Ecological Infrastructure as a framework for mapping ecosystem services for place-based conservation and management

被引:6
|
作者
Perschke, Myriam J. [1 ,2 ]
Harris, Linda R. [1 ]
Sink, Kerry J. [1 ,2 ]
Lombard, Amanda T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Nelson Mandela Univ, Inst Coastal & Marine Res, POB 77000, ZA-6031 Gqeberha, South Africa
[2] South African Natl Biodivers Inst, Kirstenbosch Res Ctr, ZA-7700 Cape Town, South Africa
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
People and nature; Spatial prioritisation; Systematic conservation planning; Social -ecological systems; Biodiversity Net Gain; Nature -based Solutions; BIODIVERSITY; WATER; NETWORK; PEOPLE; ASSESSMENTS; RESILIENCE; LESSONS; LINKING; SYSTEM; AREAS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jnc.2023.126389
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Ecosystem services are an important nexus between people and nature. Nevertheless, their inclusion in place -based conservation and management is limited also because they are often intangible. The Ecological Infra-structure (EI) concept is a promising framework to address this, but a clear definition and mapping approach is still missing. We aim to analyse the uses of EI and to distil a definition and recommendations for using EI as a framework for mapping ecosystem services. A semi-systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted to examine: (1) perceptions of what constitutes EI (n = 117), and (2) EI mapping approaches (n = 51). The main interpretations of EI indicated that it should be natural or naturally functioning (56%); deliver multiple services (75%); and benefit humans (64%) and biodiversity (36%). EI was thus defined as 'natural and naturally functioning ecological systems or networks of ecological systems that deliver multiple services to humans and enable biodiversity persistence'. Studies have used simple proxies, e.g., land cover, to identify EI, sometimes combined with service-specific variables. To evaluate EI performance (26% of studies), modelling all three ecosystem service aspects (capacity, flow, and demand) was considered appropriate. EI prioritisation (50% of studies) as part of a systematic spatial prioritisation process was recommended. Sixteen recommendations for mapping EI for inclusion in place-based conservation and management were developed. We illustrate how EI can be used to integrate ecosystem services into conservation and management in three real-world applications. The EI-based framework is a promising approach and supports the new 'people and nature' era in conservation.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Traditional ecological knowledge and practices for ecosystem conservation and management: the case of savanna ecosystem services in Limpopo, South Africa
    Moloise, Sibongile D.
    Matamanda, Abraham R.
    Bhanye, Johannes, I
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND WORLD ECOLOGY, 2024, 31 (01): : 29 - 42
  • [32] Integrating ecological engineering and ecological intensification from management practices to ecosystem services into a generic framework: a review
    Rey, Freddy
    Cecillon, Lauric
    Cordonnier, Thomas
    Jaunatre, Renaud
    Loucougaray, Gregory
    [J]. AGRONOMY FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, 2015, 35 (04) : 1335 - 1345
  • [33] Countering exclusionary infrastructure in apartment waste management: Towards a relational place-based governance in Victoria
    Bhavna Middha
    Ralph Horne
    [J]. npj Urban Sustainability, 4
  • [34] Integrating ecological engineering and ecological intensification from management practices to ecosystem services into a generic framework: a review
    Freddy Rey
    Lauric Cécillon
    Thomas Cordonnier
    Renaud Jaunatre
    Grégory Loucougaray
    [J]. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 2015, 35 : 1335 - 1345
  • [35] Place-based policy and green innovation: Evidence from the national pilot zone for ecological conservation in China
    Lee, Chien-Chiang
    Nie, Changfei
    [J]. SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND SOCIETY, 2023, 97
  • [36] Compliance-based archaeological heritage management and place-based participatory mapping for negotiated outcomes
    Guilfoyle, David R.
    Mitchell, Myles B.
    [J]. AUSTRALIAN ARCHAEOLOGY, 2015, (80) : 80 - 90
  • [37] Countering exclusionary infrastructure in apartment waste management: Towards a relational place-based governance in Victoria
    Middha, Bhavna
    Horne, Ralph
    [J]. NPJ URBAN SUSTAINABILITY, 2024, 4 (01):
  • [38] POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF PLACE-BASED SERVICES IN THE CLINICAL AREA
    Schneider, C.
    Ammenwerth, E.
    Gereke, A.
    [J]. EHEALTH2010 - MEDICAL INFORMATICS MEETS EHEALTH, 2010,
  • [39] Place-Based Ecosystem Management: Adapting Integrated Ecosystem Assessment Processes for Developing Scientifically and Socially Relevant Indicator Portfolios
    Williams, Gregory D.
    Andrews, Kelly S.
    Brown, Jennifer A.
    Gove, Jamison M.
    Hazen, Elliott L.
    Leong, Kirsten M.
    Montenero, Kelly A.
    Moss, Jamal H.
    Rosellon-Druker, Judith M.
    Schroeder, Isaac D.
    Siddon, Elizabeth
    Szymkowiak, Marysia
    Whitehouse, George A.
    Zador, Stephani G.
    Harvey, Chris J.
    [J]. COASTAL MANAGEMENT, 2021, 49 (01) : 46 - 71
  • [40] Sacred natural sites classification framework based on ecosystem services and implications for conservation
    Ma, Jianzhong
    Tam, Christine
    Li, Tianjiang
    Yu, Guangzhi
    Hu, Guanghui
    Yang, Feiling
    Wang, Junjun
    Wu, Ruidong
    [J]. CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2022, 4 (04)