Ecosystem services(ES)are growing fields of research.It helps to provide an inherent way to understand the synergy and trade-offs between human beings and their natural environment.Regulatory ecosystem services(RES)ar...Ecosystem services(ES)are growing fields of research.It helps to provide an inherent way to understand the synergy and trade-offs between human beings and their natural environment.Regulatory ecosystem services(RES)are significantly important to maintaining the world in which people can live,and control the negative effects of flood,disasters,and diseases.It can also provide regulatory services like ecosystem protection,human safety,and the provision of other ES.However,emerging ES decision-making agendas focus on ES that is tangible and has a direct link with human well-being.Thus,the attention given to RES is low due to its less tangible benefits and complexity to measure the benefits.Disregarding and lack of attention from policymakers and scientific community may lead to unintended risks to human well-being and significant influences on the provision of other ES.This study describes the research trends on RES,knowledge generated,and the major limitation.We concluded that though there is an exponential growth of scientific publications on ES,no adequate studies were found on RES.Also,the existed studies varied in their size and types of RES indicators covered,habitats/ecosystems,and geographic extent addressed.There was also a lack of connecting knowledge generated on the benefits of RES with the national policy of natural resource management,inconsistency of ES classification,and methodological diversity.Therefore,scientific communities are promoted to link RES studies with human health.Besides,the researcher should give priority for the least studied ecosystems and its services,developing robust methodology,and proposing management options to enhance the regulatory services of ecosystems.展开更多
Introduction:The potential of periurban agrarian ecosystems is recognized as one of the cornerstones for improving urban sustainability;however,this potential has been disregarded in spatial planning and decision maki...Introduction:The potential of periurban agrarian ecosystems is recognized as one of the cornerstones for improving urban sustainability;however,this potential has been disregarded in spatial planning and decision making.The main goal of the PAEc-SP project was to assess the feasibility of integrating periurban agricultural areas into spatial planning by developing a viable ecosystem services-based methodology.Methods:The research unfolded along three axes:i)mapping ecosystem services in periurban areas,distinguishing between the current state and the future potential by applying a set of indicators;ii)analyzing the regulatory framework,identifying gaps in the consideration of agrarian ecosystem services;and iii)analyzing the perceptions of these areas held by local actors.Provisioning services(food)are widely recognized by actors and plans,but this leads to weak protection.Results:Cultural services(identity,recreation)are also recognized by all actors and addressed by local urban planning,though this is not connected to farming practices.Regulating services(CO_(2) storage,water quality)are barely addressed by spatial planning and actors do not value them either.Supporting services(biodiversity)are mostly associated with natural areas.Most technicians are reluctant to changes,while new farmers and civil society demand a new holistic approach.Conclusion:The reluctant attitude to change of some actors and the inadequate understanding of ecosystem services,render it imperative to adopt a comprehensive approach through a participatory process of urban planning.Mapping ecosystem services,calculations,and graphs are a valuable communication tool both in discussing the consequences of the loss of agrarian ecosystems with different actors and in planning future scenarios.展开更多
文摘Ecosystem services(ES)are growing fields of research.It helps to provide an inherent way to understand the synergy and trade-offs between human beings and their natural environment.Regulatory ecosystem services(RES)are significantly important to maintaining the world in which people can live,and control the negative effects of flood,disasters,and diseases.It can also provide regulatory services like ecosystem protection,human safety,and the provision of other ES.However,emerging ES decision-making agendas focus on ES that is tangible and has a direct link with human well-being.Thus,the attention given to RES is low due to its less tangible benefits and complexity to measure the benefits.Disregarding and lack of attention from policymakers and scientific community may lead to unintended risks to human well-being and significant influences on the provision of other ES.This study describes the research trends on RES,knowledge generated,and the major limitation.We concluded that though there is an exponential growth of scientific publications on ES,no adequate studies were found on RES.Also,the existed studies varied in their size and types of RES indicators covered,habitats/ecosystems,and geographic extent addressed.There was also a lack of connecting knowledge generated on the benefits of RES with the national policy of natural resource management,inconsistency of ES classification,and methodological diversity.Therefore,scientific communities are promoted to link RES studies with human health.Besides,the researcher should give priority for the least studied ecosystems and its services,developing robust methodology,and proposing management options to enhance the regulatory services of ecosystems.
文摘Introduction:The potential of periurban agrarian ecosystems is recognized as one of the cornerstones for improving urban sustainability;however,this potential has been disregarded in spatial planning and decision making.The main goal of the PAEc-SP project was to assess the feasibility of integrating periurban agricultural areas into spatial planning by developing a viable ecosystem services-based methodology.Methods:The research unfolded along three axes:i)mapping ecosystem services in periurban areas,distinguishing between the current state and the future potential by applying a set of indicators;ii)analyzing the regulatory framework,identifying gaps in the consideration of agrarian ecosystem services;and iii)analyzing the perceptions of these areas held by local actors.Provisioning services(food)are widely recognized by actors and plans,but this leads to weak protection.Results:Cultural services(identity,recreation)are also recognized by all actors and addressed by local urban planning,though this is not connected to farming practices.Regulating services(CO_(2) storage,water quality)are barely addressed by spatial planning and actors do not value them either.Supporting services(biodiversity)are mostly associated with natural areas.Most technicians are reluctant to changes,while new farmers and civil society demand a new holistic approach.Conclusion:The reluctant attitude to change of some actors and the inadequate understanding of ecosystem services,render it imperative to adopt a comprehensive approach through a participatory process of urban planning.Mapping ecosystem services,calculations,and graphs are a valuable communication tool both in discussing the consequences of the loss of agrarian ecosystems with different actors and in planning future scenarios.
