauty, biodiversity and archaeological sites. Residents showed preferences for improvements in Ritoque coastal dunes’ ecosystem services, and a high willingness to pay for protecting biodiversity and archeological sites, rather than for recreational infrastructure. Our study highlights the importance of place-based research that specifically addresses residents and stakeholders’ conservation priorities, which could be used to design and implement effective conservation management strategies for coastal ecosystems and coastal cities near them.     

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.     

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...     

A national approach for mapping and quantifying habitat-based biodiversity metrics across multiple spatial scales

Ecosystem services, i.e., services provided to humans from ecological systems have become a key issue of this century in resource management, conservation planning, and environmental decision analysis. Mapping and quantifying ecosystem services have become strategic national interests for integrating ecology with economics to help understand the effects of human policies and actions and their subsequent impacts on both ecosystem function and human well-being. Some aspects of biodiversity are valued by humans in varied ways, and thus are important to include in any assessment that seeks to identify and quantify the benefits of ecosystems to humans. Some biodiversity metrics clearly reflect ecosystem services (e.g., abundance and diversity of harvestable species), whereas others may reflect indirect and difficult to quantify relationships to services (e.g., relevance of species diversity to ecosystem resilience, cultural value of native species). Wildlife habitat has been modeled at broad spatial scales and can be used to map a number of biodiversity metrics. In the present study, we present an approach that (1) identifies mappable biodiversity metrics that are related to ecosystem services or other stakeholder concerns, (2) maps these metrics throughout a large multi-state region, and (3) compares the metric values obtained for selected watersheds within the regional context. The broader focus is to design a flexible approach for mapping metrics to produce a national-scale product. We map 20 biodiversity metrics reflecting ecosystem services or other aspects of biodiversity for all vertebrate species except fish. Metrics include species richness for all vertebrates, specific taxon groups, harvestable species (i.e., upland game, waterfowl, furbearers, small game, and big game), threatened and endangered species, and state-designated species of greatest conservation need, and also a metric for ecosystem (i.e., land cover) diversity. The project is being conducted at multiple scales in a phased approach, starting with place-based studies, then multi-state regional areas, culminating into a national-level atlas. As an example of this incremental approach, we provide results for the southwestern United States (i.e., states of Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and Colorado) and portions of two watersheds within this region: the San Pedro River (Arizona) and Rio Grande River (New Mexico). Geographic patterns differed considerably among metrics across the southwestern study area, but metric values for the two watershed study areas were generally greater than those for the southwestern region as a whole.     

Research needs for incorporating the ecosystem service approach into EU biodiversity conservation policy

Using a range of different methods including extensive reviews, workshops and an electronic conference, 70 key research recommendations and 12 priority research needs to integrate the ecosystem services approach into biodiversity conservation policy and funding were identified by a cross-disciplinary group of over 100 scientists and 50 stakeholders, including research funders and policy-makers. These recommendations focus on the ecological underpinning of ecosystem services, drivers that affect ecosystems and their services, biological traits and ecosystem services, the valuation of ecosystem services, spatial and temporal scales in ecosystem service assessment, indicators of ecosystem services, and habitat management, conservation policy and ecosystem services. The recommendations in this paper help steer the research agenda on ecosystem services into policy-relevant areas, agreed upon by funders, researchers and policy-makers. This research agenda will only succeed with increased collaboration between researchers across disciplines, thereby providing a challenge to the research community and research funders to work in new, interdisciplinary ways.     

Nature’s care: diarrhea, watershed protection, and biodiversity conservation in Flores, Indonesia

Part of the puzzle surrounding biodiversity loss lies in an incomplete understanding of how humans value the functions and services that flow from biodiversity conservation projects. This paper takes a closer look at the links between the conservation of biodiversity and the livelihoods of rural people who live on the fringes of the parks and protected areas. We revisit some of the key aspects of ecosystem valuation—purpose, methodology, and policy design and implementation—because the links between biodiversity conservation, ecosystem services, and human welfare are obscured by considerable smoke and mirrors. Using a biodiversity conservation project (Ruteng Park) on Flores Island in Indonesia as a case study, we build a concrete empirical example of ecosystem valuation. This conservation project has resulted in spatially patchy watershed protection that allows us to identify and estimate the impacts of watershed services on human health (diarrhea prevalence) in the buffer zone of the park. We conclude by offering a plan of research to improve the design of conservation interventions for protecting biodiversity and providing ecosystem services. These recommendations include developing more conceptual knowledge on the linkages between biodiversity and ecosystem services; scaling up valuation efforts of underappreciated services such as health; shifting focus from valuing services individually to valuing multiple benefits from the same area; and conducting conservation policy experiments to identify causal outcomes (including defensible estimates of ecosystem values).

石羊河流域生态系统服务权衡与协同关系研究

生态系统服务权衡与协同研究是国际生态学、地理学等学科研究的热点。以石羊河流域为研究区,借助In VEST模型,对流域2005、2010和2015年的水源涵养、土壤保持、水质净化、碳储存和生物多样性五项服务进行精准测度,分析服务的时空格局及演变特征,并利用相关系数法逐像元定量计算5种服务之间的权衡与协同关系,从不同尺度分析权衡与协同关系的空间格局特征。结果表明:(1)各项服务具有空间异质性:水源涵养、土壤保持、碳储存、生物多样性呈"西南高-东北低"的空间格局,且水质净化、碳储存服务的高值区沿河流分布。(2) 10年期间,水源涵养、水质净化、碳储存、生物多样性服务呈现"整体增加-局部减少"的变化趋势,而土壤保持呈"整体减少-局部增加"的变化特征。(3)多种服务之间权衡与协同关系具有区域依赖特征:水源涵养与土壤保持、水源涵养与水质净化、水质净化与碳储存、水质净化与生物多样性、土壤保持与碳储存、土壤保持与生物多样性以权衡关系为主;水源涵养与碳储存、水源涵养与生物多样性、土壤保持与水质净化、碳储存与生物多样性以协同关系为主。定量可视化评估生态系统服务及权衡关系,为制定区域发展与生态保护双赢政策提供依据,同时也为其他流域的相关研究提供可靠参考。     

Effects of budget constraints on conservation network design for biodiversity and ecosystem services

Limited budgets and budget cuts hamper the development of effective biodiversity conservation networks. Optimizing the spatial configuration of conservation networks given such budget constraints remains challenging. Systematic conservation planning addresses this challenge. Systematic conservation planning can integrate both biodiversity and ecosystem services as conservation targets, and hence address the challenge to operationalize ecosystem services as an anthropocentric argument for conservation. We create two conservation scenarios to expand the current conservation network in the Dutch province of Limburg. One scenario focuses on biodiversity only and the other integrates biodiversity and ecosystem services. We varied conservation budgets in these scenarios and used the software Marxan to assess differences in the resulting network configurations. In addition, we tested the network’s cost-effectiveness by allocating a conservation budget either in one or in multiple steps. We included twenty-nine biodiversity surrogates and five ecosystem services. The inclusion of ecosystem services to expand Limburg’s conservation network only moderately changed prioritized areas, compared to only conserving biodiversity. Network expansion in a single time-step is more efficient in terms of compactness and cost-effectiveness than implementing it in multiple time-steps. Therefore, to cost-effectively plan conservation networks, the full budget should ideally be available before the plans are implemented. We show that including ecosystem services to cost-effectively expand conservation networks can simultaneously encourage biodiversity conservation and stimulate the protection of conservation-compatible ecosystem services.     

Changing conservation strategies in Europe: a framework integrating ecosystem services and dynamics

Protecting species and their habitats through the designation and management of protected areas is central to present biodiversity conservation efforts in Europe. Recent awareness of the importance of ecosystem dynamics in changing environments and of human needs for the sustainable provision of ecosystem services expose potential weaknesses in current European conservation management strategies and policy. Here we examine these issues in the light of information gained from reviews, workshops, interviews and discussions undertaken within the RUBICODE project. We present a new conceptual framework that joins conventional biodiversity conservation with new requirements. The framework links cultural and aesthetic values applied in a static environment to the demands of dynamic ecosystems and societal needs within social–ecological systems in a changing Europe. We employ this framework to propose innovative ways in which ecosystem service provision may be used to add value to traditional conservation approaches by supporting and complementing present European biodiversity conservation strategy and policy while remaining within the guidelines of the Convention on Biological Diversity.     

Questioning the ecosystem services argument for biodiversity conservation

One of the central justifications for the conservation of biodiversity is the notion that species diversity is essential for the maintenance of ecosystem services. However, an important observation overlooked by proponents of this argument is that most ecosystem services are provided not by whole ecosystems, but by any group of species that fulfils certain basic functional criteria. Distinguishing between services that are resilient in response to species decline, and those that are not, is a far less challenging task than identifying the precise influence on ecosystem functioning of rare species. Conservationists have been almost unanimous in their failure to acknowledge this distinction between resilient and sensitive ecosystem services. Not only does this threaten the credibility of conservation science, but also increases the likelihood that natural area management becomes hijacked by the demand that ecosystem service provision be made the dominant management criteria.     

Land management implications for ecosystem services in a South African rangeland

In South Africa, restoration and sustainable management of historically overgrazed and degraded rangelands are promoted to increase biodiversity and ecosystem service provision. This study evaluates different land management scenarios in terms of ecosystem services in a South African rangeland, the Baviaanskloof catchment. As measured data were limited, we used simple models to quantify and map the effect of the different combination of agricultural, nature conservation and restoration practices on multiple ecosystem services. The land management scenarios were evaluated against management targets set for individual ecosystem services. Results highlight how the provision of ecosystem services is related to land management as unmanaged, pristine ecosystems provide a different mix of ecosystem services than ecosystems recently restored or managed as grazing lands. Results also indicate that historically overgrazed lands provide no forage, may retain 40% less sediment and have 38% lower biodiversity, while providing 60% more fuel wood and supplying two and half times more water (i.e. retaining less water), than pristine or restored lands. We conclude that a combination of light grazing, low input agriculture, nature conservation and restoration is the best for the sufficient provision of multiple ecosystem services. Applying such mixed management would improve biodiversity, ecotourism and maintain forage production and regulating services on farmers’ land. This management option also fits into and further optimizes local decision-makers’ vision regarding the future management of the area.     

Ecosystem Services and Opportunity Costs Shift Spatial Priorities for Conserving Forest Biodiversity

Inclusion of spatially explicit information on ecosystem services in conservation planning is a fairly new practice. This study analyses how the incorporation of ecosystem services as conservation features can affect conservation of forest biodiversity and how different opportunity cost constraints can change spatial priorities for conservation. We created spatially explicit cost-effective conservation scenarios for 59 forest biodiversity features and five ecosystem services in the county of Telemark (Norway) with the help of the heuristic optimisation planning software, Marxan with Zones. We combined a mix of conservation instruments where forestry is either completely (non-use zone) or partially restricted (partial use zone). Opportunity costs were measured in terms of foregone timber harvest, an important provisioning service in Telemark. Including a number of ecosystem services shifted priority conservation sites compared to a case where only biodiversity was considered, and increased the area of both the partial (+36.2%) and the non-use zone (+3.2%). Furthermore, opportunity costs increased (+6.6%), which suggests that ecosystem services may not be a side-benefit of biodiversity conservation in this area. Opportunity cost levels were systematically changed to analyse their effect on spatial conservation priorities. Conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services trades off against timber harvest. Currently designated nature reserves and landscape protection areas achieve a very low proportion (9.1%) of the conservation targets we set in our scenario, which illustrates the high importance given to timber production at present. A trade-off curve indicated that large marginal increases in conservation target achievement are possible when the budget for conservation is increased. Forty percent of the maximum hypothetical opportunity costs would yield an average conservation target achievement of 79%.     

Characterizing and assessing key ecosystem services in a representative forest ecosystem in Turkey

Characterizing and managing multiple ecosystem services is vital for decision-making in sustainable forest management. This study focuses on characterizing and assessing the biophysical and spatial distribution of ecosystem services such as wood production, biodiversity and carbon sequestration in the Kumluca state forest (Turkey). The key ecosystem services were thematically characterized, economically valued, spatially mapped and mobilized as a knowledge-base for ecosystem based planning. Average wood production is higher (135.06 m³/ha) than the overall average (72 m³/ha) in Turkey. The average carbon stock is 119 tC/ha, indicating a medium capacity. The habitat potential for biodiversity is low to medium, based on the 15 target species. Total economic value of the key ecosystem services is estimated at US$624,748,191 (US$6132/ha). The composition and spatial distribution of vegetation determines the extent and potential of ecosystem services. This study emphasizes that comprehensive quantification as well as valuation of ecosystem services can facilitate underpinnings for efficient communication and good decision making in sustainable resource management for multiple values. The orchestrated vision of conservation and sustainable use of ecosystem services based on a comprehensive characterization, modeling, valuing and participatory approach is a strategy for sustainable forest management.     

Pathways to bridge the biophysical realism gap in ecosystem services mapping approaches

The mapping of ecosystem service supply has become quite common in ecosystem service assessment practice for terrestrial ecosystems, but land cover remains the most common indicator for ecosystems ability to deliver ecosystem services. For marine ecosystems, practice is even less advanced, with a clear deficit in spatially-explicit assessments of ecosystem service supply. This situation, which generates considerable uncertainty in the assessment of ecosystems’ ability to support current and future human well-being, contrasts with increasing understanding of the role of terrestrial and marine biodiversity for ecosystem functioning and thereby for ecosystem services. This paper provides a synthesis of available approaches, models and tools, and data sources, that are able to better link ecosystem service mapping to current understanding of the role of ecosystem service providing organisms and land/seascape structure in ecosystem functioning. Based on a review of literature, models and associated geo-referenced metrics are classified according to the way in which land or marine use, ecological processes and especially biodiversity effects are represented. We distinguish five types of models: proxy-based, phenomenological, niche-based, trait-based and full-process. Examples from each model type are presented and data requirements considered. Our synthesis demonstrates that the current understanding of the role of biota in ecosystem services can effectively be incorporated into mapping approaches and opens avenues for further model development using hybrid approaches tailored to available resources. We end by discussing ways to resolve sources of uncertainty associated with model representation of biotic processes and with data availability.     

Can biodiversity monitoring schemes provide indicators for ecosystem services?

Recently, the science and policy agenda on biodiversity moved to include ecosystem services assessments and it is recognised that for determining the effectiveness and progress of policy frameworks monitoring is crucial.Within European monitoring schemes, data is collected following different sampling protocols for a range of biodiversity or context related aspects; from EU-wide general land cover mapping to red list species within Annex I habitats. In this paper, we analysed field instructions of seven monitoring schemes on the extent to which they can provide data on the provision of ecosystem services and what additional information may be needed for future monitoring of ecosystem services.We compared seven monitoring schemes (i.e. CORINE Land Cover, Land Use Cover Area Survey (LUCAS), European Biodiversity Observation Network (EBONE), biodiversity monitoring on organic and low-input farming systems (BioBio), National Inventory of the Landscape of Sweden (NILS) and Pan-European Common Birds Monitoring (PECBM) and UK Butterfly monitoring (UK-BM)) by scoring the quality of recorded parameters and the adequacy of sampling protocols for ecosystem service monitoring.All the examined schemes were able to provide some parameters on ecosystem services, but the quality of the parameters on average did not exceed the level of qualitative data. Additionally, the divergence between the sampling designs of the schemes and the spatial characteristics of ecosystem services reduced the potential monitoring value of all schemes. Monitoring schemes including a range of sampling methods, scales and included the recording of data on habitats, such as EBONE, BioBio and NILS, provided the best data on the provision of ecosystem services.We conclude that improvement of the monitoring of ecosystem services is hindered by several knowledge gaps: (1) a robust definition and conceptual framework of ecosystem services; (2) the linkage between biodiversity and ecosystem services; and (3) the interpretation of monitoring data.In addition to ecosystem service monitoring, biodiversity monitoring unremittingly remains very important, at least to identify trade-offs between the management for services and the resulting biodiversity status.     

Response diversity determines the resilience of ecosystems to environmental change

A growing body of evidence highlights the importance of biodiversity for ecosystem stability and the maintenance of optimal ecosystem functionality. Conservation measures are thus essential to safeguard the ecosystem services that biodiversity provides and human society needs. Current anthropogenic threats may lead to detrimental (and perhaps irreversible) ecosystem degradation, providing strong motivation to evaluate the response of ecological communities to various anthropogenic pressures. In particular, ecosystem functions that sustain key ecosystem services should be identified and prioritized for conservation action. Traditional diversity measures (e.g. ‘species richness’) may not adequately capture the aspects of biodiversity most relevant to ecosystem stability and functionality, but several new concepts may be more appropriate. These include ‘response diversity’, describing the variation of responses to environmental change among species of a particular community. Response diversity may also be a key determinant of ecosystem resilience in the face of anthropogenic pressures and environmental uncertainty. However, current understanding of response diversity is poor, and we see an urgent need to disentangle the conceptual strands that pervade studies of the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Our review clarifies the links between response diversity and the maintenance of ecosystem functionality by focusing on the insurance hypothesis of biodiversity and the concept of functional redundancy. We provide a conceptual model to describe how loss of response diversity may cause ecosystem degradation through decreased ecosystem resilience. We explicitly explain how response diversity contributes to functional compensation and to spatio‐temporal complementarity among species, leading to long‐term maintenance of ecosystem multifunctionality. Recent quantitative studies suggest that traditional diversity measures may often be uncoupled from measures (such as response diversity) that may be more effective proxies for ecosystem stability and resilience. Certain conclusions and recommendations of earlier studies using these traditional measures as indicators of ecosystem resilience thus may be suspect. We believe that functional ecology perspectives incorporating the effects and responses of diversity are essential for development of management strategies to safeguard (and restore) optimal ecosystem functionality (especially multifunctionality). Our review highlights these issues and we envision our work generating debate around the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functionality, and leading to improved conservation priorities and biodiversity management practices that maximize ecosystem resilience in the face of uncertain environmental change.     

白洋淀流域生态系统服务评估及其调控

政策制定者在制定土地利用相关政策时需要权衡各方面的利益关系,协调资源保护和经济发展之间的关系.由于缺乏有效的评价与权衡办法,目前对这方面研究还较少.采用InVEST模型,评价了白洋淀流域7种服务功能指标,分析了其空间分布特征.通过情景(政策情景与保护情景)分析,较好的反映了农业直接经济收入与服务功能之间的关系.结果表明:生物多样性、水源涵养、土壤保持和固碳重要区域主要分布在流域西部、北部和流域中部山区;水质保护和授粉重要区域主要分布于流域东部、南部和中部平原区.政策情景下,产水量第二,农业产出有所下降,固碳能力较保护模式差,N/P输出最少.保护情景下产水量最大,农田产出价值不变,氮磷保持与政策情景差不多,但固碳效果最好.通过权衡不同情景下服务功能得失,筛选既不损害流域居民实际经济收入,又能使得水文服务功能得到提高的管理模式.研究表明InVEST模型可以很好的用于对自然资本评估和空间化特征分析,通过建立不同情景,评价结果可以用于权衡不同管理策略下服务功能得失,是一种评价和预测自然资本变化的有效方法,对政策制定和策略筛选具有重要的指导意义.     

The ecosystem functioning dimension in conservation: insights from remote sensing

An important goal of conservation biology is the maintenance of ecosystem processes. Incorporating quantitative measurements of ecosystem functions into conservation practice is important given that it provides not only proxies for biodiversity patterns, but also new tools and criteria for management. In the satellite era, the translation of spectral information into ecosystem functional variables expands and complements the more traditional use of satellite imagery in conservation biology. Remote sensing scientists have generated accurate techniques to quantify ecosystem processes and properties of key importance for conservation planning such as primary production, ecosystem carbon gains, surface temperature, albedo, evapotranspiration, and precipitation use efficiency; however, these techniques are still unfamiliar to conservation biologists. In this article, we identify specific fields where a remotely-sensed characterization of ecosystem functioning may aid conservation science and practice. Such fields include the management and monitoring of species and populations of conservation concern; the assessment of ecosystem representativeness and singularity; the use of protected areas as reference sites to assess global change effects; the implementation of monitoring and warning systems to guide adaptive management; the direct evaluation of supporting ecosystem services; and the planning and monitoring of ecological restorations. The approaches presented here illustrate feasible ways to incorporate the ecosystem functioning dimension into conservation through the use of satellite-derived information.