| Literature DB >> 32042511 |
Vera Camacho-Valdez1, Andrea Saenz-Arroyo2, Andrea Ghermandi3, Dario A Navarrete-Gutiérrez4, Rocío Rodiles-Hernández2.
Abstract
The Usumacinta floodplain is an exceptional area for biodiversity with important ecosystem services for local people. The main objective of this paper was to estimate reference values and define local perceptions of ecosystem services provided by wetlands and overlapping them with spatially explicit socioeconomic and biodiversity indicators. We used the Usumacinta floodplain as an example of a territory where high dependence of rural people on ecosystem services is confronted with development projects that threat the flow of ecosystem services, thus affecting rural people well-being. With a combination of data from remote sensing, global databases of ecosystem service values, local perception of ecosystem services and socioeconomic and biodiversity richness indicators in a spatially explicit framework, we develop a policy-oriented approach for rapid assessment to manage wetlands and maintain people's livelihoods. Regulating and provisioning services are identified as the most relevant ecosystem services in terms of their monetary value and local perceived importance. In a spatially explicit manner, this approach highlights the most valuable wetlands and identifies rural societies that are highly dependent on ecosystem services. Our approach can be replicated elsewhere and could provide valuable information for policymakers to design policies that can contribute to conserve wetland ecosystems where under threat of development. ©2020 Camacho-Valdez et al.Entities:
Keywords: Ecosystem services; Livelihoods; Local perception; Spatial analysis; Usumacinta floodplain; Wetland
Year: 2020 PMID: 32042511 PMCID: PMC6996512 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.8395
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Study area.
Usumacinta floodplain (UFP), southern Mexico. Location of surveyed villages. The layers are derived from INEGI open data.
Figure 2The methodological approach for ecosystem valuation in the Usumacinta floodplain (modified from TEEB in Policy (2011), Ciftcioglu (2017) and Haines-Young & Potschin (2018)).
Figure 3An example of a cognitive map derived from the semi-structured interview.
Photo: Ellinor Roth.
General characteristics of the four selected communities.
| Quintín Arauz | Tembladeras | Palizada | Boca Chica | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Location | Near the main river | Near the mangroves | Near a tributary | Near the coastal lagoon |
| Population | 1,000 inhanitants | 200 inhabitants | 1,000 inhabitants | 15 households |
| Type of settlement | Concrete homes | Precarious houses | Concrete homes | Precarious houses |
| Seniority of the community | 200 years | 40 years | 300 years | 60 years |
| Level environment transformation | High | Low | High | Low |
| Economic activities | Fishing/livestock | Fishing | Fishing/livestock/ tourism | Fishing |
| Ethnicity | Chontal | Mixed | Mixed | Mixed |
| Education | Low-medium | Low | Low-medium-high | Low |
Notes.
Based on INEGI (2010).
Figure 4Classification of land use and land cover in the UFP from 2014 Landsat TM free imagery.
Summary of estimated values for each service per wetland type derived from the value transfer exercise.
The total ecosystem service values per wetland type obtained from adding the median values per ES (in bold). Values in 2007 USD/ha/year.
| # obs. | Mangrove | Coastal lagoon | Palustrine | Riverine | Lacustrine | Total ES median value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support of commercial fishing | 57 | 380 | 122 | 67 | 822 | 446 | 1,838 |
| Water supply | 18 | 683 | 3 | 1,286 | 18 | 24 | 2,014 |
| Harvesting of natural materials | 39 | 213 | 156 | 3,353 | 65 | 8 | 3,794 |
| Fuel Wood | 20 | 48 | 26 | 180 | 254 | ||
| Ornamental resources | 1 | 114 | 114 | ||||
| Local climate control | 1 | 7 | 7 | ||||
| Flood control and storm buffering | 30 | 683 | 17 | 1,661 | 4,291 | 23 | 6,677 |
| Water quality improvement | 16 | 661 | 108 | 769 | |||
| Maintenance of genetic diversity | 1 | 31 | 31 | ||||
| Habitat for species | 20 | 247 | 24 | 2,145 | 4,369 | 6,785 | |
| Amenity and esthetics | 9 | 460 | 3,291 | 495 | 4,245 | ||
| Recreational activities | 20 | 362 | 151 | 2,430 | 1,253 | 896 | 5,093 |
| Recreational fishing and hunting | 11 | 28 | 1,018 | 37 | 658 | 105 | 1,847 |
| Median total value per ecosystem type | 2,653 | 1,926 | 9,689 | 12,833 | 6,366 | ||
| Area (ha) | 108,600 | 228,201 | 320,285 | 54,178 | 62,442 | ||
| Annual ecosystem service flow | 288,105,575 | 439,619,915 | 3,103,293,877 | 695,246,902 | 397,517,290 | 4,923,783,558 |
Notes.
Extension of the wetland in hectares.
Annual ecosystem service flow was calculated multiplying the total ecosystem service value by the wetland area.
Total economic value (TEV) was calculated by adding the value of the annual flow of ecosystem services by wetland type.
Wetland description. Mangrove: forested-shrub estuarine wetland: plant association formed by one or a combination of the four species of mangrove; coastal lagoon: subtidal estuarine wetland; palustrine: palustrine continental wetland (where there is permanent water): swamp, marshes, tular, popal; riverine: permanent riverine wetland: rivers and channels; and lacustrine: lacustrine continental wetland, permanent and seasonal: lake, ponds, body of water.
Figure 5Frequency of occurrence (%) of ecosystem services in the four communities where people were interviewed.
Food category includes: fish and crustaceans.
Figure 6(A) Ranking of priority conservation wetland areas based on overlapping of ecosystem service values, socioeconomic and biodiversity indexes; (B) overlap of socioeconomic and biodiversity indicators with the estimated ecosystem service values in the Usumacin.