Literature DB >> 21334134

Identifying priority areas for ecosystem service management in South African grasslands.

Benis N Egoh1, Belinda Reyers, Mathieu Rouget, David M Richardson.   

Abstract

Grasslands provide many ecosystem services required to support human well-being and are home to a diverse fauna and flora. Degradation of grasslands due to agriculture and other forms of land use threaten biodiversity and ecosystem services. Various efforts are underway around the world to stem these declines. The Grassland Programme in South Africa is one such initiative and is aimed at safeguarding both biodiversity and ecosystem services. As part of this developing programme, we identified spatial priority areas for ecosystem services, tested the effect of different target levels of ecosystem services used to identify priority areas, and evaluated whether biodiversity priority areas can be aligned with those for ecosystem services. We mapped five ecosystem services (below ground carbon storage, surface water supply, water flow regulation, soil accumulation and soil retention) and identified priority areas for individual ecosystem services and for all five services at the scale of quaternary catchments. Planning for individual ecosystem services showed that, depending on the ecosystem service of interest, between 4% and 13% of the grassland biome was required to conserve at least 40% of the soil and water services. Thirty-four percent of the biome was needed to conserve 40% of the carbon service in the grassland. Priority areas identified for five ecosystem services under three target levels (20%, 40%, 60% of the total amount) showed that between 17% and 56% of the grassland biome was needed to conserve these ecosystem services. There was moderate to high overlap between priority areas selected for ecosystem services and already-identified terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity priority areas. This level of overlap coupled with low irreplaceability values obtained when planning for individual ecosystem services makes it possible to combine biodiversity and ecosystem services in one plan using systematic conservation planning.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21334134     DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.01.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Manage        ISSN: 0301-4797            Impact factor:   6.789


  9 in total

1.  Historical dynamics in ecosystem service bundles.

Authors:  Delphine Renard; Jeanine M Rhemtulla; Elena M Bennett
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: From promise to practice.

Authors:  Anne D Guerry; Stephen Polasky; Jane Lubchenco; Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer; Gretchen C Daily; Robert Griffin; Mary Ruckelshaus; Ian J Bateman; Anantha Duraiappah; Thomas Elmqvist; Marcus W Feldman; Carl Folke; Jon Hoekstra; Peter M Kareiva; Bonnie L Keeler; Shuzhuo Li; Emily McKenzie; Zhiyun Ouyang; Belinda Reyers; Taylor H Ricketts; Johan Rockström; Heather Tallis; Bhaskar Vira
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Ecosystem Service Valuation Assessments for Protected Area Management: A Case Study Comparing Methods Using Different Land Cover Classification and Valuation Approaches.

Authors:  Charlotte E L Whitham; Kun Shi; Philip Riordan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Ecosystem services and opportunity costs shift spatial priorities for conserving forest biodiversity.

Authors:  Matthias Schröter; Graciela M Rusch; David N Barton; Stefan Blumentrath; Björn Nordén
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Advancing Land-Sea Conservation Planning: Integrating Modelling of Catchments, Land-Use Change, and River Plumes to Prioritise Catchment Management and Protection.

Authors:  Jorge G Álvarez-Romero; Robert L Pressey; Natalie C Ban; Jon Brodie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Quantifying ecosystem service trade-offs for plantation forest management to benefit provisioning and regulating services.

Authors:  Er-Fu Dai; Xiao-Li Wang; Jian-Jia Zhu; Wei-Min Xi
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2017-08-28       Impact factor: 2.912

7.  Spatial analysis of ecosystem service relationships to improve targeting of payments for hydrological services.

Authors:  Pierre Mokondoko; Robert H Manson; Taylor H Ricketts; Daniel Geissert
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-20       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Identifying spatial priorities for protecting ecosystem services.

Authors:  Gary W Luck; Kai Ma Chan; Carissa J Klien
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2012-09-27

9.  Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation.

Authors:  Matthias Schröter; Roy P Remme
Journal:  Landsc Ecol       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 3.848

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.