Cargando…
Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation
CONTEXT: The variation in spatial distribution between ecosystem services can be high. Hence, there is a need to spatially identify important sites for conservation planning. The term ‘ecosystem service hotspot’ has often been used for this purpose, but definitions of this term are ambiguous. OBJECT...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Netherlands
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4722056/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26843784 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0258-5 |
_version_ | 1782411311274000384 |
---|---|
author | Schröter, Matthias Remme, Roy P. |
author_facet | Schröter, Matthias Remme, Roy P. |
author_sort | Schröter, Matthias |
collection | PubMed |
description | CONTEXT: The variation in spatial distribution between ecosystem services can be high. Hence, there is a need to spatially identify important sites for conservation planning. The term ‘ecosystem service hotspot’ has often been used for this purpose, but definitions of this term are ambiguous. OBJECTIVES: We review and classify methods to spatially delineate hotspots. We test how spatial configuration of hotspots for a set of ecosystem services differs depending on the applied method. We compare the outcomes to a heuristic site prioritisation approach (Marxan). METHODS: The four tested hotspot methods are top richest cells, spatial clustering, intensity, and richness. In a conservation scenario we set a target of conserving 10 % of the quantity of five regulating and cultural services for the forest area of Telemark county, Norway. RESULTS: Spatial configuration of selected areas as retrieved by the four hotspots and Marxan differed considerably. Pairwise comparisons were at the lower end of the scale of the Kappa statistic (0.11–0.27). The outcomes also differed considerably in mean target achievement, cost-effectiveness in terms of land-area needed per unit target achievement and compactness in terms of edge-to-area ratio. CONCLUSIONS: An ecosystem service hotspot can refer to either areas containing high values of one service or areas with multiple services. Differences in spatial configuration among hotspot methods can lead to uncertainties for decision-making. This also has consequences for analysing the spatial co-occurrence of hotspots of multiple services and of services and biodiversity. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10980-015-0258-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4722056 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Springer Netherlands |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47220562016-02-01 Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation Schröter, Matthias Remme, Roy P. Landsc Ecol Research Article CONTEXT: The variation in spatial distribution between ecosystem services can be high. Hence, there is a need to spatially identify important sites for conservation planning. The term ‘ecosystem service hotspot’ has often been used for this purpose, but definitions of this term are ambiguous. OBJECTIVES: We review and classify methods to spatially delineate hotspots. We test how spatial configuration of hotspots for a set of ecosystem services differs depending on the applied method. We compare the outcomes to a heuristic site prioritisation approach (Marxan). METHODS: The four tested hotspot methods are top richest cells, spatial clustering, intensity, and richness. In a conservation scenario we set a target of conserving 10 % of the quantity of five regulating and cultural services for the forest area of Telemark county, Norway. RESULTS: Spatial configuration of selected areas as retrieved by the four hotspots and Marxan differed considerably. Pairwise comparisons were at the lower end of the scale of the Kappa statistic (0.11–0.27). The outcomes also differed considerably in mean target achievement, cost-effectiveness in terms of land-area needed per unit target achievement and compactness in terms of edge-to-area ratio. CONCLUSIONS: An ecosystem service hotspot can refer to either areas containing high values of one service or areas with multiple services. Differences in spatial configuration among hotspot methods can lead to uncertainties for decision-making. This also has consequences for analysing the spatial co-occurrence of hotspots of multiple services and of services and biodiversity. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10980-015-0258-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Netherlands 2015-09-02 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4722056/ /pubmed/26843784 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0258-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Schröter, Matthias Remme, Roy P. Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation |
title | Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation |
title_full | Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation |
title_fullStr | Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation |
title_full_unstemmed | Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation |
title_short | Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation |
title_sort | spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services: comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4722056/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26843784 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0258-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schrotermatthias spatialprioritisationforconservingecosystemservicescomparinghotspotswithheuristicoptimisation AT remmeroyp spatialprioritisationforconservingecosystemservicescomparinghotspotswithheuristicoptimisation |