Sustainability Science

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 257–273 | Cite as

Mapping and characterizing ecosystem services of social–ecological production landscapes: case study of Noto, Japan

  • Shizuka HashimotoEmail author
  • Shogo Nakamura
  • Osamu Saito
  • Ryo Kohsaka
  • Chiho Kamiyama
  • Mitsuyuki Tomiyoshi
  • Tomoya Kishioka
Special Feature: Original Article Pathways towards sustainable landscapes


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 



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.


  1. Aizaki H, Sato K, Osari H (2006) Contingent valuation approach in measuring the multifunctionality of agriculture and rural areas in Japan. Paddy Water Environ 4:217–222. doi: 10.1007/s10333-006-0052-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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
  3. Barrena J, Nahuelhual L, Báez A et al (2014) Valuing cultural ecosystem services: agricultural heritage in Chiloé island, southern Chile. Ecosyst Serv 7:66–75. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.12.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown G (2004) Mapping spatial attributes in survey research for natural resource management: methods and applications. Soc Nat Resour 18:17–39. doi: 10.1080/08941920590881853 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang K, Ying Y (2005) External benefits of preserving agricultural land: Taiwan’s rice fields. Soc Sci J 42:285–293. doi: 10.1016/j.soscij.2005.03.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cocks M (2006) Biocultural diversity: moving beyond the realm of “indigenous” and “local” people. Hum Ecol 34:185–200. doi: 10.1007/s10745-006-9013-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Daily GC, Polasky S, Goldstein J et al (2009) Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Front Ecol Environ 7:21–28. doi: 10.1890/080025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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.2009.10.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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
  10. Egoh B, Rouget M, Reyers B et al (2007) Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: a review. Ecol Econ 63:714–721. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.04.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. FAO (2011) Proposal of Noto's Satoyama and Satoumi, pp 1–74.
  12. Fisher B, Turner RK, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68:643–653. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Office of Japan (2014) National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report of Japan, vol 674.
  14. Gu H, Subramanian SM (2014) Drivers of change in socio-ecological production landscapes: implications for better management. Ecol Soc 19(1):41. doi: 10.5751/ES-06283-190141
  15. Hanewinkel M, Hummel S, Albrecht A (2010) Assessing natural hazards in forestry for risk management: a review. Eur J For Res 130:329–351. doi: 10.1007/s10342-010-0392-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harrop SR (2007) Traditional agricultural landscapes as protected areas in international law and policy. Agric Ecosyst Environ 121:296–307. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hein L, van Koppen K, de Groot RS, van Ierland EC (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 57:209–228. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hernández-Morcillo M, Plieninger T, Bieling C (2013) An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators. Ecol Indic 29:434–444. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.01.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huang CC, Tsai MH, Lin WT et al (2006) Multifunctionality of paddy fields in Taiwan. Paddy Water Environ 4:199–204. doi: 10.1007/s10333-006-0049-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ilea RC (2008) Intensive livestock farming: global trends, increased environmental concerns, and ethical solutions. J Agric Environ Ethics 22:153–167. doi: 10.1007/s10806-008-9136-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Indrawan M, Yabe M, Nomura H, Harrison R (2014) Deconstructing satoyama—the socio-ecological landscape in Japan. Ecol Eng 64:77–84. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.12.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ishikawa Prefecture (2006) Vision of food and agriculture in Ishikawa, Ishikawa prefecture (in Japanese).
  23. Ishikawa Prefecture (2007) Development plan of the Noto peninsula region (in Japanese).
  24. Ishikawa Prefecture (2013) Dams of Ishikawa (in Japanese). Accessed 1 Oct 2014
  25. Japan Meteorological Agency (2014) Risk map of extreme weather (in Japanese).
  26. Joetsu City and Research Institute for Local Government (2013) Development policy for hilly and mountainous area (in Japanese).
  27. 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.2012.04.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 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
  29. 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/s10113-011-0214-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Layke C, Mapendembe A, Brown C et al (2012) Indicators from the global and sub-global Millennium Ecosystem Assessments: an analysis and next steps. Ecol Indic 17:77–87. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. MA (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: general synthesis. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  32. Matsuno Y, Nakamura K, Masumoto T et al (2006) Prospects for multifunctionality of paddy rice cultivation in Japan and other countries in monsoon Asia. Paddy Water Environ 4:189–197. doi: 10.1007/s10333-006-0048-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Milcu AI, Hanspach J, Abson D, Fischer J (2013) Cultural ecosystem services: a literature review and prospects for future research. Ecol Soc. doi: 10.5751/ES-05790-180344 Google Scholar
  34. 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.2013.08.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nahuelhual L, Carmona A, Laterra P et al (2014) A mapping approach to assess intangible cultural ecosystem services: the case of agriculture heritage in Southern Chile. Ecol Indic 40:90–101. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.01.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Naidoo R, Balmford A, Costanza R et al (2008) Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:9495–9500. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0707823105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Natuhara Y (2013) Ecosystem services by paddy fields as substitutes of natural wetlands in Japan. Ecol Eng 56:97–106. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2012.04.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ninan KN, Inoue M (2013) Valuing forest ecosystem services: Case study of a forest reserve in Japan. Ecosyst Serv 5:78–87. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.02.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. NRIAE (1998) Calculation of public functions of agriculture and rural areas with replacement cost method. Q J Agric Econ 52:113–138Google Scholar
  40. Ostrom E (2009) A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social–ecological systems. Science 325:419–422. doi: 10.1126/science.1172133 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Power AG (2010) Ecosystem services and agriculture: tradeoffs and synergies. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 365:2959–2971. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0143 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Qiu J, Turner MG (2013) Spatial interactions among ecosystem services in an urbanizing agricultural watershed. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110:12149–12154. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1310539110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Qiu Z, Chen B, Takemoto K (2013) Conservation of terraced paddy fields engaged with multiple stakeholders: the case of the Noto GIAHS site in Japan. Paddy Water Environ 12:275–283. doi: 10.1007/s10333-013-0387-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson GD, Bennett EM (2010) Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:5242–5247. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0907284107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Raymond CM, Bryan BA, MacDonald DH et al (2009) Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 68:1301–1315. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.12.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 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).
  47. 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.2014.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Su C, Fu B, Wei Y et al (2011) Ecosystem management based on ecosystem services and human activities: a case study in the Yanhe watershed. Sustain Sci 7:17–32. doi: 10.1007/s11625-011-0145-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sugito H, Nishimura T, Kato C et al (2013) Analysis of runoff in the Tedorigawa basin using mesh data of gamsDB in Japanese. Proc Jpn Soc Irrig Drain Rural Eng (in Japanese), pp 72–73Google Scholar
  50. Tallis H, Polasky S (2009) Mapping and valuing ecosystem services as an approach for conservation and natural-resource management. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1162:265–283. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04152.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 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
  52. 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.2012.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 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.1111043108 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 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

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shizuka Hashimoto
    • 1
    Email author
  • Shogo Nakamura
    • 2
  • Osamu Saito
    • 3
  • Ryo Kohsaka
    • 4
  • Chiho Kamiyama
    • 3
  • Mitsuyuki Tomiyoshi
    • 4
  • Tomoya Kishioka
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Global Environmental StudiesKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  2. 2.Center for Social and Environmental Systems ResearchNational Institute for Environmental StudiesTsukubaJapan
  3. 3.UNU Institute for the Advanced Studies of SustainabilityTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Graduate School of Human and Socio-Environmental StudiesKanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan

Personalised recommendations