Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Balancing multiple ecosystem services in conservation priority setting

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Conservation priority setting is the critical process of allocating the limited resources available for nature conservation and; safeguarding the sustainability of biodiversity and ecosystem services (ESs). It is difficult, however, to achieve the goal of simultaneously conserving both biodiversity and ESs, not only because of the potential trade-offs between biodiversity and ESs, but also because of the trade-offs between multiple ESs. Thus far, research has focused on the trade-offs between ESs caused by spatial competition resulting from land use change or by the destruction of biophysical interaction between multiple ESs. Few studies, however, have paid attention to the trade-offs induced during the decision-making process. Approaches for measuring the trade-offs between multiple ESs in decision-making processes would thus prove to be extremely helpful. In this paper, we map the water supply, soil conservation, and net primary production as ESs in the Jiangxi province of China in the year 2010, and use risk, tradeoff, and spatial efficiency indices to measure the conservation efficiency of seven established ordered weighted averaging (OWA) scenarios under two conservation levels (conserving the top ESs at 10 or 20 % of the area of the Jiangxi province). The main results are as follows: (1) conserving one ES may result in inefficient conservation of other ESs; and (2) conserving multiple ESs and the use of GIS-based OWA methods can balance conflicts among multiple ESs and can significantly enhance the spatial efficiency of the identified priority areas. Decision-makers may combine the spatial efficiency, risk and tradeoff levels of each OWA scenario with other specific conservation demands of their own specific cases in order to achieve the optimal identification of priority areas for the simultaneous conservation of multiple ESs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amiri MJ, Mahiny AS, Hosseini SM, Jalali SG, Ezadkhasty Z, Karami S (2013) OWA analysis for ecological capability assessment in watersheds. Int J Environ Res 7(1):241–254

    Google Scholar 

  • Balvanera P, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, Ricketts TH, Bailey SA, Kark S, Kremen C, Pereira H (2001) Conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services. Science 291:2047

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett EM, Peterson GD, Gordon LJ (2009) Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol Lett 12:1394–1404

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks TM, Mittermeier RA, da Fonseca GA, Gerlach J, Hoffmann M, Lamoreux JF, Mittermeier CG, Pilgrim JD, Rodrigues AS (2006) Global biodiversity conservation priorities. Science 313(5783):58–61

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Budyko MI (1974) Climate and life. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkhard B, Kroll F, Nedkov S, Müller F (2012) Mapping supply, demand and budgets of ecosystem services. Ecol Indic 21:17–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butchart SHM, Walpole M, Collen B, van Strien A, Scharlemann JPW, Almond REA, Baillie JEM, Bomhard B, Brown C, Bruno J, Carpenter KE, Carr GM, Chanson J, Chenery AM, Csirke J, Davidson NC, Dentener F, Foster M, Galli A, Galloway JN, Genovesi P, Gregory RD, Hockings M, Kapos V, Lamarque JF, Leverington F, Loh J, McGeoch MA, McRae L, Minasyan A, Morcillo MH, Oldfield TEE, Pauly D, Quader S, Revenga C, Sauer JR, Skolnik B, Spear D, Stanwell-Smith D, Stuart SN, Symes A, Tierney M, Tyrrell TD, Vié JC, Watson R (2010) Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328(5982):1164–1168

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butler JR, Wong GY, Metcalfe DJ, Honzák M, Pert PL, van Rao N, Griekend ME, Lawson T, Bruce C, Kroon FJ, Brodie JE (2011) An analysis of trade-offs between multiple ecosystem services and stakeholders linked to land use and water quality management in the Great Barrier Reef. Agric, Ecosyst Environ, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Carreño L, Frank FC, Viglizzo EF (2012) Tradeoffs between economic and ecosystem services in Argentina during 50 years of land-use change. Agric Ecosyst Environ 154:68–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan KM, Hoshizaki L, Klinkenberg B (2011) Ecosystem services in conservation planning: targeted benefits vs. co-benefits or costs? PLoS ONE 6(9):e24378

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crossman ND, Burkhard B, Nedkov S, Willemen L, Petz K, Palomo I, Drakou EG, Martín-Lopez B, McPhearson T, Boyanovac K, Alkemade R, Egoh B, Dunbar MB, Maes J (2013) A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 4:4–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystem services, 1st edn. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • DeFiniens I (2004) eCognition. Software. http://www.definiensimaging.com. Accessed 17 Dec 2013

  • Ding QF, Wang JB, Qi SH, Ye H, Huang M, Xu YT, Ying TY, Tao J (2013) Spatial patterns of vegetation net primary productivity in Jiangxi Province of China in relation to climate factors. Chin J Ecol 32(3):726–732 (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Egoh B, Rouget M, Reyers B, Knight AT, Cowling RM, van Jaarsveld AS, Welz A (2007) Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: a review. Ecol Econ 63(4):714–721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egoh B, Drakou EG, Dunbar MB, Maes J, Willemen L (2012) Indicators for mapping ecosystem services: a review. Report EUR, 25456

  • Feng X, Fu B, Yang X, Lü Y (2010) Remote sensing of ecosystem services: an opportunity for spatially explicit assessment. Chin Geogr Sci 20(6):522–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer G, Nachtergaele F, Prieler S, van Velthuizen HT, Verelst L, Wiberg D (2008) Global agro-ecological zones assessment for agriculture (GAEZ 2008). IIASA, FAO, Laxenburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher B, Bradbury RB, Andrews JE, Ausden M, Bentham-Green S, White SM, Gill JA (2011) Impacts of species-led conservation on ecosystem services of wetlands: understanding co-benefits and trade offs. Biodivers Conserv 20(11):2461–2481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman RL, Tallis H (2009) A critical analysis of ecosystem services as a tool in conservation projects. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1162(1):63–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gu J, Li X, Huang C, Zhang X, Jin X (2013) Simulating net primary productivity of Chinese terrestrial vegetation during 2000–2010. J Lanzhou Univ (Nat Sci) 49(2):203–213 (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Haase D, Schwarz N, Strohbach M, Kroll F, Seppelt R (2012) Synergies, trade-offs, and losses of ecosystem services in urban regions: an integrated multiscale framework applied to the Leipzig-Halle region Germany. Ecol Soc 17(3):22

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamon WR (1963) Computation of direct runoff amounts from storm rainfall. Int Assoc Sci Hydrol Pub 63:52–62

    Google Scholar 

  • He Y, Che T, Wang Y (2012) Ecological footprint and endogenous economic growth in the Poyang Lake area in China based on empirical analysis of panel data model. J Resour Ecol 3(4):367–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussain AM, Tschirhart J (2013) Economic/ecological tradeoffs among ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation. Ecol Econ 93:116–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Izquierdo AE, Clark ML (2012) Spatial analysis of conservation priorities based on ecosystem services in the Atlantic forest region of misiones, Argentina. Forests 3(3):764–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jax K, Barton DN, Chan K, de Groot R, Doyle U, Eser U, Görg C, Gómez-Baggethun E, Griewald Y, Haber W, Haines-Young R, Heink U, Jahn T, Joosten H, Kerschbaumer L, Korn H, Luck GW, Matzdorf B, Muraca B, Neßhöver C, Norton B, Ott K, Potschin M, Rauschmayer F, von Haaren C, Wichmann S (2013) Ecosystem services and ethics. Ecol Econ 93:260–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang H, Eastman JR (2000) Application of fuzzy measures in multi-criteria evaluation in GIS. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 14:173–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lautenbach S, Volk M, Gruber B, Dormann CF, Strauch M, Seppelt R (2010) Quantifying ecosystem service trade-offs. In: International Environmental Modelling and Software Society (iEMSs). 2010 International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software Modelling for Environment’s Sake. Ottawa, Canada

  • Li X, Zhuge H, Mengdi L (2013) Gap analysis and conservation network for freshwater wetlands in Central Yangtze Ecoregion. Sci World J. doi:10.1155/2013/918718

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Zhang H, Yang X, Wang Y, Wang X (2013) Identifying priority areas for the conservation of ecosystem services using GIS-based multicriteria evaluation. Pol J Ecol 61(1):415–430

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu J, Sun G, McNulty SG, Amatya DM (2005) A comparison of six potential evapotranspiration methods for regional use in the southeastern United States1. JAWRA J Am Water Resour Assoc 41(3):621–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu J, Chen X, Li H, Liu H, Xiao J, Yin J (2011) Soil erosion changes based on GIS/RS and USLE in Poyang Lake basin. Trans CSAE 27(2):337–344 (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu N, Sun G, Feng X, Fu B (2013) Water supply responses to climate change and variability across the North-South Transect of Eastern China (NSTEC). J Hydrol 481:96–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luck GW, Chan KM, Klien CJ (2012) Identifying spatial priorities for protecting ecosystem services. F1000 Res 1:17

    Google Scholar 

  • MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Mace GM, Norris K, Fitter AH (2012) Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. Trends Ecol Evol 27(1):19–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maes J, Paracchini ML, Zulian G, Dunbar MB, Alkemade R (2012) Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem service supply, biodiversity, and habitat conservation status in Europe. Biol Conserv 155:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski J, Chapman T, Flegel C, Walters D, Shrubsole D, Healy MA (2003) GIS-multicriteria evaluation with ordered weighted averaging (OWA): case study of developing watershed management strategies. Environ Plan A 35(10):1769–1784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski J, Rinner C (2005) Exploring multicriteria decision strategies in GIS with linguistic quantifiers: a case study of residential quality evaluation. J Geogr Syst 7(2):249–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margules CR, Pressey RL (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405(6783):243–253

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Harms MJ, Balvanera P (2012) Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review. Int J Biodivers Sci, Ecosyst Serv Manag 8(1–2):17–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A Meller L, Leppänen J, Pouzols MF, Arponen A, Kujala H (2013) Spatial conservation planning framework and software ZONATION Version 3.1 User manual. Biodiversity Conservation Informatics Group Department of Biosciences University of Helsinki, Finland, p 288

  • Nelson E, Mendoza G, Regetz J, Polasky S, Tallis H, Cameron D, Chan KM, Daily GC, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Lonsdorf E, Naidoo R, Ricketts TH, Shaw M (2009) Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front Ecol Environ 7(1):4–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paviolo A, di Blanco YE, de Angelo CD, di Bitetti MS (2009) Protection affects the abundance and activity patterns of pumas in the Atlantic Forest. J Mammal 90:926–934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pimm SL, Russell GJ, Gittleman JL, Brooks TM (1995) The future of biodiversity. Science 269(5222):347–350

  • Pimm SL, Jenkins CN, Abell R, Brooks TM, Gittleman JL, Joppa LN, Raven PH, Robert CM, Sexton JO (2014) The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science 344(6187):1246752

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Polasky S, Johnson K, Keeler B, Kovacs K, Nelson E, Pennington D, Plantinga AJ, Withey J (2012) Are investments to promote biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services aligned? Oxf Rev Econ Policy 28(1):139–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potter CS, Randerson JT, Field CB, Matson PA, Vitousek PM, Mooney HS, Klosster SA (1993) Terrestrial ecosystem production: a process model based on global satellite and surface data. Glob Biogeochem Cy 7:811–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricardo DT, Ershun Z, Yang ZH, Arisleydis P (2013) A local spatial decision support system for developing countries based on MCA, fuzzy sets and OWA—case study of a municipality in Cuba. Geo-spatial Inf Sci 16(2):120–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues ASL (2006) Are global conservation efforts successful? Science 313(5790):1051–1052

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpley AN, Williams JR (1990). EPIC-erosion/productivity impact calculator: 1. Model documentation. Technical Bulletin-United States Department of Agriculture, (1768 Pt 1)

  • Singh SP (2002) Balancing the approaches of environmental conservation by considering ecosystem services as well as biodiversity. Curr Sci 82:1331–1335

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson TP, van Klinken RD, Metternicht G (2010) Comparison of alternative strategies for invasive species distribution modeling. Ecol Model 221(19):2261–2269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez JP, Beard TD, Bennett EM, Cumming GS, Cork SJ, Agard J, Dobson AP, Peterson GD (2006) Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecol Soc 11(1):28

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallis H, Goldman R, Uhl M, Brosi B (2009) Integrating conservation and development in the field: implementing ecosystem service projects. Front Ecol Environ 7(1):12–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner WR, Brandon K, Brooks TM, Costanza R, Da Fonseca GA, Portela R (2007) Global conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Bioscience 57(10):868–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang J, Lü Y, Zeng Y, Zhao Z, Zhang L, Fu B (2014) Spatial heterogeneous response of land use and landscape functions to ecological restoration: the case of the Chinese loess hilly region. Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-014-3175-z

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bioscience 48(8):607–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcove DS (2008) No way home: the decline of the world’s great animal migrations. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson KA, Cabeza M, Klein CJ (2009) Fundamental concepts of spatial conservation prioritization. Spatial Conservation Prioritisation: Quantitative Methods and Computational Tools. Oxford University Press, New York

  • Wischmeier WH, Smith DD (1965) Predicting rainfall-erosion losses from cropland east of the rocky mountains-guide for selection of practices for soil and water conservation. US Department of Agriculture, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Wischmeier WH, Smith DD (1978) Predicting rainfall erosion losses: a guide to conservation planning. Agriculture handbook, vol 537. US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Washington, pp 5–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multi-criteria decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet 18(1):183–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu J, Zheng B, Liu Y, Liu C (2011) Evaluation of soil loss and transportation load of adsorption N and P in Poyang Lake watershed. Acta Ecologica Sinica 31(14):3980–3989 (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L, Dawes WR, Walker GR (2001) Response of mean annual evapotranspiration to vegetation changes at catchment scale. Water Resour Res 37(3):701–708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Q, Liu X (2006) Digital topography analysis. Science Press, Beijing, pp 79–132 (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by the National Natural Sciences Foundation of China (No. 41230745) and the National Environmental Conservation Research Program (201209027-4).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bojie Fu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, L., Fu, B., Lü, Y. et al. Balancing multiple ecosystem services in conservation priority setting. Landscape Ecol 30, 535–546 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0106-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0106-z

Keywords

Navigation