Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 148-164 |
| Number of pages | 17 |
| Journal | Ecosystems and People |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 26 Mar 2021 |
Abstract
Current environmental resource management policies acknowledge the need to manage and conserve biodiversity. Sustaining good ecosystem conditions and ecosystem services (ES) is imperative at and across multiple spatial scales. The ES concept is a valuable tool to communicate the benefits that nature provides to people. In the Guiana Shield, neighbouring countries share landscapes and ecosystems, and therefore also the services they supply. This study presents the first spatial ES assessments at territorial level for Suriname and French Guiana. Expert-based ES supply matrices were used and analysed in combination with Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) data to compile ES capacity maps for the two territories. In comparison, both ES supply matrices showed a high degree of similarity–forest ecosystems scored the highest ES capacities, followed by aquatic and marine ecosystems. Agricultural and urban land cover showed weak to moderate capacities for ES supply. A statistical analysis revealed a 30% difference of the two matrix assessments. Expert scores given for ES in Suriname exceeded those in French Guiana, especially for urban LULC and planted forests. Sociodemographic factors such as age, gender and institutional environment were analysed to explain this difference. The diverging scores can also be attributed to the distribution and the degree of similarity of the different LULC types and, hence, ES capacities and different governance and institutional contexts of the assessments. Comparative evaluations are essential to understand the differences in perception of ES supply capacities and to underpin future knowledge-based bilateral conservation policies and funding decisions by governments and managers.
Keywords
- Catharina Schulp, Socio-cultural ES, cross-border assessment, ecosystem services matrix, expert-based assessment
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
- Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- Engineering(all)
- Automotive Engineering
- Environmental Science(all)
- Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Environmental Science(all)
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
Sustainable Development Goals
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Ecosystems and People, Vol. 17, No. 1, 26.03.2021, p. 148-164.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Mapping and assessing ecosystems and their services: a comparative approach to ecosystem service supply in Suriname and French Guiana
AU - Sieber, Ina Maren
AU - Campagne, Carole Sylvie
AU - Villien, Clément
AU - Burkhard, Benjamin Felix
N1 - Funding Information: This work was conducted as part of the ECOSEO Project financed underthe Interreg Amazonian cooperation Program (IACP) [N?2014TC*16*RFTN010 andFEDERCTE/ 2017/N?8], as part of ARRETE N? SQC2018/34. First and foremost, we would like to thank all stakeholders in French Guiana and Suriname who took part in the workshops and shared their valuable knowledge with us. Special thanks go to Laurent Kelle and Fred, Angie Faust and Joana Seguin. Also, we would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their diligent work and thorough feedback on earlier versions of this paper.
PY - 2021/3/26
Y1 - 2021/3/26
N2 - Current environmental resource management policies acknowledge the need to manage and conserve biodiversity. Sustaining good ecosystem conditions and ecosystem services (ES) is imperative at and across multiple spatial scales. The ES concept is a valuable tool to communicate the benefits that nature provides to people. In the Guiana Shield, neighbouring countries share landscapes and ecosystems, and therefore also the services they supply. This study presents the first spatial ES assessments at territorial level for Suriname and French Guiana. Expert-based ES supply matrices were used and analysed in combination with Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) data to compile ES capacity maps for the two territories. In comparison, both ES supply matrices showed a high degree of similarity–forest ecosystems scored the highest ES capacities, followed by aquatic and marine ecosystems. Agricultural and urban land cover showed weak to moderate capacities for ES supply. A statistical analysis revealed a 30% difference of the two matrix assessments. Expert scores given for ES in Suriname exceeded those in French Guiana, especially for urban LULC and planted forests. Sociodemographic factors such as age, gender and institutional environment were analysed to explain this difference. The diverging scores can also be attributed to the distribution and the degree of similarity of the different LULC types and, hence, ES capacities and different governance and institutional contexts of the assessments. Comparative evaluations are essential to understand the differences in perception of ES supply capacities and to underpin future knowledge-based bilateral conservation policies and funding decisions by governments and managers.
AB - Current environmental resource management policies acknowledge the need to manage and conserve biodiversity. Sustaining good ecosystem conditions and ecosystem services (ES) is imperative at and across multiple spatial scales. The ES concept is a valuable tool to communicate the benefits that nature provides to people. In the Guiana Shield, neighbouring countries share landscapes and ecosystems, and therefore also the services they supply. This study presents the first spatial ES assessments at territorial level for Suriname and French Guiana. Expert-based ES supply matrices were used and analysed in combination with Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) data to compile ES capacity maps for the two territories. In comparison, both ES supply matrices showed a high degree of similarity–forest ecosystems scored the highest ES capacities, followed by aquatic and marine ecosystems. Agricultural and urban land cover showed weak to moderate capacities for ES supply. A statistical analysis revealed a 30% difference of the two matrix assessments. Expert scores given for ES in Suriname exceeded those in French Guiana, especially for urban LULC and planted forests. Sociodemographic factors such as age, gender and institutional environment were analysed to explain this difference. The diverging scores can also be attributed to the distribution and the degree of similarity of the different LULC types and, hence, ES capacities and different governance and institutional contexts of the assessments. Comparative evaluations are essential to understand the differences in perception of ES supply capacities and to underpin future knowledge-based bilateral conservation policies and funding decisions by governments and managers.
KW - Catharina Schulp
KW - Socio-cultural ES
KW - cross-border assessment
KW - ecosystem services matrix
KW - expert-based assessment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85103355015&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/26395916.2021.1896580
DO - 10.1080/26395916.2021.1896580
M3 - Article
VL - 17
SP - 148
EP - 164
JO - Ecosystems and People
JF - Ecosystems and People
SN - 2639-5908
IS - 1
ER -