Advertisement

Ecosystem Services from Forest Landscapes: An Overview

  • Guillermo Martínez Pastur
  • Ajith H. Perera
  • Urmas Peterson
  • Louis R. Iverson
Chapter

Abstract

One of the greatest challenges of this century is to develop economic and social systems, and supporting systems of governance from local to global scales, capable of achieving sustainable levels of human population and consumption, while also maintaining the ecosystem life-support services that underpin human well-being. Forest ecosystems provide critical services to humanity and harbor most of the globe’s terrestrial biodiversity. Forests play a multifunctional role in balancing the human need for commodities with the production of other goods and services, including habitat for forest-dependent organisms. This is particularly true in the temperate forest zone, which is home to a significant proportion of the planet’s human population. Some of the vital services that forest ecosystems provide include the following: (i) the production of ecosystem goods, (ii) the regulation of climate, (iii) the formation and retention of soils, (iv) the generation and maintenance of biodiversity, (v) pollination, (vi) natural pest control, (vii) seed dispersal, and (viii) aesthetic beauty, together with intellectual and spiritual stimulation. However, the forest landscapes over which a range of ecosystem services is provided are often not considered in the development of forest management strategies. Even though much has been written on the ecosystem services received from forests, few examples exist in which this concept was effectively included in the planning, conservation, and management of temperate forest ecosystems around the world. This introductory chapter presents the concept of ecosystem services (ES) in the framework of forest ecosystems and focuses on forest management, conservation, and planning at different landscape levels. A broader perspective on ES will be crucial in designing landscapes to serve future human well-being within the context of sustainable management.

Keywords

Sustainability Human well-being Forest conservation Forest management Temperate forest ecosystems Landscape management 

References

  1. Alamgir M, Turton SM, Macgregor CJ, Pert PL (2016) Assessing regulating and provisioning ecosystem services in a contrasting tropical forest landscape. Ecol Indic 64:319–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armsworth PR, Chan KM, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, Kremen C, Ricketts TH, Sanjayan MA (2007) Ecosystem-service science and the way forward for conservation. Conserv Biol 21:1383–1384CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Ash N, Blanco H, García K, Tomich T, Vira B, Brown C, Zurek M (2010) Ecosystems and human well-being: a manual for assessment practitioners. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  4. Beer C, Reichstein M, Tomelleri E, Ciais P, Jung M, Carvalhais N, Rödenbeck C, Arain A, Baldocchi D, Bonan G, Bondeau A, Cescatti A, Lasslop G, Lindroth A, Lomas M, Luyssaert S, Margolis H, Oleson K, Roupsard O, Veenendaal E, Viovy N, Williams C, Woodward I, Papale D (2010) Terrestrial gross carbon dioxide uptake: global distribution and covariation with climate. Science 329:834–838CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyd J, Banzhaf S (2007) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol Econ 63:616–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bregman TP, Lees AC, Seddon N, Macgregor HEA, Darski B, Aleixo A, Bonsall MB, Tobias JA (2015) Species interactions regulate the collapse of biodiversity and ecosystem function in tropical forest fragments. Ecology 96(10):2692–2704CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Carpenter SR, Mooney HA, Agard J, Capistrano D, DeFries RS, Díaz S, Dietz T, Duraiappah AK, Oteng-Yeboah A, Miguel Pereira H, Perrings C, Reid W, Sarukhan J, Scholes RJ, Whyte A (2009) Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the millennium ecosystem assessment. PNAS 106(5):1305–1312CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Costanza R, Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, Oneill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Costanza R, de Groot R, Sutton P, van der Ploeg S, Anderson SJ, Kubiszewski I, Farber S, Turner RK (2014) Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Glob Environ Chang 26:152–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Daily GC, Ehrlich PR (1995) Population diversity and the biodiversity crisis. In: Perrings C, Maler K, Folke C, Holling C, Jansson B (eds) Biodiversity conservation: problems and policies. Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht, pp 41–51Google Scholar
  11. Daily GC (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  12. Daily GC, Alexander SE, Ehrlich PR, Goulder LH, Lubchenco J, Matson PA, Mooney HA, Postel S, Schneider SH, Tilman D, Woodwell GM (1997) Ecosystem services: benefits supplied to human societies by natural ecosystems. Issues in Ecology 2:1–18Google Scholar
  13. Ehrlich PR, Mooney HA (1983) Extinction, substitution, and ecosystem services. Bioscience 33(4):248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fisher B, Turner R, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68(3):643–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (2010) Global forest resources assessment 2010: Main Report. FAO Forestry Paper 163Google Scholar
  16. Franklin J (1988) Structural and functional diversity in temperate forests. In: Wilson EO, Peter FM (eds) Biodiversity. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. Golden CD, Bonds MH, Brashares JS, Rodolph Rasolofoniaina BJ, Kremen C (2014) Economic valuation of subsistence harvest of wildlife in Madagascar. Conserv Biol 28(1):234–243CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. González E, Salvo A, Valladares G (2015) Sharing enemies: evidence of forest contribution to natural enemy communities in crops, at different spatial scales. Insect conservation and. Diversity 8(4):359–366Google Scholar
  19. Guerry AD, Polasky S, Lubchenco J, Chaplin-Kramer R, Daily G, Griffin R, Ruckelshaus M, Bateman I, Duraiappah A, Elmqvist T, Feldman M, Folke C, Hoekstra J, Kareiva P, Keeler B, Li S, McKenzie E, Ouyang Z, Reyers B, Ricketts T, Rockström J, Tallis H, Vira B (2015) Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: from promise to practice. PNAS 112(24):7348–7355CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Gustafsson L, Baker S, Bauhus J, Beese W, Brodie A, Kouki J, Lindenmayer D, Lõhmus A, Martínez Pastur G, Messier C, Neyland M, Palik B, Sverdrup-Thygeson A, Volney J, Wayne A, Franklin J (2012) Retention forestry to maintain multifunctional forests: a world perspective. Bioscience 62(7):633–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heal G (2000) Valuing ecosystem services. Ecosystems 3:24–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Karp DS, Mendenhall CD, Callaway E, Frishkoff LO, Kareiva PM, Ehrlich PR, Daily GC (2015) Confronting and resolving competing values behind conservation objectives. PNAS 112(35):11132–11137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kinzig A, Perrings C, Chapin F III, Polasky S, Smith V, Tilman D, Turner IIB (2011) Paying for ecosystem services: promise and peril. Science 334:603–604CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kreye MM, Adams DC, Escobedo FJ (2014) The value of forest conservation for water quality protection. Forests 5(5):862–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kubiszewski I, Costanza R, Anderson S, Sutton P (2017) The future value of ecosystem services: global scenarios and national implications. Ecosyst Serv 26:289–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lal R, Lorenz K (2012) Carbon sequestration in temperate forests. In: Lal R, Lorenz K, Hüttl R, Schneider B, von Braun J (eds) Recarbonization of the biosphere. Springer, AmsterdamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Levin SA, Lubchenco J (2008) Resilience, robustness, and marine ecosystem based management. Bioscience 58:27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lindenmayer D, Franklin J (2002) Conserving forest biodiversity: a comprehensive multiscaled approach. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  29. Lindenmayer D, Franklin J, Lõhmus A, Baker S, Bauhus J, Beese W, Brodie A, Kiehl B, Kouki J, Martínez Pastur G, Messier C, Neyland M, Palik B, Sverdrup-Thygeson A, Volney J, Wayne A, Gustafsson L (2012) A major shift to the retention approach for forestry can help resolve some global forest sustainability issues. Conserv Lett 5(6):421–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Martínez Pastur G, Peri PL, Lencinas MV, García Llorente M, Martín López B (2016) Spatial patterns of cultural ecosystem services provision in southern Patagonia. Landsc Ecol 31:383–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Martins KT, Gonzalez A, Lechowicz MJ (2015) Pollination services are mediated by bee functional diversity and landscape context. Agric Ecosyst Environ 200:12–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Panel (MEA) (2005) Island press. Washington, USAGoogle Scholar
  33. Myers N (1996) Environmental services of biodiversity. PNAS 93(7):2764–2769CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Nahuelhual L, Donoso P, Lara A, Núnez D, Oyarzún C, Neira E (2007) Valuing ecosystem services of Chilean temperate rainforests. Environ Dev Sustain 9:481–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Quintas-Soriano C, Martín-López B, Santos-Martín F, Loureiro M, Montes C, Benayas J, García-Llorente M (2016) Ecosystem services values in Spain: a meta-analysis. Environ Sci Policy 55(01):186–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Fang J, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz W, Phillips O, Shvidenko A, Lewis S, Canadell J, Ciais P, Jackson R, Pacala S, McGuire D, Piao S, Rautiainen A, Sitch S, Hayes D (2011) A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science 333:988–993CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Panagos P, Borrelli P, Poesen J, Ballabio C, Lugato E, Meusburger K, Montanarella L, Alewell C (2015) The new assessment of soil loss by water erosion in Europe. Environ Sci Policy 54:438–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peres CA, Emilio T, Schietti J, Desmoulière SJM, Levi T (2016) Dispersal limitation induces long-term biomass collapse in overhunted Amazonian forests. PNAS 113(4):892–897CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Peri, P, Dube F, Varella A (2016) Silvopastoral systems in southern South America. Springer, Series: Advances in agroforestry 11, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  40. Seppelt R, Dormann CF, Eppink FV, Lautenbach S, Schmidt S (2011) A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J Appl Ecol 48:630–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sun G, Vose JM (2016) Forest management challenges for sustaining water resources in the Anthropocene. Forests 7(3):e68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tallis H, Kareiva P, Marvier M, Chang A (2008) An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development. PNAS 105(28):9457–9464CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Thom D, Seidl R (2016) Natural disturbance impacts on ecosystem services and biodiversity in temperate and boreal forests. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 91(3):760–81Google Scholar
  44. Thompson ID, Okabe K, Tylianakis JM, Kumar P, Brockerhoff EG, Schellhorn NA, Parrotta JA, Nasi R (2011) Forest biodiversity and the delivery of ecosystem goods and services: translating science into policy. Bioscience 61:972–981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vitousek P, Aber J, Howarth R, Likens G, Matson P, Schindler D, Schlesinger W, Tilman D (1997) Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: sources and consequences. Ecol Appl 7(3):737–750Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guillermo Martínez Pastur
    • 1
  • Ajith H. Perera
    • 2
  • Urmas Peterson
    • 3
  • Louis R. Iverson
    • 4
  1. 1.Centro Austral de Investigaciones Científicas (CADIC), Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)UshuaiaArgentina
  2. 2.Ontario Forest Research InstituteSault Ste. MarieCanada
  3. 3.Institute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Estonian University of Life SciencesTartuEstonia
  4. 4.Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science, Northern Research Station, US Forest ServiceDelawareUSA

Personalised recommendations