Advertisement

Modelling Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Trade-Offs in Agricultural Landscapes to Support Planning and Policy-Making

  • Davide GenelettiEmail author
  • Blal Adem Esmail
  • Rocco Scolozzi
  • Giacomo Assandri
  • Mattia Brambilla
  • Paolo Pedrini
Chapter
  • 57 Downloads
Part of the Innovations in Landscape Research book series (ILR)

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.

Keywords

Trade-offs Ecosystem services Mountain agriculture Biodiversity conservation 

References

  1. 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.2016.08.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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.2017.03.121CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 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.2018.01.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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/10.1111/1365-2664.13332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Autonomous Province of Trento (2013) ISPAT—Annuario on-line http://www.statweb.provincia.tn.it/annuario (accessed 12.16.19)
  6. 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/10.1111/1365-2664.12740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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.2015.03.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.2018.03.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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.0085635CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 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.1231332100CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 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/10.1080/00063657.2012.676623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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.0900231108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 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.e25477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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
  16. EEA (2013) The common international classification of ecosystem services—Version 4.3 (CICES)Google Scholar
  17. 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
  18. 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-11729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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
  20. 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/10.1080/21513732.2016.1275811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Foley JA (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–574.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772
  22. Fox J, Weisberg S (2011) An R companion to applied regression, secondGoogle Scholar
  23. 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/10.1080/21513732.2017.1409310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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/10.1080/21513732.2011.617711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 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.2011.01.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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.2012.12.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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.e25382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 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/s10531-011-0113-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kates RW (2011) What kind of a science is sustainability science? Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:19449–19450.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116097108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Kates BRW, Parris TM, Leiserowitz AA (2005) What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, and practice. Environment 47:8–21Google Scholar
  31. Landis DA (2017) Designing agricultural landscapes for biodiversity-based ecosystem services. Basic Appl Ecol 18:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2016.07.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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.1470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 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.2011.08.006CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Martín-López B, Iniesta-Arandia I, García-Llorente M et al (2012) Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS ONE 7:e38970.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038970CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 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/c12292jCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 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.2015.08.009CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 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.2013.03.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 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.2016.09.125CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 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.2005.03.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 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.1502452113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 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.0907284107CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 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.2012.62.5.12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ronchi S (2018) Ecosystem services for spatial planning. Springer International Publishing, ChamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 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
  45. 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/2009013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 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/s10980-017-0498-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 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/10.1080/21513732.2011.616534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 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-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Davide Geneletti
    • 1
    Email author
  • Blal Adem Esmail
    • 1
  • Rocco Scolozzi
    • 2
  • Giacomo Assandri
    • 3
  • Mattia Brambilla
    • 3
  • Paolo Pedrini
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Civil, Environmental and Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly
  2. 2.Department of Sociology and Social ResearchUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly
  3. 3.Section of Vertebrate ZoologyMuseo delle ScienzeTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations