IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v22y2020i3d10.1007_s10668-018-00300-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecosystem services-based multi-criteria assessment for ecologically sensitive watershed management

Author

Listed:
  • Azime Tezer

    (Istanbul Technical University)

  • Zeynep Turkay

    (Istanbul Technical University)

  • Osman Uzun

    (Duzce University)

  • Fatih Terzi

    (Istanbul Technical University)

  • Pinar Koylu

    (Duzce University)

  • Elif Karacor

    (Duzce University)

  • Nilgun Okay

    (Istanbul Technical University)

  • Melek Kaya

    (Duzce University)

Abstract

The decline in ecosystem services (ES) across the world is mostly associated with land use change, which is the basic outcome of ecosystem degradation. The changes associated with land use development often negatively impact ecosystems to sustain their services. The lack of capability of contemporary land suitability (overlay) analysis on ES-based decision support approach necessitates a new way of analytical method integrating ES to promote sustainability more efficiently in spatial decision making and ecosystem management. Although there is a growing attention on ES-based data improvement and spatialization of ES data through mapping and valuation at local and global levels, the configuration of analytical decision support tool of ES has not been developed yet to be used for spatial decision-making purposes. In this paper, a case study for the application of ES-based decision support approach is presented to contribute as a spatial decision support tool. Duzce, a province distinguished with being another major drinking water supplier of Istanbul, is selected as a case. The aim of the paper is to explore the relevancy of ES-based land suitability (ESLS) assessment approach as a decision support tool in spatial decision making by comparing with the contemporary land suitability (overlay) analysis. Both approaches have been developed and superimposed with multilayered/multi-functional spatial assessments to achieve an integrated final output separately. The findings of the research prove that ES-based analytical approach for spatial decision making can better formulate and contribute to more holistic and comprehensive spatial decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • Azime Tezer & Zeynep Turkay & Osman Uzun & Fatih Terzi & Pinar Koylu & Elif Karacor & Nilgun Okay & Melek Kaya, 2020. "Ecosystem services-based multi-criteria assessment for ecologically sensitive watershed management," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 2431-2450, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:22:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10668-018-00300-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-018-00300-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-018-00300-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-018-00300-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fisher, Janet A. & Brown, Katrina, 2014. "Ecosystem services concepts and approaches in conservation: Just a rhetorical tool?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 257-265.
    2. Annet Forkink, 2017. "Benefits and challenges of using an Assessment of Ecosystem Services approach in land-use planning," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(11), pages 2071-2084, November.
    3. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    4. Wendland, Kelly J. & Honzák, Miroslav & Portela, Rosimeiry & Vitale, Benjamin & Rubinoff, Samuel & Randrianarisoa, Jeannicq, 2010. "Targeting and implementing payments for ecosystem services: Opportunities for bundling biodiversity conservation with carbon and water services in Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2093-2107, September.
    5. Maes, Joachim & Egoh, Benis & Willemen, Louise & Liquete, Camino & Vihervaara, Petteri & Schägner, Jan Philipp & Grizzetti, Bruna & Drakou, Evangelia G. & Notte, Alessandra La & Zulian, Grazia & Bour, 2012. "Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 31-39.
    6. Schröter, Matthias & Stumpf, Klara H. & Loos, Jacqueline & van Oudenhoven, Alexander P.E. & Böhnke-Henrichs, Anne & Abson, David J., 2017. "Refocusing ecosystem services towards sustainability," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 35-43.
    7. Sohel, Md Shawkat Islam & Ahmed Mukul, Sharif & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2015. "Landscape׳s capacities to supply ecosystem services in Bangladesh: A mapping assessment for Lawachara National Park," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 128-135.
    8. Anna, Petrenko, 2016. "Мaркування готової продукції як складова частина інформаційного забезпечення маркетингової діяльності підприємств овочепродуктового підкомплексу," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 2(1), March.
    9. Tammi, Ilpo & Mustajärvi, Kaisa & Rasinmäki, Jussi, 2017. "Integrating spatial valuation of ecosystem services into regional planning and development," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 329-344.
    10. Borner, Jan & Mendoza, Arisbe & Vosti, Stephen A., 2007. "Ecosystem services, agriculture, and rural poverty in the Eastern Brazilian Amazon: Interrelationships and policy prescriptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 356-373, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Grunewald, K. & Bastian, O. & Louda, J. & Arcidiacono, A. & Brzoska, P. & Bue, M. & Cetin, N.I. & Dworczyk, C. & Dubova, L. & Fitch, A. & Jones, L. & La Rosa, D. & Mascarenhas, A. & Ronchi, S. & Schla, 2021. "Lessons learned from implementing the ecosystem services concept in urban planning," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Yingying Guan & Xueming Li & Jun Yang & Songbo Li & Shenzhen Tian, 2022. "Spatial differentiation of comprehensive suitability of urban human settlements based on GIS: a case study of Liaoning Province, China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 4150-4174, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Steger, Cara & Hirsch, Shana & Evers, Cody & Branoff, Benjamin & Petrova, Maria & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Wardropper, Chloe & van Riper, Carena J., 2018. "Ecosystem Services as Boundary Objects for Transdisciplinary Collaboration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 153-160.
    2. Maczka, Krzysztof & Matczak, Piotr & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Rechciński, Marcin & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Cent, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2016. "Application of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy—A systematic empirical analysis of national level policy documents in Poland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 169-176.
    3. Arturo Sanchez-Porras & María Guadalupe Tenorio-Arvide & Ricardo Darío Peña-Moreno & María Laura Sampedro-Rosas & Sonia Emilia Silva-Gómez, 2018. "Evaluation of the Potential Change to the Ecosystem Service Provision Due to Industrialization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    4. Pierre Mokondoko & Robert H Manson & Taylor H Ricketts & Daniel Geissert, 2018. "Spatial analysis of ecosystem service relationships to improve targeting of payments for hydrological services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, February.
    5. Heink, Ulrich & Jax, Kurt, 2019. "Going Upstream — How the Purpose of a Conceptual Framework for Ecosystem Services Determines Its Structure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 264-271.
    6. Klimanova, O.A. & Bukvareva, E.N. & Yu, Kolbowsky E. & Illarionova, O.A., 2023. "Assessing ecosystem services in Russia: Case studies from four municipal districts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    7. Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S. & Sachet, Erwan & Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Vanegas, Martha & Quintero, Marcela, 2017. "To what extent have the links between ecosystem services and human well-being been researched in Africa, Asia, and Latin America?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 201-212.
    8. van den Belt, Marjan & Stevens, Sharon M., 2016. "Transformative agenda, or lost in the translation? A review of top-cited articles in the first four years of Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 60-72.
    9. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    10. Molina Murillo, Sergio A. & Pérez Castillo, Juan Pablo & Herrera Ugalde, María Elena, 2014. "Assessment of environmental payments on indigenous territories: The case of Cabecar-Talamanca, Costa Rica," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 35-43.
    11. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    12. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    13. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    14. Linrun Qiu & Yuxiang Dong & Hai Liu, 2022. "Integrating Ecosystem Services into Planning Practice: Situation, Challenges and Inspirations," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, April.
    15. Altmann, Alexandre & Silva Stanton, Márcia, 2018. "The densification normative of the ecosystem services concept in Brazil: Analyses from legislation and jurisprudence," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 282-293.
    16. Von Thaden, Juan & Manson, Robert H. & Congalton, Russell G. & López-Barrera, Fabiola & Jones, Kelly W., 2021. "Evaluating the environmental effectiveness of payments for hydrological services in Veracruz, México: A landscape approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    17. Havinga, Ilan & Bogaart, Patrick W. & Hein, Lars & Tuia, Devis, 2020. "Defining and spatially modelling cultural ecosystem services using crowdsourced data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    18. Primmer, Eeva & Varumo, Liisa & Krause, Torsten & Orsi, Francesco & Geneletti, Davide & Brogaard, Sara & Aukes, Ewert & Ciolli, Marco & Grossmann, Carol & Hernández-Morcillo, Mónica & Kister, Jutta , 2021. "Mapping Europe’s institutional landscape for forest ecosystem service provision, innovations and governance," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    19. Brück, Maria & Abson, David J. & Fischer, Joern & Schultner, Jannik, 2022. "Broadening the scope of ecosystem services research: Disaggregation as a powerful concept for sustainable natural resource management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    20. Danley, Brian & Widmark, Camilla, 2016. "Evaluating conceptual definitions of ecosystem services and their implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 132-138.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:22:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10668-018-00300-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.