A proposed framework for assessing ecosystem goods and services from planted forests

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Related collections

Most cited references 59

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales

Erik Nelson, Guillermo F. Mendoza, James Regetz … (2009)

0 comments Cited 501 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes.

C Raudsepp-Hearne, G D Peterson, E M Bennett (2010)

A key challenge of ecosystem management is determining how to manage multiple ecosystem services across landscapes. Enhancing important provisioning ecosystem services, such as food and timber, often leads to tradeoffs between regulating and cultural ecosystem services, such as nutrient cycling, flood protection, and tourism. We developed a framework for analyzing the provision of multiple ecosystem services across landscapes and present an empirical demonstration of ecosystem service bundles, sets of services that appear together repeatedly. Ecosystem service bundles were identified by analyzing the spatial patterns of 12 ecosystem services in a mixed-use landscape consisting of 137 municipalities in Quebec, Canada. We identified six types of ecosystem service bundles and were able to link these bundles to areas on the landscape characterized by distinct social-ecological dynamics. Our results show landscape-scale tradeoffs between provisioning and almost all regulating and cultural ecosystem services, and they show that a greater diversity of ecosystem services is positively correlated with the provision of regulating ecosystem services. Ecosystem service-bundle analysis can identify areas on a landscape where ecosystem management has produced exceptionally desirable or undesirable sets of ecosystem services.

0 comments Cited 419 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Knowing but not doing: selecting priority conservation areas and the research-implementation gap.

Andrew Knight, Richard Cowling, Mathieu Rouget … (2008)

Conservation assessment is a rapidly evolving discipline whose stated goal is the design of networks of protected areas that represent and ensure the persistence of nature (i.e., species, habitats, and environmental processes) by separating priority areas from the activities that degrade or destroy them. Nevertheless, despite a burgeoning scientific literature that ever refines these techniques for allocating conservation resources, it is widely believed that conservation assessments are rarely translated into actions that actually conserve nature. We reviewed the conservation assessment literature in peer-reviewed journals and conducted survey questionnaires of the authors of these studies. Two-thirds of conservation assessments published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature do not deliver conservation action, primarily because most researchers never plan for implementation. This research-implementation gap between conservation science and real-world action is a genuine phenomenon and is a specific example of the "knowing-doing gap" that is widely recognized in management science. Given the woefully inadequate resources allocated for conservation, our findings raise questions over the utility of conservation assessment science, as currently practiced, to provide useful, pragmatic solutions to conservation planning problems. A reevaluation of the conceptual and operational basis of conservation planning research is urgently required. We recommend the following actions for beginning a process for bridging the research-implementation gap in conservation planning: (1) acknowledge the research-implementation gap is real, (2) source research questions from practitioners, (3) situate research within a broader conservation planning model, (4) expand the social dimension of conservation assessments, (5) support conservation plans with transdisciplinary social learning institutions, (6) reward academics for societal engagement and implementation, and (7) train students in skills for "doing" conservation.

0 comments Cited 249 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Title: Ecosystem Services

Abbreviated Title: Ecosystem Services

Publisher: Elsevier BV

ISSN (Print): 22120416

Publication date Created: December 2016

Publication date (Print): December 2016

Volume: 22

Issue:

Pages: 260-268

Article

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.10.002

SO-VID: 6cb8c2be-a2f7-4092-a72a-440c2c20a018

History

Data availability:

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 27

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 772

See all reference authors

A proposed framework for assessing ecosystem goods and services from planted forests

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Ecosystem services

Most cited references 59

Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales

Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes.

Knowing but not doing: selecting priority conservation areas and the research-implementation gap.

Author and article information

Journal

Article

History

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 2,003

Cited by 27

Most referenced authors 772