Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A user-inspired framework and tool for restoring multifunctional landscapes: putting into practice stakeholder and scientific knowledge of landscape services

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

Abstract

Context

Planning for multifunctional landscapes is a way to restore ecological processes that benefit human well-being (ecosystem services—ES). By accounting for the effects of the spatial arrangement of restored areas, planners can enhance the positive outcomes of restoration activities. However, while there are many models for individual ES provision, the direct influence of landscape structure on multiple ES has not been integrated into practical tools that planners can use.

Objectives

We aimed to develop a modelling framework to support a landscape-scale evaluation of multiple services, by identifying bundles of ES that respond similarly to landscape structure and providing a tool to support the prioritization of restoration efforts.

Methods

Based on current literature for examples and scientific support, our framework first considers stakeholders’ interests, and then states the main ES features that planners need to identify to understand which landscape structure to pursue with restoration actions. We also developed a tool that uses simple, readily available data to prioritize locations for restoration across landscapes.

Results

With our framework, it becomes possible to integrate ES preferences and context-dependent management options that are understandable to a broad audience. We identified ten ES bundles with a unique response to landscape structure. We used eight of them in our tool, simplifying planner's management decisions for multiple benefits.

Conclusion

Our framework and tool have a great potential to support landscape planning and management decisions that aim to increase landscape multifunctionality and will encourage actions towards landscape sustainability across both public and private lands.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Biggs R, Schlüter M, Biggs D, Bohensky EL, BurnSilver S, Cundill G, Dakos V, Daw TM, Evans LS, Kotschy K, Leitch AM, Meek C, Quinlan A, Raudsepp-Hearne C, Robards MD, Schoon, ML, Schultz L, West PC (2012) Toward principles for enhancing the resilience of ecosystem services. Annu Rev Environ Resour 37:421–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosi BJ, Armsworth PR, Daily GC (2008) Optimal design of agricultural landscapes for pollination services. Conserv Lett 1:27–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkhard B, Kandziora M, Hou Y, Müller F (2014) Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands - concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification. Landsc Online 34:1–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CBD, Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Document UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/2, (October 2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12383

  • Chan KMA, Anderson E, Chapman M, Jespersen K, Olmsted P (2017) Payments for ecosystem services: rife with problems and potential - For transformation towards sustainability. Ecol Econ 140:110–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cimon-Morin J, Darveau M, Poulin M (2013) Fostering synergies between ecosystem services and biodiversity in conservation planning: a review. Biol Conserv 166:144–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cimon-Morin J, Darveau M, Poulin M (2014) Towards systematic conservation planning adapted to the local flow of ecosystem services. Glob Ecol Conserv 2:11–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowling RM, Egoh B, Knight AT, O'Farrell PJ, Reyers B, Rouget M, Roux DJ, Welz A, Wilhelm-Rechman A (2008) An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105:9483–9488

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duarte GT, Santos PM, Cornellissen TG, Ribeiro MC, Paglia AP (2018) The effects of landscape patterns on ecosystem services: meta-analyses of landscape services. Landsc Ecol 33:1247–1257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher B, Turner RK, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68:643–653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garbach K, Milder JC, DeClerck FAJ, Montenegro de Wit M, Driscoll L, Gemmill-Herren B (2016) Examining multi-functionality for crop yield and ecosystem services in five systems of agroecological intensification. Int J Agric Sustain 5903:1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • GRASS Development Team (2017) Geographic Resources Analysis Support System (GRASS) Software, Version 7.2. Open Source Geospatial Foundation. https://grass.osgeo.org

  • Haines-Young R, Potschin M (2013) Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-419964-4.00001-9

  • Howe C, Suich H, Vira B, Mace GM (2014) Creating win-wins from trade-offs? Ecosystem services for human well-being: a meta-analysis of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies in the real world. Glob Environ Change 28:263–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICMBio, Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (2015) Floresta Nacional de Silvânia, Goiás: resumo executivo. Ministério do Meio Ambiente, Brasil, Brasília

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeler BL, Chaplin-Kramer R, Guerry AD, Addison PFE, Bettigole C, Burke IC, Gentry B, Chambliss L, Young C, Travis AJ, Darimont CT, Gordon DR, Hellmann J, Kareiva P, Monfort S, Olander L, Profeta T, Possingham HP, Slotterback C, Sterling E, Ticktin T, Vira B (2017) Society is ready for a new kind of science - is academia? Bioscience 67:591–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeler BL, Polasky S, Brauman KA, Johnson KA, Finlay JC, O'Neill A, Kovacs K, Dalzell B (2012) Linking water quality and well-being for improved assessment and valuation of ecosystem services. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:18619–18624

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Knight AT, Cowling RM, Rouget M, Balmford A, Lombard AT, Campbell BM (2008) Knowing but not doing: selecting priority conservation areas and the research-implementation gap. Conserv Biol 22:610–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurance WF, Laurance SG, Ferreira LV, Rankin-de Merona JM, Gascon C, Lovejoy TE (1997) Biomass collapse in Amazonian forest fragments. Science 80-(278):1117–1118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao C, Qiu J, Chen B, Chen D, Fu B, Georgescu M, He C, Jenerette GD, Li X, Li X, Li X, Qiuying B, Shi P, Wu J (2020) Advancing landscape sustainability science: theoretical foundation and synergies with innovations in methodology, design, and application. Landsc Ecol 35:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MEA (2005) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Melito M, Metzger JP, Oliveira AA (2018) Landscape-level effects on aboveground biomass of tropical forests: a conceptual framework. Glob Change Biol 24:597–607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metzger JP, Brancalion PHS (2016) Landscape ecology and restoration processes. In: Palmer MA, Zedler JB, Washington DAF (eds) Foundations of restoration ecology, 2nd edn. Island Press, Washington, DC, p 584

    Google Scholar 

  • Metzger JP, Esler K, Krug C, Arias M, Tambosi L, Crouzeilles R, Acosta AL, Brancalion PHS, D'Albertas F, Duarte GT, Garcia LC, Grytnes JA, Hagen D, Jardim AVF, Kamiyama C, Latawiec AE, Rodrigues RR, Ruggiero PGC, Sparovek G, Strassburg B, Saraiva AM, Joly C (2017) Best practice for the use of scenarios for restoration planning. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 29:14–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Numata I, Cochrane MA, Souza CM Jr, Sales MH (2011) Carbon emissions from deforestation and forest fragmentation in the Brazilian Amazon. Environ Res Lett 6:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P, Luque S, Nassauer J, Verburg PH, Wu JG (2018) How can landscape ecology contribute to sustainability science? Landsc Ecol 33:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner SM, Mckenzie E, Ricketts TH (2016) Policy impacts of ecosystem services knowledge. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:1760–1765

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pretty J (2008) Agricultural sustainability: concepts, principles and evidence. Philos Trans R Soc B 363:447–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2017) A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed MS (2008) Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol Conserv 141:2417–2431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed MS, Graves A, Dandy N, Posthumus H, Hubacek K, Morris J, Prell C, Quinn CH, Stringer LC (2009) Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J Environ Manag 90:1933–1949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rey Benayas JMR, Newton AC, Diaz A, Bullock JM (2009) Enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: a meta-analysis. Science 325:1121–1124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockström J, Williams J, Daily G, Noble A, Matthews N, Gordon L (2016) Sustainable intensification of agriculture for human prosperity and global sustainability. Ambio 46:4–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syrbe RU, Walz U (2012) Spatial indicators for the assessment of ecosystem services: providing, benefiting and connecting areas and landscape metrics. Ecol Indic 21:80–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabarelli M, Lopes AV, Peres CA (2008) Edge-effects drive tropical forest fragments towards an early-successional system. Biotropica 40:657–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Termorshuizen JW, Opdam P (2009) Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landsc Ecol 24:1037–1052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trabucchi M, Ntshotsho P, O’Farrell P, Comín FA (2012) Ecosystem service trends in basin-scale restoration initiatives: a review. J Environ Manag 111:18–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villamagna AM, Angermeier PL, Bennett EM (2013) Capacity, pressure, demand, and flow: a conceptual framework for analyzing ecosystem service provision and delivery. Ecol Complex 15:114–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wischmeier WH, Smith DD (1978) Predicting rainfall erosion losses - A guide to conservation planning. USDA, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu J (2013) Landscape sustainability science: ecosystem services and human well-being in changing landscapes. Landsc Ecol 28:999–1023

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all LEC—UFMG, LEEC – UNESP and CHANS Lab—UBC members for their various forms of contribution, especially Rafaela Silva and Julia Assis for their support during this work. We thank Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) and National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) for the scholarships of G.T. Duarte. M.C. Ribeiro is funded by CNPq (Grant 312045/2013-1 and 312292/2016-3), PROCAD/CAPES (project # 88881.068425/2014-01) and The São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP—Grant 2013/50421-2). We also thank two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - UFMG, Av. Antonio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, 31270-90, Brazil

    Gabriela Teixeira Duarte & Adriano Pereira Paglia

  2. Institute for Resources, Environment, and Sustainability, University of British Columbia – UBC, 429-2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada

    Matthew Mitchell, Edward J. Gregr & Kai M. A. Chan

  3. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Manejo de Recursos Naturais, Universidade Federal do Acre – UFAC, Rodovia BR 364, Km 04 - Distrito Industrial, Rio Branco, Acre, 69920-900, Brazil

    Felipe Martello

  4. Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Estadual Paulista - UNESP, Av. 24A, 1515, Rio Claro, São Paulo, 13506-900, Brazil

    Milton Cezar Ribeiro

Authors
  1. Gabriela Teixeira Duarte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew Mitchell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Felipe Martello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Edward J. Gregr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Adriano Pereira Paglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kai M. A. Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Milton Cezar Ribeiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriela Teixeira Duarte.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 22 kb)

Supplementary file2 (PDF 1651 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Duarte, G.T., Mitchell, M., Martello, F. et al. A user-inspired framework and tool for restoring multifunctional landscapes: putting into practice stakeholder and scientific knowledge of landscape services. Landscape Ecol 35, 2535–2548 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01093-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01093-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation