1 / 20

Ecosystem Services David Alderman, Julia Glenday, Kelli McCune, and Seth Strongin

Ecosystem Services David Alderman, Julia Glenday, Kelli McCune, and Seth Strongin. Conservation Planning for Ecosystem Services Chan et al. 2006 Linking GIS-Based Models to Value Ecosystem Services in an Alpine Region Gret-Regamey et al. 2007

lilac
Download Presentation

Ecosystem Services David Alderman, Julia Glenday, Kelli McCune, and Seth Strongin

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ecosystem ServicesDavid Alderman, Julia Glenday, Kelli McCune, and Seth Strongin • Conservation Planning for Ecosystem Services • Chan et al. 2006 • Linking GIS-Based Models to Value Ecosystem Services in an Alpine Region • Gret-Regamey et al. 2007 • Assessing Alternative Futures for Agriculture in Iowa, USA • Santelmann et al. 2004

  2. Linking GIS-based models to value ecosystem services in an Alpine region Grêt-Regamey et al. Journal of Environmental Management 89 (2008) 197-208

  3. Including E.S. assessment & valuation in planning • Maintain/improve well-being & quality of life • Rationalizing plan budgets • Costanza et al. 1997 – global valuation of ecosystem services by ecosystem type, total: $16-57 trillion • Need for local studies of valuation of services before & after change

  4. Conceptual model

  5. Study site: Landschaft Davos, Switzerland • Alpine ecosystem • Main land covers: urban (Davos), rural/agricultural, forest, alpine meadow/slope • Economy: tourism (+farm, forestry)

  6. Services: process models • Regulatory: avalanche prevention • AVAL-2D model • Habitat: forest grouse (Capercaillie, Tetrao urogallus) • Regionally calibrated habitat suitability model • Production: timber production • Forest area & density + probabilistic transition with climate • Aesthetic/information: scenic beauty • View magnitudes from vacation rental sites

  7. Valuation: economic models • Risk analysis • Avalanche probability & damage • Alternative method • Avalanche prevention with snow fences • Replacement cost • Recreate grouse habitat elsewhere • Willingness to pay • View preference consumer surveys

  8. Scenarios • A: Climate change (+2.4oC temperature increase - forest extent increase) • B: Tourist development (40 ha increase in urban area, additional 11 ha ski slope)

  9. Results: Avalanche risk

  10. Results: Grouse habitat

  11. Results: Summary • Have to compare with benefits of scenarios & increase number of services considered • Spatially explicit output allows targeted management & planning

  12. Discussion • Limited analysis of services and scenarios – meant to be a demonstration of methodology/conceptual model Linking service & valuation – spatially? • What do you think of their valuation methods? Method appropriate for service? • Not deal with: • Uncertainty assessment • many models! • Making tradeoffs • Now what… decision making

  13. Assessing alternative futures for agriculture in Iowa, U.S.A. Santelmann, et al. 2004 Landscape Ecology 19: 357-374

  14. Main points of this paper • Scenario planning – what possible futures look like for ag landscapes • 3 different futures for 2 watersheds in central Iowa in 2025 • Based on human priorities for ag landscapes • Can alternative futures achieve multiple endpoints? • Social, economic, native biodiversity, water quality

  15. Scenarios Biodiversity Production Water Quality http://www.iptv.org/iowapathways/artifact_detail.cfm?aid=a_000180&oid=ob_000133 http://www.e85nj.org/media/corn_field.jpg http://www.erdc.usace.army.mil/pls/erdcpub/docs/erdc/images/Stream.jpg

  16. Present and future land cover: Buck Creek Watershed

  17. Present and future land cover: Walnut Creek watershed

  18. Summary table of results

  19. Discussion questions • These scenarios were based on various human priorities for ag land; can human priorities be #1 for other landscapes and still result in BD conservation/improved WQ? Examples? • Did the authors provide effective argument that could be effective for policymakers and decision makers to make changes?

  20. Ecosystem Services Discussion • Is managing for ecosystem services an effective strategy for conserving biodiversity? • How does spatial distribution impact the use of ecosystem services as a tool for conservation planning? • Are some ecosystem services better suited than others for conservation planning? • How can a conservation planner determine which ecosystem service is most appropriate for their plan? • What are the challenges associated with modeling, valuing, and/or coming up with scenarios for ecosystem services in the context of conservation planning? • By using ecosystem services as a tool for conservation planning, are you increasing the possibility of funding by adding value on top of protecting biodiversity or are you diluting the funding pool by using conservation $ for other purposes? • How does climate change factor into using ecosystem services for conservation planning? • Has Conservation International used ecosystem services for conservation planning? In what ways? Has it been successful?

More Related