Abstract
Agricultural areas provide non-commodity outputs besides food and fiber that can contribute to sustainability. Balancing the interest of farmers and the benefits for the society is a key challenge. Assessing the potential benefits for biodiversity and understanding spatial and temporal trade-offs among multiple ecosystem services (ES) from agricultural areas remain a key challenge, especially in mountainous landscapes. We develop an approach to assess the trade-offs and synergies between ES and biodiversity associated with agricultural areas, focusing on mountain landscapes. We first model the distribution of ES and biodiversity in seven study areas in northern Italy, aiming at providing guidance on the relationship between the intensity of use of agricultural land and the provision of ES. We then performed a thematic aggregation of the indicators and correlation analysis followed to gain a better understanding of the spatial and temporal ES trade-offs. Finally, we discuss how the results can provide support to planning and policy-making in different sectors, with a focus on rural development and nature conservation planning.
Text and figures of this chapter, except for Section 4, are based on a revised version of the following paper: Geneletti D, Scolozzi R & Adem Esmail B (2018) Assessing ecosystem services and biodiversity tradeoffs across agricultural landscapes in a mountain region. Int J Biodivers Sci, Ecosyst Serv Manage 14:1189–209. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2018.1526214
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adem Esmail B, Geneletti D (2017) Design and impact assessment of watershed investments: An approach based on ecosystem services and boundary work. Environ Impact Assess Rev 62:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2016.08.001
Adem Esmail B, Geneletti D, Albert C (2017) Boundary work for implementing adaptive management: a water sector application. Sci Total Environ 593–594:274–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.121
Assandri G, Bogliani G, Pedrini P, Brambilla M (2018) Beautiful agricultural landscapes promote cultural ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation. Agric Ecosyst Environ 256:200–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2018.01.012
Assandri G, Bogliani G, Pedrini P, Brambilla M (2019) Toward the next common agricultural policy reform: determinants of avian communities in hay meadows reveal current policy’s inadequacy for biodiversity conservation in grassland ecosystems. J Appl Ecol 56:604–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13332
Autonomous Province of Trento (2013) ISPAT—Annuario on-line http://www.statweb.provincia.tn.it/annuario (accessed 12.16.19)
Barbaro L, Rusch A, Muiruri EW et al (2017) Avian pest control in vineyards is driven by interactions between bird functional diversity and landscape heterogeneity. J Appl Ecol 54:500–508. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12740
Bennett EM, Cramer W, Begossi A et al (2015) Linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being: three challenges for designing research for sustainability. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 14:76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.007
Brambilla M, Gustin M, Vitulano S et al (2017) Sixty years of habitat decline: impact of land-cover changes in northern Italy on the decreasing ortolan bunting Emberiza hortulana. Reg Environ Chang 17:323–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1019-y
Brambilla M, Resano-Mayor J, Scridel D et al (2018) Past and future impact of climate change on foraging habitat suitability in a high-alpine bird species: management options to buffer against global warming effects. Biol Conserv 221:209–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.03.008
Buri P, Humbert J-Y, Arlettaz R (2014) Promoting pollinating insects in intensive agricultural matrices: field-scale experimental manipulation of hay-meadow mowing regimes and its effects on bees. PLoS ONE 9:e85635. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085635
Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F et al (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100:8086–8091. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1231332100
Ceresa F, Bogliani G, Pedrini P, Brambilla M (2012) The importance of key marginal habitat features for birds in farmland: an assessment of habitat preferences of Red-backed Shrikes Lanius collurio in the Italian Alps. Bird Study 59:327–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063657.2012.676623
Clark WC, Tomich TP, van Noordwijk M et al (2016) Boundary work for sustainable development: natural resource management at the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:4615–4622. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0900231108
Cortinovis C, Geneletti D (2018) Mapping and assessing ecosystem services to support urban planning: a case study on brownfield regeneration in Trento. Italy. One Ecosyst 3:e25477. https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.3.e25477
Daw TM, Coulthard S, Cheung WWL et al (2015) Evaluating taboo trade-offs in ecosystems services and human well-being. Proc Natl Acad Sci 201414900. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414900112
EEA (2013) The common international classification of ecosystem services—Version 4.3 (CICES)
Feld CK, Martins da Silva P, Paulo Sousa J et al (2009) Indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services: a synthesis across ecosystems and spatial scales. Oikos 118:1862–1871. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.17860.x
Ferrari M, Geneletti D (2014) Mapping and assessing multiple ecosystem services in an alpine region: a study in Trentino, Italy. Ann Bot 4:65–71. https://doi.org/10.4462/annbotrm-11729
Ferrari M, Geneletti D, Cayuela L et al (2016) Analysis of bundles and drivers of change of multiple ecosystem services in an Alpine region. J Environ Assess Policy Manag 18:1650026. https://doi.org/10.1142/s1464333216500265
Fichino BS, Pivello VR, Santos RF (2017) Trade-offs among ecosystem services under different pinion harvesting intensities in Brazilian Araucaria forests. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag 13:139–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2016.1275811
Foley JA (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–574. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772
Fox J, Weisberg S (2011) An R companion to applied regression, second
Fürst C, Luque S, Geneletti D (2017) Nexus thinking—how ecosystem services concepts and practice can contribute balancing integrative resource management through facilitating cross-scale and cross-sectoral planning. Int J Biodivers Sci Manage 13(1):1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2017.1409310
Geneletti D (2011) Reasons and options for integrating ecosystem services in strategic environmental assessment of spatial planning. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag 7:143–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2011.617711
Geneletti D (2012) Environmental assessment of spatial plan policies through land use scenarios. A study in a fast-developing town in rural Mozambique. Environ Impact Assess Rev 32:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2011.01.015
Geneletti D (2013) Assessing the impact of alternative land-use zoning policies on future ecosystem services. Environ Impact Assess Rev 40:25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2012.12.003
Geneletti D, Adem Esmail B, Cortinovis C (2018) Identifying representative case studies for ecosystem services mapping and assessment across Europe. One Ecosyst 3:e25382. https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.3.e25382
Holland RA, Eigenbrod F, Armsworth PR et al (2011) The influence of temporal variation on relationships between ecosystem services. Biodivers Conserv 20:3285–3294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0113-1
Kates RW (2011) What kind of a science is sustainability science? Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:19449–19450. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116097108
Kates BRW, Parris TM, Leiserowitz AA (2005) What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, and practice. Environment 47:8–21
Landis DA (2017) Designing agricultural landscapes for biodiversity-based ecosystem services. Basic Appl Ecol 18:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2016.07.005
Locatelli B, Lavorel S, Sloan S et al (2017) Characteristic trajectories of ecosystem services in mountains. Front Ecol Environ 15:150–159. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1470
Mace GM, Norris K, Fitter AH (2012) Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. Trends Ecol Evol 27:19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.08.006
MartÃn-López B, Iniesta-Arandia I, GarcÃa-Llorente M et al (2012) Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS ONE 7:e38970. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038970
Mckenzie E, Posner S, Tillmann P et al (2014) Understanding the use of ecosystem service knowledge in decision making: lessons from international experiences of spatial planning. Environ Plan C Gov Policy 32:320–340. https://doi.org/10.1068/c12292j
Oliver TH, Heard MS, Isaac NJB et al (2015) Biodiversity and resilience of ecosystem functions. Trends Ecol Evol 30:673–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2015.08.009
Orsi F, Geneletti D (2013) Using geotagged photographs and GIS analysis to estimate visitor flows in natural areas. J Nat Conserv 21:359–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2013.03.001
Persichillo MG, Bordoni M, Meisina C (2017) The role of land use changes in the distribution of shallow landslides. Sci Total Environ 574:924–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.125
Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Modell 190:231–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.03.026
Posner SM, McKenzie E, Ricketts TH (2016) Policy impacts of ecosystem services knowledge. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:201502452. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1502452113
Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson GD, Bennett EM (2010) Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:5242–5247. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0907284107
Reyers B, Polasky S, Tallis H et al (2012) Finding common ground for biodiversity and ecosystem services. Bioscience 62:503–507. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.5.12
Ronchi S (2018) Ecosystem services for spatial planning. Springer International Publishing, Cham
Ruckelshaus M, McKenzie E, Tallis H et al (2015) Notes from the field: lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions. Ecol Econ 115:11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.009
Simon S, Bouvier J-C, Debras J-F, Sauphanor B (2010) Biodiversity and pest management in orchard systems. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 30:139–152. https://doi.org/10.1051/agro/2009013
Tenerelli P, Püffel C, Luque S (2017) Spatial assessment of aesthetic services in a complex mountain region: combining visual landscape properties with crowdsourced geographic information. Landscape Ecol 32:1097–1115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-017-0498-7
von Haaren C, Albert C (2011) Integrating ecosystem services and environmental planning: limitations and synergies. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag 7:150–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2011.616534
Zhang L, Fu B, Lü Y, Zeng Y (2015) Balancing multiple ecosystem services in conservation priority setting. Landscape Ecol 30:535–546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0106-z
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Geneletti, D., Adem Esmail, B., Scolozzi, R., Assandri, G., Brambilla, M., Pedrini, P. (2020). Modelling Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Trade-Offs in Agricultural Landscapes to Support Planning and Policy-Making. In: Mirschel, W., Terleev, V., Wenkel, KO. (eds) Landscape Modelling and Decision Support. Innovations in Landscape Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37421-1_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37421-1_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-37420-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-37421-1
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)