IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i10p2948-d233855.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Small-Scale Ecosystem Conservation in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: A Study from Rio Canoas State Park, Southern Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Manoela Sacchis Lopes

    (Programa de Pós-graduação em Sensoriamento Remoto, Centro Estadual de Pesquisas em Sensoriamento Remoto e Meteorologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre 91501-970, Brazil)

  • Bijeesh Kozhikkodan Veettil

    (Department for Management of Science and Technology Development, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
    Faculty of Environment and Labour Safety, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City 758307, Vietnam)

  • Dejanira Luderitz Saldanha

    (Programa de Pós-graduação em Sensoriamento Remoto, Centro Estadual de Pesquisas em Sensoriamento Remoto e Meteorologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre 91501-970, Brazil)

Abstract

The efficiency of the environmental management of a territory largely depends on previous surveys and systematic studies on the main elements and conditions of the physical environment. We applied remote sensing and digital image processing techniques (Principal Component Analysis and supervised classification) to Landsat imagery for analyzing the spatiotemporal land cover changes occurred in the Rio Canoas State Park in Brazil and its surrounding area from 1990 to 2016. Reforested areas around the park with exotic species is a part of the region’s economy and a number of industries depend on it for raw materials. However, it is a matter of concern to avoid contamination with such invasive species, due to the proximity of the Park. From 1990 to 2004, more than 95% of the study area was unchanged and showed minimal distinction in land cover over the 14 years. This was mainly due to the continuous presence of agricultural monocultures around the Park without significant increases (only 3.1% of land cover change during this period). Regarding the interior of the Rio Canoas State Park, from 1990 to 2004, there was no increase in the area of exposed soil. The analysis of the surrounding areas of the park from 2004 to 2016 showed that 5663.78 ha (12.2% of the area) of the land cover has been changed, in most areas, due to reforestation by Pinus sp. Notable changes occurred within the park (established in 2004) between 2004 and 2016—there was a partial regeneration of natural species diversity, a small number of invasive species ( Pinus sp.) and removal of agricultural activities within the park, which contributed a 6.6% (75.45 ha) change in its land cover. We verified that 92.51% (1048.40 ha) of the areas inside the park were unchanged. The results demonstrated that actions were conducted to preserve the natural vegetation cover within the park and to reduce the impacts of anthropogenic activities, including the invasion of exotic species from the surrounding reforested areas into the natural habitat of the park. Given this, our study can aid the environmental management of the Park and its surrounding areas, enabling the monitoring of environmental legislation, the creation of a management plan, and can guide new action plans for the present study area and can be applied to other similar regions.

Suggested Citation

  • Manoela Sacchis Lopes & Bijeesh Kozhikkodan Veettil & Dejanira Luderitz Saldanha, 2019. "Assessment of Small-Scale Ecosystem Conservation in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: A Study from Rio Canoas State Park, Southern Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:10:p:2948-:d:233855
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/10/2948/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/10/2948/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernard, Florence & de Groot, Rudolf S. & Campos, José Joaquín, 2009. "Valuation of tropical forest services and mechanisms to finance their conservation and sustainable use: A case study of Tapantí National Park, Costa Rica," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 174-183, May.
    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. Lijun Mao & Mingshi Li & Wenjuan Shen, 2020. "Remote Sensing Applications for Monitoring Terrestrial Protected Areas: Progress in the Last Decade," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-27, June.
    2. Prudencio García Jiménez & Abel Fernández Ruiz & José Sánchez Sánchez & David Rodríguez de la Cruz, 2020. "Mycological Indicators in Evaluating Conservation Status: The Case of Quercus spp. Dehesas in the Middle-West of the Iberian Peninsula (Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Manoela Sacchis Lopes & Dejanira Lüderitz Saldanha & Bijeesh Kozhikkodan Veettil, 2021. "Object-oriented and fuzzy logic classification methods for mapping reforested areas with exotic species in Rio Canoas State Park—Santa Catarina, Brazil," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7791-7807, May.

    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. Halkos, George E. & Jones, Nikoleta, 2012. "Modeling the effect of social factors on improving biodiversity protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 90-99.
    2. Liu, Peng & Jiang, Shiwei & Zhao, Lianjun & Li, Yunxi & Zhang, Pingping & Zhang, Li, 2017. "What are the benefits of strictly protected nature reserves? Rapid assessment of ecosystem service values in Wanglang Nature Reserve, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 70-78.
    3. Sáenz, Leonardo & Mulligan, Mark & Arjona, Fabio & Gutierrez, Tatiana, 2014. "The role of cloud forest restoration on energy security," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 180-190.
    4. Namhee Kim & Miju Kim & Sangkwon Lee & Chi-Ok Oh, 2023. "Comparing Stakeholders’ Economic Values for the Institution of Payments for Ecosystem Services in Protected Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, July.
    5. Arabatzis, Garyfallos & Grigoroudis, Evangelos, 2010. "Visitors' satisfaction, perceptions and gap analysis: The case of Dadia-Lefkimi-Souflion National Park," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 163-172, March.
    6. Nitanan Koshy Matthew & Ahmad Shuib & Nitya Ganeshwaari Raja Gopal & Goh Ie Zheng, 2022. "Economic Value of Recreation as an Ecosystem Service in Ayer Keroh Recreational Forest, Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-13, April.
    7. Arsić, Sanela & Nikolić, Djordje & Živković, Živan, 2017. "Hybrid SWOT - ANP - FANP model for prioritization strategies of sustainable development of ecotourism in National Park Djerdap, Serbia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 11-26.
    8. Erin C. Pischke & Adam M. Wellstead, 2020. "Reimagining instrument constituencies: the case of conservation policy in Mexico," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 371-388, June.
    9. Ojea, Elena & Martin-Ortega, Julia, 2015. "Understanding the economic value of water ecosystem services from tropical forests: A systematic review for South and Central America," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 97-106.
    10. Voltaire, Louinord, 2017. "Pricing Future Nature Reserves Through Contingent Valuation Data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 66-75.
    11. Hao Li & Xiaohui Yang & Xiao Zhang & Yuyan Liu & Kebin Zhang, 2018. "Estimation of Rural Households’ Willingness to Accept Two PES Programs and Their Service Valuation in the Miyun Reservoir Catchment, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, January.
    12. Yunxiao Bai & Moucheng Liu & Lun Yang, 2021. "Calculation of Ecological Compensation Standards for Arable Land Based on the Value Flow of Support Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    13. Schirpke, Uta & Scolozzi, Rocco & De Marco, Claudio & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2014. "Mapping beneficiaries of ecosystem services flows from Natura 2000 sites," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 170-179.
    14. Halkos, George & Jones, Nikoleta, 2011. "Social factors influencing the decision to pay for the protection of biodiversity: A case study in two national parks of Northern Greece," MPRA Paper 34581, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Ninan, K.N. & Inoue, Makoto, 2013. "Valuing forest ecosystem services: What we know and what we don't," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 137-149.
    16. Fotakis, Dimitris G. & Sidiropoulos, Epameinondas & Myronidis, Dimitriοs & Ioannou, Kostas, 2012. "Spatial genetic algorithm for multi-objective forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 12-19.
    17. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L. & Alló, Maria & Barrio, Melina, 2016. "Ecosystem Services and REDD: Estimating the Benefits of Non-Carbon Services in Worldwide Forests," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 246-261.
    18. López-Mosquera, Natalia & Sánchez, Mercedes, 2013. "Income effects on visitors' decision structure in a suburban natural area," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 102-110.
    19. Espécie, Mariana de Assis & de Carvalho, Pedro Ninô & Pinheiro, Maria Fernanda Bacile & Rosenthal, Vinicius Mesquita & da Silva, Leyla A. Ferreira & Pinheiro, Mariana Rodrigues de Carvalhaes & Espig, , 2019. "Ecosystem services and renewable power generation: A preliminary literature review," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 39-51.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:10:p:2948-:d:233855. 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.