Modelling regulating ecosystem services trade-offs across landscape scenarios in Třeboňsko Wetlands Biosphere Reserve, Czech Republic

Ecological Modelling

Volumn 295, Issue , 2015, Pages 207-215

  Harmáčková, Zuzana V ^a,b   Vačkář, David ^a,b  

^a INSTITUTE OF MATHEMATICS   (Czech Republic)

^b CHARLES UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

Author keywords

Climate regulation; Decision support; InVEST models; Nature conservation; Social ecological systems; Water quality regulation

Indexed keywords

BIOSPHERE RESERVE; CLIMATE REGULATION; CZECH REPUBLIC; DECISION SUPPORTS; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; QUALITY REGULATION; SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS;

CONSERVATION;

CLIMATE CHANGE; DECISION MAKING; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; LAND USE CHANGE; LANDSCAPE CHANGE; NATURE CONSERVATION; STAKEHOLDER; TRADE-OFF; WATER QUALITY;

CZECH REPUBLIC; JIHOCESKY; TREBON BASIN BIOSPHERE RESERVE;

EID: 84910072916     PISSN: 03043800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.10.003     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Bennett E.M., Carpenter S.R., Peterson G.D., Cumming G.S., Zurek M., Pingali P. Why global scenarios need ecology. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2003, 1(6):322-329. 10.1890/1540-9295(2003)001[0322:WGSNE]2.0.CO;2.
2. Bennett E.M., Peterson G.D., Gordon L.J. Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol. Lett. 2009, 12:1394-1404. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01387.x.
3. Brander L., Bräuer I., Gerdes H., Ghermandi A., Kuik O., Markandya A., et al. Using meta-analysis and GIS for value transfer and scaling up: valuing climate change induced losses of European wetlands. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2012, 52:395-413. 10.1007/s10640-011-9535-1.
4. Burkhard B., Kroll F., Nedkov S., Müller F. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 21:17-29. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.019.
5. Čížková H., Květ J., Comín F.A., Laiho R., Pokorný J., Pithart D. Actual state of European wetlands and their possible future in the context of global climate change. Aquat. Sci. 2013, 75(1):3-26. 10.1007/s00027-011-0233-4.
6. Collins S.L., Carpenter S.R., Swinton S.M., Orenstein D.E., Childers D.L., Gragson T.L., et al. An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social-ecological research. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2011, 9:351-357. 10.1890/100068.
7. Daily G.C., Polasky S., Goldstein J., Kareiva P.M., Mooney H.A., Pejchar L., et al. Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7:21-28. 10.1890/080025.
8. De Simon G., Alberti G., Delle Vedove G., Zerbi G., Peressotti A. Carbon stocks and net ecosystem production changes with time in two Italian forest chronosequences. Eur. J. For. Resour. 2012, 131(5):1297-1311. 10.1007/s10342-012-0599-4.
9. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) An Introductory Guide to Valuing Ecosystem Services 2007.
10. Dendoncker N., Bogaert P., Rounsevell M. A statistical method to downscale aggregated land use data and scenarios. J. Land Use Sci. 2006, 1:63-82. 10.1080/17474230601058302.
11. ESDB The European Soil Database distribution version 2.0 2004, European Commission and the European Soil Bureau Network, CD-ROM, EUR 19945 EN. Retrieved from http://eusoils.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ESDB_Archive/ESDBv2/index.htm.
12. ESRI ArcGIS 10.1 2012, Environmental System Research Institute, Redlands, CA.
13. Goldstein J.H., Caldarone G., Duarte T.K., Ennaanay D., Hannahs N., Mendoza G., et al. Integrating ecosystem-service tradeoffs into land-use decisions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, 109:7565-7570. 10.1073/pnas.1201040109.
14. Haberl H., Winiwarter V., Andersson K., Ayres R.U., Boone C., Castillo A., et al. From LTER to LTSER: conceptualizing the socioeconomic dimension of long-term socioecological research. Ecol. Soc. 2006, 11(2):13. Retrieved from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art13/.
15. Hansson L.-A., Brönmark C., Nilsson P.A., Åbjörnsson K. Conflicting demands on wetland ecosystem services: nutrient retention, biodiversity or both?. Freshw. Biol. 2005, 50:705-714. 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2005.01352.x.
16. IFER Inventarizace krajiny - CzechTerra 2010, Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic, Prague.
17. Isely E.S., Isely P., Seedang S., Mulder K., Thompson K., Steinman A.D. Addressing the information gaps associated with valuing green infrastructure in west Michigan: Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services Tool (InVEST). J. Great Lakes Res. 2010, 36(3):448-457. 10.1016/j.jglr.2010.04.003.
18. Ekologie a ekonomika Třeboňska 1978, Botanický ústav ČSAV, Třeboň. J. Jeník, S. Přibyl (Eds.).
19. Joyce C. The sensitivity of a species-rich flood-meadow plant community to fertilizer nitrogen: the Lužnice river floodplain, Czech Republic. Plant Ecol. 2001, 155:47-60. 10.1023/A:,1,1013218803639.
20. Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services 2011, Oxford University Press, New York. P. Kareiva, H. Tallis, T.H. Ricketts, G.C. Daily, S. Polasky (Eds.).
21. Koomen E., Stillwell J. Modelling land-use change: theories and methods. Modelling Land-use Change: Progress and Applications 2007, Dordrecht, Springer. E. Koomen, J. Stillwell, A. Bakema, H.J. Scholten (Eds.).
22. Lindsay R. Peatbogs and carbon: a critical synthesis to inform policy development in oceanic peat bog conservation and restoration in the context of climate change (Technical report) 2010, University of East London, Environmental Research Group, Retrieved from http://www.rspb.org.uk/images/peatbogs_and_carbon_tcm9-255200.pdf.
23. Lorencová E., Frélichová J., Nelson E., Vačkář D. Past and future impacts of land use and climate change on agricultural ecosystem services in the Czech Republic. Land Use Policy 2013, 33:183-194. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.12.012.
24. Lotze-Campen H. Socio-ecological monitoring of biodiversity change: building upon the World Network of Biosphere Reserves. Gaia 2008, 17(Suppl. 1):107-115.
25. Metzger M.J., Rounsevell M.D.A., Acosta-Michlik L., Leemans R., Schröter D. The vulnerability of ecosystem services to land use change. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2006, 114(1):69-85. 10.1016/j.agee.2005.11.025.
26. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment 2005, Island Press, Washington, DC.
27. Musil P., Pykal J., Janda J. Sustainable use of fishponds in the Třeboňsko Protected Landscape Area and Biosphere Reserve 1996, IUCN, Gland.
28. Long-Term Ecological Research: Between Theory and Application 2010, Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, New York, 456 pp. F. Müller, C. Baessler, H. Schubert, S. Klotz (Eds.).
29. Naidoo R., Ricketts T.H. Mapping the economic costs and benefits of conservation. PLoS Biol. 2006, 4:2153-2164.
30. Nelson E., Mendoza G., Regetz J., Polasky S., Tallis H., Cameron D.R., et al. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7(1):4-11. 10.1890/080023.
31. NIR National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report of the Czech Republic 2012, Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic, Prague, Retrieved from http://unfccc.int/files/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/application/zip/cze-2012-nir-19oct.zip.
32. O'Halloran L.R., Borer E.T., Seabloom E.W., MacDougall A.S., Cleland E.E., McCulley R.L., et al. Regional contingencies in the relationship between aboveground biomass and litter in the world's grasslands. PLoS ONE 2013, 8(2):e54988. 10.1371/journal.pone.0054988.
33. Panagos P., Van Liedekerke M., Jones A., Montanarella L. European Soil Data Centre: response to European policy support and public data requirements. Land Use Policy 2012, 29(2):329-338. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.07.003.
34. Peterson G.D., Cumming G.S., Carpenter S.R. Scenario planning: a tool for conservation in an uncertain world. Conserv. Biol. 2003, 17:358-366.
35. Třeboňsko 2000 - ekologie a ekonomika Třeboňska po dvaceti letech 2000, ENKI o.p.s., Třeboň. J. Pokorný, J. Šulcová, M. Hátle, J. Hlásek (Eds.).
36. Raudsepp-Hearne C., Peterson G.D., Bennett E.M. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, 107(11):5242-5247. 10.1073/pnas.0907284107.
37. Reckhow K.H., Beaulac M.N., Simpson J.T. Modeling Phosphorus Loading and Lake Response under Uncertainty: A manual and Compilation of Export Coefficients 1980, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
38. Rounsevell M.D.A., Metzger M.J. Developing qualitative scenario storylines for environmental change assessment. WIREs Clim. Change 2010, 1(4):606-619. 10.1002/wcc.63.
39. Rounsevell M.D.A., Reginster I., Araújo M.B., Carter T.R., Dendoncker N., Ewert F., et al. A coherent set of future land use change scenarios for Europe. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2006, 114:57-68. 10.1016/j.agee.2005.11.027.
40. Schumacher J., Roscher C. Differential effects of functional traits on aboveground biomass in semi-natural grasslands. Oikos 2009, 118:1659-1668. 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.17711.x.
41. Settele J., Hammen V., Hulme P., Karlson U., Klotz S., Kotarac M., et al. ALARM: assessing Large-scale environmental risks for biodiversity with tested methods. Gaia 2005, 14:69-72.
42. Long Term Socio-Ecological Research - Studies in Society-Nature Interactions Across Spatial and Temporal Scales 2013, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. S.J. Singh, H. Haberl, M. Chertow, M. Mirtl, M. Schmid (Eds.).
43. Spangenberg J.H. Integrated scenarios for assessing biodiversity risks. Sustain. Dev. 2007, 15:343-356. 10.1002/sd.320.
44. Spangenberg J.H., Bondeau A., Carter T.R., Fronzek S., Jaeger J., Jylhä K., et al. Scenarios for investigating risks to biodiversity. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 2012, 21(1):5-18. 10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00620.x.
45. Tallis H.T., Kareiva P., Marvier M., Chang A. An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2008, 105:9457-9464. 10.1073/pnas.0705797105.
46. Tallis H.T., Ricketts T., Guerry A.D., Wood S.A., Sharp R., Nelson E., et al. InVEST 2.4.4 User's Guide 2011, The Natural Capital Project, Stanford.
47. Tallis H., Polasky S. Mapping and valuing ecosystem services as an approach for conservation and natural-resource management. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2009, 1162:265-283. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04152.x.
48. TEEB The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations 2010.
49. Tietenberg T. Environmental and Natural Resource Economics 2006, Pearson Addison Wesley, Boston, MA.
50. Atlas podnebí Česka 2007, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute/Palacky University, Praha/Olomouc. R. Tolasz (Ed.).
51. Truus L. Estimation of above-ground biomass of wetlands. Biomass and Remote Sensing of Biomass 2011, InTech, Retrieved from http://www.intechopen.com/books/biomass-and-remote-sensing-of-biomass/estimation-of-above-groundbiomass-of-wetlands. I. Atazadeh (Ed.).
52. Vačkář D., Melichar J., Lorencová E. Ecosystem services of grasslands in the Czech Republic (Report to the Agency for Nature Conservation and Landscape Protection of the Czech Republic and European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity) 2010, Charles University Environment Center, Prague.
53. Verburg P.H., Schot P.P., Dijst M.J., Veldkamp A. Land use change modelling: current practice and research priorities. GeoJournal 2004, 61:309-324. 10.1007/s10708-004-4946-y.
54. Villamagna A.M., Angermeier P.L., Bennett E.M. Capacity, pressure, demand, and flow: a conceptual framework for analyzing ecosystem service provision and delivery. Ecol. Complex. 2013, 15:114-121.
55. Zedler J.B., Kercher S. Wetland resources: status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2005, 30:39-74. 10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144248.