, Volume 49, Issue 1, pp 245–257 | Cite as

Representation of biodiversity and ecosystem services in East Africa’s protected area network

  • Fangli Wei
  • Shuai WangEmail author
  • Bojie Fu
  • Yanxu Liu
Research Article


The dramatic increase in anthropogenic activity severely threatens the biodiversity and life-support services that underpin human well-being. The broadened focus of protecting ecosystem services (ESs) better aligns the interests of people and biodiversity conservation. In this study, we used species richness as a surrogate for biodiversity and mapped the key ESs in East Africa with the goal to assess the spatial congruence between biodiversity and ESs, and evaluate the representation of current protected areas (PAs) network for biodiversity and ESs. The results showed that PAs well represented for species richness and regulating services but underrepresented for provisioning services. The PAs network occupies 10.96% of East Africa’s land surface, and captures 20.62–26.37% of conservation priorities for vertebrate and plant species. It encompasses more than 16.23% of priority areas for three regulating services, but only 6.17% and 5.22% for crop and livestock production, respectively. Strong correlations and high overlaps exist between species richness and regulating services, particularly for carbon storage, water yield and plants. Thus, we believe that actions taken to conserve biodiversity also will protect certain ESs, which in turn will create new incentives and funding sources for the conservation of biodiversity. Overall, our results have wide-ranging policy implications and can be used to optimize conservation strategies for both biodiversity and multiple ESs in East Africa.


Biodiversity Conservation priority area East Africa Ecosystem management Ecosystem services Protected areas (PAs) 



This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Numbers 31361140360, 4171101213).

Supplementary material

13280_2019_1155_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (1.2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 1862 kb)


  1. Andela, N., D.C. Morton, L. Giglio, Y. Chen, G.R. van der Werf, P.S. Kasibhatla, R.S. DeFries, G.J. Collatz, et al. 2017. A human-driven decline in global burned area. Science 356: 1356–1361. Scholar
  2. Archer, E., L. Dziba, K.J. Mulongoy, M.A. Maoela, M. Walters, R.O. Biggs, M.-C. Cormier-Salem, F. DeClerck, et al. 2018. Summary for policymakers of the regional assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Africa of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.Google Scholar
  3. Armsworth, P.R., K.M.A. Chan, G.C. Daily, P.R. Ehrlich, C. Kremen, T.H. Ricketts, and M.A. Sanjayan. 2007. Ecosystem-service science and the way forward for conservation. Conservation Biology 21: 1383–1384. Scholar
  4. Bai, Y., C.W. Zhuang, Z.Y. Ouyang, H. Zheng, and B. Jiang. 2011. Spatial characteristics between biodiversity and ecosystem services in a human-dominated watershed. Ecological Complexity 8: 177–183. Scholar
  5. Balvanera, P., G.C. Daily, P.R. Ehrlich, T.H. Ricketts, S.A. Bailey, S. Kark, C. Kremen, and H. Pereira. 2001. Conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services. Science 291: 2047. Scholar
  6. Castro, A.J., B. Martín-López, E. López, T. Plieninger, D. Alcaraz-Segura, C.C. Vaughn, and J. Cabello. 2015. Do protected areas networks ensure the supply of ecosystem services? Spatial patterns of two nature reserve systems in semi-arid Spain. Applied Geography 60: 1–9. Scholar
  7. Chapa-Vargas, L., and K. Monzalvo-Santos. 2012. Natural protected areas of San Luis Potosí, Mexico: Ecological representativeness, risks, and conservation implications across scales. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 26: 1625–1641. Scholar
  8. Cimon-Morin, J., M. Darveau, and M. Poulin. 2013. Fostering synergies between ecosystem services and biodiversity in conservation planning: A review. Biological Conservation 166: 144–154. Scholar
  9. Costanza, R., B. Fisher, K. Mulder, S. Liu, and T. Christopher. 2007. Biodiversity and ecosystem services: A multi-scale empirical study of the relationship between species richness and net primary production. Ecological Economics 61: 478–491. Scholar
  10. Dee, L.E., M. De Lara, C. Costello, and S.D. Gaines. 2017. To what extent can ecosystem services motivate protecting biodiversity? Ecology Letters 20: 935–946. Scholar
  11. Dudley, N. 2008. Guidelines for applying protected area management categories. Gland: IUCN.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eastwood, A., R. Brooker, R. Irvine, R. Artz, L. Norton, J. Bullock, L. Ross, D. Fielding, et al. 2016. Does nature conservation enhance ecosystem services delivery? Ecosystem Services 17: 152–162. Scholar
  13. Egoh, B., B. Reyers, M. Rouget, M. Bode, and D.M. Richardson. 2009. Spatial congruence between biodiversity and ecosystem services in South Africa. Biological Conservation 142: 553–562. Scholar
  14. Egoh, B., M. Rouget, B. Reyers, A.T. Knight, R.M. Cowling, A.S. van Jaarsveld, and A. Welz. 2007. Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: A review. Ecological Economics 63: 714–721. Scholar
  15. Fritz, S., L. See, I. McCallum, L. You, A. Bun, E. Moltchanova, M. Duerauer, F. Albrecht, et al. 2015. Mapping global cropland and field size. Global Change Biology 21: 1980–1992. Scholar
  16. Harrison, P.A., P.M. Berry, G. Simpson, J.R. Haslett, M. Blicharska, M. Bucur, R. Dunford, B. Egoh, et al. 2014. Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services: A systematic review. Ecosystem Services 9: 191–203. Scholar
  17. Haslett, J.R., P.M. Berry, G. Bela, R.H.G. Jongman, G. Pataki, M.J. Samways, and M. Zobel. 2010. Changing conservation strategies in Europe: A framework integrating ecosystem services and dynamics. Biodiversity and Conservation 19: 2963–2977. Scholar
  18. Hernandez-Morcillo, M., T. Plieninger, and C. Bieling. 2013. An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators. Ecological Indicators 29: 434–444. Scholar
  19. Jenkins, C.N., S.L. Pimm, and L.N. Joppa. 2013. Global patterns of terrestrial vertebrate diversity and conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110: E2602–E2610. Scholar
  20. Kier, G., J. Mutke, E. Dinerstein, T.H. Ricketts, W. Kuper, H. Kreft, and W. Barthlott. 2005. Global patterns of plant diversity and floristic knowledge. Journal of Biogeography 32: 1107–1116. Scholar
  21. Kukkala, A.S., and A. Moilanen. 2013. Core concepts of spatial prioritisation in systematic conservation planning. Biological Reviews 88: 443–464. Scholar
  22. Lavorel, S., A. Bayer, A. Bondeau, S. Lautenbach, A. Ruiz-Frau, N. Schulp, R. Seppelt, P. Verburg, et al. 2017. Pathways to bridge the biophysical realism gap in ecosystem services mapping approaches. Ecological Indicators 74: 241–260. Scholar
  23. Lu, Y., L. Zhang, Y. Zeng, B. Fu, C. Whitham, S. Liu, and B. Wu. 2017. Representation of critical natural capital in China. Conservation Biology. Scholar
  24. Mace, G.M., K. Norris, and A.H. Fitter. 2012. Biodiversity and ecosystem services: A multilayered relationship. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 27: 19–26. Scholar
  25. Manhaes, A.P., G.G. Mazzochini, A.T. Oliveira, G. Ganade, and A.R. Carvalho. 2016. Spatial associations of ecosystem services and biodiversity as a baseline for systematic conservation planning. Diversity and Distributions 22: 932–943. Scholar
  26. Martínez-Harms, M.J., and P. Balvanera. 2012. Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: A review. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management 8: 17–25. Scholar
  27. Myers, N., R.A. Mittermeier, C.G. Mittermeier, G.A.B. da Fonseca, and J. Kent. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853–858. Scholar
  28. Naidoo, R., A. Balmford, R. Costanza, B. Fisher, R.E. Green, B. Lehner, T.R. Malcolm, and T.H. Ricketts. 2008. Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105: 9495–9500. Scholar
  29. Naughton-Treves, L., M.B. Holland, and K. Brandon. 2005. The role of protected areas in conserving biodiversity and sustaining local livelihoods. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 30: 219–252. Scholar
  30. Ouyang, Z., H. Zheng, Y. Xiao, S. Polasky, J. Liu, W. Xu, Q. Wang, L. Zhang, et al. 2016. Improvements in ecosystem services from investments in natural capital. Science 352: 1455–1459. Scholar
  31. Plieninger, T., S. Dijks, E. Oteros-Rozas, and C. Bieling. 2013. Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy 33: 118–129. Scholar
  32. Qiu, J.X., and M.G. Turner. 2013. Spatial interactions among ecosystem services in an urbanizing agricultural watershed. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110: 12149–12154. Scholar
  33. Rands, M.R.W., W.M. Adams, L. Bennun, S.H.M. Butchart, A. Clements, D. Coomes, A. Entwistle, I. Hodge, et al. 2010. Biodiversity conservation: Challenges beyond 2010. Science 329: 1298–1303. Scholar
  34. Reid, R.S., D. Nkedianye, M.Y. Said, D. Kaelo, M. Neselle, O. Makui, L. Onetu, S. Kiruswa, et al. 2016. Evolution of models to support community and policy action with science: Balancing pastoral livelihoods and wildlife conservation in savannas of East Africa. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences of United States of America 113: 4579–4584. Scholar
  35. Rodrigues, A.S.L., S.J. Andelman, M.I. Bakarr, L. Boitani, T.M. Brooks, R.M. Cowling, L.D.C. Fishpool, G.A.B. da Fonseca, et al. 2004. Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature 428: 640–643. Scholar
  36. Ruesch, A., and H.K. Gibbs. 2008. New IPCC Tier-1 global biomass carbon map for the year 2000. Oak Ridge: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory.Google Scholar
  37. Sandifer, P.A., A.E. Sutton-Grier, and B.P. Ward. 2015. Exploring connections among nature, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human health and well-being: Opportunities to enhance health and biodiversity conservation. Ecosystem Services 12: 1–15. Scholar
  38. Schröter, M., and R.P. Remme. 2016. Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: Comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation. Landscape Ecology 31: 431–450. Scholar
  39. Schulp, C.J.E., B. Burkhard, J. Maes, J. Van Vliet, and P.H. Verburg. 2014. Uncertainties in ecosystem service maps: A comparison on the European scale. PLoS ONE. Scholar
  40. Scott, J.M., F.W. Davis, R.G. McGhie, R.G. Wright, C. Groves, and J. Estes. 2001. Nature reserves: Do they capture the full range of America’s biological diversity? Ecological Applications 11: 999–1007.;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Steger, C.E., and B. Butt. 2015. Integrating citizen science into protected areas: Problems and prospects from East Africa. African Journal of Ecology 53: 592–594. Scholar
  42. Strassburg, B.B., A. Kelly, A. Balmford, R.G. Davies, H.K. Gibbs, A. Lovett, L. Miles, C.D.L. Orme, et al. 2010. Global congruence of carbon storage and biodiversity in terrestrial ecosystems. Conservation Letters 3: 98–105. Scholar
  43. Summers, J.K., L.M. Smith, J.L. Case, and R.A. Linthurst. 2012. A review of the elements of human well-being with an emphasis on the contribution of ecosystem services. Ambio 41: 327–340. Scholar
  44. Tallis, H., P. Kareiva, M. Marvier, and A. Chang. 2008. An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105: 9457–9464. Scholar
  45. Turner, R., and G. Daily. 2008. The ecosystem services framework and natural capital conservation. Environmental and Resource Economics 39: 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van der Knijff, J., R. Jones, and L. Montanarella. 2000. Soil erosion risk assessment in Europe. Brussels: European Soil Bureau, European Commission.Google Scholar
  47. Wang, Z., A.M. Lechner, and T. Baumgartl. 2018. Ecosystem services mapping uncertainty assessment: A case study in the Fitzroy Basin mining region. Water 10: 88. Scholar
  48. Watson, J.E., N. Dudley, D.B. Segan, and M. Hockings. 2014. The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature 515: 67. Scholar
  49. Wei, H., H. Liu, Z. Xu, J. Ren, N. Lu, W. Fan, P. Zhang, and X. Dong. 2018a. Linking ecosystem services supply, social demand and human well-being in a typical mountain–oasis–desert area, Xinjiang, China. Ecosystem Services 31: 44–57. Scholar
  50. Wei, F.L., S. Wang, B.J. Fu, N.Q. Pan, X.M. Feng, W.W. Zhao, and C. Wang. 2018b. Vegetation dynamic trends and the main drivers detected using the ensemble empirical mode decomposition method in East Africa. Land Degradation and Development 29: 2542–2553. Scholar
  51. Withers, M.B., and D. Hosking. 2002. Wildlife of East Africa. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Wittmer, H., and H. Gundimeda. 2012. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity in local and regional policy and management. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Xu, W., Y. Xiao, J. Zhang, W. Yang, L. Zhang, V. Hull, Z. Wang, H. Zheng, et al. 2017a. Reply to Bridgewater and Babin: Need for a new protected area category for ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of United States of America 114: E4319–E4320. Scholar
  54. Xu, W., Y. Xiao, J. Zhang, W. Yang, L. Zhang, V. Hull, Z. Wang, H. Zheng, et al. 2017b. Strengthening protected areas for biodiversity and ecosystem services in China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of United States of America 114: 1601–1606. Scholar
  55. Zagonari, F. 2016. Using ecosystem services in decision-making to support sustainable development: Critiques, model development, a case study, and perspectives. Science of the Total Environment 548: 25–32. Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental SciencesChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical ScienceBeijing Normal UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical ScienceBeijing Normal UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations