Revisiting production and ecosystem services on the farm scale for evaluating land use alternatives |
| |
| Institution: | 1. KU Leuven, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Division Bio-Economics, Celestijnenlaan 200E, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium;2. ‘Het Bolhuis’, Asdonkstraat 49, 3294 Molenstede-Diest, Belgium;3. KU Leuven, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Division Forest, Nature and Landscape, Celestijnenlaan 200E, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium;1. State Key Laboratory of Water Environment Simulation, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China;2. Research Institute of Forestry, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing, China;1. Centre national de la recherche scientifique, Univ Pau and Pays Adour, UMR 5319 – PASSAGES, IRSAM – Avenue du Doyen Poplawski – PAU, F-64000, France;2. Université Rennes 2, UMR LETG (UMR CNRS 5654), 5 Place Henri Le Moal, 35000, Rennes, France;3. Universidade Federal do Pará (UFPA), Núcleo de Ciências Agrárias e Desenvolvimento Rural (NCADR), Rua Augusto Corrêa, 01 - Guamá, 66075-110 Belém, Pará, Brazil;4. Universidade Federal do Pará (UFPA), Campus de Maraba, Floha 17, Quadra e lote especial, Campus II da UFPA, CEP 68.505-80, Marabá, Pará, Brazil;5. Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense (Paris 10), UMR Centre de recherches sociologiques et politiques de Paris (UMR 7217), 200 avenue de la République, 92001 Nanterre Cedex, France;6. Université Lyon 1, LEHNA, UMR Biodiversité des écosystèmes lotiques (UMR 5023), Bâtiment Florel, 6 rue R. Dubois, 69622 Villeurbanne Cedex, France;7. Université P. et M. Curie (Paris 6), UMR BIOEMCO 7618, Centre IRD Ile de France, 32 rue Henri Varagnat, 93143 Bondy, France;1. Centro de Pesquisas em Limnologia, Biodiversidade e Etnobiologia do Pantanal, CELBE, Laboratório de Mamíferos, Universidade do Estado de Mato Grosso, Cáceres, Mato Grosso, Brazil;2. Departamento de Engenharia Florestal, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Avenida Purdue, s/nº, Campus Universitário, Edif. Reinaldo de Jesus Araújo, 36.570-900, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Associate Professor II, Institute of Biosciences, Federal University of Goiás, Regional Jataí, 75801615, Jataí, GO, Brazil;3. Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, United Kingdom;4. Grupo de Ecologia Animal, GECA, Instituto de Ciências Naturais, Humanas e Sociais, NEBAM, Federal University of Mato Grosso, Sinop, Mato Grosso, Brazil;1. Centro para la Investigación en Sistemas Sostenibles de Producción Agropecuaria—CIPAV, Cra. 25 No. 6- 62, Cali, Colombia;2. Universidad del Valle, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Exactas, Departamento de Biología, Calle 13 No. 13-00 Sede Meléndez, Cali, Colombia;3. Red de Ecoetología, Instituto de Ecología, A.C., Carretera antigua a Coatepec 351, El Haya, Xalapa 91070, Veracruz, Mexico;1. Ecology Department, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, C/José Antonio Novais n° 12, 28040 Madrid, Spain;2. Entomology Group, Plant Protection Department, Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA), Ctra. Coruña Km 7, 28040 Madrid, Spain |
| |
| Abstract: | Urbanization pressure increases the demand on remaining open spaces to deliver food and biomass, as well as other ecosystem services, but it is often paired with a reduced capacity to deliver these services. This calls for an integrated and innovative use of the remaining space.However, current spatial planning paradigms are not always adapted to face these new challenges. In many regions, an important aspect of spatial planning in relation to agriculture is still the pragmatic and monofunctional allocation of land use between vocal stakeholders. This is rarely paired with a regional view on the effective or desired quantity of services provided by this open space. Since land use policies increasingly need to strive for resilience on top of diversification of services, assessments of the servicing capacity and sustainability of land uses are needed.This paper presents a framework to assess all ecosystem services (i.e. marketable and non-marketable ES) delivered by conventional as well as innovative land uses. The framework is then used to assess land use strategies at the scale of an unconventional case farm in Flanders, Belgium. The analysis combines spatial and economic analysis of land use alternatives and illustrates some shortcomings of usual ecosystem valuation tools. Our findings illustrate that land use evaluation might be biased against unconventional land management alternatives. The proposed framework provides land planners with a way to assess and arbitrate between land sharing and land sparring options more accurately. The approach can help to optimize land use from the societal perspective, and allows for benchmarking farm-level land use alternatives by comparing the services they deliver. |
| |
| Keywords: | Bioproductive land Land management Ecosystem services Land sharing vs sparing Multifunctional land use |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
