You are here:
The Landscape Framework for the Spatial Characterization and Mapping of Ecosystem Services: What is the State of the Science?
Citation:
ALLEN, P., R. D. LOPEZ, M. S. NASH, J. R. CHRISTENSEN, N. G. TALLENT-HALSELL, L. C. BUTLER, A. M. PITCHFORD, AND A. C. NEALE. The Landscape Framework for the Spatial Characterization and Mapping of Ecosystem Services: What is the State of the Science? Presented at A Conference on Ecosystem Services, Naples, FL, December 08 - 11, 2008.
Impact/Purpose:
Presentation
Description:
Ecosystem services (ESS) represent an ecosystems capacity for satisfying essential human needs, directly or indirectly, above that required to maintain ecosystem integrity (structure, function and processes). The spatial characterization and mapping of ESS is an essential first step in establishing existing conditions to characterize, assess, value and communicate the impact of decisions that affect the flow of ESS benefits to society. The US Environmental Protection Agency is charged with developing a National Atlas of Ecosystem Services by the year 2012. We conducted an intensive literature survey related to characterizing and mapping ecosystem functions, processes, and services. We reviewed approximately 250 journal articles dated from 1990 to 2008. The number of articles on ecosystem services and related functions and processes has increased exponentially since 1990. We summarized the current state of the science regarding issues of scale, mapping and modeling tools, and statistical aids. Less than 3% were explicitly related to “mapping ecosystem services”. The largest number of reviewed articles were published in Ecological Economics (22) followed by Ecological Applications (20). When journals are grouped into major categories, those published in ecological journals (40%) outpaced those published in economic journals (11%); however, the distribution of publications across journals was surprisingly heterogeneous. Research was conducted on individual or multiple ecosystems; forest was the ecosystem most studied followed by urban, wetland, and agricultural systems. The dominant focal area of research has been North America, primarily the United States, followed by Europe, Asia, and Global studies but the focal area was highly dependent on the service. Research extent ranged from that of individual households to the world with data of highly variable resolutions. Data resolutions ranged from 0.1 m (bathymetric mapping with sonar) to grids of 5 degrees of latitude by 3.7 degrees of longitude (used as global nitrogen cycling model inputs). Remote sensing (RS) data and derived products often dictated the resolution of the study outcome; and constraints of scale were apparent when dealing with different data types (e.g., geopolitical versus biophysical units). Approaches to characterizing and mapping ESS included landscape change detection; suitability analyses or classification; risk or vulnerability assessments; future scenarios; neutral models; index development; and mass balance. RS and GIS were the primary tools used to present ESS results. The statistical tools applied were generally driven by the approach taken and the focal ESS. For example, clustering tools are most often used for remote sensing data classification, whereas geostatistical techniques are used in biodiversity studies due to the nature of available datasets consisting of point data. The state of the science is rapidly evolving; challenges remain in integrating scales particularly between biophysical and economic data. Increased availability of land use and land cover data will likely drive research toward approaches utilizing landscape change detection techniques and modeling to quantify uncertainties related to the integration of data at multiple scales.