Addressing the interplay of poverty and the ecology of landscapes: a Grand Challenge Topic for landscape ecologists?

We argue for the landscape ecology community to adopt the study of poverty and the ecology of landscapes as a Grand Challenge Topic. We present five areas of possible research foci that we believe that landscape ecologists can join with other social and environmental scientists to increase scientific understanding of this pressing issue: (1) scale and poverty; (2) landscape structure and human well-being; (3) social and ecological processes linked to spatial patterns in landscapes; (4) conservation and poverty, and (5) applying the landscape ecologist’s toolkit. A brief set of recommendations for landscape ecologists is also presented. These include the need to utilize broad frameworks that integrate social and ecological variables, build capacity to do this kind of work through the development of strong collaborations of researchers in developed and developing countries, create databases in international locations where extreme poverty exists, and create a new generation of researchers capable of addressing this pressing social and environmental issue.     

World congress highlights need for action

Landscape ecology traditionally has been limited to the study of terrestrial systems; however, the questions and methods defining the science are equally relevant for marine and coastal systems. The reciprocal relationship between spatial pattern and ecological processes and the overarching effect of scale on this relationship was being explored in some marine and coastal settings as the general discipline of landscape ecology was evolving throughout the latter two decades of the last century. As with all components of the biosphere, an understanding of these relationships is critical for successful management of marine and coastal systems. In these systems, widely dispersed field or ship-based observations and lack of broad scale data have historically precluded quantification of large-scale patterns and processes and hindered management efforts. However, relatively recent advances in geographic information systems, remote sensing and computer technologies have begun to address these issues and are now permitting assessments of pattern and process in oceans. The intent of this special issue is to highlight research that is adapting the tools of landscape ecology to answer ecological questions within marine and coastal systems, to address the unique challenges faced in these landscapes, and to stimulate an exchange of ideas and solutions to common problems. Inspiration for this special issue of Landscape Ecology began with a special session on “Marine and Coastal Applications in Landscape Ecology” that was held at the 19th Annual Symposium of the United States Regional Association of the International Association for Landscape Ecology, March 31–April 2, 2004 in Las Vegas, Nevada.     

Why history matters in landscape ecology

Landscape ecology traditionally has been limited to the study of terrestrial systems; however, the questions and methods defining the science are equally relevant for marine and coastal systems. The reciprocal relationship between spatial pattern and ecological processes and the overarching effect of scale on this relationship was being explored in some marine and coastal settings as the general discipline of landscape ecology was evolving throughout the latter two decades of the last century. As with all components of the biosphere, an understanding of these relationships is critical for successful management of marine and coastal systems. In these systems, widely dispersed field or ship-based observations and lack of broad scale data have historically precluded quantification of large-scale patterns and processes and hindered management efforts. However, relatively recent advances in geographic information systems, remote sensing and computer technologies have begun to address these issues and are now permitting assessments of pattern and process in oceans. The intent of this special issue is to highlight research that is adapting the tools of landscape ecology to answer ecological questions within marine and coastal systems, to address the unique challenges faced in these landscapes, and to stimulate an exchange of ideas and solutions to common problems. Inspiration for this special issue of Landscape Ecology began with a special session on “Marine and Coastal Applications in Landscape Ecology” that was held at the 19th Annual Symposium of the United States Regional Association of the International Association for Landscape Ecology, March 31–April 2, 2004 in Las Vegas, Nevada.

     

Driving forces of landscape change - current and new directions

The concept of driving forces is gaining increasing attention in landscape-change research. We summarize the state of the art of this field and present new conceptual and methodological directions for the study of driving forces of landscape changes. These new directions address four major challenges faced by landscape-change studies, i.e., studying processes and not merely spatial patterns, extrapolating results in space and time, linking data of different qualities, and considering culture as a driver of landscape change. The proposed research directions include: studying landscape change across borders and transects, focusing on persistence as well as change, investigating rates of change, considering attractors of landscape change, targeting correlation and causality, and searching for precursors of landscape change. Based on established knowledge and the new approaches we outline a standard procedure to study driving forces of landscape change. We anticipate that our analytical and systematic approach increases the relevance of studies of landscape change for science as well as for the solution of real world problems.     

Driving forces of landscape change - current and new directions

The concept of driving forces is gaining increasing attention in landscape-change research. We summarize the state of the art of this field and present new conceptual and methodological directions for the study of driving forces of landscape changes. These new directions address four major challenges faced by landscape-change studies, i.e., studying processes and not merely spatial patterns, extrapolating results in space and time, linking data of different qualities, and considering culture as a driver of landscape change. The proposed research directions include: studying landscape change across borders and transects, focusing on persistence as well as change, investigating rates of change, considering attractors of landscape change, targeting correlation and causality, and searching for precursors of landscape change. Based on established knowledge and the new approaches we outline a standard procedure to study driving forces of landscape change. We anticipate that our analytical and systematic approach increases the relevance of studies of landscape change for science as well as for the solution of real world problems.     

Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: An idiosyncratic synthesis

Landscape ecology has made tremendous progress in recent decades, but as a rapidly developing discipline it is faced with new problems and challenges. To identify the key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology, a special session entitled “Top 10 List for Landscape Ecology in the 21st Century” was organized at the 16th Annual Symposium of the US Regional Association of International Association of Landscape Ecology, held at Arizona State University (Tempe, Arizona, USA) during April 25–29, 2001. A group of leading landscape ecologists were invited to present their views. This paper is intended to be a synthesis, but not necessarily a consensus, of the special session. We have organized the diverse and wide-ranging perspectives into six general key issues and 10 priority research topics. The key issues are: (1) interdisciplinarity or transdisciplinarity, (2) integration between basic research and applications,(3) Conceptual and theoretical development, (4) education and training, (5)international scholarly communication and collaborations, and (6) outreach and communication with the public and decision makers. The top 10 research topics are: (1) ecological flows in landscape mosaics, (2) causes, processes, and consequences of land use and land cover change, (3) nonlinear dynamics and landscape complexity, (4) scaling, (5) methodological development, (6) relating landscape metrics to ecological processes, (7) integrating humans and their activities into landscape ecology, (8) optimization of landscape pattern, (9)landscape sustainability, and (10) data acquisition and accuracy assessment. We emphasize that, although this synthesis was based on the presentations at the“Top 10 List” session, it is not a document that has been agreed upon by each and every participant. Rather, we believe that it is reflective of the broad-scale vision of the collective as to where landscape ecology is now and where it may be going in future. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Identifying future research needs in landscape genetics: where to from here?

Landscape genetics is an emerging interdisciplinary field that combines methods and concepts from population genetics, landscape ecology, and spatial statistics. The interest in landscape genetics is steadily increasing, and the field is evolving rapidly. We here outline four major challenges for future landscape genetic research that were identified during an international landscape genetics workshop. These challenges include (1) the identification of appropriate spatial and temporal scales; (2) current analytical limitations; (3) the expansion of the current focus in landscape genetics; and (4) interdisciplinary communication and education. Addressing these research challenges will greatly improve landscape genetic applications, and positively contribute to the future growth of this promising field. Participants of the Landscape Genetics Research Agenda Workshop, held at the 2007 World Congress of the International Association of Landscape Ecologists (IALE), in Wageningen, The Netherlands: Paul Arens, Pascal Campagne, Virginia H. Dale, Alfredo G. Nicieza, Marinus J. M. Smulders, Edoardo Tedesco, Hongfang Wang, Tzeidle Wasserman.     

Global biodiversity scenarios and landscape ecology

The composition of ecological communities is both cause and consequence of landscape pattern. Predicting biodiversity change involves understanding not only ecology and evolution, but also complex changes in human societies and economies. Scenarios offer a less rigid approach to thinking about biodiversity change in a policy and management context. They shift the focus of research and management from making singular predictions and developing single ‘best’ strategies to exploring uncertainties and assessing the outcomes of alternative policies. The four Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) biodiversity scenarios illustrate current approaches to biodiversity estimation in global scenarios. The MA biodiversity scenarios are built around the species–area relationship and the magnitudes of a few area-dependent processes such as nitrogen deposition and climate change. Some of the most obvious landscape-related omissions from the MA scenarios are pattern-process feedbacks, scale dependencies, and the role of landscape configuration. While the MA has set a new standard for biodiversity scenarios, future exercises would benefit from a more multi-scale and more mechanistic framework. I use examples from research on the landscape ecology and biogeography of African ticks to illustrate how a hypothesis-based approach can be used to analyse the multi-scale, multi-level drivers of change in patterns of species occurrences. Two of the most important challenges for the future development of both landscape ecology and biodiversity scenarios are to become more mechanistic (less pattern-based) and more general (applicable across different landscapes).     

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.”     

What is soundscape ecology? An introduction and overview of an emerging new science

We summarize the foundational elements of a new area of research we call soundscape ecology. The study of sound in landscapes is based on an understanding of how sound, from various sources—biological, geophysical and anthropogenic—can be used to understand coupled natural-human dynamics across different spatial and temporal scales. Useful terms, such as soundscapes, biophony, geophony and anthrophony, are introduced and defined. The intellectual foundations of soundscape ecology are described—those of spatial ecology, bioacoustics, urban environmental acoustics and acoustic ecology. We argue that soundscape ecology differs from the humanities driven focus of acoustic ecology although soundscape ecology will likely need its rich vocabulary and conservation ethic. An integrative framework is presented that describes how climate, land transformations, biodiversity patterns, timing of life history events and human activities create the dynamic soundscape. We also summarize what is currently known about factors that control temporal soundscape dynamics and variability across spatial gradients. Several different phonic interactions (e.g., how anthrophony affects biophony) are also described. Soundscape ecology tools that will be needed are also discussed along with the several ways in which soundscapes need to be managed. This summary article helps frame the other more application-oriented papers that appear in this special issue.     

ABC of green infrastructure analysis and planning: The basic ideas and methodological guidance based on landscape ecological principle

Green infrastructure (GI) is a pivotal multifunctional approach for urban green spaces fragmentation problem. The green space fragmentation issue has increasingly caught worldwide researchers’ critical attention. However, researchers face challenges in understanding GI analysis and planning. Only limited research exists on GI analysis and planning case studies. Therefore, this study reviewed case studies on GI analysis and planning. The finding simplifies GI analysis and planning case studies methodology and critical points to get more worldwide researchers’ attention. The study applied a systematic literature review (SLR) on 34 qualified studies to determine the trends and similarities of GI case studies. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2009) was adopted for the study. The review found a sequential methodological pattern in GI analysis and planning study. The review themes were trend analysis, basic study information, study nature, geographic information system (GIS) software and plugin, remote sensing processing and data needed, and analysis and output. Thus, the study provides a basic methodology and framework for developing GI analysis and planning based on the landscape ecology principle.     

Teaching landscape ecology: the importance of field-oriented,inquiry-based approaches

Context

Landscape ecology has traditionally been taught through theoretical classes or computer labs. On the other hand, field labs have been generally less used as a way of teaching landscape ecology concepts.

Objectives

We show that field labs with an inquiry-based approach, where students are involved in the investigation, are feasible for training students in landscape ecology. We evaluated how common field labs are in landscape ecology courses, and also their contribution for student learning.

Methods

We evaluated whether field labs are used in landscape ecology courses by scanning available syllabi. We also used outcomes from a course offered in Brazil to show how field labs can be integrated into landscape ecology courses.

Results

Only 18.2 % of the 44 syllabi we found had field labs. The case study developed in Brazil showed that field labs allowed students to develop important skills, including the ability to design field studies, choose appropriate scales of analysis, detect ecological patterns, and judge multiple hypotheses.

Conclusions

Field labs are still uncommon in landscape ecology courses, but they can be a useful tool to teach landscape ecology concepts and to help students developing the necessary skills to do research. We offer recommendations regarding how to incorporate field labs in landscape ecology courses.

     

Issues and challenges in landscape models for agriculture: from the representation of agroecosystems to the design of management strategies

Context

Agroecosystems produce food and many other services that are crucial for human well-being. Given the scales at which the processes underlying these services take place, agricultural landscapes appear as appropriate spatial units for their evaluation and management. The design of sustainable agricultural landscapes that value these services has thus become a pressing issue but faces major challenges stemming from the diversity of processes, their interactions and the number of scales at stake. Agricultural landscape modelling can provide a key contribution to this design but must still overcome several difficulties to offer reliable tools for decision makers.

Objectives

Our study aimed at shedding light on the main scientific and technical difficulties that make the building of landscape models that may efficiently inform decision-makers a complex task, as well as translating them in terms of challenges that can be further investigated and discussed.

Methods

We examine current issues and challenges and indicate future research needs to overcome the scientific and technical obstacles in the development of useful agricultural landscape models.

Results

We highlight research perspectives to better couple landscape patterns and process models and account for feedbacks, integrate the decisions of multiple stakeholders, consider the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of data and processes, explore alternative landscape organisations and assess multiobjective performance.

Conclusion

Coping with the issues and challenges discussed in this paper should improve our understanding of agroecosystems and give rise to new hypotheses, thereby informing future research.

     

Changing landscapes to accommodate for climate change impacts: a call for landscape ecology

Predictions of climate change suggest major changes in temperature, rainfall as well as in frequency and timing of extreme weather, all in varying degrees and patterns around the world. Although the details of these patterns changes are still uncertain, we can be sure of profound effects on ecological processes in and functioning of landscapes. The impact of climate change will affect all types of land use, ecosystem services, as well as the behavior of humans. The core business of Landscape Ecology is the interaction of landscape patterns and processes. Most of these interactions will be affected by changing climate patterns, so clearly within the focus of our science. Nevertheless, climate change received little attention from landscape ecologists. Are we missing the boat? Why is it that our science does not contribute to building a knowledge base to help solving this immense problem? Why is there so little attention paid to adaptation of landscape to climate change? With this editorial article IALE would like to receive inputs from the Landscape Ecology scientific community in related research on adaptation of landscapes to climate change, on tools or approaches to help landscape planners and stakeholders to this new challenge where landscape ecology can play a key role.     

Landscape ecology meets landscape science

Landscape ecology is a broad field in a patchwork of related disciplines. Giving landscape ecology a definition and delimiting it from related research areas is both a challenge and a necessity. Past endeavors have focused on expert opinions, analyses of published papers, and conference proceedings. We used a mix of all three, including a unique keyword analysis in two leading landscape-related journals, to highlight latest developments in landscape ecology between 2010 and 2013. Our analysis confirms the key topics of Wu (Landscape Ecol 28(1):1–11, 2013), and suggests that of those connectivity is dominating in terms of research output. However, we also found evidence that the borders of the journal Landscape Ecology are fuzzier than sketched in recent publications. There is a large overlap with the journal Landscape and Urban Planning, and in general a growing weight of conservation, landscape management, and planning related issues in the landscape ecology community. We conclude by encouraging the continued inclusion and strengthening of socio-ecological hot topics such as urban studies and landscape-human interactions in landscape ecological studies and subsequently in the journal landscape ecology.     

Relationships between a terrain-based hydrologic model and patch-scale vegetation patterns in an arctic tundra landscape

Implicit in the relationship between vegetation patterns and landforms is the influence of topography on the water regime at the patch scale. Hence, based on the numerous process-based studies linking plant structure and function to water in the arctic, we hypothesize that the general pattern of arctic landscapes can be explained by a mesotopographic variable such as water drainage. In this paper, we test this hypothesis by examining the spatial relationship between patterns of vegetation and the water regime in a small watershed in northern Alaska. Using gridded elevation data, we develop a model (T-HYDRO) to generate a 2-dimensional water flow field for the watershed and compare this to vegetation patterns as given by 1) a vegetation map developed from aerial photographs in conjunction with extensive field sampling; and 2) a normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI). Our results show that it is possible to account for about 43% of the spatial variance in NDVI, which supports our hypothesis. In spite of its limitations, the correspondence of patterns presented in this paper provides encouraging evidence that we can find simple approaches to stratify landscapes and that it is possible to overcome the frequently made assumption of spatial homogeneity in ecosystems modeling.     

Ascribing Ecological Meaning to Habitat Shape by Means of a Piecewise Regression Approach to Fractal Domains

A fractal dimension (FD) indicates the ability of a set of structures to fill the Euclidean space where it is embedded. For habitat boundaries, FD is bound to a plane, thus 1 ≤ FD  ≤ 2. FD is low for simple shapes and increases as patches become more irregular. Some authors have found that FD metric delineating area-perimeter relation (APR) is best fitted through piecewise linear curves, where the slope of each line segment is one-half the FD over the corresponding scaling region. The detection of shifts in boundary FD of landscape habitats is a significant issue in ecology, since discontinuities could be an index of a substantial modification of the processes and dynamics that generate and maintain habitats. This work makes use of fractal analysis to examine the relationship between anthropogenic processes and habitat spatial patterns. It proposes two goals (1) suggesting Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (MARS®) as a fast and effective approach to discover shifts in APR of landscape patches; (2) explaining the substantial existence of such shifts using a set of human-related predictor variables. MARS methodology has been applied to 6 types of habitats within the Baganza stream watershed (Parma, Italy) and the discovered patterns have been correlated with anthropogenic variables that could influence APR. A standardized linear discriminant analysis (DA) has been used to predict FDs from the set of the employed predictors. DA corroborated the existence of breakpoints in APR and explained the contribute of predictor variables in determining the discovered shifts.     

Spectral representation of neutral landscapes

Pattern in ecological landscapes is often the result of different processes operating at different scales. Neutral landscape models were introduced in landscape ecology to differentiate patterns that are the result of simple random processes from patterns that arise from more complex ecological processes. Recent studies have used increasingly complex neutral models that incorporate contagion and other constraints on random patterns, as well as using neutral landscapes as input to spatial simulation models. Here, I consider a common mathematical framework based on spectral transforms that represents all neutral landscape models in terms of sets of spectral basis functions. Fractal and multi-fractal models are considered, as well as models with multiple scaling regions and anisotropy. All of the models considered are shown to be variations on a basic theme: a scaling relation between frequency and amplitude of spectral components. Two example landscapes examined showed long-range correlations (distances up to 1000 km) consistent with fractal scaling.