Heterogeneity in Ecosystem Services: Multi-Scale Carbon Management in Tropical Forest Landscapes

  • Kathryn R. KirbyEmail author
  • Jeanine M. Rhemtulla
  • Sarah E. Gergel


Landscape management is increasingly focused on trade-offs among various ecosystem services. For example, while clearing forests may produce timber and provide land for agriculture, it also releases significant amounts of carbon to the atmosphere, influencing the global climate system. Evaluating the tradeoffs among ecosystem services is made difficult by the inherent heterogeneity of social–ecological systems at many levels of ecological (and social) organization. For example, the provisioning of ecosystem services may change with the size of organisms, the species composition of communities, and with variation in landscape pattern through time. In this chapter, we introduce common methods for estimating the amount of carbon stored in forests and explore the implications of spatial and temporal heterogeneity for carbon management at the landscape level. Assuming little prior knowledge of these issues, these exercises will enable students to.


Ecosystem Service Carbon Stock Clean Development Mechanism Forest Inventory Allometric Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors thank two reviewers for their comments on earlier versions. Data from the BCI forest dynamics research project was made possible by National Science Foundation grants to Stephen P. Hubbell: DEB-0640386, DEB-0425651, DEB-0346488, DEB-0129874, DEB-00753102, DEB-9909347, DEB-9615226, DEB-9615226, DEB-9405933, DEB-9221033, DEB-9100058, DEB-8906869, DEB-8605042, DEB-8206992, DEB-7922197, support from the Center for Tropical Forest Science, the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Mellon Foundation, the Small World Institute Fund, and numerous private individuals, and through the hard work of over 100 people from 10 countries over the past two decades. The plot project is part the Center for Tropical Forest Science, a global network of large-scale demographic tree plots.

References and Recommended Readings1

  1. *Balvanera P, Kremen C, Martinez-Ramos M (2005) Applying community structure analysis to ecosystem function: examples from pollination and carbon storage. Ecol Appl 15:360–375. Presents a framework for considering how community attributes other than simple species richness affect ecosystem functioning, and how species within a community differ in their relative contributions to the function. The framework is applied to case studies of watermelon pollination by bees and carbon storage by trees. Management implications are discussed. Google Scholar
  2. Brittain C, Williams N, Kremen C et al (2013) Synergistic effects of non-Apis bees and honey bees for pollination services. Proc R Soc B 280:20122767CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Bunker DE, DeClerk F, Bradford JC et al (2005) Species loss and above-ground carbon storage in a tropical forest. Science 310:1029–1031CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Chave J, Andalo C, Brown S et al (2005) Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 145:87–99CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Condit R (1998) Tropical forest census plots. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. *Coomes OT, Grimard F, Potvin C (2008) The fate of the tropical forest: carbon or cattle? Ecol Econ 65:207–212. Discusses alternate land-use scenarios proposed as carbon-emission reduction strategies in the tropics, and their economic costs and risks to rural households and communities. Based on a case study from Panama. Google Scholar
  7. Ellison AM, Bank MS, Clinton BD et al (2005) Loss of foundation species: Consequences for the structure and dynamics of forested ecosystems. Front Ecol Environ 3:479–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Harmon ME, Ferrell WK, Franklin JF (1990) Effects on carbon storage of conversion of old-growth forests to young forests. Science 247:699–702CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Hubbell SP, Foster RB, O’Brien ST et al (1999) Light gap disturbances, recruitment limitation, and tree diversity in a Neotropical forest. Science 283:554–557CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Hubbell SP, Condit R, Foster RB (2005) Barro colorado forest census plot data.
  11. Laurance WF, Laurance SG, Delamonica P (1998) Tropical forest fragmentation and greenhouse gas emissions. For Ecol Manage 110:173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. *Laurance WF, Camargo JLC, Luizão RCC et al (2011) The fate of Amazonian forest fragments: a 32-year investigation. Biol Conserv 144:56–67. Synthesizes findings from a 30-year experimental study of forest fragmentation in central Amazonia. Provides an excellent introduction to what is known about the impacts of tropical forest fragmentation on forest microclimate, tree recruitment and mortality, and various other species groups, from beetles to birds. Google Scholar
  13. Luyssaert S, Schulze ED, Börner A et al (2008) Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature 455:213–215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Manning A, Fischer J, Lindenmayer D (2006) Scattered trees are keystone structures—Implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 132:311–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Martin AR, Thomas SC (2011) A reassessment of carbon content in tropical trees. PLoS One 6, e23533CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. *Pelletier J, Kirby KR, Potvin C (2012) Consequences of carbon stock uncertainties on emissions reductions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries. Forest Policy Econ 24:3–11. Explores how forest heterogeneity, different field sampling protocols, and alternative allometric models contribute to uncertainty in forest carbon stock estimates. The impacts of this uncertainty on carbon emission baselines, and thus on projections of how much a given project could contribute to carbon-emission reductions, are discussed. Google Scholar
  17. Powers J, Velásquez-Runk J (2016) Field exercise: quantifying aboveground biomass stocks in different land-use and forest types. Online supplementary material for Heterogeneity in ecosystem services: multi-scale carbon management in tropical forest landscapes (Chapter 17). In: Gergel SE, Turner MG (eds) Learning landscape ecology: A practical guide to concepts and techniques. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Salick J, Amend A, Anderson D et al (2007) Tibetan sacred sites conserve old growth trees and cover in the eastern Himalayas. Biodivers Conserv 16:693–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ziter C, Bennett EM, Gonzalez A (2013) Functional diversity and management mediate aboveground carbon stocks in small forest fragments. Ecosphere 4:art85Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kathryn R. Kirby
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jeanine M. Rhemtulla
    • 2
  • Sarah E. Gergel
    • 2
  1. 1.University of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.University of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations