Review of Methods to Quantify Trade-offs among Ecosystem Services and Future Model Developments

doi:10.5814/j.issn.1674-764X.2019.02.013

Abstract

Abstract:

Ecosystem services are spatially heterogeneous and temporal variability, which results in trade-offs, synergies and neutrality. The trade-off is a key problem in ecosystem management and requires optimized decision-making research. This paper reviews methods for identifying trade-offs and suggest future model developments. We conclude that (1) ecosystem service assessment depends on quantitative indicators and its modeling; (2) scenario analysis, multi-objective analysis and production possibility boundary are an effective means of ecosystem service trade-off decision-making; (3) future research needs to strengthen ecosystem service supply and demand flow and assist decision-making ecosystem mapping. Finally, integrated models should be developed to simulate and diagnose different scenarios and to optimize measures in land and ecosystem management for sustainability.

Key words: ecosystem service function, trade-off, quantitative methods

WU Baiqiu,WANG Junbang,QI Shuhua,WANG Shaoqiang,LI Yingnian. Review of Methods to Quantify Trade-offs among Ecosystem Services and Future Model Developments[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2019, 10(2): 225-233.

Figures/Tables 3

References 102

[1]	Ager A A, Vogler K C, Day M A, et al.2017. Economic opportunities and trade-offs in collaborative forest landscape restoration.Ecological Economics, 136: 226-239.
[2]	Bagdon B A, Huang C-H, Dewhurst S, et al.2017. Climate change constrains the efficiency frontier when managing forests to reduce fire severity and maximize carbon storage.Ecological Economics, 140: 201-214.
[3]	Bennett E M, Balvanera P.2007. The future of production systems in a globalized world.Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 5(4): 191-198.
[4]	Bohensky E L, Reyers B, Van Jaarsveld A S.2006. Conservation in practice: future ecosystem services in a southern African river basin: a scenario planning approach to uncertainty.Conservation Biology, 20(4): 1051-1061.
[5]	Bonan G B, Doney S C.2018. Climate, ecosystems, and planetary futures: The challenge to predict life in Earth system models.Science, 359(6375): 533.
[6]	Bottalico F, Pesola L, Vizzarri M, et al.2016. Modeling the influence of alternative forest management scenarios on wood production and carbon storage: A case study in the Mediterranean region.Environmental Research, 144: 72-87.
[7]	Boumans R, Roman J, Altman I, et al.2015. The Multiscale Integrated Model of Ecosystem Services (MIMES): Simulating the interactions of coupled human and natural systems.Ecosystem services, 12: 30-41.
[8]	Brown G, Brabyn L.2012. The extrapolation of social landscape values to a national level in New Zealand using landscape character classification.Applied Geography, 35(1): 84-94.
[9]	Butler J R A, Wong G Y, Metcalfe D J, et al.2013. An analysis of trade-offs between multiple ecosystem services and stakeholders linked to land use and water quality management in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia.Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 180: 176-191.
[10]	Cazalis V, Loreau M, Henderson K.2018. Do we have to choose between feeding the human population and conserving nature? Modelling the global dependence of people on ecosystem services.Science of the Total Environment, 634: 1463-1474.
[11]	Chen D, Li J, Yang X, et al.2018a. Trade-offs and optimization among ecosystem services in the Weihe River basin.Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38(9): 3260-3271. (in Chinese)
[12]	Chen D S, Li J, Zhou Z X, et al.2018b. Simulating and mapping the spatial and seasonal effects of future climate and land -use changes on ecosystem services in the Yanhe watershed, China.Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(2): 1115-1131.
[13]	Chen S, Shahi C, Chen H Y H.2016. Economic and ecological trade-off analysis of forest ecosystems: options for boreal forests.Environmental Reviews, 24(3): 348-361.
[14]	Cheung W W, Sumaila U R.2008. Trade-offs between conservation and socio-economic objectives in managing a tropical marine ecosystem.Ecological economics, 66(1): 193-210.
[15]	Chisasa J, Makina D.2013. Bank credit and agricultural output in South Africa: A Cobb-Douglas empirical analysis.
[16]	Cord A F, Bartkowski B, Beckmann M, et al.2017. Towards systematic analyses of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies: Main concepts, methods and the road ahead.Ecosystem Services, 28: 264-272.
[17]	Costanza R, d'Arge R, de Groot R, et al.1997. The value of the ecosystem services and natural capital.Nature, 387: 253-260.
[18]	Daily G C, Polasky S, Goldstein J, et al.2009. Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver.Frontiers in Ecology & the Environment, 7(1): 21-28.
[19]	de Groot R, Christie M, Aronson J.2010. Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation, doi:10.4324/9781849775489.
[20]	Falloon P, Betts R.2010. Climate impacts on European agriculture and water management in the context of adaptation and mitigation—the importance of an integrated approach.Science of the Total Environment, 408(23): 5667-5687.
[21]	Fan M, Shibata H, Chen L.2018. Assessing high impacts of climate change: spatial characteristics and relationships of hydrological ecosystem services in northern Japan (Teshio River watershed).Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 23(4): 525-552.
[22]	Farber S C, Costanza R, Wilson M A.2002. Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services.Ecological Economics, 41(3): 375-392.
[23]	Feng Q, Zhao W, Fu B, et al.2017. Ecosystem service trade-offs and their influencing factors: A case study in the Loess Plateau of China.Science of the Total Environment, 607: 1250-1263.
[24]	Fu B, Forsius M.2015. Ecosystem services modeling in contrasting landscapes.Landscape Ecology, 30(3): 375-379.
[25]	Fu B, Yu D.2016. Trade-off analyses and synthetic integrated method of multiple ecosystem services.Resources Science, 38(1): 1-9. (in Chinese)
[26]	Fu M, Tian J, Zhu Y, et al.2017. Identification of functional zones and methods of target management in Sanjiangyuan National Park.Biodiversity Science, 25(1): 71-79.
[27]	Goldenberg R, Kalantari Z, Cvetkovic V, et al.2017. Distinction, quantification and mapping of potential and realized supply-demand of flow- dependent ecosystem services. Sci Total Environ, 593-594: 599-609.
[28]	Grasso M.1998. Ecological-economic model for optimal mangrove trade off between forestry and fishery production: comparing a dynamic optimization and a simulation model.Ecological Modelling, 112(2-3): 131-150.
[29]	Gret-Regamey A, Siren E, Brunner S H, et al.2017. Review of decision support tools to operationalize the ecosystem services concept.Ecosystem Services, 26: 306-315.
[30]	Groot R S d, Fisher B, Christie M, et al. 2010.Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation. In: Kumar P. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB): Ecological and Economic Foundations. London: Earthscan Press.
[31]	Haines-Young R, Potschin M, Kienast F.2012. Indicators of ecosystem service potential at European scales: mapping marginal changes and trade-offs.Ecological Indicators, 21: 39-53.
[32]	Han W.2016. Xi'an metropolitan area agricultural ecosystem service trade- off and synergy relationship and its driving force. Shaanxi Normal University. (in Chinese)
[33]	Hao M Y, Ren Z Y, Sun Y J, et al. 2017.Dynamic analysis of trade-offs and synergies between ecosystem services in Guanzhong Basin.Geography Research, 36(3): 592-602. (in Chinese)
[34]	He J, Huang J, Li C.2017. The evaluation for the impact of land use change on habitat quality: A joint contribution of cellular automata scenario simulation and habitat quality assessment model.Ecological Modelling, 366: 58-67.
[35]	Hu H T, Fu B J, Lü Y H, et al.2015. SAORES: A spatially explicit assessment and optimization tool for regional ecosystem services. Landscape Ecology, 30(3): 547-560.
[36]	Huang I B, Keisler J, Linkov I.2011. Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: Ten years of applications and trends.Science of the Total Environment, 409(19): 3578-3594.
[37]	Jonsson P, Eklundh L.2004. TIMESAT-a program for analyzing time- series of satellite sensor data.Computers & Geosciences, 30(8): 833-845.
[38]	Kaim A, Cord A F, Volk M.2018. A review of multi-criteria optimization techniques for agricultural land use allocation.Environmental Modelling & Software, 105: 79-93.
[39]	Kim H, Rosa I M D, Alkemade R, et al.2018. A protocol for an intercomparison of biodiversity and ecosystem services models using harmonized land-use and climate scenarios. bioRxiv, 10.1101/300632.
[40]	Kim I, Arnhold S.2018. Mapping environmental land use conflict potentials and ecosystem services in agricultural watersheds.Science of the Total Environment, 630: 827-838.
[41]	Lautenbach S, Volk M, Strauch M, et al.2013. Optimization-based trade- off analysis of biodiesel crop production for managing an agricultural catchment.Environmental Modelling & Software, 48: 98-112.
[42]	Law E A, Bryan B A, Meijaard E, et al.2017. Mixed policies give more options in multifunctional tropical forest landscapes.Journal of Applied Ecology, 54(1): 51-60.
[43]	Le Clec'h S, Jegou N, Decaens T, et al.2018a. From field data to ecosystem services maps: using regressions for the case of deforested areas within the Amazon.Ecosystems, 21(2): 216-236.
[44]	Le Clec'h S, Sloan S, Gond V, et al.2018b. Mapping ecosystem services at the regional scale: the validity of an upscaling approach.International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 32(8): 1593-1610.
[45]	Lee H, Lautenbach S.2016. A quantitative review of relationships between ecosystem services.Ecological Indicators, 66: 340-351.
[46]	Li J, Jiang H, Bai Y, et al.2016. Indicators for spatial-temporal comparisons of ecosystem service status between regions: A case study of the Taihu River Basin, China.Ecological Indicators, 60: 1008-1016.
[47]	Li T, Lü Y.2018. A review on the progress of modeling techniques in ecosystem services.Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38(15): 5287-5296. (in Chinese)
[48]	Li Y C, Liu C M,Yu J J.2006. The balance of wetland protection and cultivated land reclamation in sanjiang plain.Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 28(1): 39-42. (in Chinese)
[49]	Li Y, Luo Y, Liu G, et al.2013. Effects of land use change on ecosystem services: a case study in Miyun reservoir watershed.Acta Ecologica Sinica, 33(3): 726-736. (in Chinese)
[50]	Li Y, Zhang L, Yan J, et al.2017. Mapping the hotspots and coldspots of ecosystem services in conservation priority setting.Journal of Geographical Sciences, 27(6): 681-696. (in Chinese)
[51]	Lin Q.2012. Research on the method of grassland ecosystem service trade-off. Beijing Forestry University. (in Chinese)
[52]	Liu H, Fan Y, Shengyan D.2016. Research progress of ecosystem service flow.Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 27(7): 2161-2171. (in Chinese)
[53]	Liu J, Shao Q, Fan J.2009. The integrated assessment indicator system of grassland ecosystem in the Three-River Headwaters region.Geographical Research, 28(2): 273-283. (in Chinese)
[54]	Lu C H; Cheng L.2007. Conflicts between land use change and ecological service functions.Arid Zone Research, 24(3): 302-306. (in Chinese)
[55]	Maes J, Paracchini M, Zulian G, et al.2012. Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem service supply, biodiversity, and habitat conservation status in Europe.Biological Conservation, 155: 1-12.
[56]	Malmborg K, Sinare H, Kautsky E E, et al.2018. Mapping regional livelihood benefits from local ecosystem services assessments in rural Sahel. Plos One, 13(2).
[57]	Maskell L C, Crowe A, Dunbar M J, et al.2013. Exploring the ecological constraints to multiple ecosystem service delivery and biodiversity.Journal of Applied Ecology, 50(3): 561-571.
[58]	Millennium Ecosystem Assesment.2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis.Washington D C:Island Press.
[59]	Mina M, Bugmann H, Cordonnier T, et al.2017. Future ecosystem services from European mountain forests under climate change.Journal of Applied Ecology, 54(2): 389-401.
[60]	Mulwa R, Rao K P C, Gummadi S, et al.2016. Impacts of climate change on agricultural household welfare in Kenya.Climate Research, 67(2): 87-97.
[61]	Nelson E, Mendoza G, Regetz J, et al.2009. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales.Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(1): 4-11.
[62]	Nguyen T T, Verdoodt A, Van Y T, et al.2015. Design of a GIS and multi-criteria based land evaluation procedure for sustainable land-use planning at the regional level.Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 200: 1-11.
[63]	Pagella T F, Sinclair F L.2014. Development and use of a typology of mapping tools to assess their fitness for supporting management of ecosystem service provision.Landscape Ecology, 29(3): 383-399.
[64]	Pang X, Nordström E-M, Böttcher H, et al.2017. Trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services under different forest management scenarios-The LEcA tool.Ecosystem Services, 28: 67-79.
[65]	Polasky S, Nelson E, Camm J, et al.2008. Where to put things? Spatial land management to sustain biodiversity and economic returns.Biological Conservation, 141(6): 1505-1524.
[66]	Pueffel C, Haase D, Priess J A.2018. Mapping ecosystem services on brownfields in Leipzig, Germany.Ecosystem Services, 30: 73-85.
[67]	Rao S, Lin Q, Wang X H, et al.2015. Zhenglan Banner grassland ecosystem servicetrade-off research. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 29(3): 81-86. (in Chinese)
[68]	Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson G D, Bennett E.2010. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(11): 5242-5247.
[69]	Raum S.2018. A framework for integrating systematic stakeholder analysis in ecosystem services research: Stakeholder mapping for forest ecosystem services in the UK.Ecosystem Services, 29: 170-184.
[70]	Reilly K, Adamowski J, John K.2018. Participatory mapping of ecosystem services to understand stakeholders' perceptions of the future of the Mactaquac Dam, Canada.Ecosystem Services, 30: 107-123.
[71]	Renard D, Rhemtulla J M, Bennett E M.2015. Historical dynamics in ecosystem service bundles.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(43): 13411-13416.
[72]	Rodriguez J P, Beard T D, Jr., Bennett E M, et al.2006. Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecology and Society, 11(1).
[73]	Sanon S, Hein T, Douven W, et al.2012. Quantifying ecosystem service trade-offs: The case of an urban floodplain in Vienna, Austria.Journal of Environmental Management, 111: 159-172.
[74]	Schaberg R H, Holmes T P, Lee K J, et al.1999. Ascribing value to ecological processes: an economic view of environmental change.Forest Ecology and Management, 114(2-3): 329-338.
[75]	Schirpke U, Candiago S, Egarter Vigl L, et al.2018. Integrating supply, flow and demand to enhance the understanding of interactions among multiple ecosystem services.The Science of the Total Environment, 651(Pt 1): 928-941.
[76]	Scholte S S K, Daams M, Farjon H, et al.2018. Mapping recreation as an ecosystem service: Considering scale, interregional differences and the influence of physical attributes.Landscape and Urban Planning, 175: 149-160.
[77]	Schuerch M, Spencer T, Temmerman S, et al.2018. Future response of global coastal wetlands to sea-level rise.Nature, 561: 231-234.
[78]	Schwenk W S, Donovan T M, Keeton W S, et al.2012. Carbon storage, timber production, and biodiversity: Comparing ecosystem services with multi-criteria decision analysis.Ecological Applications, 22(5): 1612-1627.
[79]	Seppelt R, Lautenbach S, Volk M.2013. Identifying trade-offs between ecosystem services, land use, and biodiversity: A plea for combining scenario analysis and optimization on different spatial scales.Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(5): 458-463.
[80]	Serna-Chavez H M, Schulp C J E, van Bodegom P M, et al.2014. A quantitative framework for assessing spatial flows of ecosystem services.Ecological Indicators, 39: 24-33.
[81]	Sharps K, Masante D, Thomas A, et al.2017. Comparing strengths and weaknesses of three ecosystem services modelling tools in a diverse UK river catchment. Science of the Total Environment, 584-585: 118-130.
[82]	Sherrouse B C, Semmens D J, Ancona Z H, et al.2017. Analyzing land-use change scenarios for trade-offs among cultural ecosystem services in the Southern Rocky Mountains.Ecosystem Services, 26: 431-444.
[83]	Smith F P, Gorddard R, House A P N, et al.2012. Biodiversity and agriculture: Production frontiers as a framework for exploring trade-offs and evaluating policy.Environmental Science & Policy, 23: 85-94.
[84]	Syrbe R-U, Walz U.2012. Spatial indicators for the assessment of ecosystem services: Providing, benefiting and connecting areas and landscape metrics.Ecological Indicators, 21: 80-88.
[85]	Thellmann K, Blagodatsky S, Haeuser I, et al.2017. Assessing ecosystem services in rubber dominated landscapes in South-East Asia-a challenge for biophysical modeling and transdisciplinary valuation.Forests, 8(12): 505.
[86]	Turner K G, Anderson S, Gonzales-Chang M, et al.2016. A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration.Ecological Modelling, 319: 190-207.
[87]	Uhde B, Hahn W A, Griess V C, et al.2015. Hybrid MCDA Methods to integrate multiple ecosystem services in forest management planning: A Critical Review.Environmental Management, 56(2): 373-388.
[88]	Van Jaarsveld A, Biggs R, Scholes R, et al.2005. Measuring conditions and trends in ecosystem services at multiple scales: the Southern African Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (SAfMA) experience.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 360(1454): 425-441.
[89]	Viglizzo E F, Frank F C.2006. Land-use options for Del Plata Basin in South America: Tradeoffs analysis based on ecosystem service provision.Ecological economics, 57(1): 140-151.
[90]	Vrebos D, Staes J, Vandenbroucke T, et al.2015. Mapping ecosystem service flows with land cover scoring maps for data-scarce regions.Ecosystem Services, 13: 28-40.
[91]	Wang J B, Liu J, Shao Q, et al.2009. Spatial-temporal patterns of net primary productivity for 1988-2004 based on GLOPEM-CEVSA model in the “Three-River Headwaters” region of Qinghai province, China.Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 33(2): 254-269. (in Chinese)
[92]	Wang J, Dong J, Yi Y, et al.2017. Decreasing net primary production due to drought and slight decreases in solar radiation in China from 2000 to 2012.Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 122(1): 261-278.
[93]	Wang Y, Li G, Ding J, et al.2016. A combined GLAS and MODIS estimation of the global distribution of mean forest canopy height.Remote Sensing of Environment, 174: 24-43.
[94]	Wei H, Fan W, Wang X, et al.2017. Integrating supply and social demand in ecosystem services assessment: A review.Ecosystem Services, 25: 15-27.
[95]	Wolff S, Schulp C J E, Verburg P H.2015. Mapping ecosystem services demand: A review of current research and future perspectives.Ecological Indicators, 55: 159-171.
[96]	Wu X, Wang S, Fu B, et al.2018. Land use optimization based on ecosystem service assessment: A case study in the Yanhe watershed.Land Use Policy, 72: 303-312.
[97]	Xue H.2013. Studies on services from artificial ecosystems. Hangzhou, Zhejiang University. (in Chinese )
[98]	Yang S, Zhao W, Liu Y, et al.2018a. Influence of land use change on the ecosystem service trade-offs in the ecological restoration area: Dynamics and scenarios in the Yanhe watershed, China.The Science of the total environment, 644: 556-566.
[99]	Yang T, Wang C, Li G, et al.2015. Forest canopy height mapping over China using GLAS and MODIS data.Science China Earth Sciences, 58(1): 96-105.
[100]	Yang W, Jin Y, Sun T, et al.2018b. Trade-offs among ecosystem services in coastal wetlands under the effects of reclamation activities.Ecological Indicators, 92: 354-366.
[101]	Yu G, He H, Zhou Y.2018. Ecosystem observation and research under background of big data.Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 33(8): 832-837. (in Chinese)
[102]	Zhou X, Zhu H, Wen Y, et al.2018. Effects of understory management on trade-offs and synergies between biomass carbon stock, plant diversity and timber production in eucalyptus plantations.Forest Ecology and Management, 410: 164-173.