Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Methodology for Quantifying and Mapping Ecosystem Services Provided by Watersheds

  • Chapter
Ecosystem Services and River Basin Ecohydrology

Abstract

Watershed processes – physical, chemical, and biological – are the foundation for many benefits that ecosystems provide for human societies. A crucial step toward accurately representing those benefits, so they can ultimately inform decisions about land and water management, is the development of a coherent methodology that can translate available data into the ecosystem services (ES) produced by watersheds. Ecosystem services (ES) provide an instinctive way to understand the tradeoffs associated with natural resource management. We provide a synthesis of common terminology and explain a rationale and framework for distinguishing among the components of ecosystem service delivery, including: an ecosystem’s capacity to produce a service; societal demand for the service; ecological pressures on this service; and flow of the service to people. We discuss how interpretation and measurement of these components can differ among provisioning, regulating, and cultural services and describe selected methods for quantifying ES components as well as constraints on data availability. We also present several case studies to illustrate our methods, including mapping capacity of several water purification services and demand for two forms of wildlife-based recreation, and discuss future directions for ecosystem service assessments. Our flexible framework treats service capacity, demand, ecological pressure, and flow as separate but interactive entities to better evaluate the sustainability of service provision across space and time and to help guide management decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arthington AH, Naiman RJ, McClain ME, Nilsson C (2010) Preserving the biodiversity and ecological services of rivers: new challenges and research opportunities. Freshw Biol 55:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagstad KJ, Johnson GW, Voigt B, Villa F (2012) Spatial dynamics of ecosystem service flows: a comprehensive approach to quantifying actual services. Ecosyst Serv 4:117–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker ME, Weller DE, Jordan TE (2006) Improved methods for quantifying potential nutrient interception by riparian buffers. Landsc Ecol 21:1327–1345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balmford A, Fisher B, Green RE, Naidoo R, Strassburg B, Turner RK, Rodrigues ASL (2011) Bringing ecosystem services into the real world: an operational framework for assessing the economic consequences of losing wild nature. Environ Resour Econ 48:161–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balvanera P, Pfisterer AB, Buchmann N, He JS, Nakashizuka T, Raffaelli D, Schmid B (2006) Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services. Ecol Lett 9:1146–1156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbier EB (2009) Ecosystem service trade-offs. In: Mcleod K, Leslie H (eds) Ecosystem-based management for the oceans. Island Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Beier CM, Patterson TM, Chapin FS (2008) Ecosystem services and emergent vulnerability in managed ecosystems, a geospatial decision-support tool. Ecosystems 1:923–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett EM, Peterson GD, Gordon LJ (2009) Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol Lett 12:1394–1404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd J, Banzhaf S (2007) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol Econ 63:616–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkhard B, Kroll F, Nedkov S, Muller F (2012) Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol Indic 21:17–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns J (1997) Protecting the delivery of ecosystem services. Ecosyst Health 3:185–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter SR, Mooney HA, Agard J, Capistrano D, DeFries RS, Diaz S, Dietz T, Duraiappah AK, Oteng-Yeboah A, Pereira HM, Perrings C, Reid WV, Sarukhan J, Scholes RJ, Whyte A (2009) Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:1305–1312

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chan K, Shaw MR, Cameron DR, Underwood EC, Daily GC (2006) Conservation planning for ecosystem services. PLoS Biol 4:2138–2152

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chan K, Satterfield T, Goldstein J (2012) Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecol Econ 74:8–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correll DL (2005) Principles of planning and establishment of buffer zones. Ecol Eng 24:433–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R (2008) Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biol Conserv 141:350–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czymmek K, Ketterings QM, van Es H DeGloria S (2003) The New York nitrate leaching index. CSS Extension Publication, 34 pp. Available online March 15 2015 at http://nmsp.cals.cornell.edu/publications/extension/nleachingindex.pdf

  • Daily GC, Matson PA (2008) Ecosystem services: from theory to implementation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105:9455–9456

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC, Polasky S, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Mooney HA, Pejchar L, Ricketts TH, Salzman J, Shallenberger R (2009) Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Front Ecol Environ 7:21–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily G, Kareiva P, Polasky S, Ricketts T, Tallis H (2011) Mainstreaming natural capital into decisions. In: Kareiva P, Tallis H, Ricketts T, Daily G, Polasky S (eds) Natural capital: theory and practice of mapping ecosystem services. University Press Oxford, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale VH, Polasky S (2007) Measures of the effects of agricultural practices on ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 64:286–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Groot RS, Wilson MA, Boumans RM (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol Econ 41:393–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7:260–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egoh B, Reyers B, Rouget M, Richardson DM, Le Maitre DC, van Jaarsveld AS (2008) Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management. Agr Ecosyst Environ 127:135–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eigenbrod F, Armsworth PR, Anderson BJ, Heinemeyer A, Gillings S, Roy DB, Thomas CD, Gaston KJ (2010) The impact of proxy-based methods on mapping the distribution of ecosystem services. J Appl Ecol 47:377–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute) (2010) ArcGIS Desktop (ArcInfo) Software v10.0 ESRI. Redlands, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Fennessy MS, Cronk JK (1997) The effectiveness and restoration potential of riparian ecotones for the management of nonpoint source pollution, particularly nitrate. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 27:285–317

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher B, Turner K (2008) Ecosystem services, classification for valuation. Biol Conserv 141:1167–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher B, Turner K, Zylstra M, Brouwer R, de Groot R, Farber S, Ferraro P, Green R, Hadley D, Harlow J, Jefferiss P, Kirkby C, Morling P, Mowatt S, Naidoo R, Paavola J, Strassburg B, Yu D, Balmford A (2008) Ecosystem services and economic theory: integration for policy-relevant research. Ecol Appl 18:2050–2067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fry J, Xian G, Jin S, Dewitz J, Homer C, Yang L, Barnes C, Herold N, Wickham J (2011) Completion of the 2006 national land cover database for the conterminous United States. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 77:858–864

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesch DB (2007) The National Elevation Dataset. In: Maune D (ed) Digital elevation model technologies and applications: the DEM users manual, 2nd edn. American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabowski JH, Brumbaugh RD, Conrad RF, Keeler AG, Opaluch JJ, Peterson CH, Piehler MF, Powers SP, Smyth AR (2012) Economic valuation of ecosystem services provided by oyster reefs. Bioscience 62:900–909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hein L, van Koppen K, de Groot RS, van Ierland EC (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 57:209–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston RJ, Russell M (2011) An operational structure for clarity in ecosystem service values. Ecol Econ 70:2243–2249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jose S (2009) Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: an overview. Agrofor Syst 76:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeler BL, Polaskya S, Braumana KA, Johnsond KA, Finlayc JC, O’Neille A, Kovacsf K, Dalzellg B (2012) Linking water quality and well-being for improved assessment and valuation of ecosystem services. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109:18619–18624

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Layke C (2009) Measuring nature’s benefits: a preliminary roadmap for improving ecosystem service indicators. World Resources Institute, Working Paper, 36 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim KJ, Sagong M, Engel BA, Tang Z, Choi J, Kim K (2005) GIS-based sediment assessment tool. CATENA 64:61–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MA [Millennium Ecosystem Assessment] (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being. Synthesis Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin-Lopez B, Iniesta-Arandia I, Garcia-Llorente M, Palomo I, Casado-Arzuaga I, Del Amo DG, Gomez-Baggethun E, Oteros-Rozas E, Palacios-Agundez I, Willaarts B, Gonzalez JA, Santos-Martin F, Onaindia M, Lopez-Santiago C, Montes C (2012) Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLos One 7(6):e38970

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez ML, Perez-Maqueo O, Vazquez G, Castillo-Campos G, Garcia-Franco J, Mehltreter K, Equihua M, Landgrave R (2009) Effects of land use change on biodiversity and ecosystem services in tropical montane cloud forests of Mexico. For Ecol Manage 258:1856–1863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer PM, Reynolds SK, McCutchen MD, Canfield TJ (2007) Meta-analysis of nitrogen removal in riparian buffers. J Environ Qual 36:1172–1180

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald RI (2009) Ecosystem service demand and supply along the urban-to-rural gradient. J Conserv Plann 5:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • McShane TO, Hirsch PD, Trung TC, Songorwa AN, Kinzig A, Monteferri B, Mutekanga D, Thang HV, Dammert JL, Pulgar-Vidal M, Welch-Devine M, Brosius JP, Coppolillo P, O’Connor S (2011) Hard choices: making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being. Biol Conserv 144:966–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nedkov S, Burkhard B (2012) Flood regulating ecosystem services-mapping supply and demand, in the Etropole municipality, Bulgaria. Ecol Indic 21:67–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson E, Mendoza G, Regetz J, Polasky S, Tallis H, Cameron DR, Chan KMA, Daily GC, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Lonsdorf E, Naidoo R, Ricketts TH, Shaw MR (2009) Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front Ecol Environ 7:4–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plummer ML (2009) Assessing benefit transfer for the valuation of ecosystem services. Front Ecol Environ 7:38–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PRISM Group (Parameter-elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model) (2004) Mean annual and monthly precipitation 1971–2000. Oregon State University. http://www.prismclimate.org. Accessed 10 Feb 2012

  • Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson GD, Bennett EM (2010) Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107:5242–5247

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez JP, Beard TD, Bennett EM, Cumming GS, Cork SJ, Agard J, Dobson AP, Peterson GD (2006) Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecol Soc 11(1):28. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art28/

  • Scheffer M, Carpenter S (2003) Catastrophic regime shifts in ecosystems: linking theory to observation. Trends Ecol Evol 18:648–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture (2012a) Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO). Database available online at http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov. Accessed 15 Mar 2015

  • Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture (2012b) US General Soil Map (STATSGO2). Database available online at http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov. Accessed 15 Mar 2015

  • Tallis H, Mooney H, Andelman S, Balvanera P, Cramer W, Karp D, Polasky S, Reyers B, Ricketts T, Running S, Thonicke K, Tietjen B, Walz A (2012) A global system for monitoring ecosystem service change. Bioscience 62:977–986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA -NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service, formerly Soil Conservation Service) (1972) National engineering handbook hydrology, Section 4 Chapters 4–10. USDA, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA -NRCS (2003) RUSLE2 (Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation: Version 2) Available online at 1 March 2010. http://fargo.nserl.purdue.edu/rusle2_dataweb/RUSLE2_Index.htm. Accessed 1 Mar 2010

  • van Oudenhoven A, Petz K, Alkemade R, Hein L, de Groot R (2012) Framework for systematic indicator selection to assess effects of land management on ecosystem services. Ecol Indic 21:110–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villamagna AM, Angermeier PL, Bennett EM (2013) Capacity, demand, pressure, and flow: a conceptual framework for analyzing ecosystem service provision and delivery. Ecol Complex 15:114–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villamagna AM, Giesecke C (2014) Adapting a human well-being framework for ecosystem service assessment. Ecol Soc 19(1):11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villamagna AM, Mogollon B, Angermeier PL (2014a) A multi-indicator framework for mapping cultural services: the case of freshwater recreational fishing. Ecol Indic 45:255–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villamagna AM, Angermeier PL, Niazi N (2014b) Evaluating opportunities to enhance ecosystem services in public use areas. Ecosyst Serv 7:167–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace K (2007) Classification of ecosystem services: problems and solutions. Biol Conserv 139:235–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wischmeier WH, Smith DD (1978) Predicting rainfall erosion losses: a guide to conservation planning, USDA agriculture handbook. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Yapp G, Walker J, Thackway R (2010) Linking vegetation type and condition to ecosystem goods and services. Ecol Complex 7:292–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially funded by the U.S. Department of Defense’s Environmental Security and Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) and the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Aquatic Gap Analysis Program. We thank E. Bennett for her valuable contributions and D. Carpenter, J. Comiskey and anonymous reviewers for valuable input and feedback. The Virginia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit is jointly sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, and Wildlife Management Institute. Use of trade names or commercial products does not imply endorsement by U.S. government.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Science and Policy, Plymouth State University, Plymouth, NH, 03263, USA

    Amy M. Villamagna

  2. U.S. Geological Survey, Virginia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, 24061, USA

    Paul L. Angermeier

Authors
  1. Amy M. Villamagna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul L. Angermeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy M. Villamagna .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Algarve, Gambelas-Faro, Portugal

    Luis Chicharo

  2. Department of Ecosystem Management, University of Kiel Institute for Natural Resource Conservation, Kiel, Germany

    Felix Müller

  3. Hydrology and Water Resources Management, University of Kiel Institute for Natural Resource Conservation, Kiel, Germany

    Nicola Fohrer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Villamagna, A.M., Angermeier, P.L. (2015). A Methodology for Quantifying and Mapping Ecosystem Services Provided by Watersheds. In: Chicharo, L., Müller, F., Fohrer, N. (eds) Ecosystem Services and River Basin Ecohydrology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9846-4_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation