IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v26y2017ipbp355-364.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating ecosystem services supply potential from future land-use scenarios in protected area management: A Bangladesh case study

Author

Listed:
  • Mukul, Sharif A.
  • Sohel, Md. Shawkat I.
  • Herbohn, John
  • Inostroza, Luis
  • König, Hannes

Abstract

The establishment of protected areas (PAs) is a key strategy to conserve declining forests and biodiversity worldwide. Due to poor infrastructure and a limited capacity of PA managers, most of the PAs in developing countries fail to achieve their management targets. In this paper, the potential to integrate ecosystem services (ES) into land-use planning was assessed in order to better manage PAs in tropical countries. Firstly, we mapped the relative capacity of different land-use/land cover (LULC) to supply ES in and around the Satchari National Park (SNP) located in northeast Bangladesh. Two alternative scenarios to envisage the likely future supply of ES in the area were then analysed. The study reveals a relatively higher supply of supporting ES from LULC located inside the park compared to the ES supplied from surrounding forests, tea gardens, and oil palm and rubber plantations. Provisioning ES were greater in surrounding forests than from SNP. Both regulating and cultural ES were also higher in LULC within the park. Spatially explicit ES supply assessment and mapping was found to be useful for land use planning and the prioritization of future management actions. Based on our findings, we suggest that PA managers should consider the ES framework as an effective tool for the future-oriented PAs management.

Suggested Citation

  • Mukul, Sharif A. & Sohel, Md. Shawkat I. & Herbohn, John & Inostroza, Luis & König, Hannes, 2017. "Integrating ecosystem services supply potential from future land-use scenarios in protected area management: A Bangladesh case study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 355-364.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:26:y:2017:i:pb:p:355-364
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.04.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041617302383
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.04.001?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. Nahlik, Amanda M. & Kentula, Mary E. & Fennessy, M. Siobhan & Landers, Dixon H., 2012. "Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 27-35.
    2. Crossman, Neville D. & Burkhard, Benjamin & Nedkov, Stoyan & Willemen, Louise & Petz, Katalin & Palomo, Ignacio & Drakou, Evangelia G. & Martín-Lopez, Berta & McPhearson, Timon & Boyanova, Kremena & , 2013. "A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 4-14.
    3. 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.
    4. Palomo, Ignacio & Martín-López, Berta & Potschin, Marion & Haines-Young, Roy & Montes, Carlos, 2013. "National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: Mapping ecosystem service flows," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 104-116.
    5. Jacobs, Sander & Burkhard, Benjamin & Van Daele, Toon & Staes, Jan & Schneiders, Anik, 2015. "‘The Matrix Reloaded’: A review of expert knowledge use for mapping ecosystem services," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 295(C), pages 21-30.
    6. Burkhard, Benjamin & Müller, Anja & Müller, Felix & Grescho, Volker & Anh, Quynh & Arida, Gertrudo & Bustamante, Jesus Victor (Jappan) & Van Chien, Ho & Heong, K.L. & Escalada, Monina & Marquez, Leo, 2015. "Land cover-based ecosystem service assessment of irrigated rice cropping systems in southeast Asia—An explorative study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 76-87.
    7. Sharif Ahmed Mukul & A. Z. M. Manzoor Rashid & Mohammad Belal Uddin & Niaz Ahmed Khan, 2016. "Role of non-timber forest products in sustaining forest-based livelihoods and rural households' resilience capacity in and around protected area: a Bangladesh study†," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(4), pages 628-642, April.
    8. Sharif A. Mukul & Narayan Saha, 2017. "Conservation Benefits of Tropical Multifunctional Land-Uses in and Around a Forest Protected Area of Bangladesh," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-12, January.
    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. Gaglio, Mattias & Aschonitis, Vassilis & Castaldelli, Giuseppe & Fano, Elisa Anna, 2020. "Land use intensification rather than land cover change affects regulating services in the mountainous Adige river basin (Italy)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    2. Hongmi Koo & Janina Kleemann & Christine Fürst, 2020. "Integrating Ecosystem Services into Land-Use Modeling to Assess the Effects of Future Land-Use Strategies in Northern Ghana," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-24, October.
    3. Huan Wang & Peng Hou & Jinbao Jiang & Rulin Xiao & Jun Zhai & Zhuo Fu & Jing Hou, 2020. "Ecosystem Health Assessment of Shennongjia National Park, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Siliang Zhang & Zilong Guan & Yan Liu & Feimin Zheng, 2022. "Land Use/Cover Change and Its Relationship with Regional Development in Xixian New Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Hui Wen & Jiquan Chen & Zhifang Wang, 2020. "Disproportioned Performances of Protected Areas in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Harald Zepp & Luis Inostroza, 2021. "Who Pays the Bill? Assessing Ecosystem Services Losses in an Urban Planning Context," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    7. Ahammad, Ronju & Stacey, Natasha & Sunderland, Terry, 2021. "Analysis of forest-related policies for supporting ecosystem services-based forest management in Bangladesh," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    8. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2020. "Assessing the financial contribution and carbon emission pattern of provisioning ecosystem services in Siwalik forests in Nepal: Valuation from the perspectives of disaggregated users," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    9. Matthias Bürgi & Panna Ali & Afroza Chowdhury & Andreas Heinimann & Cornelia Hett & Felix Kienast & Manoranjan Kumar Mondal & Bishnu Raj Upreti & Peter H. Verburg, 2017. "Integrated Landscape Approach: Closing the Gap between Theory and Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-13, August.
    10. Yingchao Li & Zhiyuan Fan & Zhenhao Li & Xuefang Zhang & Ruyu Du & Minghui Li, 2021. "Exploring Development Trends of Terrestrial Ecosystem Health—A Case Study from China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, December.
    11. Qing Qin & Yuan Huang & Jingru Liu & Dai Chen & Ling Zhang & Jian Qiu & Hongli Tan & Yali Wen, 2019. "The Landscape Patterns of the Giant Panda Protection Area in Sichuan Province and Their Impact on Giant Pandas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-15, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Peng Li & Yuxiao Zhang & Weikun Lu & Min Zhao & Meng Zhu, 2020. "Identification of Priority Conservation Areas for Protected Rivers Based on Ecosystem Integrity and Authenticity: A Case Study of the Qingzhu River, Southwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-23, December.

    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. Wei, Hejie & Fan, Weiguo & Wang, Xuechao & Lu, Nachuan & Dong, Xiaobin & Zhao, Yanan & Ya, Xijia & Zhao, Yifei, 2017. "Integrating supply and social demand in ecosystem services assessment: A review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 15-27.
    2. Drakou, E.G. & Crossman, N.D. & Willemen, L. & Burkhard, B. & Palomo, I. & Maes, J. & Peedell, S., 2015. "A visualization and data-sharing tool for ecosystem service maps: Lessons learnt, challenges and the way forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 134-140.
    3. Jennifer Hodbod & Emma Tebbs & Kristofer Chan & Shubhechchha Sharma, 2019. "Integrating Participatory Methods and Remote Sensing to Enhance Understanding of Ecosystem Service Dynamics Across Scales," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-30, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Lydia Gorn & Janina Kleemann & Christine Fürst, 2018. "Improving the Matrix-Assessment of Ecosystem Services Provision—The Case of Regional Land Use Planning under Climate Change in the Region of Halle, Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-18, June.
    6. Czúcz, Bálint & Arany, Ildikó & Potschin-Young, Marion & Bereczki, Krisztina & Kertész, Miklós & Kiss, Márton & Aszalós, Réka & Haines-Young, Roy, 2018. "Where concepts meet the real world: A systematic review of ecosystem service indicators and their classification using CICES," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 145-157.
    7. Paudyal, Kiran & Baral, Himlal & Burkhard, Benjamin & Bhandari, Santosh P. & Keenan, Rodney J., 2015. "Participatory assessment and mapping of ecosystem services in a data-poor region: Case study of community-managed forests in central Nepal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 81-92.
    8. Burkhard, Benjamin & Müller, Anja & Müller, Felix & Grescho, Volker & Anh, Quynh & Arida, Gertrudo & Bustamante, Jesus Victor (Jappan) & Van Chien, Ho & Heong, K.L. & Escalada, Monina & Marquez, Leo, 2015. "Land cover-based ecosystem service assessment of irrigated rice cropping systems in southeast Asia—An explorative study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 76-87.
    9. Balzan, Mario V & Caruana, Julio & Zammit, Annrica, 2018. "Assessing the capacity and flow of ecosystem services in multifunctional landscapes: Evidence of a rural-urban gradient in a Mediterranean small island state," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 711-725.
    10. González-García, Alberto & Palomo, Ignacio & González, José A. & López, César A. & Montes, Carlos, 2020. "Quantifying spatial supply-demand mismatches in ecosystem services provides insights for land-use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    11. Víctor García-Díez & Marina García-Llorente & José A. González, 2020. "Participatory Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Madrid: Insights for Landscape Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, July.
    12. Cumming, Graeme S. & Maciejewski, Kristine, 2017. "Reconciling community ecology and ecosystem services: Cultural services and benefits from birds in South African National Parks," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 219-227.
    13. Luo, Xiangyu & Jiang, Peng & Yang, Jingyi & Jin, Jing & Yang, Jun, 2021. "Simulating PM2.5 removal in an urban ecosystem based on the social-ecological model framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    14. Adrienne Grêt-Regamey & Bettina Weibel & Kenneth J Bagstad & Marika Ferrari & Davide Geneletti & Hermann Klug & Uta Schirpke & Ulrike Tappeiner, 2014. "On the Effects of Scale for Ecosystem Services Mapping," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-26, December.
    15. 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).
    16. Chen, Wanxu & Chi, Guangqing & Li, Jiangfeng, 2020. "The spatial aspect of ecosystem services balance and its determinants," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    17. Lia Laporta & Tiago Domingos & Cristina Marta-Pedroso, 2021. "Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems Services under the Proposed MAES European Common Framework: Methodological Challenges and Opportunities," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-28, October.
    18. Clements, Hayley S. & Cumming, Graeme S., 2017. "Manager strategies and user demands: Determinants of cultural ecosystem service bundles on private protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 228-237.
    19. Darvill, Rachel & Lindo, Zoë, 2015. "Quantifying and mapping ecosystem service use across stakeholder groups: Implications for conservation with priorities for cultural values," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 153-161.
    20. Gacutan, Jordan & Galparsoro, Ibon & Murillas-Maza, Arantza, 2019. "Towards an understanding of the spatial relationships between natural capital and maritime activities: A Bayesian Belief Network approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).

    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:eee:ecoser:v:26:y:2017:i:pb:p:355-364. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.