Expanding the conservation toolbox: conservation planning of multifunctional landscapes

An area of convergence appears to be emerging between the approaches of conservation planning and the concepts of multifunctional landscapes, which if exploited correctly may assist in overcoming the resource and other constraints faced by biodiversity conservation, while at the same time furthering the aims of multifunctional landscapes to improve production abilities and overall sustainability. Using a multi-zone conservation planning approach, we explore the conservation costs, benefits to biodiversity conservation and possible ecosystem service payments associated with various land-use configurations, in the Little Karoo of South Africa, in order to develop and showcase a multifunctional landscape planning approach and its data requirements, as well as the possible cost savings to conservation agencies. The study uses four conservation planning scenarios, five land-use types, their conservation costs and biodiversity benefits, as well as possible payments from carbon sequestration and tourism. We find that the costs and biodiversity benefits associated with different land-uses varies substantially between land-uses, and also spatially within a land-use type. By incorporating this variation into a multi-zone conservation planning approach land-uses can be allocated in a way that achieves biodiversity targets while at the same time reducing costs by up to 50?% when compared with traditional binary approaches to conservation. Despite some challenges presented by cost and ecosystem service value data and the determination of land-use impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services, the ability of conservation planning approaches to reflect differential contributions of particular land-uses to biodiversity targets and ecosystem services holds much potential for conservation planning, for multifunctional landscape objectives and for growing the resources and partnerships available to the establishment of sustainable and resilient landscapes.     

Opportunities and challenges for mainstreaming ecosystem services in development planning: perspectives from a landscape level

Despite much progress in ecosystem services research, a gap still appears to exist between this research and the implementation of landscape management and development activities on the ground, especially within a developing country context. If ecosystem service science is to be operationalised and used by decision-makers directing local development, an in-depth understanding of the implementation context for landscape planning and management, and of the opportunities and challenges for ecosystem services in this context are needed. Very little is known about these opportunities and constraints, largely because of the absence of methods to explore the complexity of the landscape planning, management and implementation context and the possibilities of integrating scientific information into these processes within a real-world setting. This study aims to address this need for information and methods, by focusing on a region in South Africa with a long history of ecosystem service research and stakeholder engagement, and testing a social science approach to explore opportunities and challenges for integrating ecosystem services in landscape planning processes and policies. Our methodological approach recognises the importance of social processes and legitimacy in decision-making, emphasizing the need to engage with the potential end-users of ecosystem service research in order to ensure the relevance of the research. While we discovered challenges for mainstreaming ecosystem service at a local level, we also found strong opportunities in the multi-sectoral planning processes driving development and in how the concept of ecosystem services is framed and aligned with development priorities, especially those relating to disaster risk reduction.     

Supplying urban ecosystem services through multifunctional green infrastructure in the United States

This paper summarizes a strategy for supplying ecosystem services in urban areas through a participatory planning process targeting multifunctional green infrastructure. We draw from the literature on landscape multifunctionality, which has primarily been applied to agricultural settings, and propose opportunities to develop urban green infrastructure that could contribute to the sustainable social and ecological health of the city. Thinking in terms of system resilience, strategies might focus on the potential for green infrastructure to allow for adaptation and even transformation in the face of future challenges such as climate change, food insecurity, and limited resources. Because planning for multiple functions can be difficult when many diverse stakeholders are involved, we explored decision support tools that could be applied to green infrastructure planning in the early stages, to engage the public and encourage action toward implementing a preferred solution. Several specific ecosystem services that could be relevant for evaluating current and future urban green spaces include: plant biodiversity, food production, microclimate control, soil infiltration, carbon sequestration, visual quality, recreation, and social capital. Integrating such ecosystem services into small-scale greening projects could allow for creativity and local empowerment that would inspire broader transformation of green infrastructure at the city level. Those cities committing to such an approach by supporting greening projects are likely to benefit in the long run through the value of ecosystem services for urban residents and the broader public.     

Landscapes, sustainability and the place-based analysis of ecosystem services

There is currently, widespread interest in the assessment of ecosystem services, and the new insights that the concept provides in understanding the ecology of landscapes and the science of sustainability. Three major assessment frameworks can be identified in the contemporary literature, namely one based on habitats, one based on the identification of the system elements that delivers the service, and one based on the understanding of places. Although all are useful for supporting decision making in relation to sustainable development, different situations require different perspectives, and so it is important to understand their advantages and drawbacks. Moreover, it is important to determine how they relate to other approaches used, for example, in landscape planning, so that the contribution that ecosystem assessments can make to sustainability debates can be better understood. The aim of this paper is to describe the strengths of the place-based approach because it is more easily overlooked as an assessment option. In particular we will argue that a place-based approach can help us better understand issues of multi-functionality, the valuation of natural capital and the role of landscape in framing debates about ecosystem services and sustainability. An appreciation of these issues will enable researchers interested in landscape to key questions and priorities in relation to questions of sustainability. Although it is useful to consider different assessment perspectives separately, we conclude that in practice, the habitat and systems approaches can form part of a place-based assessment, just as a better understanding of place can enrich assessments that spring from these more natural science approaches. Nevertheless, in designing analytical strategies to take the ecosystem approach forward, we suggest that it is vital to consider these different perspectives in order to build assessments that are relevant, legitimate and credible, and which can effectively address the problems of sustainability that emerge at the landscape scale.     

Development and use of a typology of mapping tools to assess their fitness for supporting management of ecosystem service provision

The importance of land use in affecting a range of ecosystem services (ES) provided from rural landscapes is increasingly recognised, creating an imperative for tools to assist in managing impacts of land use on ES provision. Many stakeholders, at a range of scales, are involved, including policy makers and implementers, land users and people receiving the services. Here, we develop a new and comprehensive typology of ES maps by expanding the basic stock-flow-receptor concept to create a set of map categories that embraces requirements for management of ES provision. We then use this typology as a framework for assessment of approaches to mapping ES. Most approaches have considered natural capital stocks of few services, at large scales (>1,000 km²) and coarse resolution (>100 m²). Emphasis has been on areas of ES generation, with little attention to flows, limiting the extent to which reception of services, interactions amongst services, and impacts on different stakeholders are considered. Most approaches focused on a bounded watershed or administrative unit, with little attention to landscape evolution, or to the definition of system boundaries that encompass flows from source to reception for different services. Although uncertainty is inherent in both input data and the services that are mapped, this is rarely acknowledged, quantified or presented. These features of current mapping approaches constrain their usefulness for informing the management of ES provision from rural landscapes. Key areas for future development are (1) maps at scales and resolutions that connect field scale management options to local landscape impacts; (2) mapping flows, and defining landscape boundaries, that include complete pathways, from source to reception; (3) calculating and presenting information on synergies and trade-offs amongst services; and (4) incorporating stakeholder knowledge and perspectives in the generation and interpretation of maps to bound and communicate uncertainty and improve their legitimacy.     

Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development

Landscape ecology is in a position to become the scientific basis for sustainable landscape development. When spatial planning policy is decentralised, local actors need to collaborate to decide on the changes that have to be made in the landscape to better accommodate their perceptions of value. This paper addresses two prerequisites that landscape ecological science has to meet for it to be effective in producing appropriate knowledge for such bottom-up landscape-development processes—it must include a valuation component, and it must be suitable for use in collaborative decision-making on a local scale. We argue that landscape ecological research needs to focus more on these issues and propose the concept of landscape services as a unifying common ground where scientists from various disciplines are encouraged to cooperate in producing a common knowledge base that can be integrated into multifunctional, actor-led landscape development. We elaborate this concept into a knowledge framework, the structure–function–value chain, and expand the current pattern–process paradigm in landscape ecology with value in this way. Subsequently, we analyse how the framework could be applied and facilitate interdisciplinary research that is applicable in transdisciplinary landscape-development processes.     

Multi-functional landscapes in semi arid environments: implications for biodiversity and ecosystem services

Synergies between biodiversity conservation objectives and ecosystem service management were investigated in the Succulent Karoo biome (83,000 km²) of South Africa, a recognised biodiversity hotspot. Our study complemented a previous biodiversity assessment with an ecosystem service assessment. Stakeholder engagement and expert consultation focussed our investigations on surface water, ground water, grazing and tourism as the key services in this region. The key ecosystem services and service hotspots were modelled and mapped. The congruence between these services, and between biodiversity priorities and ecosystem service priorities, were assessed and considered in relation to known threats. Generally low levels of overlap were found between these ecosystem services, with the exception of surface and ground water which had an 80% overlap. The overlap between ecosystem service hotspots and individual biodiversity priority areas was generally low. Four of the seven priority areas assessed have more than 20% of their areas classified as important for services. In specific cases, particular service levels could be used to justify the management of a specific biodiversity priority area for conservation. Adopting a biome scale hotspot approach to assessing service supply highlighted key management areas. However, it underplayed local level dependence on particular services, not effectively capturing the welfare implications associated with diminishing and limited service provision. We conclude that regional scale (biome level) approaches need to be combined with local level investigations (municipal level). Given the regional heterogeneity and varied nature of the impacts of drivers and threats, diverse approaches are required to steer land management towards sustainable multifunctional landscape strategies.     

The social and economic value of cultural ecosystem services provided by urban forests in North America: A review and suggestions for future research

With the majority of the world’s human population now living in cities, urban forests provide an increasingly important range of ecosystem services, from improved air quality and climate change adaptation to better public health outcomes and increased tourism revenues. The importance of these ecosystem services in urban environments, and the central role that cities play in the lives of people around the world, have motivated various attempts to quantify the value of ecosystem services provided by urban forests. This paper reviews existing research in the fields of urban forestry, economics, sociology, and health on the value of urban ecosystem services, with a focus on cultural services, a category of ecosystem services that is of key importance to human well-being but that has suffered from a lack of empirical research. The review identified 38 studies that examined the value of mixed vegetation, 31 studies that examined the value of trees, and 43 studies that examined the value of green spaces. Psychological health is the most-studied ecosystem service category, with most research in this area focusing on the services of mixed vegetation. Social health, community economic development, and tourism are the least-studied, with most research in these areas focusing on mixed vegetation and trees. Multiple metrics were used to quantify the value of urban greenery within each ecosystem service category but only 11 metrics were assigned a monetary value. Gaps in the literature that present strong opportunities for future research include: the value of urban forests for improving social health, equitable access to ecosystem services, the impact of urban forests on community economic development, and economic valuation and green exposure metrics. We hope that this review stimulates future research in the areas highlighted and that municipalities consider including evaluations of a broad range of ecosystem services during land use planning and budgeting processes.     

Integration of ecosystem services into a conceptual spatial planning framework based on a landscape ecology perspective

Context

The study of ecosystem services has extended its influence into spatial planning and landscape ecology, the integration of which can offer an opportunity to enhance the saliency, credibility, and legitimacy of landscape ecology in spatial planning issues.

Objectives

This paper presents a conceptual framework suitable for spatial planning in human dominated environments supported by landscape ecological thinking. It seeks to facilitate the integration of ecosystem services into current practice, including landscape metrics as suitable indicators.

Methods

A literature review supported the revision of existing open questions pertaining to ecosystem services as well as their integration into landscape ecology and spatial planning. A posterior reflection of the current state-of-the-art was then used as a basis for developing the spatial planning conceptual framework.

Results and conclusion

The framework is articulated around four phases (characterisation, assessment, design, and monitoring) and three concepts (character, service, and value). It advocates integration of public participation, consideration of “landscape services”, the inclusion of ecosystem disservices, and the use of landscape metrics for qualitative assessment of services. As a result, the framework looks to enhance spatial planning practice by providing: (i) a better consideration of landscape configuration in the supply of services (ii) the integration of anthropogenic services with ecosystem services; (iii) the consideration of costs derived from ecosystems (e.g. disservices); and (iv) an aid to the understanding of ecosystem services terminology for spatial planning professionals and decision makers.

     

Towards sustainable forest management in the European Union through polycentric forest governance and an integrated landscape approach

Context

Achieving sustainable development as an inclusive societal process, and securing sustainability and resilience of human societies as well as the natural environment are wicked problems. Realising sustainable forest management (SFM) policy in local landscapes is one example.

Objectives

Using the European Union as a case study for the implementation of SFM policy across multiple governance levels in different contexts, we discuss the benefits of adopting an integrated landscape approach with place and space, partnership and sustainability as three pillars.

Methods

We map the institutional frameworks for implementing SFM policy within all EU member states. Next, we analyse whether or not there is EU-level forest governance, and how power is distributed among EU, member state and operational levels.

Results

Mechanisms to steer a centralized forest governance approach towards SFM in the EU are marginal. Instead, there is a polycentric forest governance with 90 national and sub-national governments, which create and implement own and EU-wide SFM-related policies. Additionally, both among and within regional governance units there is a large variation in governance arrangements linked to land ownership at the operational level.

Conclusions

To effectively translate EU-wide SFM and SFM-related policies into action in local landscapes, it is crucial to acknowledge that there are different land ownership structures, landscape histories and alternative value chains based on multiple ecosystem services. Therefore regionally adapted landscape approaches engaging multiple stakeholders and actors through evidence-based landscape governance and stewardship towards sustainable forest landscape management are needed. Model Forest, Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research platform and Biosphere Reserve are three of many examples.

     

Incorporating ecosystem services into ecosystem-based management to deal with complexity: a participative mental model approach

Integrating ecosystem services into ecosystem-based management (EBM) is currently one of the most relevant challenges for management. For that purpose, it is necessary to depict the relationships established between ecosystems and society considering the delivery, use and governance of ecosystem services. One effective way of doing so involves collaboration between researchers, who scientifically study the system, and managers, who have specific experience and technical knowledge. With this aim, we held two workshops in 2011 in the National Parks of Doñana and Sierra Nevada, Andalusia (Spain), with researchers and managers from the protected areas at different organizational levels: local, regional and national. Taking the participative mental model technique as an inspiration, we developed a tool that was used as a means to allow a holistic analysis of ecosystem services from an interdisciplinary and participative perspective. We found that participatory mental models, help integrating ecosystem services into EBM as it includes stakeholders’ proposals and knowledge. For the implementation of ecosystem services for management, we discuss the necessity of navigating a process that requires considerable changes, not only in using new concepts such as ecosystem services, but also in the management structures that govern the services. This process would require closer interaction between citizens, researchers and managers, and the creation of new participation spaces that include ecosystem service beneficiaries located beyond protected areas.     

The multifunctionality concept in urban green infrastructure planning: A systematic literature review

Urban green infrastructure is critical for providing a wide range of ecosystem goods and services that benefit the urban population. Past studies have suggested that multifunctionality concerning urban infrastructure services and functions is a prerequisite for targeting effective and impactful urban green infrastructure. Moreover, urban green infrastructure with multiple functions can offer socio-economic and environmental benefits. However, there has been a knowledge gap in the planning literature to elaborate multiple ecosystem functions in urban green infrastructure. In particular, existing methods and approaches are lacking for quantifying and monitoring such ecological services and biodiversity in urban green infrastructures at different spatial scales. Therefore, this research aims to review studies focusing on the multifunctionality concept in urban green infrastructure planning. The study highlights the current status and knowledge gaps through a systematic review. Our analysis revealed that current studies on green infrastructure multifunctionality have focused on five main themes: 1) planning methods for urban green infrastructure, 2) assessment approaches of urban green infrastructure, 3) ecosystem services and their benefits, 4) sustainability and climate adaptation, and 5) urban agriculture. The study found that the five themes are somewhat connected to each other. The study has revealed a knowledge gap regarding incorporating multifunctional green infrastructure in the planning principle. The results suggest at least five critical elements to ensure multiple functions in urban infrastructure. The elements are spatial distribution, optimal distance, integrated network, accessibility, and public participation and engagement. The study further recommends research directions for future analysis on green infrastructure multifunctionality that are critical for urban planning.     

Greening urban road verges highlights diverse views of multiple stakeholders on ecosystem service provision,challenges and preferred form

Globally, there is growing recognition of the potential of road verges to contribute to urban greening and ecosystem service provision, beyond their original functions of utility provision and public access. Numerous, diverse stakeholders are involved in their management, yet their shared and diverging perspectives on verge greening are poorly understood. This research examined the perspectives on road verge greening by 30 respondents from eight stakeholder groups from the Perth Metropolitan Area, Australia. Stakeholders spanned local and state governments, developers, peak bodies, utility providers, environmental consultants, verge treatment providers and urban greening advocates. Semi-directed interviews and Likert scales were used to assess respondents' perspectives and perceived importance of urban verge functions and ecosystem services, risks and challenges associated with verge greening, and preferred verge vegetation composition. The most important ecosystem services for all stakeholders were temperature regulation (through the provision of street trees), those associated with water management and aesthetically interesting streetscapes. Perceived challenges included limited knowledge for the management of native species verges and streetscapes, organisational costs for verge managers and utility providers, and the need to engage with multiple local government authorities with widely varying management and financial valuation of verge vegetation. Stakeholders’ preferred verge reflected diverse uses, local characteristics, and was climate and water resilient (particularly ‘waterwise’). A majority of stakeholder groups felt greater attention to the ‘understorey’ of the ‘urban forest’ was warranted. An emerging perspective across four stakeholder groups identified the potential for verges to grow a local ‘sense of place’, through plantings emphasising local native species and highlighting local Whadjuk Noongar seasons. These findings support policies and programmes associated with urban greening, and assist in navigating the contestation often associated with new or transformative uses of land at the public-private interface.     

Landscape sustainability science: ecosystem services and human well-being in changing landscapes

The future of humanity depends on whether or not we have a vision to guide our transition toward sustainability, on scales ranging from local landscapes to the planet as a whole. Sustainability science is at the core of this vision, and landscapes and regions represent a pivotal scale domain. The main objectives of this paper are: (1) to elucidate key definitions and concepts of sustainability, including the Brundtland definition, the triple bottom line, weak and strong sustainability, resilience, human well-being, and ecosystem services; (2) to examine key definitions and concepts of landscape sustainability, including those derived from general concepts and those developed for specific landscapes; and (3) to propose a framework for developing a science of landscape sustainability. Landscape sustainability is defined as the capacity of a landscape to consistently provide long-term, landscape-specific ecosystem services essential for maintaining and improving human well-being. Fundamentally, well-being is a journey, not a destination. Landscape sustainability science is a place-based, use-inspired science of understanding and improving the dynamic relationship between ecosystem services and human well-being in changing landscapes under uncertainties arising from internal feedbacks and external disturbances. While landscape sustainability science emphasizes place-based research on landscape and regional scales, significant between landscape interactions and hierarchical linkages to both finer and broader scales (or externalities) must not be ignored. To advance landscape sustainability science, spatially explicit methods are essential, especially experimental approaches that take advantage of designed landscapes and multi-scaled simulation models that couple the dynamics of landscape services (ecosystem services provided by multiple landscape elements in combination as emergent properties) and human well-being.     

Making use of the ecosystem services concept in regional planning—trade-offs from reducing water erosion

In this article we demonstrate how to integrate the ecosystem services concept into regional planning using the example of a case study in Saxony, Germany. We analysed how the reduction of water erosion as a regulating service impacts six other ecosystem services. Ecological integrity, provisioning services (provision of food and fibre, provision of biomass), regulating services (soil erosion protection, drought-risk regulation, flood regulation), and the cultural service landscape aesthetics are taken into account. Using a decision support software, we found that the greening of preferential discharge paths can reduce water erosion by 2–7 %. The introduction of hedgerows and the change in the soil management system from tillage to no-till practices revealed a reduction in the total soil loss by 33 and 89 %, respectively. A combination of the three erosion control measures—greening, hedgerows, and no-till management—reduced the soil loss most efficiently by 92 %. We found synergies between the measures for reducing erosion and the provision of ecological integrity, of regulating and cultural ecosystem services. In contrast, the impact on provisioning services was slightly negative. For the land use planning in the case study region we recommend therefore a combination of greening, hedges, and management change. We found that the applied integrated ecosystem services assessment approach, in combination with stakeholder involvement in the scenario development, helped communicating cross-sectoral effects of different management strategies in a comprehensive way and therefore supports regional planning.     

Resilience, experimentation, and scale mismatches in social-ecological landscapes

Growing a resilient landscape depends heavily on finding an appropriate match between the scales of demands on ecosystems by human societies and the scales at which ecosystems are capable of meeting these demands. While the dynamics of environmental change and ecosystem service provision form the basis of many landscape ecology studies, enhancing landscape resilience is, in many ways, a problem of establishing relevant institutions that act at appropriate scales to modify and moderate demand for ecosystem services and the resulting exploitation of ecosystems. It is also of central importance for landscape sustainability that institutions are flexible enough to adapt to changes in the external environment. The model provided by natural ecosystems suggests that it is only by encouraging and testing a diversity of approaches that we will be able to build landscapes that are resilient to future change. We advocate an approach to landscape planning that involves growing learning institutions on the one hand, and on the other, developing solutions to current problems through deliberate experimentation coupled with social learning processes.     

Ecologies as a complement to ecosystem services? Exploring how landscape planners might advance understanding about human–nature relationships in changing landscapes

Context

One of the key challenges for landscape planners is to reframe the meaning of ecosystem services. In this context, alternative concepts such as ecologies have potential to complement ecosystem services when applied to human–nature relationships in changing landscapes.

Objectives

The objectives of this article are: (1) to review how landscape planners use major critical approaches to translate the meaning of ecosystem services and (2) to introduce why ecologies provides helpful insights to complement ecosystem services.

Methods

A conceptual framework examines how landscape planners use critique to reframe the meaning of ecosystem services. This framework is then revised as a scenario to reframe the meanings of ecologies and ecosystem services.

Results

Landscape planners use three critical approaches to reframe the meaning of ecosystem services to advance the understanding of human–nature relationships in changing landscapes. Yet, they identify some important issues and gaps that emerge when it is applied. These issues and gaps are part of the rationale for why landscape planning is at a crossroads with ecosystem services. This rationale is then extended to create a scenario for why a revised conceptual framework is needed for landscape planners to reframe the meanings of ecologies and ecosystem services.

Conclusion

The translational challenge of ecologies and ecosystem services is an example of the key role that landscape planners play in developing a deeper understanding of human–nature relationships.

     

Spatial patterns of cultural ecosystem services provision in Southern Patagonia

Context

Although there is a need to develop a spatially explicit methodological approach that addresses the social importance of cultural ecosystem services for regional planning, few studies have analysed the spatial distribution on the cultural ecosystem services based on social perceptions.

Objective

The main objective of this study was to identify cultural ecosystem service hot-spots, and factors that characterize such hot-spots and define the spatial associations between cultural ecosystem services in Southern Patagonia (Argentina).

Methods

The study was carried out in Southern Patagonia (243.9 thousand km²) located between 46° and 55° SL with the Andes mountains on the western fringe and the Atlantic Ocean on the eastern fringe of the study area. The study region has a range of different vegetation types (grasslands, shrub-lands, peat-lands and forests) though the cold arid steppe is the main vegetation type. We used geo-tagged digital images that local people and visitors posted in the Panoramio web platform to identify hot-spots of four cultural ecosystem services (aesthetic value, existence value, recreation and local identity) and relate these hot-spots with social and biophysical landscape features.

Results

Aesthetic value was the main cultural service tagged by people, followed by the existence value for biodiversity conservation, followed by local identity and then recreational activity. The spatial distribution of these cultural ecosystem services are associated with different social and biophysical characteristics, such as the presence of water bodies, vegetation types, marine and terrestrial fauna, protected areas, urbanization, accessibility and tourism offer. The most important factors are the presence of water in Santa Cruz and tourism offer in Tierra del Fuego.

Conclusions

Our results demonstrate that this methodology is useful for assessing cultural ecosystem services at the regional scale, especially in areas with low data availability and field accessibility, such as Southern Patagonia. We also identify new research challenges that can be addressed in cultural ecosystem services research through the use of this method.

     

Informing landscape planning and design for sustaining ecosystem services from existing spatial patterns and knowledge

Over the last decade we have seen an increased emphasis in environmental management and policies aimed at maintaining and restoring multiple ecosystem services at landscape scales. This emphasis has resulted from the recognition that management of specific environmental targets and ecosystem services requires an understanding of landscape processes and the spatial scales that maintain those targets and services. Moreover, we have become increasingly aware of the influence of broad-scale drivers such as climate change on landscape processes and the ecosystem services they support. Studies and assessments on the relative success of environmental policies and landscape designs in maintaining landscape processes and ecosystem services is mostly lacking. This likely reflects the relatively high cost of maintaining a commitment to implement and maintain monitoring programs that document responses of landscape processes and ecosystem services to different landscape policies and designs. However, we argue that there is considerable variation in natural and human-caused landscape pattern at local to continental scales and that this variation may facilitate analyses of how environmental targets and ecosystem services have responded to such patterns. Moreover, wall-to-wall spatial data on land cover and land use at national scales may permit characterization and mapping of different landscape pattern gradients. We discuss four broad and interrelated focus areas that should enhance our understanding of how landscape pattern influences ecosystem services: (1) characterizing and mapping landscape pattern gradients; (2) quantifying relationships between landscape patterns and environmental targets and ecosystem services, (3) evaluating landscape patterns with regards to multiple ecosystem services, and (4) applying adaptive management concepts to improve the effectiveness of specific landscape designs in sustaining ecosystem services. We discuss opportunities as well as challenges in each of these four areas. We believe that this agenda could lead to spatially explicit solutions in managing a range of environmental targets and ecosystem services. Spatially explicit options are critical in managing and protecting landscapes, especially given that communities and organizations are often limited in their capacity to make changes at landscape scales. The issues and potential solutions discussed in this paper expand upon the call by Nassauer and Opdam (Landscape Ecol 23:633–644, 2008) to include design as a fundamental element in landscape ecology research by evaluating natural and human-caused (planned or designed) landscape patterns and their influence on ecosystem services. It also expands upon the idea of “learning by doing” to include “learning from what has already been done.”     

The effects of landscape patterns on ecosystem services: meta-analyses of landscape services

Purpose

The recently introduced concept of ‘landscape services’—ecosystem services influenced by landscape patterns—may be particularly useful in landscape planning by potentially increasing stakeholder participation and financial funding. However, integrating this concept remains challenging. In order to bypass this barrier, we must gain a greater understanding of how landscape composition and configuration influence the services provided.

Methods

We conducted meta-analyses that considered published studies evaluating the effects of several landscape metrics on the following services: pollination, pest control, water quality, disease control, and aesthetic value. We report the cumulative mean effect size (E₊₊), where the signal of the values is related to positive or negative influences.

Results

Landscape complexity differentially influenced the provision of services. Particularly, the percentage of natural areas had an effect on natural enemies (E₊₊ =?0.35), pollination (E₊₊?=?0.41), and disease control (E₊₊?=?0.20), while the percentage of no-crop areas had an effect on water quality (E₊₊?=?0.42) and pest response (E₊₊?=?0.33). Furthermore, heterogeneity had an effect on aesthetic value (E₊₊?=?0.5) and water quality (E₊₊ =???0.40). Moreover, landscape aggregation was important to explaining pollination (E₊₊?=?0.29) and water quality (E₊₊?=?0.35).

Conclusions

The meta-analyses reinforce the importance of considering landscape structure in assessing ecosystem services for management purposes and decision-making. The magnitude of landscape effect varies according to the service being studied. Therefore, land managers must account for landscape composition and configuration in order to ensure the maintenance of services and adapt their approach to suit the focal service.