Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Limitations of Protected Areas Zoning in Mediterranean Cultural Landscapes Under the Ecosystem Services Approach

Abstract

Protected areas have been created worldwide to set apart certain areas from land-use transformation. The biodiversity and ecosystems protected by these areas deliver several ecosystem services. Recently, besides increasing global protected coverage, there has been a growing demand to assess the adequacy of protected areas management. In this study, we assessed how the management of protected areas can deal with ecosystem services taking as example the Doñana and Sierra Nevada protected areas (Spain). For that aim we analyzed the protected area management plans, mapped seven ecosystem services, and assessed how they are affected by protected area zoning and land-use intensity. We found that although provisioning and cultural services are included in the management plans of the protected areas under a different terminology, regulating services are barely addressed. Ecosystem service delivery varies depending on several factors including the protection category of the protected areas (protection intensity), land-use intensity and geomorphological factors, among others. Therefore, we discuss that integrating ecosystem services in protected area management requires dealing with complexity, necessitating the establishment of specific goals for ecosystem service delivery, which include ecosystem service synergies and trade-offs.

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

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5

References

  1. Bai Y, Zhuang C, Ouyang Z, Zheng H, Jiang B. 2011. Spatial characteristics between biodiversity and ecosystem services in a human-dominated watershed. Ecol Complex 8:177–83.

  2. Bengtsson J, Angelstam P, Elmqvist T, Emanuelsson U, Folke C, Ihse M, Moberg F, Nyström M. 2003. Reserves, resilience and dynamic landscapes. Ambio 32(6):389–96.

  3. Blanca G, Cueto M, Martínez-Lirola MJ, Molero-Mesa J. 1998. Threatened vascular flora of Sierra Nevada (Southern Spain). Biol Conserv 85:269–85.

  4. Blondel J. 2006. The “design” of Mediterranean landscapes: a millennial story of humans and ecological systems during the historic period. Hum Ecol 34:713–29.

  5. Blondel J, Aronson J, Bodiu JY, Boeuf G, Eds. 2010. The Mediterranean region. Biological diversity in space and time. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

  6. Bugalho MN, Caldeira MC, Pereira JS, Aronson J, Pausas JG. 2011. Mediterranean cork oak savannas require human use to sustain biodiversity and ecosystem services. Front Ecol Environ 9:278–86.

  7. Butchart SHM et al. 2010. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328:1164–8.

  8. Burkhard B, Kroll F, Nedkov S, Müller F. 2012. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol Ind 21:17–29.

  9. CBD. 2010. The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Convention on Biological Diversity, Tenth Conference of Parties, Nagoya, Japan, UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/2, 29 October 2010.

  10. Chape S, Harrison J, Spalding M, Lysenko I. 2005. Measuring the extent and effectiveness of protected areas as an indicator for meeting global biodiversity targets. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B 360(1454):443–55.

  11. Chan K, Shaw MR, Cameron DR, Underwood EC, Daily GC. 2006. Conservation planning for ecosystem services. PLoS Biol 4(11):e379.

  12. Cook CN, Hockings M, Carter RB. 2010. Conservation in the dark? The information used to support management decisions. Front Ecol Environ 8:181–6.

  13. DeFries R, Hansen A, Newton AC, Hansen MC. 2005. Increasing isolation of protected areas in tropical forests over the past 20 years. Ecol Appl 15:19–26.

  14. Di Castri F, Mooney HA, Eds. 1973. Mediterranean type ecosystems: origin and structure. New York: Springer.

  15. Dudley N, Ed. 2008. Guidelines for applying protected area management categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

  16. Eigenbrod F, Anderson BJ, Armsworth PR, Heinemeyer A, Jackson SF, Parnell M, Thomas CD, Gaston KJ. 2009. Ecosystem service benefits of contrasting conservation strategies in a human-dominated region. Proc R Soc 276(1669):2903–11.

  17. Eigenbrod F, Anderson BJ, Armsworth PR, Heinemeyer A, Gillings S, Roy DB, Thomas CD, Gaston KJ. 2010. Representation of ecosystem services by tiered conservation strategies. Conserv Lett 3:184–91.

  18. Egoh B, Reyers B, Rouget M, Richardson DM, LeMaitre DC, van Jaarsveld AS. 2008. Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management. Agric Ecosyst Environ 127(1–2):135–40.

  19. Ervin J. 2003. Protected area assessments in perspective. BioScience 53:819–22.

  20. Fernández-Delgado C. 2006. Conservation management of a European natural area: Doñana National Park, Spain. In: Groom MJ, Meffe GK, Carroll CR, Eds. Principles of conservation biology. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates Inc.

  21. Foley JA et al. 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–4.

  22. García-Llorente M, Martín-López B, Iniesta-Arandia I, López-Santiago CA, Aguilera PA, Montes C. 2012. The role of multi-functionality in social preferences toward semi-arid rural landscapes: an ecosystem service approach. Environ Sci Policy 19–20:136–46.

  23. García-Nieto AP, García-Llorente M, Iniesta-Arandia I, Martín-López B. 2013. Mapping forest ecosystem services: from providing units to beneficiaries. Ecosyst Serv 4:126–83.

  24. Geneletti D, Van Duren I. 2008. Protected area zoning for conservation and use: a combination of spatial multicriteria and multiobjective evaluation. Landscape Urban Plann 85:97–110.

  25. Gimmi U, Schmidt SL, Hawbaker TJ, Alcántara C, Gafvert U, Radeloff VC. 2011. Increasing development in the surroundings of U.S. National Park service holdings jeopardizes park effectiveness. J Environ Manage 92:229–39.

  26. Goldstein JH, Caldarone G, Duarte TK, Ennaanay D, Hannahs N, Mendoza G, Polasky S, Wolny S, Daily GC. 2012. Integrating ecosystem-service tradeoffs into land-use decisions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(19):7565–70.

  27. Gómez-Baggethun E, Mingorría S, Reyes-García V, Calvet L, Montes C. 2010. Traditional ecological knowledge trends in the transition to a market economy: empirical study in the Doñana natural areas. Conserv Biol 24(3):721–9.

  28. Gómez-Baggethun E, Reyes-García V, Olsson P, Montes C. 2012. Traditional knowledge and community resilience to environmental extremes. A case study in Doñana, SW Spain. Glob Environ Change 22:640–50.

  29. Gómez-Limón GJ, Medina DL, Atance MI, Garrido PA. 2003. Los visitantes de la comarca de Doñana, Monográfico Sostenible 4. Fundación Fernando González Bernáldez y EUROPARC-España.

  30. González Bernáldez FG. 1981. Ecología y Paisaje. Barcelona: Blume.

  31. González Bernáldez FG. 1985. Invitación a la ecología humana. La adaptación afectiva al entorno. Madrid: Tecnos.

  32. Grumbine E. 1990. Protecting biological diversity through the greater ecosystem concept. Nat Areas J 10(3):114–20.

  33. Hull V et al. 2011. Evaluating the efficacy of zoning designations for protected area management. Biol Conserv 144:3028–37.

  34. Jiménez-Olivencia Y. 1991. Los paisajes de Sierra Nevada. Cartografía de los sistemas naturales de una Montana mediterránea. Granada: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Granada.

  35. Joppa LN, Loarie SR, Pimm SL. 2008. On the protection of “protected areas”. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:6673–8.

  36. Kettunen M, et al. 2010. Recognizing the value of protected areas. Chapter 8 in The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity. Teeb for National and International Policy Makers.

  37. Kroll F, Müller F, Haase D, Fohrer N. 2012. Rural–urban gradient analysis of ecosystem services supply and demand dynamics. Land Use Policy 29(3):521–35.

  38. Leverington F, Costa KL, Pavese H, Lisle A, Hockings M. 2010. A global analysis of protected area management effectiveness. Environ Manag 46:685–98.

  39. Liu J et al. 2007. Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science 317:1513–16.

  40. MA. 2005. Millennium ecosystem assessment. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.

  41. 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.

  42. Martín-López B, García-Llorente M, Palomo I, Montes C. 2011. The conservation against development paradigm in protected areas: valuation of ecosystem services in the Doñana social–ecological system (southwestern Spain). Ecol Econ 70(8):1481–91.

  43. Martín-López B et al. 2012. Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS One 7(6):e38970.

  44. Martín-López B, García-Llorente M. 2013. The relative cost of saving species. In: Grzimek’s animal life encyclopedia extinction. Gale Cengage, Farmington Hills, MI. p. 857–66.

  45. Montes C, Borja JA, Bravo MA, Moreira JM. 1998. Reconocimiento biofísico de espacios naturales protegidos. Doñana: Una aproximación ecosistémica, Junta de Andalucía, Sevilla.

  46. Naughton-Treves L, Buck M, Brandon K. 2005. The role of protected areas in conserving biodiversity and sustaining local livelihoods. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:219–52.

  47. Nelson E et al. 2009. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front Ecol Environ 7(1):4–11.

  48. Ojeda JF. 1986. Protection ou development. La creation et l´abus d´un faux dilemme relatif au parc national de Doñana et de sa region. La nature et le rural. Association des ruralistes Francais. Colloque National.

  49. Palomo I, Martín-López B, López-Santiago C, Montes C. 2011. Participatory scenario planning for protected areas management under the ecosystem services framework: the Doñana social–ecological system in Southwestern Spain. Ecol Soc 16(1):23.

  50. Palomo I, Martín-López B, Potschin M, Haines-Young R, Montes C. 2013. National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: mapping ecosystem service flows. Ecosyst Serv 4:104–16.

  51. Palomo I, Martín-López B, Zorrilla-Miras P, García-Amo D, Montes C. 2014a. Deliberative mapping of ecosystem services within and around Doñana National Park (SW Spain) in relation to land-use change. Reg Environ Change 14(1):237–51.

  52. Palomo I, Montes C, Martín-López B, González JA, García-Llorente M, Alcorlo P, García-Mora MR. 2014b. Incorporating the social–ecological approach in protected areas in the Anthropocene. BioScience 64(3):181–91.

  53. Parrott L, Meyer WS. 2012. Future landscapes: managing within complexity. Front Ecol Environ 10:382–9.

  54. Pineda FD, Montalvo J. 1995. Dehesa systems in western mediterranean. Biological diversity in traditional land-use systems. Halladay P, Gilmour DA, Eds. Conserving biodiversity outside protected areas. The role of traditional agro-ecosystems. UICN, Forest Conservation Programme, Gland. p. 107–22.

  55. Quijas S, Jackson LE, Mass M, Schmid B, Raffaelli D, Balvanera P. 2012. Plant diversity and generation of ecosystem services at the landscape scale: expert knowledge assessment. J Appl Ecol 49(4):929–40.

  56. Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson GD, Bennett EM. 2010. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:5242–7.

  57. Reed MS. 2008. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol Conserv 141:2417–31.

  58. Reyers B, Cowling RM, Egoh BN, Le Maitre DC, Vlok JHJ. 2009. Ecosystem services, land-cover change, and stakeholders: finding a sustainable foothold for a Semiarid Biodiversity Hotspot. Ecol Soc 14:38.

  59. Reyers B, O´Farrell PJ, Nel JL, Wilson K. 2012. Expanding the conservation toolbox: conservation planning of multifunctional landscapes. Landscape Ecol 27:1121–34.

  60. Ruiz-Labourdette D, Schmitz MF, Montes C, Pineda FD. 2010. Zoning a protected area: proposal based on a multi-thematic approach and final decision. Environ Model Assess 15(6):531–47.

  61. Schneiders A, Van Daele T, Van Landuyt W, Van Reeth W. 2012. Biodiversity and ecosystem services: complementary approaches for ecosystem management? Ecol Ind 21:123–33.

  62. Tallis H, Polasky S. 2009. Mapping and valuing ecosystem services as an approach for conservation and natural-resource management. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1162:265–83.

  63. Troy A, Wilson M. 2006. Mapping ecosystem services: practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer. Ecol Econ 60(2):435–49.

  64. Villa F, Tunesi L, Agardy T. 2002. Zoning protected áreas through spatial multiple-criteria analysis: the case of the Asinara Island Marine Reserve of Italy. Conserv Biol 16(2):515–26.

  65. Wright JB, Campbell CL. 2008. Moorish cultural landscapes of Las Alpujarras, Spain. Focus Geogr 51(1):25–30.

  66. Zorrilla P, Palomo I, Gómez-Baggethun E, Martín-López B, Lomas PL, Montes C. 2014. Effects of land-use change on wetland ecosystem services: a case study in the Doñana Natural Areas, SW Spain. Landscape Urban Plan 122:160–74.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their comments as well as the Spanish Ministry of the Environment (Project 018/2009) for the financial support that permitted the creation of this manuscript and to the European Commission project ‘‘OpenNESS’’ (code 308428), as well as the Ministry of Education for the FPU fellowship.

Author information

Correspondence to Ignacio Palomo.

Additional information

Author Contributions

IP, BML, and CM conceived and designed the study; IP, BML, PA, and CM performed the research; IP and BML analyzed the data; and IP, BML, PA, and CM wrote the paper.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1065 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Palomo, I., Martín-López, B., Alcorlo, P. et al. Limitations of Protected Areas Zoning in Mediterranean Cultural Landscapes Under the Ecosystem Services Approach. Ecosystems 17, 1202–1215 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-014-9788-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • cultural landscapes
  • ecosystem service bundles
  • mapping
  • social–ecological system
  • trade-offs