Loading…

Landscape structure as a mediator of ecosystem service interactions

Context Management of multiple ecosystem services (ES) is complex, in part due to synergies and trade-offs among ES. Landscape configuration—the spatial arrangement of patches in a landscape—affects the provision of many ES, and may also influence the strength and direction of these interactions. Un...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Landscape ecology 2020-12, Vol.35 (12), p.2863-2880
Main Authors: Rieb, Jesse T., Bennett, Elena M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Context Management of multiple ecosystem services (ES) is complex, in part due to synergies and trade-offs among ES. Landscape configuration—the spatial arrangement of patches in a landscape—affects the provision of many ES, and may also influence the strength and direction of these interactions. Understanding how landscape configuration can influence ES interactions may provide landscape managers with a tool to promote positive interactions and avoid negative interactions among ES. Objectives We investigate the relationship between ES, their interactions, and landscape configuration across the Montérégie region of Québec, Canada. Through this, we explore the potential for landscape configuration to serve as a tool to mediate ES interactions. Methods We quantified seven ES at a 30 m spatial resolution across the Montérégie region of Québec, Canada. The strength and direction of pairwise correlations in ES provision was compared across five classes of landscape configuration. Results We found significant variation in response to landscape configuration for almost all pairwise ES interactions. In some cases, two ES showed a trade-off in one type of landscape and a synergy in another. Response to landscape configuration varied by ES, and no single type of landscape configuration was better overall at promoting synergies and reducing trade-offs. Conclusions The effect of landscape configuration was relatively small compared to the effect of land use and land cover. However, directed manipulation of landscape configuration may allow managers to enhance the provision of specific ES, or influence the strength and direction of interactions between specific pairs of ES.
ISSN:0921-2973
1572-9761
DOI:10.1007/s10980-020-01117-2