Improving our understanding about ecosystem production, function, and services is central to balancing both conservation and development goals while enhancing human well-being. This study builds a scientific basis for conservation and development planning by exploring the types, abundance, and spatial variation in ecosystem services in the Noto Peninsula of Japan, a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems. Although the Noto Peninsula is recognized as an important social–ecological production landscape, limited quantitative information about ecosystem services is available. This study evaluates and maps ecosystem services and explores their spatial variation using original data obtained through questionnaire surveys and secondary data from literature, statistics, and geographic information systems. The hilly and mountainous geography of the Noto Peninsula and its remoteness from large consumption markets work as constraints for agricultural provisioning services by limiting water resources, labor productivity, and choice of economically viable crops. However, the rich forests, and marine and coastal resources provide various economic opportunities for forest-, fishery-, and livestock-related provisioning services. Geographical conditions such as land use and cover type also play an important role in differentiating the spatial variation of regulating services, a variation that starkly differs to distribution patterns in other areas. Unlike provisioning and regulating services, natural and artificial landscape components including traditional and cultural constructions such as shrines and temples work as an anchor to help people appreciate intangible and tangible cultural services, linking different services to specific locales across the Noto Peninsula.
Social–ecological production landscape Ecosystem services Spatial variation Landscape planning Geographic information system (GIS) Noto Peninsula
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
The authors are grateful to government officials of Ishikawa prefecture and Suzu city who devoted their time to the interview in the early stage of this study. This research was supported by the Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (1-1303) of the Ministry of the Environment, Japan, and by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 24780230.
Alessa L (Naia), Kliskey A (Anaru), Brown G (2008) Social–ecological hotspots mapping: a spatial approach for identifying coupled social–ecological space. Landsc Urban Plan 85:27–39. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.09.007
de Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L et al (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7:260–272. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duraiappah AK, Koji N, Kazuhiko T et al (2012) Satoyama–satoumi ecosystems and human well-being: socio-ecological production landscapes of Japan. United Nations University Press, TokyoGoogle Scholar
Johnson KA, Polasky S, Nelson E, Pennington D (2012) Uncertainty in ecosystem services valuation and implications for assessing land use tradeoffs: an agricultural case study in the Minnesota River Basin. Ecol Econ 79:71–79. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.04.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koohafkan P, Jane M (2011) Conservation and adaptive management of globally important agricultural heritage systems (GIAHS). J Resour Ecol 2:22–28. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-764x.2011.01.004
Lamarque P, Tappeiner U, Turner C et al (2011) Stakeholder perceptions of grassland ecosystem services in relation to knowledge on soil fertility and biodiversity. Reg Environ Change 11:791–804. doi:10.1007/s10113-011-0214-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morri E, Pruscini F, Scolozzi R, Santolini R (2014) A forest ecosystem services evaluation at the river basin scale: supply and demand between coastal areas and upstream lands (Italy). Ecol Indic 37:210–219. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SCJ (2001) Evaluating the multi-functionalities of agriculture and forest related to the global environment and the society: report in response to an inquiry from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (in Japanese). http://www.scj.go.jp/ja/info/kohyo/pdf/shimon-18-1.pdf
Shoyama K, Yamagata Y (2014) Predicting land-use change for biodiversity conservation and climate-change mitigation and its effect on ecosystem services in a watershed in Japan. Ecosyst Serv 8:25–34. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.02.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tallis H, Kareiva P, Marvier M et al (2008) An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:9457–9464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Riper CJ, Kyle GT, Sutton SG et al (2012) Mapping outdoor recreationists’ perceived social values for ecosystem services at Hinchinbrook Island National Park, Australia. Appl Geogr 35:164–173. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2012.06.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xie J, Hu L, Tang J et al (2011) Ecological mechanisms underlying the sustainability of the agricultural heritage rice-fish coculture system. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:E1381–E1387. doi:10.1073/pnas.1111043108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshida K, Hayashi K (2012) The biodiversity observation network in the Asia-Pacific Region. In: Nakano S, Yahara T, Nakashizuka T (eds) Biodiversity observation network in the Asia-Pacific Region. Springer Japan, Tokyo, pp 27–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar