A Framework for Ecosystem Performance Using Khazan Example

  • Sangeeta M. Sonak
Part of the Advances in Asian Human-Environmental Research book series (AAHER)


Understanding the dynamics of the khazan ecosystem is critical to draw conclusions about the sustainability of this ecosystem. Comprehending different factors that are necessary for ecosystem performance, its functioning and environmental sustainability will help in informed decision-making that is necessary to arrest erosion of the khazan ecosystems or any other ecosystem in general. This chapter presents a commentary on ecosystem services provided by khazans, linkages between ecological, sociocultural and economic dimensions, ecosystem performance, ecosystem functions, ecosystem vulnerability and resilience. It presents a qualitative conceptual framework for the khazan ecosystem and then relates this framework to the other global ecosystems.


Ecosystem performance Functions Vulnerability Resilience Conceptual framework 


  1. Adger WN (2006) Vulnerability. Glob Environ Chang 16:268–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreasen JK, O’Neill RV, Noss R, Slosser SC (2001) Considerations for the development of a terrestrial index of ecological integrity. Ecol Indic 1:21–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbier EB, Burgess J, Folke C (1994) Paradise lost? In: The ecological economics of biodiversity. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Berkes F, Folke C (eds) (2000) Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, p 459Google Scholar
  5. Chiesura A, de Groot R (2003) Critical natural capital: a socio-cultural perspective. Ecol Econ 44:219–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Curran SR, Agardy T (2002) Common property systems, migration, and coastal ecosystems. Ambio 31:303–305Google Scholar
  7. Daily GC (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  8. De Angelis DL, Mulholland PJ, Palumbo AV, Steinman AD, Huston MA, Elwood JW (1989) Nutrient dynamics and food web stability. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 20:71–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Groot R (1992) Functions of nature. Wolters-Noordhoff, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  10. De Groot R, Van der Perk J, Chiesura A, van Vliet A (2003) Importance and threat as determining factors for criticality of natural capital. Ecol Econ 44:187–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deutsch L, Folke C, Skanberg K (2003) The critical natural capital of ecosystem performance as insurance for human well-being. Ecol Econ 44:205–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ekins P, Simon S (2003) An illustrative application of the CRITINC framework to the UK. Ecol Econ 44:255–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ekins P, Simon S, Deutsch L, Folke C, de Groot RS (2003) A framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability. Ecol Econ 44:165–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holling C, Schindler D, Walker B, Roughgarden J (1995) Biodiversity and the functioning of ecosystems: an ecological synthesis. In: Perrings C, Mäler KG, Folke C, Holling C, Jansson BO (eds) Biodiversity loss: economic and ecological issues. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 44–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Levin S (1999) Fragile dominion: complexity and the commons. Perseus Books, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  16. Lobo-Ferreira JP, Cabral M (1991) Proposal for an operational definition of vulnerability for the European community’s atlas of ground water resources. Paper presented in the meeting of the European institute for water, groundwater work group, Brussels, Feb 1991Google Scholar
  17. Lobo-Ferreira JP, Chachadi AG, Oliveira MM, Nagel K, Raikar PS (2003) Ground water vulnerability assessment for the Goa case study area. In: Noronha L, Lourenco N, Lobo-Ferreira JP, Lleopart A, Feoli E, Sawkar K, Chachadi AG (eds) Coastal tourism, environment and sustainable local development. TERI Press, New Delhi, pp 167–178Google Scholar
  18. Mac Donald DV, Hanley N, Moffatt I (1999) Applying the concept of natural capital criticality to regional resource management. Ecol Econ 29:73–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Report (2005) Millennium ecosystem assessment, ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  20. Noël JF, O’Connor M (1998) Strong sustainability and critical natural capital. In: Costanza R (ed) Valuation for sustainable development, methods and policy indicators. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  21. Pearce DW (1993) Economic values and the natural world. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Pearce DW, Turner RK (1990) Economics of natural resources and the environment. Harvester Wheatsheaf, HertfordshireGoogle Scholar
  23. Rapport DJ, Costanza R, Mc Michael AJ (1998) Assessing ecosystem health. Trends Ecol Evol 13(10):397–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sonak S (2005) Role of institutions in global environmental change. APN Newsl 11(3)…/d87b61d9653831c218e3149b91603df9.pdf
  25. UNISDR/UNDP (2012) A toolkit for integrating disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation into ecosystem management of coastal and marine areas in South Asia. Outcome of the South Asian consultative workshop on integration of disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation into biodiversity and ecosystem management of coastal and marine areas in South Asia held in New Delhi on 6–7 Mar 2012. UNDP, New Delhi, 173 pagesGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sangeeta M. Sonak
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Environment and Natural Resource Management, SrujanPanajiIndia

Personalised recommendations