Prioritizing sites for ecological restoration based on ecosystem services

被引:30
|
作者
Comin, Francisco A. [1 ]
Miranda, Beatriz [2 ]
Sorando, Ricardo [3 ]
Felipe-Lucia, Maria R. [4 ]
Jimenez, Juan J. [5 ]
Navarro, Enrique [1 ]
机构
[1] Spanish Natl Res Council, CSIC, IPE, Zaragoza, Spain
[2] Emgesa, Bogota, Colombia
[3] Aiseco, Zaragoza, Spain
[4] Univ Bern, Inst Plant Sci, Bern, Switzerland
[5] Spanish Natl Res Council, CSIC, IPE, Jaca, Spain
关键词
catchment scale; ecosystem services assessment; hierarchical restoration; landscape management; large spatial scales; Mediterranean ecosystems; multiple ecosystem services index; River Piedra; scenario analysis; semi-arid landscape restoration; CONSERVATION; MANAGEMENT; DIVERSITY; FRAMEWORK; SCIENCE; NEED;
D O I
10.1111/1365-2664.13061
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
1. Restoration ecology that maximizes ecosystem services (ES) requires planning at large spatial scales, which are often the most meaningful for ecosystem functioning and ES supply. As economic resources to undertake ecological restoration at large scales are scarce, prioritizing sites to enhance multiple ES supply is critical. 2. We present the Relative Aggregated Value of Ecosystem Services (RAVES) index, to prioritize sites for ecological restoration based on the assessment of multiple ES. We tested the spatial heterogeneity of ES to identify the relevant scale to managing ES and to apply the RAVES index using a local case study. We also used the RAVES index to compare three alternative restoration scenarios to enhance ES based on the availability of socio-economic resources. 3. The highest RAVES values were found in areas with natural vegetation and in gorges with riparian forests. The lowest values were found in crop fields, steep slopes and river stretches without riparian forest. The multiscale spatial analysis indicated that most ES showed significant heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales, especially at broad (20-30 km) and very broad (40-50 km) scales. For spatial scales smaller than 2 km, only biological control showed significant heterogeneity. 4. The optimal socio-economic conditions to enhance ES supply were met when both private and public land, together with economic funds, were available to implement ecological restoration. As most areas with low RAVES were in private lands, even with limited funds restoration of private lands would result in a large increase in RAVES. 5. Synthesis and applications. The Relative Aggregated Value of Ecosystem Services (RAVES) index is a practical tool to hierarchically prioritize sites for ecological restoration across large spatial scales. The RAVES index integrates both ecological information and societal values by weighting ecosystem services (ES) via a multicriteria analysis and can be used in scenario analysis to identify optimal management scenarios. We highlight the importance of analysing the spatial heterogeneity of ES to identify the most relevant scale to applying the RAVES index and to managing ES via ecological restoration.
引用
收藏
页码:1155 / 1163
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Functional traits and ecosystem services in ecological restoration
    Carlucci, Marcos B.
    Brancalion, Pedro H. S.
    Rodrigues, Ricardo R.
    Loyola, Rafael
    Cianciaruso, Marcus V.
    [J]. RESTORATION ECOLOGY, 2020, 28 (06) : 1372 - 1383
  • [2] Mapping Ecological Processes and Ecosystem Services for Prioritizing Restoration Efforts in a Semi-arid Mediterranean River Basin
    Trabucchi, Mattia
    O'Farrell, Patrick J.
    Notivol, Eduardo
    Comin, Francisco A.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2014, 53 (06) : 1132 - 1145
  • [3] Mapping Ecological Processes and Ecosystem Services for Prioritizing Restoration Efforts in a Semi-arid Mediterranean River Basin
    Mattia Trabucchi
    Patrick J. O’Farrell
    Eduardo Notivol
    Francisco A. Comín
    [J]. Environmental Management, 2014, 53 : 1132 - 1145
  • [4] Prioritizing ecological restoration among sites in multi-stressor landscapes
    Neeson, Thomas M.
    Smith, Sigrid D. P.
    Allan, J. David
    McIntyre, Peter B.
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 2016, 26 (06) : 1785 - 1796
  • [5] Critical thresholds in ecological restoration to achieve optimal ecosystem services: An analysis based on forest ecosystem restoration projects in China
    Zhang, Junze
    Luo, Mengting
    Yue, Hui
    Chen, Xiyun
    Feng, Chong
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2018, 76 : 675 - 678
  • [6] Mainstreaming of ecosystem services as a rationale for ecological restoration in Australia
    Matzek, Virginia
    Wilson, Kerrie A.
    Kragt, Marit
    [J]. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES, 2019, 35 : 79 - 86
  • [7] The relationship between ecological restoration and the ecosystem services concept
    Alexander, Sasha
    Aronson, James
    Whaley, Oliver
    Lamb, David
    [J]. ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY, 2016, 21 (01):
  • [8] Long-term assessment of ecosystem services at ecological restoration sites using Landsat time series
    del Rio-Mena, Trinidad
    Willemen, Louise
    Vrieling, Anton
    Snoeys, Andy
    Nelson, Andy
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2021, 16 (06):
  • [9] The cost–benefit evaluation based on ecosystem services under different ecological restoration scenarios
    Mingqi Li
    Shiliang Liu
    Yixuan Liu
    Yongxiu Sun
    Fangfang Wang
    Shikui Dong
    Yi An
    [J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2021, 193
  • [10] From ecosystems to ecosystem services: Stream restoration as ecological engineering
    Palmer, Margaret A.
    Filoso, Solange
    Fanelli, Rosemary M.
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING, 2014, 65 : 62 - 70