Spatial relationships and impacts of global change on ecosystem services in the European Alps
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.2022.1102Keywords:
cultural ecosystem services, global change, mountain landscape, spatial analysisAbstract
The increasing interest in the concept of ecosystem services (ES) for decision-making requires a profound understanding of ecological processes, social values and spatial patterns to mitigate the effects of global change on human well-being. Although great progress has been made in the assessment and valuation of ES, scientists are still facing challenges due to a frequent emphasis on ES potential and individual ecosystems as well as disciplinary thinking. This post-doctoral thesis addresses these challenges by (1) contributing to novel mapping approaches with a focus on cultural ES, (2) examining impacts of global change on ES at the ecosystem and landscape level and (3) analysing spatial patterns and interactions between ES supply and demand for ES across multiple spatial scales. This work focuses on the European Alps, as mountain regions are highly important for providing ES while beeing particularly vulnerable to global change. The findings clearly confirm the relevance of mountain landscapes not only to local populations, but indicates spatial interactions that go far beyond the regional level with great implications for decision- and policy-making. The findings also indicate how the concept of ES may promote biodiversity conservation and the maintainance of multiple ES supported by a sustainable use of natural resources. This work also suggests how interdisciplinary approaches can help to integrate ES supply and demand across different temporal and spatial scales for decision-making in planning and management, taking into account ecological processes in response to climate change. Finally, this work reveals research gaps that need to be addressed in future research to deepen the understanding of socio-ecological systems and underlying mechanisms, as well as to enhance interdisciplinary research.
References
Barnaud, C., Corbera, E., Muradian, R., Salliou, N., Sirami, C., Vialatte, A., Choisis, J.P., Dendoncker, N., Mathevet, R., Moreau, C., Reyes-García, V., Boada, M., Deconchat, M., Cibien, C., Garnier, S., Maneja, R., Antona, M., 2018. Ecosystem services, social interdependencies, and collective action: A conceptual framework. Ecology and Society 23, 15. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09848-230115
Barton, D.N., Kelemen, E., Dick, J., Martin-Lopez, B., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Jacobs, S., Hendriks, C.M.A., Termansen, M., García- Llorente, M., Primmer, E., Dunford, R., Harrison, P.A., Turkelboom, F., Saarikoski, H., van Dijk, J., Rusch, G.M., Palomo, I., Yli-Pelkonen, V.J., Carvalho, L., Baró, F., Langemeyer, J., van der Wal, J.T., Mederly, P., Priess, J.A., Luque, S., Berry, P., Santos, R., Odee, D., Pastur, G.M., García Blanco, G., Saarela, S.-R., Silaghi, D., Pataki, G., Masi, F., Vădineanu, A., Mukhopadhyay, R., Lapola, D.M., 2018. (Dis) integrated valuation – Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support. Ecosystem Services 29, 529–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.021
Baustert, P., Othoniel, B., Rugani, B., Leopold, U., 2018. Uncertainty analysis in integrated environmental models for ecosystem service assessments: Frameworks, challenges and gaps. Ecosystem Services 33, 110–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.08.007
Bennett, E.M., Cramer, W., Begossi, A., Cundill, G., Díaz, S., Egoh, B.N., Geijzendorffer, I.R., Krug, C.B., Lavorel, S., Lazos, E., Lebel, L., Martín-López, B., Meyfroidt, P., Mooney, H.A., Nel, J.L., Pascual, U., Payet, K., Harguindeguy, N.P., Peterson, G.D., Prieur-Richard, A.-H., Reyers, B., Roebeling, P., Seppelt, R., Solan, M., Tschakert, P., Tscharntke, T., Turner, B.L., Verburg, P.H., Viglizzo, E.F., White, P.C.L., Woodward, G., 2015. Linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being: three challenges for designing research for sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14, 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.007
Birch, J.C., Thapa, I., Balmford, A., Bradbury, R.B., Brown, C., Butchart, S.H.M., Gurung, H., Hughes, F.M.R., Mulligan, M., Pandeya, B., Peh, K.S.H., Stattersfield, A.J., Walpole, M., Thomas, D.H.L., 2014. What benefits do community forests provide, and to whom? A rapid assessment of ecosystem services from a Himalayan forest, Nepal. Ecosystem Services 8, 118–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.03.005
Bryan, B.A., Ye, Y., Zhang, J., Connor, J.D., 2018. Land-use change impacts on ecosystem services value: Incorporating the scarcity effects of supply and demand dynamics. Ecosystem Services 32, 144–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.07.002
Bürgi, M., Östlund, L., Mladenoff, D.J., 2017. Legacy Effects of Human Land Use: Ecosystems as Time-Lagged Systems. Ecosystems 20, 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-016-0051-6
Bürgi, M., Silbernagel, J., Wu, J., Kienast, F., 2015. Linking ecosystem services with landscape history. Landscape Ecology 30, 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0102-3
Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Müller, F., Windhorst, W., 2009. Landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services - A concept for land-cover based assessments. Landscape Online 15. https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.200915
Burkhard, B., Maes, J. (Eds.), 2017. Mapping Ecosystem Services, Mapping Ecosystem Services. Advanced Books. https://doi.org/10.3897/ab.e12837
Chan, K.M.A., Satterfield, T., Goldstein, J., 2012. Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics 74, 8–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.11.011
Cord, A.F., Bartkowski, B., Beckmann, M., Dittrich, A., Hermans-Neumann, K., Kaim, A., Lienhoop, N., Locher-Krause, K., Priess, J., Schröter-Schlaack, C., Schwarz, N., Seppelt, R., Strauch, M., Václavík, T., Volk, M., 2017. Towards systematic analyses of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies: Main concepts, methods and the road ahead. Ecosystem Services 28, 264–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.012
Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R. V, Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., van den Belt, M., 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
Cumming, G.S., Buerkert, A., Hoffmann, E.M., Schlecht, E., Von Cramon-Taubadel, S., Tscharntke, T., 2014. Implications of agricultural transitions and urbanization for ecosystem services. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13945
Egarter Vigl, L., Schirpke, U., Tasser, E., Tappeiner, U., 2016. Linking long-term landscape dynamics to the multiple interactions among ecosystem services in the European Alps. Landscape Ecology 31, 1903–1918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0389-3
Eigenbrod, F., Armsworth, P.R., Anderson, B.J., Heinemeyer, A., Gillings, S., Roy, D.B., Thomas, C.D., Gaston, K.J., 2010. The impact of proxy-based methods on mapping the distribution of ecosystem services. Journal of Applied Ecology 47, 377–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01777.x
Grêt-Regamey, A., Brunner, S.H., Kienast, F., 2012. Mountain Ecosystem Services: Who Cares? Mountain Research and Development 32, S23–S34. https://doi.org/10.1659/mrd-journal-d-10-00115.s1
Grêt-Regamey, A., Weibel, B., 2020. Global assessment of mountain ecosystem services using earth observation data. Ecosystem Services 46, 101213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101213
Guerry, A.D., Polasky, S., Lubchenco, J., Chaplin-Kramer, R., Daily, G.C., Griffin, R., Ruckelshaus, M., Bateman, I.J., Duraiappah, A., Elmqvist, T., Feldman, M.W., Folke, C., Hoekstra, J., Kareiva, P.M., Keeler, B.L., Li, S., McKenzie, E., Ouyang, Z., Reyers, B., Ricketts, T.H., Rockström, J., Tallis, H., Vira, B., 2015. Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: From promise to practice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 7348 LP – 7355. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1503751112
Guo, Z., Zhang, L., Li, Y., 2010. Increased dependence of humans on ecosystem services and biodiversity. PLoS ONE 5. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013113
Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M., 2018. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5. 1. Guidance on the Application of the Revised Structure. Fabis Consulting.
Hernández-Morcillo, M., Plieninger, T., Bieling, C., 2013. An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators. Ecological Indicators 29, 434–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.01.013
Hirons, M., Comberti, C., Dunford, R., 2016. Valuing Cultural Ecosystem Services. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 41, 545–574. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085831
Hossain, M.S., Pogue, S.J., Trenchard, L., Van Oudenhoven, A.P.E., Washbourne, C.-L., Muiruri, E.W., Tomczyk, A.M., García-Llorente, M., Hale, R., Hevia, V., Adams, T., Tavallali, L., De Bell, S., Pye, M., Resende, F., 2018. Identifying future research directions for biodiversity, ecosystem services and sustainability: perspectives from early-career researchers. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 25, 249–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2017.1361480
Hou, Y., Burkhard, B., Müller, F., 2013. Uncertainties in landscape analysis and ecosystem service assessment. Journal of Environmental Management 127, S117–S131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.12.002
Keeler, B.L., Dalzell, B.J., Gourevitch, J.D., Hawthorne, P.L., Johnson, K.A., Noe, R.R., 2019. Putting people on the map improves the prioritization of ecosystem services. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 17, 151–156. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2004
Khanna, M., Swinton, S.M., Messer, K.D., 2018. Sustaining our Natural Resources in the Face of Increasing Societal Demands on Agriculture: Directions for Future Research. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 40, 38–59. https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/ppx055
Landuyt, D., Van der Biest, K., Broekx, S., Staes, J., Meire, P., Goethals, P.L.M.P.L.M., 2015. A GIS plug-in for Bayesian belief networks: Towards a transparent software framework to assess and visualise uncertainties in ecosystem service mapping. Environmental Modelling & Software 71, 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.05.002
Lautenbach, S., Mupepele, A.-C., Dormann, C.F., Lee, H., Schmidt, S., Scholte, S.S.K., Seppelt, R., van Teeffelen, A.J.A., Verhagen, W., Volk, M., 2019. Blind spots in ecosystem services research and challenges for implementation. Regional Environmental Change 19, 2151–2172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1457-9
Lavorel, S., Colloff, M.J., Mcintyre, S., Doherty, M.D., Murphy, H.T., Metcalfe, D.J., Dunlop, M., Williams, R.J., Wise, R.M., Williams, K.J., 2015. Ecological mechanisms underpinning climate adaptation services. Global Change Biology 21, 12–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12689
Locatelli, B., Lavorel, S., Sloan, S., Tappeiner, U., Geneletti, D., 2017. Characteristic trajectories of ecosystem services in mountains. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1470
McDonough, K., Hutchinson, S., Moore, T., Hutchinson, J.M.S., 2017. Analysis of publication trends in ecosystem services research. Ecosystem Services 25, 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.03.022
MEA, 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being. Island press United States of America, Washington, DC.
Nagler, M., Fontana, V., Lair, G.J., Radtke, A., Tasser, E., Zerbe, S., Tappeiner, U., 2015. Different management of larch grasslands in the European Alps shows low impact on above- and belowground carbon stocks. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 213, 186–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.08.005
Nowak-Olejnik, A., Schirpke, U., Tappeiner, U., 2022. A systematic review on subjective well-being benefits associated with cultural ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services 57, 101467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101467
Olander, L.P., Johnston, R.J., Tallis, H., Kagan, J., Maguire, L.A., Polasky, S., Urban, D., Boyd, J., Wainger, L., Palmer, M., 2018. Benefit relevant indicators: Ecosystem services measures that link ecological and social outcomes. Ecological Indicators 85, 1262–1272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.12.001
Palomo, I., Felipe-Lucia, M.R., Bennett, E.M., Martín-López, B., Pascual, U., 2016. Chapter Six - Disentangling the Pathways and Effects of Ecosystem Service Co-Production, in: Woodward, G., Bohan, D.A.B.T.-A. in E.R. (Eds.), Ecosystem Services: From Biodiversity to Society, Part 2. Academic Press, pp. 245–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aecr.2015.09.003
Pastur, G.M., Peri, P.L.P.L., Lencinas, M.V.M. V., García-Llorente, M., Martín-López, B., Martínez Pastur, G., Peri, P.L.P.L., Lencinas, M.V.M. V., García-Llorente, M., Martín-López, B., 2016. Spatial patterns of cultural ecosystem services provision in Southern Patagonia. Landscape Ecology 31, 383–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0254-9
Ruckelshaus, M., McKenzie, E., Tallis, H., Guerry, A., Daily, G., Kareiva, P., Polasky, S., Ricketts, T., Bhagabati, N., Wood, S.A., Bernhardt, J., 2015. Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions. Ecological Economics 115, 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.009
Rüdisser, J., Schirpke, U., Tappeiner, U., 2019. Symbolic entities in the European Alps: Perception and use of a cultural ecosystem service. Ecosystem Services 39, 100980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100980
Schägner, J.P., Brander, L., Maes, J., Hartje, V., 2013. Mapping ecosystem services’ values: Current practice and future prospects. Ecosystem Services 4, 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.02.003
Schirpke, U., Altzinger, A., Leitinger, G., Tasser, E., 2019a. Change from agricultural to touristic use: Effects on the aesthetic value of landscapes over the last 150 years. Landscape and Urban Planning 187, 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.03.004
Schirpke, U., Candiago, S., Egarter Vigl, L., Jäger, H., Labadini, A., Marsoner, T., Meisch, C., Tasser, E., Tappeiner, U., 2019b. Integrating supply, flow and demand to enhance the understanding of interactions among multiple ecosystem services. Science of the Total Environment 651, 928–941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.235
Schirpke, U., Kohler, M., Leitinger, G., Fontana, V., Tasser, E., Tappeiner, U., 2017a. Future impacts of changing land-use and climate on ecosystem services of mountain grassland and their resilience. Ecosystem Services 26, 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.06.008
Schirpke, U., Marino, D., Marucci, A., Palmieri, M., 2018a. Positive effects of payments for ecosystem services on biodiversity and socio-economic development: Examples from Natura 2000 sites in Italy. Ecosystem Services 34, 96–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.10.006
Schirpke, U., Marino, D., Marucci, A., Palmieri, M., Scolozzi, R., 2017b. Operationalising ecosystem services for effective management of protected areas: Experiences and challenges. Ecosystem Services 28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.009
Schirpke, U., Meisch, C., Marsoner, T., Tappeiner, U., 2018b. Revealing spatial and temporal patterns of outdoor recreation in the European Alps and their surroundings. Ecosystem Services 31, 336–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.017
Schirpke, U., Meisch, C., Tappeiner, U., 2018c. Symbolic species as a cultural ecosystem service in the European Alps: insights and open issues. Landscape Ecology 33, 711–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-018-0628-x
Schirpke, U., Scolozzi, R., Dean, G., Haller, A., Jäger, H., Kister, J., Kovács, B., Sarmiento, F.O., Sattler, B., Schleyer, C., 2020. Cultural ecosystem services in mountain regions: Conceptualising conflicts among users and limitations of use. Ecosystem Services 46, 101210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101210
Schirpke, U., Scolozzi, R., De Marco, C., Tappeiner, U., 2014. Mapping beneficiaries of ecosystem services flows from Natura 2000 sites. Ecosystem Services 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.06.003
Schirpke, U., Tappeiner, G., Tasser, E., Tappeiner, U., 2019c. Using conjoint analysis to gain deeper insights into aesthetic landscape preferences. Ecological Indicators 96, 202–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.09.001
Schirpke, U., Tappeiner, U., Tasser, E., 2019d. A transnational perspective of global and regional ecosystem service flows from and to mountain regions. Scientific Reports 9, 6678. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-43229-z
Schirpke, U., Timmermann, F., Tappeiner, U., Tasser, E., 2016. Cultural ecosystem services of mountain regions: Modelling the aesthetic value. Ecological Indicators 69, 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.04.001
Schirpke, U., Vigl, L.E., Tasser, E., Tappeiner, U., 2019e. Analyzing spatial congruencies and mismatches between supply, demand and flow of ecosystem services and sustainable development. Sustainability (Switzerland) 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082227
Schirpke, U., Wang, G., Padoa-Schioppa, E., 2021. Editorial: Mountain landscapes: Protected areas, ecosystem services, and future challenges. Ecosystem Services 49, 101302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101302
Schröter, M., Stumpf, K.H., Loos, J., van Oudenhoven, A.P.E., Böhnke-Henrichs, A., Abson, D.J., 2017. Refocusing ecosystem services towards sustainability. Ecosystem Services 25, 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.03.019
Scolozzi, R., Schirpke, U., Morri, E., D’Amato, D., Santolini, R., 2014. Ecosystem services-based SWOT analysis of protected areas for conservation strategies. Journal of Environmental Management 146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.05.040
Seidl, R., Albrich, K., Erb, K., Formayer, H., Leidinger, D., Leitinger, G., Tappeiner, U., Tasser, E., Rammer, W., 2019. What drives the future supply of regulating ecosystem services in a mountain forest landscape? Forest Ecology and Management 445, 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2019.03.047
Spake, R., Lasseur, R., Crouzat, E., Bullock, J.M., Lavorel, S., Parks, K.E., Schaafsma, M., Bennett, E.M., Maes, J., Mulligan, M., Mouchet, M., Peterson, G.D., Schulp, C.J.E., Thuiller, W., Turner, M.G., Verburg, P.H., Eigenbrod, F., 2017. Unpacking ecosystem service bundles: Towards predictive mapping of synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 47, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.08.004
Stritih, A., Bebi, P., Grêt-Regamey, A., 2019. Quantifying uncertainties in earth observation-based ecosystem service assessments. Environmental Modelling & Software 111, 300–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.09.005
Tasser, E., Schirpke, U., Zoderer, B.M., Tappeiner, U., 2020. Towards an integrative assessment of land-use type values from the perspective of ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services 42, 101082. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOSER.2020.101082
Tenerelli, P., Demšar, U., Luque, S., 2016. Crowdsourcing indicators for cultural ecosystem services: A geographically weighted approach for mountain landscapes. Ecological Indicators 64, 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.12.042
Turkelboom, F., Leone, M., Jacobs, S., Kelemen, E., García-Llorente, M., Baró, F., Termansen, M., Barton, D.N., Berry, P., Stange, E., Thoonen, M., Kalóczkai, Á., Vadineanu, A., Castro, A.J., Czúcz, B., Röckmann, C., Wurbs, D., Odee, D., Preda, E., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Rusch, G.M., Pastur, G.M., Palomo, I., Dick, J., Casaer, J., van Dijk, J., Priess, J.A., Langemeyer, J., Mustajoki, J., Kopperoinen, L., Baptist, M.J., Peri, P.L., Mukhopadhyay, R., Aszalós, R., Roy, S.B., Luque, S., Rusch, V., 2018. When we cannot have it all: Ecosystem services trade-offs in the context of spatial planning. Ecosystem Services 29, 566–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.011
van Oudenhoven, A.P.E., Schröter, M., Drakou, E.G., Geijzendorffer, I.R., Jacobs, S., van Bodegom, P.M., Chazee, L., Czúcz, B., Grunewald, K., Lillebø, A.I., Mononen, L., Nogueira, A.J.A., Pacheco-Romero, M., Perennou, C., Remme, R.P., Rova, S., Syrbe, R.-U., Tratalos, J.A., Vallejos, M., Albert, C., 2018. Key criteria for developing ecosystem service indicators to inform decision making. Ecological Indicators 95, 417–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.06.020
Wolff, S., Schulp, C.J.E., Verburg, P.H., 2015. Mapping ecosystem services demand: A review of current research and future perspectives. Ecological Indicators. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.03.016
Wong, C.P., Jiang, B., Kinzig, A.P., Lee, K.N., Ouyang, Z., 2015. Linking ecosystem characteristics to final ecosystem services for public policy. Ecology Letters 18, 108–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12389
Wood, S.L.R., Jones, S.K., Johnson, J.A., Brauman, K.A., Chaplin-Kramer, R., Fremier, A., Girvetz, E., Gordon, L.J., Kappel, C. V, Mandle, L., Mulligan, M., O’Farrell, P., Smith, W.K., Willemen, L., Zhang, W., DeClerck, F.A., 2018. Distilling the role of ecosystem services in the Sustainable Development Goals. Ecosystem Services 29, 70–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.010
Zen, M., Candiago, S., Schirpke, U., Egarter Vigl, L., Giupponi, C., 2019. Upscaling ecosystem service maps to administrative levels: beyond scale mismatches. Science of the Total Environment 660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.01.087
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Uta Schirpke
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
