IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v6y2017i2p33-d98137.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of Anthromes to Frame Scenario Planning for Landscape-Scale Conservation Decision Making

Author

Listed:
  • Dainee M. Gibson

    (Department of Biology, Furman University, 3300 Poinsett Hwy, Greenville, SC 29613, USA
    Current Address: Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, 921 South 8th Avenue, Pocatello, ID 83209, USA.)

  • John E. Quinn

    (Department of Biology, Furman University, 3300 Poinsett Hwy, Greenville, SC 29613, USA
    Current Address: Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, 921 South 8th Avenue, Pocatello, ID 83209, USA.)

Abstract

Complexities in the rates and patterns of change necessitate the consideration of alternate futures in planning processes. These scenarios, and the inputs and assumptions used to build them, should reflect both ecological and social contexts. Considering the regional landscape as an anthrome, a priori, assumes human needs and institutions have a fundamental role and place in these futures, but that institutions incorporate ecological limits in decision making. As a case study of conservation scenario planning under the anthrome paradigm, we used a suite of InVEST models to develop and explore land use and land cover scenarios and to measure the associated change in biodiversity and ecosystem services in a region where dense settlements are expanding into populated and residential woodland anthromes. While tradeoffs between benefits in alternative futures are unavoidable, we found that distinct conservation opportunities arise within and around the protected areas and in the heterogeneous urban core of the county. Reflecting on the process and subsequent findings, we discuss why anthromes can be a more suitable framing for scenarios used in conservation decision making and land use planning. Specifically, we discuss how starting with anthromes influenced assumptions about inputs and opportunities and the decisions related to the planning for human and natural systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Dainee M. Gibson & John E. Quinn, 2017. "Application of Anthromes to Frame Scenario Planning for Landscape-Scale Conservation Decision Making," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:6:y:2017:i:2:p:33-:d:98137
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/6/2/33/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/6/2/33/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kareiva, Peter & Tallis, Heather & Ricketts, Taylor H. & Daily, Gretchen C. & Polasky, Stephen (ed.), 2011. "Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199589005.
    2. C. Brannon Andersen & R. Kyle Donovan & John E. Quinn, 2015. "Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production (HANPP) in an Agriculturally-Dominated Watershed, Southeastern USA," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-28, June.
    3. Adam J Terando & Jennifer Costanza & Curtis Belyea & Robert R Dunn & Alexa McKerrow & Jaime A Collazo, 2014. "The Southern Megalopolis: Using the Past to Predict the Future of Urban Sprawl in the Southeast U.S," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-8, July.
    4. Stephen Polasky & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Kris Johnson, 2011. "The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 219-242, February.
    5. Sandifer, Paul A. & Sutton-Grier, Ariana E. & Ward, Bethney P., 2015. "Exploring connections among nature, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human health and well-being: Opportunities to enhance health and biodiversity conservation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 1-15.
    6. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Waage, Sissel & Winthrop, Robert, 2013. "A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 27-39.
    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. Di Pirro, E. & Sallustio, L. & Capotorti, G. & Marchetti, M. & Lasserre, B., 2021. "A scenario-based approach to tackle trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and land use pressure in Central Italy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 448(C).
    2. Hyun-Jung Hong & Choong-Ki Kim & Hyun-Woo Lee & Woo-Kyun Lee, 2021. "Conservation, Restoration, and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity Based on Habitat Quality Monitoring: A Case Study on Jeju Island, South Korea (1989–2019)," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Erle C. Ellis & Arthur H.W. Beusen & Kees Klein Goldewijk, 2020. "Anthropogenic Biomes: 10,000 BCE to 2015 CE," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-19, April.
    4. Xiaoliang Han & Peiyi Lv & Sen Zhao & Yan Sun & Shiyu Yan & Minghao Wang & Xiaona Han & Xiuru Wang, 2018. "The Effect of the Gully Land Consolidation Project on Soil Erosion and Crop Production on a Typical Watershed in the Loess Plateau," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Khaleel Muhammed & Aavudai Anandhi & Gang Chen & Kevin Poole, 2021. "Define–Investigate–Estimate–Map (DIEM) Framework for Modeling Habitat Threats," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-30, October.
    6. Brown, Melanie G. & Quinn, John E., 2018. "Zoning does not improve the availability of ecosystem services in urban watersheds. A case study from Upstate South Carolina, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 254-265.

    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. Turner, Katrine Grace & Anderson, Sharolyn & Gonzales-Chang, Mauricio & Costanza, Robert & Courville, Sasha & Dalgaard, Tommy & Dominati, Estelle & Kubiszewski, Ida & Ogilvy, Sue & Porfirio, Luciana &, 2016. "A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 319(C), pages 190-207.
    2. Léa Tardieu, 2017. "The need for integrated spatial assessments in ecosystem service mapping," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 173-200, December.
    3. Jacobs, Sander & Martín-López, Berta & Barton, David N. & Dunford, Robert & Harrison, Paula A. & Kelemen, Eszter & Saarikoski, Heli & Termansen, Mette & García-Llorente, Marina & Gómez-Baggethun, , 2018. "The means determine the end – Pursuing integrated valuation in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 515-528.
    4. Lele, Sharachchandra & Srinivasan, Veena, 2013. "Disaggregated economic impact analysis incorporating ecological and social trade-offs and techno-institutional context: A case from the Western Ghats of India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 98-112.
    5. Mengyao Li & Yong Zhou & Pengnan Xiao & Yang Tian & He Huang & Liang Xiao, 2021. "Evolution of Habitat Quality and Its Topographic Gradient Effect in Northwest Hubei Province from 2000 to 2020 Based on the InVEST Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-25, August.
    6. Paulo A.L.D. Nunes & Pushpam Kumar & Tom Dedeurwaerdere (ed.), 2014. "Handbook on the Economics of Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15058.
    7. Russell, Shaina & Ens, Emilie, 2020. "Connection as Country: Relational values of billabongs in Indigenous northern Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    8. Brown, Melanie G. & Quinn, John E., 2018. "Zoning does not improve the availability of ecosystem services in urban watersheds. A case study from Upstate South Carolina, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 254-265.
    9. Pickard, Brian R. & Daniel, Jessica & Mehaffey, Megan & Jackson, Laura E. & Neale, Anne, 2015. "EnviroAtlas: A new geospatial tool to foster ecosystem services science and resource management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 45-55.
    10. Oosterbroek, Bram & de Kraker, Joop & Huynen, Maud M.T.E. & Martens, Pim, 2016. "Assessing ecosystem impacts on health: A tool review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 237-254.
    11. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    12. Renata Giedych & Gabriela Maksymiuk, 2017. "Specific Features of Parks and Their Impact on Regulation and Cultural Ecosystem Services Provision in Warsaw, Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    13. Forio, Marie Anne Eurie & Villa-Cox, Gonzalo & Van Echelpoel, Wout & Ryckebusch, Helena & Lock, Koen & Spanoghe, Pieter & Deknock, Arne & De Troyer, Niels & Nolivos-Alvarez, Indira & Dominguez-Granda,, 2020. "Bayesian Belief Network models as trade-off tools of ecosystem services in the Guayas River Basin in Ecuador," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    14. Clément Feger & Laurent Mermet & Emily Mckenzie & Bhaskar Vira, 2017. "Improving Decisions with Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Information," Working Papers hal-01930929, HAL.
    15. Davide Geneletti, 2015. "A Conceptual Approach to Promote the Integration of Ecosystem Services in Strategic Environmental Assessment," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1-27, December.
    16. Andrea Früh-Müller & Stefan Hotes & Lutz Breuer & Volkmar Wolters & Thomas Koellner, 2016. "Regional Patterns of Ecosystem Services in Cultural Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-19, June.
    17. Quanfeng Li & Lu Wang & Guoming Du & Bonoua Faye & Yunkai Li & Jicheng Li & Wei Liu & Shijin Qu, 2022. "Dynamic Variation of Ecosystem Services Value under Land Use/Cover Change in the Black Soil Region of Northeastern China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-18, June.
    18. Xichen Che & Liang Jiao & Huijun Qin & Jingjing Wu, 2022. "Impacts of Climate and Land Use/Cover Change on Water Yield Services in the Upper Yellow River Basin in Maqu County," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.
    19. Léa Tardieu & Laetitia Tufféry, 2019. "From supply to demand factors : what are the determinants of attractiveness for outdoor recreation?," Post-Print hal-02883545, HAL.
    20. Ma, Shan & Duggan, Jennifer M. & Eichelberger, Bradley A. & McNally, Brynn W. & Foster, Jeffrey R. & Pepi, Eda & Conte, Marc N. & Daily, Gretchen C. & Ziv, Guy, 2016. "Valuation of ecosystem services to inform management of multiple-use landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 6-18.

    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:gam:jlands:v:6:y:2017:i:2:p:33-:d:98137. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.