Identifying Priority Areas for Ecosystem Services Management in South Africa

Studies have highlighted the importance of managing ecosystem services to stop further degradation and transformation, yet very few studies have endeavored to identify priorities. The identification of priority areas for ecosystem services remains the least of objective for all studies that have mapped ecosystem services. Steps for identifying priority areas for management of ecosystem services include identifying features that supply ecosystem services, threats to service provision, potential actions to ensure future supply of service and cost of these actions as well as the availability of alternative means of providing benefits supplied by the service, the capacity to meet human demands and scale and site dependency of service. We present examples of the inclusion of ecosystem services in spatial planning in South Africa including quantifying conservation features and threats, as well as implementation issues. The prioritization of areas for ecosystem services management is still in its infancy. At present, spatial planning for ecosystem services is mostly coupled with biodiversity, but ecosystem services deserve to be conserved on their own right through conservation actions specifically designed for ecosystem services. The identification of priorities for such conservation action faces many challenges

Current Status and Future Prospects for the Assessment of Marine and Coastal Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Review

Background: Research on ecosystem services has grown exponentially during the last decade. Most of the studies have focused on assessing and mapping terrestrial ecosystem services highlighting a knowledge gap on marine and coastal ecosystem services (MCES) and an urgent need to assess them. Methodology/Principal Findings: We reviewed and summarized existing scientific literature related to MCES with the aim of extracting and classifying indicators used to assess and map them. We found 145 papers that specifically assessed marine and coastal ecosystem services from which we extracted 476 indicators. Food provision, in particular fisheries, was the most extensively analyzed MCES while water purification and coastal protection were the most frequently studied regulating and maintenance services. Also recreation and tourism under the cultural services was relatively well assessed. We highlight knowledge gaps regarding the availability of indicators that measure the capacity, flow or benefit derived from each ecosystem service. The majority of the case studies was found in mangroves and coastal wetlands and was mainly concentrated in Europe and North America. Our systematic review highlighted the need of an improved ecosystem service classification for marine and coastal systems, which is herein proposed with definitions and links to previous classifications. Conclusions/Significance: This review summarizes the state of available information related to ecosystem services associated with marine and coastal ecosystems. The cataloging of MCES indicators and the integrated classification of MCES provided in this paper establish a background that can facilitate the planning and integration of future assessments. The final goal is to establish a consistent structure and populate it with information able to support the implementation of biodiversity conservation policies.JRC.H.1-Water Resource

Ecosystem services classification : A systems ecology perspective of the cascade framework

Creative Commons License (CC BY 4.0)Ecosystem services research faces several challenges stemming from the plurality of interpretations of classifications and terminologies. In this paper we identify two main challenges with current ecosystem services classification systems: i) the inconsistency across concepts, terminology and definitions, and; ii) the mix up of processes and end-state benefits, or flows and assets. Although different ecosystem service definitions and interpretations can be valuable for enriching the research landscape, it is necessary to address the existing ambiguity to improve comparability among ecosystem-service-based approaches. Using the cascade framework as a reference, and Systems Ecology as a theoretical underpinning, we aim to address the ambiguity across typologies. The cascade framework links ecological processes with elements of human well-being following a pattern similar to a production chain. Systems Ecology is a long-established discipline which provides insight into complex relationships between people and the environment. We present a refreshed conceptualization of ecosystem services which can support ecosystem service assessment techniques and measurement. We combine the notions of biomass, information and interaction from system ecology, with the ecosystem services conceptualization to improve definitions and clarify terminology. We argue that ecosystem services should be defined as the interactions (i.e. processes) of the ecosystem that produce a change in human well-being, while ecosystem components or goods, i.e. countable as biomass units, are only proxies in the assessment of such changes. Furthermore, Systems Ecology can support a re-interpretation of the ecosystem services conceptualization and related applied research, where more emphasis is needed on the underpinning complexity of the ecological system.Peer reviewe

Rewilding and restoring nature in a changing world

Overview of the PLoS ONE collection 'Rewilding and Restoration'

Restoration planning for climate change mitigation and adaptation in the city of Durban, South Africa

Peer reviewe

An environmental justice perspective on ecosystem services

Mainstreaming of ecosystem service approaches has been proposed as one path toward sustainable development. Meanwhile, critics of ecosystem services question if the approach can account for the multiple values of ecosystems to diverse groups of people, or for aspects of inter- and intra-generational justice. In particular, an ecosystem service approach often overlooks power dimensions and capabilities that are core to environmental justice. This article addresses the need for greater guidance on incorporating justice into ecosystem services research and practice. We point to the importance of deep engagement with stakeholders and rights holders to disentangle contextual factors that moderate justice outcomes on ecosystem service attribution and appropriation in socio-political interventions. Such a holistic perspective enables the integration of values and knowledge plurality for enhancing justice in ecosystem services research. This broadened perspective paves a way for transformative ecosystem service assessments, management, and research, which can help inform and design governance structures that nourish human agency to sustainably identify, manage, and enjoy ecosystem services for human wellbeing

Integrating ecosystem services into conservation planning in South Africa

Thesis (PhD (Botany and Zoology))—University of Stellenbosch, 2009.Natural ecosystems provide many services that are crucial for sustainability and health of human society. Ecosystem services are the benefits people obtain from ecosystems (i.e. goods and services) and can be classified into provisioning (e.g. fibre, fuel wood); regulating (e.g. water and climate regulation); supporting (e.g. soil retention) and cultural (e.g. aesthetic value). The growing global human population and other threats place enormous stress on the natural environment reducing its capability to provide services. According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, more than 60% of ecosystem services worldwide are being degraded or used unsustainably. The need to safeguard ecosystem services is therefore urgent. Biodiversity underpins most ecosystem services, but the functional relationship between biodiversity and services is not well known. A wide range of strategies exist for safeguarding biodiversity, but no such approaches have been developed for ecosystem services. A key conservation strategy is the use of systematic conservation planning to identify priority areas where effort should be focused. There are calls for the inclusion of ecosystem services into conservation planning geared towards biodiversity. Ecosystem services have been used for many years as an additional rationale to justify biodiversity conservation and it is often assumed that conserving biodiversity will also conserve services. However, it is unclear how different facets of biodiversity relate to different services and to what extent conserving biodiversity will safeguard services. This thesis addresses a range of issues relating to the integration of ecosystem services into conservation planning in South Africa. I first investigated the status of ecosystem services in conservation planning worldwide by reviewing the conservation planning literature from 1998 to 2005. Ecosystem services are clearly not adequately addressed in conservation assessments. A critical barrier preventing the inclusion of ecosystem services in conservation plans is the lack of spatially-explicit data. I developed a methodology for mapping ecosystem services in South Africa and mapped the distribution of five important ecosystem services (surface water supply, water flow regulation, carbon storage, soil retention and accumulation). Using the five services to examine relationships within services and between biodiversity revealed a lack of congruence between services and different levels of congruence with biodiversity features. However, including ecosystem services in a biodiversity assessment captured at least thirty percent of each of three services selected for the study. Nevertheless, a biodiversity plan may not necessarily capture adequate amounts of ecosystem services. Ecosystem services should be planned for explicitly instead of relying on biodiversity data. I identified priorities that met targets for five services in the grasslands of South Africa. This thesis provides new insights on planning for biodiversity and ecosystem services. The results have immediate applicability for conservation planning in South Africa. Keywords: Conservation planning, conservation assessments, ecosystem functions, ecosystem processes, ecosystem services, natural capital, biodiversity, soil, water, carbon

Climate and biodiversity change constrain the flow of cultural ecosystem services to people: A case study modeling birding across Africa under future climate scenarios

Global change is currently impacting ecosystems and their contributions to people (i.e. ecosystem services). These impacts have consequences for societies and human well-being, especially in Africa. Historically, efforts have focused on assessing global change from a social or biophysical perspective, treating them as separate entities. Yet, our understanding of impacts to social-ecological systems remains limited, particularly in the Global South, due to a lack of data, tools, and approaches accounting for social and ecological aspects of ecosystem services. This is especially relevant for cultural ecosystem services as they are less tangible. We use a simple indicator and important provider of a multitude of cultural ecosystem services, birding, to understand how climate, biodiversity, and land use change will impact cultural ecosystem services across Africa. We explore how emerging tools and data can overcome limitations in mapping and modeling cultural ecosystem services, particularly in analyzing human preferences and behavior at large spatiotemporal scales and in data-poor regions. Leveraging crowdsourced data from eBird and using machine learning techniques we map and model recreational birding to assess the underlying social-ecological relationships and the impact of future climate and environmental change. We show that bird species richness, protected areas, accessibility, and max temperature contribute most to birding suitability across the continent. Further, we show spatial shifts in the suitability of birding under three future climate scenarios (SSP126, 370, and 585). Models suggest climate and biodiversity change will increasingly constrain the flow of birding related cultural ecosystem services across Africa. This has implications for human-nature interactions, development of countries, management of protected areas, and overall human well-being in the future. More generally, we highlight opportunities for crowdsourced datasets and machine learning to integrate non-material ecosystem services in models and thus, enhance the understanding of future impacts to ecosystem services and human well-being

Mapping and modeling the impact of climate change on recreational ecosystem services using machine learning and big data

The use of recreational ecosystem services is highly dependent on the surrounding environmental and climate conditions. Due to this dependency, future recreational opportunities provided by nature are at risk from climate change. To understand how climate change will impact recreation we need to understand current recreational patterns, but traditional data is limited and low resolution. Fortunately, social media data presents an opportunity to overcome those data limitations and machine learning offers a tool to effectively use that big data. We use data from the social media site Flickr as a proxy for recreational visitation and random forest to model the relationships between social, environmental, and climate factors and recreation for the peak season (summer) in California. We then use the model to project how non-urban recreation will change as the climate changes. Our model shows that current patterns are exacerbated in the future under climate change, with currently popular summer recreation areas becoming more suitable and unpopular summer recreation areas becoming less suitable for recreation. Our model results have land management implications as recreation regions that see high visitation consequently experience impacts to surrounding ecosystems, ecosystem services, and infrastructure. This information can be used to include climate change impacts into land management plans to more effectively provide sustainable nature recreation opportunities for current and future generations. Furthermore, our study demonstrates that crowdsourced data and machine learning offer opportunities to better integrate socio-ecological systems into climate impacts research and more holistically understand climate change impacts to human well-being