Deliberative mapping of ecosystem services within and around Doñana National Park (SW Spain) in relation to land use change

Abstract

The establishment of protected areas is one of the main strategies for preserving biodiversity from land use transformation. However, a great number of protected areas are becoming isolated due to land use changes in their surroundings. We analyzed quantitatively land use changes from 1956 to 2007 inside and around one of the most emblematic protected areas in Europe, the Doñana protected area. Next, stakeholders mapped social values for current ecosystem service delivery with an expert workshop. Using the maps from the workshop, we mapped six ecosystem service spatial indicators: Service Provision Hotspots, Provisioning, Regulating, Cultural, Richness and Decline. Then, we performed nonparametric and multivariate statistical analyses to study the associations between land uses, ecosystem service indicators and protection category. Our results confirm the isolation of the Doñana protected area as intense land use changes occurred outside it (increase in irrigated agricultural lands and urbanized areas and decrease in wetlands surface). Furthermore, land uses and the protection category have an effect on ecosystem service delivery as food from agriculture is the main ecosystem service supplied outside the protected area, and regulating and cultural services are mainly delivered inside the protected area. We discuss how the social values for ecosystem services match with previous ecosystem service evaluations that described the existence of conservation versus development planning strategy in the area. Our study highlights the adequacy of the social value approach as a first step toward ecosystem service spatial evaluation.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Abbreviations

D-SES:

Doñana social-ecological system

PCA:

Principal component analysis

SPHs:

Service Provision Hotspots

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 8:177–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Balmford A, Bruner A, Cooper P, Costanza R, Farber S, Green RE, Jenkins M et al (2002) Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science 297:950–953

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Baral H, Keenan RJ, Fox JC, Stork NE, Kasel S (2013) Spatial assessment of ecosystem goods and services in complex production landscapes: a case study from south-eastern Australia. Ecol Complex 13:35–45

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bennett EM, Paterson GD, Gordon LJ (2009) Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol Lett 12:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bryan BA, Raymond CM, Crossman ND, Macdonald DH (2010) Targeting the management of ecosystem services based on social values: where, what, and how? Landsc Urban Plan 97(2):111–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bryan BA, Raymond CM, Crossman ND, King D (2011) Comparing spatially explicit ecological and social values for natural areas to identify effective conservation strategies. Conserv Biol 25(1):172–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 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 9:278–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Carpenter SR, Mooney HA, Agard J, Capistrano D, Defries RS, Díaz S, Dietz T et al (2009) Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the millennium ecosystem assessment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(5):1305–1312

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  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 B Biol Sci 360(1454):443–455

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cohen-Shacham E, Dayan T, Feitelson E, de Groot RS (2011) Ecosystem service trade-offs in wetland management: drainage and rehabilitation of the Hula. Israel Hydrol Sci J 56:1582–1601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cowling RM, Egoh B, Knight AT, O’Farrell PJ, Reyers B, Rouget M, Roux DJ, Welz A, Wilhem-Rechman A (2008) An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(28):9483–9948

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Daily GC, Polasky S, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Mooney HA, Pejchar L, Ricketts TH et al (2009) Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Front Ecol Environ 7(1):21–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. De Fries R, Hansen A, Turner BL, Reid R, Liu J (2007) Land use change around protected areas: management to balance human needs and ecological function. Ecol Appl 17(4):1031–1038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. De Fries R, Karanth KK, Pareeth S (2010) Interactions between protected areas and their surroundings in human-dominated tropical landscapes. Biol Conserv 143(12):2870–2880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dunn OJ (1961) Multiple comparisons among means. J Am Stat Assoc 56:52–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Eigenbrod F, Anderson BJ, Armsworth PR, Heinemeyer A, Jackson SF, Parnell M, Thomas CD et al (2009) Ecosystem service benefits of contrasting conservation strategies in a human-dominated region. Proc R Soc 276(1669):2903–2911

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Eigenbrod F, Anderson BJ, Armsworth PR, Heinemeyer A, Gillings S, Roy DB, Thomas CD et al (2010) Representation of ecosystem services by tiered conservation strategies. Conserv Lett 3(3):184–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fagerholm N, Käyhkö N, Ndumbaro F, Khamis M (2012) Community stakeholders’ knowledge in landscape assessments—mapping indicators for landscape services. Ecol Ind 18:421–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fernández-Delgado C (2005) Conservation management of a European natural area: Doñana National Park, Spain. In: Groom MJ et al (eds) Principles of conservation biology. Sinauer Associates, Massachusetts, pp 458–467

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fischer J, Brosi B, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, Goldman R, Goldstein J, Lindenmayer DB, Manning AD, Mooney HA, Pejchar L, Ranganathan J, Tallis H (2008) Should agricultural policies encourage land sparing or wildlife-friendly farming? Front Ecol Environ 6:380–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. García-Llorente M, Martín-López B, Díaz S, Montes C (2011) Can ecosystem properties be fully translated into service values? An economic valuation of aquatic plant services. Ecol Appl 21:3083–3103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 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 19–20:136–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 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(1):229–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Goldstein JH, Calderone 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 109(19):7565–7570

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gordon LJ, Finlayson CM, Falkenmark M (2010) Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services. Agric Water Manage Compr Assess Water Manage Agric 97(4):512–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Green RE, Cornell SJ, Scharlemann JPW, Balmford A (2005) Farming and the fate of wild nature. Science 307:550–555

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Grimmalt JO, Ferrer M, McPherson E (1999) The mine tailing accident in Aznalcollar. Sci Total Environ 242(1):3–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Haines-Young R, Potschin M, Kienast F (2012) Indicators of ecosystem service potential at European scales: mapping marginal changes and trade-offs. Ecol Ind 21:39–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hansen AJ, de Fries R (2007) Ecological mechanisms linking protected areas. Ecol Appl 17(4):974–988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Joppa LN, Loarie SR, Pimm SL (2008) On the protection of protected areas. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(18):6673–6678

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kaiser HF (1960) The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educ Psychol Meas 20:141–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Klain SC, Chan KMA (2012) Navigating coastal values: participatory mapping of ecosystem services for spatial planning. Ecol Econ 82:104–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kruskal WH, Wallis WA (1952) Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 47(260):583–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Layke C (2009) Measuring nature’s benefits: a preliminary roadmap for improving ecosystem service indicators. WRI Working Paper. World Resources Institute, Washington DC

  36. Layke C, Mapendembe A, Brown C, Walpole M, Winn J (2012) Indicators from the global and sub-global millennium ecosystem assessments: an analysis and next steps. Ecol Ind 17:77–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lovell ST, DeSantis S, Nathan CA, Olson MB, Ernesto Méndez V, Kominami HC, Erickson DL, Morris KS, Morris WB (2010) Integrating agroecology and landscape multifunctionality in Vermont: an evolving framework to evaluate the design of agroecosystems. Agric Syst 103:327–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being. Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  39. 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 

  40. 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):1481–1491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Martín-López B, Iniesta-Arandia I, García-Llorente M, Palomo I, Casado-arzuaga I, García del Amo D et al (2012) Uncovering ecosystem services bundles through social preferences: experimental evidence from Spain. PLoS ONE 7(6):e38970

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. McDonald RI, Boucher TM (2011) Global development and the future of the protected area strategy. Biol Conserv 144(1):383–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. McNeely JA (1994) Protected areas for the 21st century: working to provide benefits to society. Biodivers Conserv 3:390–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Menzel S, Teng J (2009) Ecosystem services as a stakeholder-driven concept for conservation science. Conserv Biol 24(3):907–909

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  46. Moran PA (1950) Notes on continuous stochastic phenomena. Biometrika 37:17–33

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Myers N (1972) National Parks in Savannah Africa. Ecological requirements of parks must be balanced against socioeconomic constraints in their environs. Science 178(4067):1255–1263

    Google Scholar 

  48. Nedkov S, Burkhard B (2012) Flood regulating ecosystem services—mapping supply and demand, in the Etropole municipality, Bulgaria. Ecol Ind 21:67–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Nelson E, Mendoza G, Regetz J, Polasky S, Tallis H et al (2009) Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front Ecol Environ 7(1):4–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 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

  51. Olías M, González F, Cerón J, Bolívar J, González-Labajo J, García-López S (2008) Water quality and distribution of trace elements in the Doñana aquifer (SW Spain). Environ Geol 55:1555–1568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Oudenhoven APE, Petz K, Alkemade R, Hein L, de Groot RS (2012) Framework for systematic indicator selection to assess effects of land management on ecosystem services. Ecol Ind 21:110–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 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

    Google Scholar 

  54. Palomo I, Martín-López B, Potschin M, Haines-Young R, Montes C (in press) National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: mapping ecosystem service flows. Ecosyst Serv, corrected proof, doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.09.001

  55. Parks SA, Harcourt AH (2002) Reserve size, local human density, and mammalian extinctions in U.S. protected areas. Conserv Biol 16(3):800–808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Plieninger T, Dijks S, Oteros-Rozas E, Bieling C (2013) Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy 33:118–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Radeloff VC, Stewart SI, Hawbaker TJ, Gimmi U, Pidgeon AM, Flather CH, Hammer RB et al (2010) Housing growth in and near United States protected areas limits their conservation value. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107(2):940–945

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Raymond CM, Bryan BA, MacDonald DH, Cast A, Strathearn S, Grandgirard A, Kalivas T (2009) Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 68(5):1301–1315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Revilla E, Palomares F, Delibes M (2001) Edge-core effects and the effectiveness of traditional reserves in conservation: Eurasian badgers in Doñana National Park. Conserv Biol 15(1):148–158

    Google Scholar 

  60. Reyers B, Cowling RM, Egoh BN, Maitre DCL, Vlok JHJ (2009) Ecosystem services, land-cover change, and stakeholders: finding a sustainable foothold for a semiarid biodiversity hotspot. Ecol Soc 14(1):38

    Google Scholar 

  61. Rodriguez A, Delibes M (2004) Patterns and causes of non-natural mortality in the Iberian lynx during a 40-year period of range contraction. Biol Conserv 118:151–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Rodríguez Ramírez A, Yañez Camacho C, Gascó C, Clemente Salas L, Antón MP (2005) Colmatación natural y antrópica de las marismas del Parque Nacional de Doñana: implicaciones para su manejo y conservación. Cuaternario y Geomorfología 19:37–48

    Google Scholar 

  63. 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 

  64. Ruiz-Frau A, Edwards-Jones G, Kiaser MJ (2011) Mapping stakeholder values for coastal zone management. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 434:239–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Scherr SJ, McNeely JA (2008) Biodiversity conservation and agricultural sustainability: towards a new paradigm of “ecoagriculture” landscapes. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 363:477–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Schirpke U, Leitinger G, Tasser E, Schermer M, Steinbacher M, Tappeiner U (2012) Multiple ecosystem services of a changing Alpine landscape: past, present and future. Int J Biodiv Sci Ecosyst Serv Manage 9(2):123–135

    Google Scholar 

  67. Schneiders A, Van Daele T, Van Reeth W, Van Landuyt W (2012) Biodiversity and ecosystem services: complementary approaches for ecosystem management? Ecol Ind 21:123–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Seiferling IS, Proulx R, Peres-Neto PR, Fahrig L, Messier C (2011) Measuring protected-area isolation and correlations of isolation with land use intensity and protection status. Conserv Biol 26:610–618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Serrano L, Reina M, Martín G, Reyes I, Arechederra A, León D, Toja J (2006) The aquatic systems of Doñana (SW Spain): watersheds and frontiers. Limnetica 25(1–2):11–32

    Google Scholar 

  70. Serrano L, Esquivias-Segura MP, Zunzunegui M (2008) Long-term hydrological changes over a seventeen-year period in temporary ponds of the Doñana N. P. (SW Spain). Limnetica 27(1):65–78

    Google Scholar 

  71. Shapiro SS, Wilk MB (1965) An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52:591–611

    Google Scholar 

  72. Sherrouse BC, Clement JM, Semmens DJ (2011) A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services. Appl Geogr 31(2):748–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Tianhong L, Wenkai L, Zhenghan Q (2010) Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use changes in Shenzhen. Ecol Econ 69(7):1427–1435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Turner RK, Paavola J, Farber S, Cooper P, Jessamy V, Rosendo S, Georgiou S (2003) Valuing nature: lessons learnt and future research directions. Ecol Econ 46:493–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Van Riper CJ, Kyle GT, Sutton SG, Barnes M, Sherrouse BC (2012) Mapping outdoor recreationists’ perceived social values for ecosystem services at Hinchinbrook Island National Park, Australia. Appl Geogr 35(1–2):164–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Vihervaara P, Kumpula T, Tanskanen A, Burkhard B (2010) Ecosystem services—a tool for sustainable management of human–environment systems. Case study Finnish Forest Lapland. Ecol Complex 7(3):410–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Vioque-Fernández A, Alves de Almeida E, López-Barea J (2009) Assessment of Doñana national park contamination in Procambarus clarkii: integration of conventional biomarkers and proteomic approaches. Sci Total Environ 407:1784–1797

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank all of the participants in the workshops and Teresa Agudo from the Doñana Protected Area for helping with the organization of the workshop. Thanks are also due to Marina García Llorente, and Cesar López Santiago from the Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory and to Javier Moreno and Javier Escalera from Pablo Olavide University for assisting in the preparation and development of the workshop. Thanks are also due to two anonymous reviewers of the previous version of the manuscript. The funding for this study was provided by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment of Spain (018/2009), the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [project CGL2011-30266 and Subprogram Inncorpora-Torres Quevedo 2011)] and the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport (the National Programme for Training Human Resources).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ignacio Palomo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Palomo, I., Martín-López, B., Zorrilla-Miras, P. et al. Deliberative mapping of ecosystem services within and around Doñana National Park (SW Spain) in relation to land use change. Reg Environ Change 14, 237–251 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0488-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Conservation planning
  • Participation
  • Priority areas
  • Social values
  • Social-ecological systems
  • Trade-offs