Landscape Ecology

, Volume 30, Issue 7, pp 1145–1164 | Cite as

The significance of geosystem and landscape concepts for the assessment of ecosystem services: exemplified in a case study in Russia

  • Olaf Bastian
  • Karsten Grunewald
  • Alexander V. Khoroshev
Perspective
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Context

Recently, physical geography and landscape ecology have attracted increasing attention, due to the expectation that their theoretical and methodical concepts may improve the assessment of ecosystem services (ES). Examples of promising approaches rooted in various scientific schools, especially of Eastern Europe and Russia.

Objective

The paper briefly describes these approaches, particularly in terms of ES supply. This is deepened by way of a case study in Russia which shows the crucial role of landscape patterns and landscape units in the assessment of ES with respect to the relationship between forestry and runoff.

Methods

For the selection of important geosystem-based aspects we started from the ES approach and reviewed the Eastern European (particularly Russian and Eastern German) literature to identify aspects that might be suitable for incorporation into the ES concept.

Results

Among the geosystem-based geographical and landscape-ecological approaches which have been addressed by scientific schools in Russia and Eastern Europe, landscape genesis, landscape units, landscape hierarchy, the role of spatial scales, ecosystem patterns and relationships and natural potentials belong to the most promising ones. These approaches can improve assessments of ES by strengthening their scientific foundation, and elaborating them in a spatial context which might help to better influence land use policy and decision-making.

Conclusions

Integrated geosystem approaches may provide a number of interesting theoretical and methodological contributions and impulses to the study of ES, especially for the current national TEEB initiatives in many countries. This provides significant perspectives for the application of geosystem-based concepts in ecological planning.

Keywords

Landscape genesis Landscape units River basins Catena Natural potentials Spatial scales Forestry Water runoff 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The cooperation between the authors was supported by the DFG-Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Science Foundation, BA 1214/8-1). We also thank the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) in Germany for the support of academic exchange between Germany and Russia to ecosystem services. We thank Prof. W. Wende, IOER Dresden, and two unknown reviewers for their advice, and Mr. Phil Hill (†)/F. Pahl, Berlin, for polishing the language.

References

  1. Albert C, von Haaren C, Galler C (2012) Ökosystemdienstleistungen. Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung 44:142–148Google Scholar
  2. Antipov AN, Mikhalkovsky VG (2006) Landscape planning: tools and experience in implementation. Russian Academy of Sciences, Siberian Branch, VB Sochava Institute of Geography, Irkutsk. Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Bonn (2005 also in Russian)Google Scholar
  3. Bailey RG (2005) Identifying ecoregion boundaries. Environ Manag 34(Suppl. 1):14–26Google Scholar
  4. Bastian O, Steinhardt U (eds) (2002) Development and perspectives in landscape ecology. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  5. Bastian O, Krönert R, Lipský Z (2006) Landscape diagnosis in different space and time scales—a challenge for landscape planning. Landscape Ecol 21:359–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bastian O, Grunewald K, Syrbe R-U (2012a) Space and time aspects of ecosystem services, using the example of the EU Water Framework Directive. Int J Biodivers Sci, Ecosyst Serv Manag. doi: 10.1080/21513732.2011.631941 Google Scholar
  7. Bastian O, Haase D, Grunewald K (2012b) Ecosystem properties, potentials and services—The EPPS conceptual framework and an urban application example. Ecol Indic 21:7–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bastian O, Syrbe R-U, Rosenberg M, Rahe D, Grunewald K (2013) The five pillar EPPS framework for quantifying, mapping and managing ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 4:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beauchesne P, Ducruc J-P, Gerardin V (1996) Ecological mapping: a framework for delimiting forest management units. Environ Monit Assess 39:173–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennett EM, Peterson GD, Gordon LJ (2009) Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol Lett 12:1394–1404PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Berg LS (1915) The objectives and tasks of geography. In: Proceedings of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society 51:463–475 (in Russian). Also in: Wiens JA, Moss M, Turner MG, Mladenoff DJ (eds.) (2006) Fundamental papers in landscape ecology. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 11–18Google Scholar
  12. Blaschke T (2006) The role of the spatial dimension within the framework of sustainable landscapes and natural capital. Landsc Urb Plan 75:198–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blotevogel HH (1995) Raum. In: Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ed) Handwörterbuch der Raumordnung. Hannover, pp 733–740Google Scholar
  14. Blumenstein O, Schachtzabel H, Barsch H, Bork H-R, Küppers U (2000) Grundlagen der Geoökologie. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bobylev SN, Zakharov VM (2009) Ecosystem services and economy. Institute of Sustainable Development, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  16. Braat LC, de Groot R (2012) The ecosystem services agenda: bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy. Ecosyst Serv 1:4–16Google Scholar
  17. Bradley T, Hammond H (1993) Practical methodology for landscape analysis and zoning. Silva Forest Foundation, Slocan ParkGoogle Scholar
  18. Brouwer R, Brander L, Kuik O, Papyrakis E, Bateman I (2013) A synthesis of approaches to assess and value ecosystem services in the EU in the context of TEEB. TEEB follow-up study for Europe. University of Amsterdam, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  19. Burkhard B, Kroll F, Müller F, Windhorst W (2009) Landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services—a concept for land-cover based assessments. Landsc Online 15:1–22Google Scholar
  20. Burkhard B, de Groot R, Costanza R, Seppelt R, Jørgensen SE, Potschin M (2012) Solutions for sustaining natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecol Indic 21:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chorley RJ, Kennedy BA (1971) Physical geography: a systems approach. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  22. Christian CS (1958) The concept of land units and land systems. Proc Ninth Pac Sci Congr 20:74–81Google Scholar
  23. Christopherson RW (2014) Geosystems: an introduction to physical geography, 9th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  24. Costanza R (2008) Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biol Conserv 141:350–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. de Groot RS, Wilson M, Boumans R (2002) A typology for description, classification and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Environ Econ 41:393–408Google Scholar
  26. de Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7:260–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Drozdov AV (ed) (2000) Landscape planning with elements of engineering biology. KMK, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  28. Dyakonov KN (2007) Landscape studies in Moscow Lomonosov University: development of scientific domains and education. In: Dyakonov KN, Kasimov NS, Khoroshev AV, Kushlin AV (eds) Landscape analysis for sustainable development. Theory and applications of landscape science in Russia. Alex Publishers, Moscow, pp 11–20Google Scholar
  29. Eigenbrod F, Armsworth PR, Anderson BJ, Heinemeyer A, Gillings S, Roy DB, Thomas CD, Gaston KJ (2010) The impact of proxy-based methods on mapping the distribution of ecosystem services. J Appl Ecol 47:377–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Flyvbjerg B (2006) Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qual Inq 12:219–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Grunewald K, Bastian O (eds) (2015) Ecosystem services—concept, methods and case studies. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  33. Grünwald A, Wende W (2015) Integrating the concept of ecosystem services into landscape planning. In: Grunewald K, Bastian O (eds) Ecosystem services—concept, methods and case studies. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 177–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Haase G, Mannsfeld K (2002) Naturraumeinheiten, Landschaftsfunktionen und Leitbilder am Beispiel von Sachsen. Forsch. z. deutschen Landeskunde, vol 250. Deutsche Akademie für Landeskunde, FlensburgGoogle Scholar
  35. Haines-Young RH, Potschin MB (2009) Methodologies for defining and assessing ecosystem services. Final Report. University of NottinghamGoogle Scholar
  36. Hein L, van Koppen K, de Groot RS, van Ierland EC (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 57:209–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Herz K (1973) Beitrag zur Theorie der landschaftsanalytischen Maßstabsbereiche. Petermanns Geogr Mitt 117:91–96Google Scholar
  38. Hills GA (1961) The ecological basis for land-use planning. Research Report 26. Ontario Department of Lands and Forests, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  39. Ingegnoli V (2014) Landscape bionomics. Biological-integrated landscape ecology. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  40. Isachenko AG (1973) Principles of landscape science and physical-geographic regionalization. Melbourne University Press, CarltonGoogle Scholar
  41. Isachenko AG (2003) Ecological geography of Russia. Sankt-Petersburg University Publishing House, Sankt-PetersburgGoogle Scholar
  42. Iverson L, Echeverria C, Nahuelhual L, Luque S (2014) Ecosystem services in changing landscapes: an introduction. Landscape Ecol 29:181–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kasimov NS, Gennadiev AN (2007) Basic concepts of landscape geochemistry and soil geography. In: Dyakonov KN, Kasimov NS, Khoroshev AV, Kushlin AV (eds) Landscape analysis for sustainable development. Theory and applications of landscape science in Russia. Alex Publishers, Moscow, pp 165–175Google Scholar
  44. Kenkel NC, Watson PR, Uhlig P (1998) Modelling landscape-level vegetation dynamics in the boreal forests of Northwestern Ontario. Forest Research Report No. 148. Ontario Forest Research InstituteGoogle Scholar
  45. Khoroshev A (2010) Multilevel analysis of landscape structure for land use decisions. In: Barančoková M, Krajčí J, Kollár J, Belčáková I (eds) Landscape ecology–methods, applications and interdisciplinary approach. Institute of Landscape Ecology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, pp 99–112Google Scholar
  46. Khoroshev A, Koshcheeva A (2009) Landscape ecological approach to hierarchical spatial planning. Terra Spectra Plan Stud 1:3–11Google Scholar
  47. Khoroshev AV, Nemchinova AV, Avdanin VO (2013) Landscapes and ecological network of the Kostroma region. Kostroma Univ Publ House, Kostroma (in Russian)Google Scholar
  48. Kienast F (2010) Landschaftsdienstleistungen: ein taugliches Konzept für Forschung und Praxis? Forum für Wissen 2010:7–12Google Scholar
  49. Kolbovsky EYu (2008) Landscape planning. Academia, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  50. Krestovsky OI (1986) Influence of cutting and forest regeneration on stream discharge. Hydrometeoizdat, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  51. Leser H (1997) Landschaftsökologie. 4th ed, (1st ed. 1976), Ulmer, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  52. Löffler J (2002) Landscape complexes. In: Bastian O, Steinhardt U (eds) Development and perspectives of landscape ecology. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 58–68Google Scholar
  53. Loveland TR, Merchant JM (2004) Ecoregions and ecoregionalization: geographical and ecological perspectives. Environ Manag 34(Suppl. 1):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Maes J, Egoh B, Willemen L, Liquete C, Vihervaara P, Schägner JP, Grizzetti B, Drakou EG, La Notte A, Zulian G, Bouraoui F, Paracchini ML, Bidoglio G (2012) Mapping ecosystems services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst Serv 1:31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mannsfeld K (1983) Landschaftsanalyse und Ableitung von Naturraumpotentialen. Abhandl. Sächs. Akad. Wiss., Leipzig, math. nat. class, vol 35. Akademie-Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  56. Martin-Duque JF, Pedraza J, Sanz MA, Bodoque JM, Godfrey AE, Diez A, Carrasco RM (2003) Landform classification for land use planning in developed areas: an example in Segovia province (Central Spain). Environ Manag 32:488–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington (DC)Google Scholar
  58. Miklós L (2010) The most successful landscape ecological concepts in the practice. Probl Landsc Ecol 28:15–22Google Scholar
  59. Milne G (1935) Some suggested units of classification and mapping for East African soils. Soil Res 4:183–198Google Scholar
  60. Minar J, Tremboš P (1997) Selected aspects of geoecological regionalization at detailed scales. Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Geographica 32:39–43Google Scholar
  61. Moss M (2000) Interdisciplinarity, landscape ecology and the “Transformation of Agricultural Landscapes”. Landscape Ecol 15:303–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nabuurs GJ, Pussinen A, van Brusselen J, Schelhaas MJ (2007) Future harvesting pressure on European forests. Eur J For Res 126:391–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Naturkapital Deutschland–TEEB DE (2012) Der Wert der Natur für Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft—Eine Einführung. Ifuplan, München; Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research–UFZ, Leipzig. Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, BonnGoogle Scholar
  64. Neef E (1963a) Dimensionen geographischer Betrachtungen. Forsch Fortschr 37:361–363Google Scholar
  65. Neef E (1963b) Topologische und chorologische Arbeitsweisen in der Landschaftsforschung. Petermanns Geogr Mitt 107:249–259Google Scholar
  66. Neef E (1967) Die theoretischen Grundlagen der Landschaftslehre. Haack, Gotha, Leipzig. Also in: Wiens JA, Moss M, Turner MG, Mladenoff DJ (eds) (2006) Fundamental papers in landscape ecology. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 225–245Google Scholar
  67. O’Neill RV (1989) Transmutations across hierarchical levels. In: Innis GS. O’Neill RV (eds.) Systems analysis of ecosystems. Int. Coop. Publ., Fairland, Md., pp 59–78. Also in: Wiens JA, Moss M, Turner MG, Mladenoff DJ (eds) (2006) Fundamental papers in landscape ecology. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 11–18Google Scholar
  68. Omernik JM (2004) Perspectives on the nature and definition of ecological regions. Environ Manag 34(Suppl. 1):27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Pobedinsky AV (1979) Water protection and soil protection role of forests. Lesnaya Promyshlennost, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  70. Potschin M, Klug H, Haines-Young R (2010) From visions to action: framing the Leitbild concept in the context of landscape planning. Futures 42:656–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rowe JS (1996) Land classification and ecosystem classification. Environ Monit Assess 39:11–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Schägner JP, Brander L, Maes J, Hartje V (2013) Mapping ecosystem services’ values: current practice and future prospects. Ecosyst Serv 4:33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Smith M-L, Carpenter C (1996) Application of the USDA Forest Service national hierarchical framework of ecological units at the sub-regional level: the New England-New York example. Environ Monit Assess 39:187–198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sochava VB (1963) Definition of some notions and terms in physical geography. In: Proceedings of the Institute of Geography of Siberia and Far East. vol 3, pp 50–59 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  75. Solntsev NA (1948) The natural geographic landscape and some of its general rules. In: Proceedings of the Second All-Union Geographical Congress, vol 1. OGIZ, Leningrad, pp 258–269 (in Russian). Also in: Wiens JA, Moss MR, Turner MG, Mladenoff DJ (eds) (2006) Fundamental papers in landscape ecology. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 19–27Google Scholar
  76. Spangenberg JH, von Haaren C, Settele J (2014) The ecosystem service cascade: further developing the metaphor. The influence of purpose and application characteristics like scale and beneficiaries. Ecosyst Serv 104:22–32Google Scholar
  77. Tallis HT, Ricketts T, Guerry AD, Wood SA, Sharp R, Nelson E, Ennaanay D, Wolny S, Olwero N, Vigerstol K, Pennington D, Mendoza G, Aukema J, Foster J, Forrest J, Cameron D, Arkema K, Lonsdorf E, Kennedy C, Verutes G, Kim CK, Guannel G, Papenfus M, Toft J, Marsik M, Bernhardt J, Griffin R, Glowinski K, Chaumont N, Perelman A, Lacayo M (2013) InVEST 2.5.6 User’s Guide. The Natural Capital Project, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  78. Tansley AG (1935) The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology 16:284–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. TEEB (2010) In: Kumar P (ed.) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity. Ecological and Economic Foundations. Earthscan, London and Washington. http://www.teebweb.org. Accessed 20 Sept 2013
  80. TEEB (2013) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity. Guidance manual for TEEB country studies. Version 1.0. http://www.teebweb.org. Accessed 20 Sept 2013
  81. Tishkov AA (2005) Biospheric functions of natural ecosystems of Russia. Nauka, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  82. Troll C (1950) Die geographische Landschaft und ihre Erforschung. Studium Generale 3:163–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. UK NEA (2011) The UK National Ecosystem Assessment: synthesis of key findings. UNEP-WCMC, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  84. van der Biest K (2013) An integrated model to assess the effects of land use change on the delivery of multiple ecosystem services. In: Abstract of the workshop “Indication, integration and application of ecosystem services in decision making”, University of Kiel May 6–8Google Scholar
  85. Vandewalle M, Sykes MT, Harrison PA, Luck GW, Berry P, Bugter R, Dawson TP, Feld CK, Harrington R, Haslett JR, Hering D, Jones KB, Jongman R, Lavorel S, Martins da Silva P, Moora M, Paterson J, Rounsevell MDA, Sandin L, Settele J, Sousa JP, Zobel M (2008) Review paper on concepts of dynamic ecosystems and their services. RUBICODE Deliverable D2.1. http://www.rubicode.net/rubicode/RUBICODE_e-conference_report.pdf. Accessed Dec 2013
  86. von Haaren C, Albert C (2011) Integrating ecosystem services and environmental planning: limitations and synergies. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag 7:150–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. von Haaren C, Galler C, Ott S (2008) Landscape planning. The basis of sustainable landscape development. Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, LeipzigGoogle Scholar
  88. Wascher DM (ed) (2005) European landscape character areas—typologies, cartography and indicators for the assessment of sustainable landscapes. Final Project Report. Alterra Report No. 1254, Wageningen (NL)Google Scholar
  89. Wende W, Wirth P, Közle E, Lappo A, Spirin P (2013) Zum Umgang mit Schutzgütern und Nutzungen in der Territorialplanung der Russischen Föderation. 1. Practical guidance within the framework of the project EkoRus. Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development IOER, Dresden; NIIP Gradostroitelstva, St. PetersburgGoogle Scholar
  90. Wiens JA, Moss MR, Turner MG, Mladenoff DJ (eds) (2006) Fundamental papers in landscape ecology. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  91. Wiggering H, Müller K, Werner A, Helming K (2003) The concept of multifunctionality in sustainable land development. In: Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Sustainable development of multifunctional landscapes. Springer, Berlin, pp 3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Willemen L (2010) Mapping and modeling multifunctional landscapes. PhD thesis, Wageningen University (NL)Google Scholar
  93. Wojtkiewicz W, May A, Hoppenstedt A, Wende W (2010) Einführung des Naturschutzinstruments “Landschaftsplanung” in der Region des Südkaukasus. Natur Landschaft 85:340–344Google Scholar
  94. Wu J (1999) Hierarchy and scaling: extrapolating information along a scaling ladder. Can J Remote Sens 25:367–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Wu J, Li H (2006) Theories and methods in scaling: a review. In: Wu J, Jones B, Li H, Loucks OL (eds) Scaling and uncertainty analysis in ecology. Springer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Wu J, Jelinski DE, Luck M, Tueller PT (2000) Multiscale analysis of landscape heterogeneity: scale variance and pattern metrics. Geogr Inf Sci 6:6–19Google Scholar
  97. Zonneveld IS (1989) The land unit—a fundamental concept in landscape ecology, and its application. Landscape Ecol 3:67–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olaf Bastian
    • 1
  • Karsten Grunewald
    • 1
  • Alexander V. Khoroshev
    • 2
  1. 1.Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional DevelopmentDresdenGermany
  2. 2.Faculty of GeographyMoscow State UniversityMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations