Mapping the ecosystem service delivery chain: Capacity, flow, and demand pertaining to aesthetic experiences in mountain landscapes

Science of the Total Environment

Volumn 574, Issue , 2017, Pages 422-436

  Egarter Vigl, Lukas ^a,c   Depellegrin, Daniel ^b   Pereira, Paulo ^b   de Groot, Rudolf ^d   Tappeiner, Ulrike ^a,c  

^a INSTITUTE FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY   (Italy)

^b MYKOLAS ROMERIS UNIVERSITY   (Lithuania)

^c UNIVERSITY OF INNSBRUCK   (Austria)

^d WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Aesthetic values; Alpine landscapes; Ecosystem service budgeting; Ecosystem services delivery chain; Protected areas; Viewshed model

Indexed keywords

BUDGET CONTROL; CHAINS; CONSERVATION; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; LAND USE; LOCATION BASED SERVICES; REGIONAL PLANNING;

AESTHETIC VALUE; ALPINE LANDSCAPES; DELIVERY CHAIN; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; PROTECTED AREAS; VIEWSHED;

ECOSYSTEMS;

ECOSYSTEM FUNCTION; ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT; ECOSYSTEM MODELING; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ESTHETICS; LANDSCAPE PLANNING; MAPPING; POLICY MAKING; PROTECTED AREA; VIEWSHED;

AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE; ARTICLE; BUFFER ZONE; DECISION MAKING; ECOSYSTEM DEMAND; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE BUDGET; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE CAPACITY; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE DELIVERY CHAIN; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE FLOW MAPS; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FLOW DEMAND BALANCE; FLOW MEASUREMENT; HEALTH CARE NEED; HIKING TRAILS; ITALY; LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; MOUNTAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECREATION; SKI RUNS; SOCIOECONOMICS; SUPPLY DEMAND RELATION; VISITATION RATE;

ITALY;

GARDENA;

EID: 84987950346     PISSN: 00489697     EISSN: 18791026     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.08.209     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Ala-Hulkko, T., Kotavaara, O., Alahuhta, J., Helle, P., Hjort, J., Introducing accessibility analysis in mapping cultural ecosystem services. Ecol. Indic. 66:July (2016), 416–427.
2. Anton, C., Young, J., Harrison, P.A., Musche, M., Bela, G., Feld, C.K., Harrington, R., Haslett, J.R., Pataki, G., Rounsevell, M.D.A., Skourtos, M., Sousa, J.P., Sykes, M.T., Tinch, R., Vandewalle, M., Watt, A., Settele, J., Research needs for incorporating the ecosystem service approach into EU biodiversity conservation policy. Biodivers. Conserv. 19 (2010), 2979–2994.
3. ArcGIS, 2016a. Create Points From Lines. http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=a2a41c8345e24ab6a9dd2ae215710b39 (accessed 23.04.2016).
4. ArcGIS, 2016b. Create Fishnet (Data Management). http://help.arcgis.com/En/Arcgisdesktop/10.0/Help/index.html#//00170000002q000000 (accessed 23.04.2016).
5. ArcGIS, 2016c. Raster Calculator. http://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/tool-reference/spatial-analyst/raster-calculator.htm (accessed 23.04.2016).
6. ArcGIS, 2016d. An Overview of the Spatial Analyst Toolbox. http://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/tool-reference/spatial-analyst/an-overview-of-the-spatial-analyst-toolbox.htm (accessed 24.04.2016).
7. ARIES, 2016. (Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services). http://aries.integratedmodelling.org/ (accessed 23.03.2016).
8. ASTAT, 2006 (Landesinstitut für Statistik). Sportliche Aktivitäten 2006. http://www.provinz.bz.it/gesundheit-leben/sport-freizeit/service/publikationen.asp (accessed: 15.01.2016) (in German and Italian).
9. ASTAT, (Landesinstitut für Statistik). Tourismusströme in Südtirol, Tourismusjahr 2012/13. ASTAT Schriftreihe, 2015, 209 (in German and Italian).
10. ASTER, 2016. (Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer). Global Digital Elevation Model Version 2 (GDEM V2). https://asterweb.jpl.nasa.gov/gdem.asp (accessed 05.06.2016).
11. Bagstad, K.J., Semmens, D.J., Winthrop, R., Comparing approaches to spatially explicit ecosystem service modeling: a case study from the San Pedro River, Arizona. Ecosyst. Serv. 5:September (2013), 40–50.
12. Bagstad, K.J., Villa, F., Batker, D., Harrison-Cox, J., Voigt, B., Johnson, G.W., From theoretical to actual ecosystem services: mapping beneficiaries and spatial flows in ecosystem service assessments. Ecol. Soc., 19(2), 2014, 64, 10.5751/ES-06523-190264.
13. Beza, B.B., The aesthetic value of a mountain landscape: a study of the Mt. Everest Trek. Landsc. Urban Plan. 97:2010 (2010), 306–317.
14. Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Müller, F., Windhorst, W., Landscapes' capacities to provide ecosystem services - a concept for land-cover based assessments. Landsc. Online 15 (2009), 1–22, 10.3097/LO.200915.
15. Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Nedkov, S., Müller, F., Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol. Indic. 21:October (2012), 17–29.
16. Burkhard, B., Kandziora, M., Hou, Y., Müller, F., Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands – concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification. Landsc. Online 34 (2014), 1–32, 10.3097/LO.201434.
17. Casado-Arzuaga, I., Onaindia, M., Madariaga, I., Verburg, P.H., Mapping recreation and aesthetic value of ecosystems in the Bilbao Metropolitan Greenbelt (northern Spain) to support landscape planning. Landsc. Ecol. 29:8 (2013), 1393–1405.
18. Chamberlain, B.C., Meitner, J., A route-based visibility analysis for landscape management. Landsc. Urban Plan. 111:March (2013), 13–24.
19. CICES, 2016. (The Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services). CICES Version 4.3. http://cices.eu/ (accessed 23.05.2016).
20. Connoly, J., Lake, M., Geographical information systems in archaeology. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology, 2006, Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom.
21. Copernicus, 2016 (Copernicus Land Monitoring Services). CLC 2012. http://land.copernicus.eu/pan-european/corine-land-cover/clc-2012 (accessed 23.04.2016).
22. Daily, G.C., Polasky, S., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P.M., Mooney, H.A., Pejchar, L., Ricketts, T.H., Salzman, J., Shallenberger, R., Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Front. Ecol. Environ. 7:1 (2009), 21–28.
23. de Groot, R.S., Wilson, M.A., Boumans, R.M.J., A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol. Econ. 41 (2002), 393–408.
24. Depellegrin, D., Blažauskas, N., Egarter Vigl, L., An integrated visual impact assessment model for offshore windfarm development. Ocean Coast. Manag. 98 (2014), 95–110, 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.05.019.
25. Depellegrin, D., Pereira, P., Misiunė, E., Egarter Vigl, L., Mapping ecosystem services potential in Lithuania. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 2016, 10.1080/13504509.2016.1146176.
26. Díaz, S., Fargione, J., Chapin, F.S., Tilman, D., Biodiversity loss threatens human well-being. PLoS Biol., 4, 2006, 277.
27. Dohse, K.C., Effects of Field of View and Stereo Graphics on Memory in Immersive Command and Control. ProQuest. 2007 (ISBN 978-0-549-33503-0).
28. Egarter Vigl, L., Schirpke, U., Tasser, E., Tappeiner, U., Linking long-term landscape dynamics to multiple interactions among ecosystem services in the European Alps. Landsc. Ecol., 1–16, 2016, 10.1007/s10980-016-0389-3.
29. ESRI, ArcGIS ver. 10.1. 2010, ESRI, Redlands, CA, USA.
30. EU Renewables Directive, 2009. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the Promotion of the Use of Energy From Renewable Sources. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32009L0028 (accessed 23.03.2016).
31. Eurostat, 2015b. Tourism Statistics at Regional Level. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Tourism_statistics_at_regional_level (accessed 12.01.2016).
32. Eurostat, 2016a. Local Administrative Units (LAU). http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/nuts/local-administrative-units (accessed 12.01.2016).
33. Microsoft Excel, 2016. Microsoft Office. https://products.office.com/it-it/excel (accessed 05.06.2016).
34. García-Nieto, A.P., García-Llorente, M., Iniesta-Arandia, I., Martín-López, B., Mapping forest ecosystem services: from providing units to beneficiaries. Ecosyst. Serv. 4:June (2013), 126–138.
35. Geneletti, D., Impact assessment of proposed ski areas: a GIS approach integrating biological, physical and landscape indicators. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 28:2–3 (2008), 116–130.
36. Geofabrik, 2016.Geofabrik https://www.geofabrik.de/ (accessed 23.01.2016).
37. Geokatalog, 2015. Geodatabase of the Autonomous Province of South Tyrol. http://geokatalog.buergernetz.bz.it/geokatalog/#! (accessed 25.10.2015).
38. Gianolla, P., Micheletti C., Ponticelli L., Furlanis S., Furin S., Valt V., Dal Pont M., Pierobon E., Kammerer A., Sascor R., Beikircher S., Fiamoi F., Baldovin L., Marcolin S., Zucchiatti D., Zampedri G., Boratti F., Fucarino G., Turella A., 2009. Nomination of the Dolomites for inscription on The World Heritage List UNESCO. Supplementary Information. http://www.provincia.udine.it/economia/zonemontane/Documents/04-DOLOMITES-supplementary-information.pdf (accessed 14.6.2016).
39. Grêt-Regamey, A., Bishop, I.D., Bebi, P., Predicting the scenic beauty value of mapped landscape changes in a mountainous region through the use of GIS. Environ. Plann. B Plann. Des. 34:1 (2007), 50–67.
40. Grêt-Regamey, A., Weibel, B., Kienast, F., Rabe, S.-E., Zulian, G., A tiered approach for mapping ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 13:June (2014), 16–27.
41. Grêt-Regamey, A., Weibel, B., Bagstad, K.J., Ferrari, M., Geneletti, D., Klug, H., Schirpke, U., Tappeiner, U., On the effects of scale for ecosystem services mapping. PLoS One, 9(12), 2014, e112601, 10.1371/journal.pone.0112601.
42. Griffin, R., Chaumont, N., Denu, D., Guerry, A., Kim, C.-K., Ruckelshaus, M., Incorporating the visibility of coastal energy infrastructure into multi-criteria siting decisions. Mar. Policy 62:December (2015), 218–223.
43. Guerry, A.D., Ruckelshaus, M.H., Arkema, K.K., Bernhardt, J.R., Guannel, Kim, C.K., Marsik, M., Papenfus, M., Toft, J.E., Verutes, G., Wood, S.A., Beck, M., Chan, F., Chan, K.M.A., Gelfenbaum, G., Gold, B.D., Halpern, B.S., Labiosa, W.B., Lester, S.E., Levin, P.S., McField, M., Pinsky, M.L., Plummer, M., Polasky, S., Ruggiero, P., Sutherland, D.A., Tallis, H., Day, A., Spencer, J., Modeling benefits from nature: using ecosystem services to inform coastal and marine spatial planning. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manage. 8:1–2 (2012), 107–121.
44. Haddaway, N.R., Styles, D., Pullin, A.S., Environmental impacts of farm land abandonment in high altitude/mountain regions: a systematic map of the evidence. Environ. Evid. Syst. Rev. Protoc., 2(18), 2013, 10.1186/2047-2382-2-18.
45. Honey-Rosés, J., Pendleton, L.H., A demand driven research agenda for ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 1:5 (2013), 160–162.
46. InVest, 2016. (Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs). http://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/invest/ (accessed 23.03.2016).
47. Johnson, G.W., Snapp, R.R., Villa, F., Bagstad, K.J., Modelling ecosystem service flows under uncertainty with stochastic SPAN. International environmental modelling and software society (iEMSs). 2012 International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software Managing Resources of a Limited Planet, Sixth Biennial Meeting, Leipzig, Germany, 2012.
48. MA, Millennium ecosystem assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis, 2005, Island Press, Washington DC.
49. Maes, J., Braat, L., Jax, K., Hutchins, M., Furman, E., Termansen, M., Luque, S., Paracchini, M.L., Chauvin, C., Williams, R., Volk, M., Lautenbach, S., Kopperoinen, L., Schelhaas, M.J., Weinert, J., Goossen, M., Dumont, E., Strauch, M., Görg, C., Dormann, C., Katwinkel, M., Zulian, G., Varjopuro, R., Ratamäki, O., Hauck, J., Forsius, M., Hengeveld, G., Perez-Soba, M., Bouraoui, F., Scholz, M., Schulz-Zunkel, C., Lepistö, A., Polishchuk, Y., Bidoglio, G., 2011. A Spatial Assessment of Ecosystem Services in Europe: Methods, Case Studies and Policy Analysis - Phase 1. http://www.peer.eu/publications/a-spatial-assessment-of-ecosystem-services-in-europe-phase-1/ (accessed 05.06.2016).
50. Mitchell, M.G.E., Suarez-Castro, A.F., Martinez-Harms, M., Maron, M., McAlpine, C., Gaston, K.J., Johansen, K., Rhodes, J.R., Reframing landscape fragmentation's effects on ecosystem services. Trends Ecol. Evol. 30:4 (2015), 190–198.
51. Nature Park Office, South Tyrol Nature Parks: Puez-Geisler/Puez-Odle Nature Park. 2015, Nature, Landscape and Planning Department, Nature Park Office ( http://www.provinz.bz.it/natur-raum/themen/publikationen-geisler.asp (accessed 12.01.2016)).
52. Nedkov, S., Burkhard, B., Flood regulating ecosystem services—mapping supply and demand, in the Etropole municipality, Bulgaria. Ecol. Indic. 21:October (2012), 67–79.
53. Orsi, F., Geneletti, D., Using geotagged photographs and GIS analysis to estimate visitor flows in natural areas. J. Nat. Conserv. 21:5 (2013), 359–368.
54. Palomo, I., Martín-López, B., Potschin, M., Roy Haines-Young, R., Montes, C., National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: mapping ecosystem service flows. Ecosyst. Serv. 4 (2013), 104–116.
55. Popelka, S., Vozenilek, V., Landscape visibility analysis and their visualization. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences (ISPRS), ISPRS Archives – Volume XXXVIII-4/W13, 2010 ( http://www.isprs.org/proceedings/XXXVIII/4-W13/ID_67.pdf (accessed 23.04.2016)).
56. Provincial Authority for Lifts, 2016 (Amt für Seilbahnen). Seilbahnen in Südtirol. Autonome Provinz Bozen-Südtirol. www.provinz.bz.it/mobilitaet/3803/seilbahnen ((accessed) 10.02.2016) (in German and Italian).
57. Sander, H.A., Polasky, S., The value of views and open space: estimates from a hedonic pricing model for Ramsey County, Minnesota, USA. Land Use Policy 26:3 (2009), 837–845.
58. Schirpke, U., Tasser, E., Tappeiner, U., Predicting scenic beauty of mountain regions. Landsc. Urban Plan. 111:March (2013), 1–12.
59. Schirpke, U., Timmerman, F., Tappeiner, U., Tasser, E., Cultural ecosystem services of mountain regions: modelling the aesthetic value. Ecol. Indic. 69:October (2016), 78–90.
60. Schröter, M., Barton, D.N., Remme, R.P., Hein, L., Accounting for capacity and flow of ecosystem services: a conceptual model and a case study for Telemark, Norway. Ecol. Indic. 36:January (2014), 539–551.
61. Schüpbach, B., Junge, X., Lindemann-Matthies, P., Walter, T., Seasonality, diversity and aesthetic valuation of landscape plots: an integrative approach to assess landscape quality on different scales. Land Use Policy 53:May (2016), 27–35.
62. Seppelt, R., Fath, B., Burkhard, B., Fisher, J.L., GrêtRegamey, A., Lautenbach, S., Pert, P., Hotes, S., Spangenberg, J., Verburg, P.H., van Oudenhoven, A.P.E., Form follows function? Proposing a blueprint for ecosystem service assessments based on reviews and case studies. Ecol. Indic. 21:October (2012), 145–154.
63. Serna-Chavez, H.M., Schulp, C.J.E., van Bodegom, P.M., Bouten, W., Verburg, P.H., Davidson, M.D., A quantitative framework for assessing spatial flows of ecosystem services. Ecol. Indic. 39:April (2014), 24–33.
64. Sevenant, M., Antrop, M., Settlement models, land use and visibility in rural landscapes: two case studies in Greece. Landsc. Urban Plan. 80:4 (2006), 362–374.
65. Shaw, E., Kumar, V., Lange, E., Lerner, D.N., Exploring the utility of Bayesian Networks for modelling cultural ecosystem services: a canoeing case study. Sc. of The Tot. Env., 5th Special Issue SCARCE: River Conservation under Multiple stressors: Integration of ecological status, pollution and hydrological variability, 540 (January), 2016, 71–78.
66. Skiing, 2016 (Skiing. about.com). How fast do skiers go? Average speed of skiers. http://skiing.about.com/od/skiingtip1/qt/How-Fast-Do-Skiers-Go.htm (accessed 23.02.2016).
67. Stoll, S., Frenzel, M., Burkhard, B., Adamescu, M., Augustaitis, A., Baeßler, C., Bonet, F.J., Carranza, M.L., Cazacu, C., Cosor, G.L., Díaz-Delgado, R., Grandin, U., Haase, P., Hämäläinen, H., Loke, R., Müller, J., Stanisci, A., Staszewski, T., Müller, F., Assessment of ecosystem integrity and service gradients across Europe using the LTER Europe network. Ecol. Mod., Use of Ecological Indicators in Models, 295, 10 (January), 2015, 75–87.
68. Syrbe, R.-U., Walz, U., Spatial indicators for the assessment of ecosystem services: providing, benefiting and connecting areas and landscape metrics. Ecol. Indic. 21:October (2012), 80–88.
69. Tasser, E., Walde, J., Tappeiner, U., Teutsch, A., Noggler, W., Land-use changes and natural reforestation in the eastern central alps. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 118:1–4 (2007), 115–129.
70. TEEB, Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity, 2010 ( http://www.teebweb.org/ (accessed 06.06.2016)).
71. Tenerelli, P., Demšar, U., Luque, S., Crowdsourcing indicators for cultural ecosystem services: a geographically weighted approach for mountain landscapes. Ecol. Indic. 64:May (2016), 237–248.
72. Terrasson, D., Luginbühl, Y., Howard, P., Landscape and Sustainable Development: The French Perspective. 2015, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., Surrey, England.
73. UNESCO, World heritage and buffer zones. Martin, O., Piatti, G., (eds.) International Expert Meeting on World Heritage and Buffer Zones Davos, Switzerland, 11–14 March 2008, 2009, World Heritage Papers, 25.
74. UNESCO, 2015. The Dolomites. http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1237 (accessed 23.10.2015).
75. van Zanten, B., Zasada, I., Koetse, M.J., Ungaro, F., Häfner, K., Verburg, P.H., A comparative approach to assess the contribution of landscape features to aesthetic and recreational values in agricultural landscapes. Ecosyst. Serv. 17:February (2016), 87–98.
76. Vejre, H., Jensen, F.S., Thorsen, J.B., Demonstrating the importance of intangible ecosystem services from peri-urban landscapes. Ecol. Complex. 7:3 (2010), 338–348.
77. 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. 15:September (2013), 114–121.
78. Wang, J., Mountrakis, G., Developing a multi-network urbanization model: a case study of urban growth in Denver, Colorado. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 25:2 (2011), 229–253.
79. Wheatley, D., Cumulative Viewshed Analysis: A GIS-Based Method for Investigating Intervisibility, and its Archaeological Application. Lock, G., Stancic, Z., (eds.) Archaeology and GIS: A European Perspective, 1995, Routledge, London, 171–185.
80. Windharvest, A., Development of information base regarding potentials, problems and the necessary technical, legal and socio-economic conditions for expanding wind energy in the Alpine Space. INTERREG IIIB Alpine Space Project. Executive Summary. Report No. 3–1, 2005, 1–92.
81. Wood, S.A., Guerry, A.D., Silver, J.M., Lacayo, M., Using social media to quantify nature-based tourism and recreation. Sci. Rep., 3(October), 2013, 10.1038/srep02976.
82. Zagonari, F., Using ecosystem services in decision-making to support sustainable development: critiques, model development, a case study, and perspectives. Sc. of The Tot. Env. 258-549:April (2016), 25–32 Short Communication.
83. Zank, B., Bagstad, K.J., Voigt, B., Villa, F., Modeling the effects of urban expansion on natural capital stocks and ecosystem service flows: a case study in the Puget Sound, Washington, USA. Landsc. Urban Plan. 149:May (2016), 31–42.