Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Informing landscape planning and design for sustaining ecosystem services from existing spatial patterns and knowledge

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the last decade we have seen an increased emphasis in environmental management and policies aimed at maintaining and restoring multiple ecosystem services at landscape scales. This emphasis has resulted from the recognition that management of specific environmental targets and ecosystem services requires an understanding of landscape processes and the spatial scales that maintain those targets and services. Moreover, we have become increasingly aware of the influence of broad-scale drivers such as climate change on landscape processes and the ecosystem services they support. Studies and assessments on the relative success of environmental policies and landscape designs in maintaining landscape processes and ecosystem services is mostly lacking. This likely reflects the relatively high cost of maintaining a commitment to implement and maintain monitoring programs that document responses of landscape processes and ecosystem services to different landscape policies and designs. However, we argue that there is considerable variation in natural and human-caused landscape pattern at local to continental scales and that this variation may facilitate analyses of how environmental targets and ecosystem services have responded to such patterns. Moreover, wall-to-wall spatial data on land cover and land use at national scales may permit characterization and mapping of different landscape pattern gradients. We discuss four broad and interrelated focus areas that should enhance our understanding of how landscape pattern influences ecosystem services: (1) characterizing and mapping landscape pattern gradients; (2) quantifying relationships between landscape patterns and environmental targets and ecosystem services, (3) evaluating landscape patterns with regards to multiple ecosystem services, and (4) applying adaptive management concepts to improve the effectiveness of specific landscape designs in sustaining ecosystem services. We discuss opportunities as well as challenges in each of these four areas. We believe that this agenda could lead to spatially explicit solutions in managing a range of environmental targets and ecosystem services. Spatially explicit options are critical in managing and protecting landscapes, especially given that communities and organizations are often limited in their capacity to make changes at landscape scales. The issues and potential solutions discussed in this paper expand upon the call by Nassauer and Opdam (Landscape Ecol 23:633–644, 2008) to include design as a fundamental element in landscape ecology research by evaluating natural and human-caused (planned or designed) landscape patterns and their influence on ecosystem services. It also expands upon the idea of “learning by doing” to include “learning from what has already been done.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen CD, Macalady AK, Chenchouni H, Bachelet D, McDowell N, Vennetier M, Kizberger T, Rigling A, Breshears DD, Hogg EH, Gonzalez P, Fensham R, Zhang Z, Castro J, Demidova N, Lim JH, Allard G, Running SW, Semerci A, Cobb N (2010) A global overview of drought and heat-induced tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. For Ecol Manag 259:660–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andren H (1994) Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71:355–3366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ator SW, Olsen AR, Pitchford AM, Denver JM (2003) Application of a multipurpose unequal probability stream survey in the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain. J Am Water Res Assoc 39:873–885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austen DJ (2011) Landscape conservation cooperatives: a science-based network in support of conservation. Wildlife Prof (Fall), pp 32–37

  • Baker JP, Hulse DW, Gregory SV, White D, Van Sickle J, Berger PA, Dole D, Schumaker NH (2004) Alternative futures for the Willamette River Basin, Oregon. Ecol Appl 14:313–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker ME, Weller DE, Jordan TE (2006) Improved methods for quantifying potential nutrient interception by riparian buffers. Landscape Ecol 21:1327–1345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barker LS, Felton GK, Russek-Cohen E (2006) Use of Maryland biological stream survey data to determine effects of agricultural riparian buffers on measures of biological stream health. Environ Monit Assess 117:1–19

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baron JS, Gunderson L, Allen CD, Fleishman E, McKenzie D, Meyerson LA, Oropeza J, Stephenson N (2009) Options for national parks and reserves for adapting to climate change. Environ Manag 44:1033–1042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartholome E, Belward AS (2005) GLC2000: a new approach to global land cover mapping from Earth observation data. Int J Remote Sens 26:1959–1977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baudry J, Burel F, Aviron S, Martin M, Ouin A, Pain G, Thenail C (2003) Temporal variability of connectivity in agricultural landscapes: do farming activities help? Landscape Ecol 18:303–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellamy PH, Loveland PJ, Bradley RI, Lark RM, Kirk GJD (2005) Carbon losses from all soils across England and Wales 1978–2003. Nature 437:245–248

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Benayas JMR, Newton AC, Diaz A, Bullock JM (2009) Enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: a meta-analysis. Science 325:1121–1124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bernhardt ES, Palmer MA, Allan JD, Alexander G, Barnas K, Brooks S, Carr J et al (2005) Synthesizing U.S. river restoration efforts. Science 308:636–637

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Betriel GD, Mohamed YA, van Griensven A, Srinivasan R (2011) Sediment management modeling in the Blue Nile Basin using SWAT model. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 15:807–818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair RB, Launer AE (1997) Butterfly diversity and human land use: species assemblages along an urban gradient. Biol Conserv 80:113–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolund P, Hunhammar S (1999) Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol Econ 29:293–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bormann BT, Haynes RW, Martin JR (2007) Adaptive management of forest ecosystems: did some rubber hit the road? Bioscience 57:186–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boumans RMJ, Costanza R, Farley J, Wilson MA, Rotmans J, Villa F, Portela R, Grasso M (2002) Modeling the dynamics of the integrated earth system and the value of global ecosystem services using the GUMBO model. Special issue: the dynamics and value of ecosystem services: integrating economic and ecological perspectives. Ecol Econ 41:529–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunnell (2006) Indicators for sustaining biological diversity in Canada’s most controversial forest type—coastal temperature rainforest. Ecol Indic 8:149–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgman MA, Lindenmeyer DB, Elith J (2005) Managing landscapes for conservation under uncertainty. Ecology 86:2007–2017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busch G (2006) Future European agricultural landscape—what can we learn from existing quantitative land use scenario studies? Agr EcosystEnviron 114:121–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield HS, Malmstrom CM (2006) Experimental use of remote sensing by private range managers and its influence on management decisions. Range Ecol Manag 59:541–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle DM, Wolock DM, Meador MR (2010) Alternation of streamflow magnitudes and potential ecological consequences: a multiregional assessment. Front Ecol Environ 9:264–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter DeFries R, Dietz T, Mooney HA, Polasky S, Reid WV, Scholes RJ (2005) Millennium ecosystem assessment: research needs. Science 314:257–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr MH, Hoctor TD, Goodison C, Zwick PD, Green J, Hernandez P, McCain C, Teisinger J, Whitney K (2002) Final report: Southeastern ecological framework. University of Florida, Gainsville

  • Cifaldi RL, Allan JD, Duh JD, Brown DG (2004) Spatial patterns in land cover of exurbanizing watersheds in southeastern Michigan. Landsc Urban Plan 66:107–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R (2008) Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biol Conserv 141:350–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coulon A, Cooson JF, Angibault JM, Cargnelutti B, Galan M, Morellet N, Petit E, Aulagnier S, Hewison AJM (2004) Landscape connectivity influences gene flow in roe deer population inhabitating a fragmented landscape: an individual-based approach. Mol Ecol 13:2841–2850

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cuffney TF, Brighbill RA, May JT, Waite IR (2010) Responses of benthic macroinvertebrates to environmental changes associated with urbanization in nine metropolitan areas of the conterminous United States. Ecol Appl 20:1384–1401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cushman SA, McGarigal K (2004) Hierarchical analysis of forest bird species-environment relationships in the Oregon coast range. Ecol Appl 14:1090–1105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cushman SA, McKelvey KS (2010) Data on distribution and abundance: monitoring for research and management. In: Cushman SA, Huettman F (eds) Spatial complexity, informatics and wildlife conservation. Springer, Tokyo, pp 111–130

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cushman SA, McKenzie DA, Peterson DL, Littell J, McKelvey KS (2007) Research agenda for integrated landscape modeling. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-194

  • Cushman SA, Shirk A, Landguth EL (2012) Separating the effects of habitat area, fragmentation and matrix resistance on genetic differentiation in complex landscapes. Landscape Ecol 27:369–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damschen EI, Haddad NM, Orrock JL, Tewksbury JJ, Levey DJ (2006) Corridors increase plant species richness at large scales. Science 313:1284–1286

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davies KW, Steven PL, Dustin JD, Davis DB, Madsen MD, Daniel ZL, Bates JD (2010) Estimating western juniper cover with NAIP imagery and evaluating the relationships between potential cover and environmental variables. Range Ecol Manage 63:630–637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Grott R (2006) Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable, multi-functional landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 75:175–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decout S, Manuel S, Miaud C, Luque S (2012) Integrative approach for landscape-based graph connectivity analysis: a case study with the common frog (Rana temporaria) in human-dominated landscapes. Landscape Ecol 27:267–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon JD, Oli MK, Wooten MC, Eason TH, McCowins JW, Paetkau D (2006) Effectiveness of a regional corridor in connecting two Florida black beer populations. Conserv Biol 20:155–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • EEA (2004) Impacts of Europe’s changing climate—an indicator-based assessment. EEA Report, No. 2/2004, Copenhagen European Environment Agency

  • Egoh B, Rouget M, Reyers B, Knight AT, Cowling RM, van Jaarsveld AS, Welze A (2007) Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: a review. Ecol Econ 63:714–721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabos JG, Ryan RL (2004) International Greenway planning: an introduction. Landsc Urban Plan 68:143–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 34:487–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Failing E, Horn G, Higgens P (2004) Using expert judgment and stakeholder values to evaluate adaptive management options. Ecol Soc 9:13

    Google Scholar 

  • Feld CK, da Silva PM, Sousa JP, de Bello F, Bugter R, Grandin U, Hering D, Lavorel S, Mountford O, Pardo I, Partel M, Rombke J, Sandin L, Jones KB, Harrison P (2009) Indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services: a synthesis across ecosystems and spatial scales. Oikos 118:1862–1871

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng M, Liu S, Euliss NH Jr, Young C, Mushet DM (2011) Prototyping an online wetland ecosystem services model using open model sharing standards. Environ Model Softw 26:458–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feranec J, Hazeu G, Christensen S, Jaffrain G (2007) Corine land cover change detection in Europe (case studies of the Netherlands and Slovakia). Land Use Policy 24:234–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman E, Blockstein DE, Hall JA, Mascia MB, Rudd MA, Scott JM, Sutherland WJ, Bartuska AM, Brown AG, Christen CA, Clement JP, DellaSala D, Duke CS, Eaton M, Fiske SJ, Gosnell H, Haney JC, Hutchins M, Klein ML, Marqusee J, Noon BR, Nordgren JR, Orbuch PM, Powell J, Quarles SP, Saterson KA, Savitt CC, Stein BA, Webster MS, Vedder A (2011) Top 40 priorities for science to inform US conservation and management policy. Bioscience 61:290–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser RH, Olthof I, Carrière M, Deschamps A, Pouliot D (2011) Detecting long-term changes to vegetation in northern Canada using the Landsat satellite image archive. Environ Res Lett 6:045502

    Google Scholar 

  • Füreder L, Waldner T, Ulrich A, Renner K, Streifeneder T, Heinrichs AK, Künzl M, Plassmann G, Sedy K, Walzer C (2011) Policy recommendations. Econnect Program, STUDIA Universitätsverlag, Herzog-Siegmund-Ufer 15, Innsbruck

  • Gardner RH, Urban DL (2007) Neutral models for testing landscape hypotheses. Landscape Ecol 22:15–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garroway CJ, Bowman J, Carr D, Wilson PJ (2008) Applications of graph theory to landscape genetics. Evol Appl 1:620–630

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesch D, Oimoen M, Greenlee S, Nelson C, Steuck M, Tyler D (2002) The national elevation dataset. Photogr Eng Remote Sens 68:5–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Giri C, Defourny P, Shrestha S (2003) Land cover characterization and mapping of continental Southeast Asia using multi-resolution satellite sensor data. Int J Remote Sens 24:4181–4196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giri C, Ochieng E, Tieszen LL, Zhu Z, Singh A, Loveland T, Masek J, Duke N (2011) Status and distribution of mangrove forests of the world using earth observation satellite data. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 20:154–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grashof-Bokdam CJ, Chardon JP, Vos CC, Foppen RPB, Wallis DeVries M, van der Veen M, Meeuwsen HAM (2009) The synergistic effect of combining woodlands and green veining for biodiversity. Landscape Ecol 24:1105–1121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimm NB, Foster D, Groffman P, Grove JM, Hopkinson CS, Nadelhoffer KJ, Pataki DE, Peters DPC (2008) The changing landscape: ecosystem responses to urbanization and pollution across climatic and social gradients. Front Ecol Environ 6:264–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson EJ, Gardner RH (1996) The effect of landscape heterogeneity on the probability of patch colonization. Ecology 77:94–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddad NM, Bowne DR, Cunningham A, Danielson BJ, Levey DJ, Sargent S, Spira T (2003) Corridor use by diverse taxa. Ecology 84:609–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins CP (2006) Quantifying biological integrity by taxonomic completeness: its utility in regional and global assessments. Ecol Appl 16:1277–1294

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herrick JE, Lessard VC, Spaeth KE, Shave PL, Dayton RS, Pyke DA, Jolley L, Goebel J (2010) National ecosystem assessments supported by scientific and local knowledge. Front Ecol Environ 8:403–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzkaemper A, Lausch A, Seppelt R (2006) Optimizing landscape configuration to enhance habitat suitability for species with contrasting habitat requirements. Ecol Model 198:277–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honnay O, Piessens K, Van Landuyt W, Hermy M, Gulinck H (2003) Satellite based land use and landscape complexity indices as predictors for regional plant species diversity. Landsc Urban Plan 63:241–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horskins K, Mather PB, Wilson JC (2006) Corridors and connectivity: when use and function do not equate. Landscape Ecol 21:641–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houghton RA (1994) The worldwide extent of land-use change. Bioscience 4:305–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger JAG, Madrinan LF (2011) Landscape fragmentation in Europe. Joint EEA-FOEN report, European Environmental Agency, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, ISSN 1725-9177. doi:10.2800/78322

  • Johnson GW, Bagstad KJ, Snapp R, Villa F (2010) Service path attribution networks (SPANs): spatially quantifying the flow of ecosystem services from landscapes to people. Lect Notes Comput Sci 6016:238–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson GW, Bagstad KJ, Snapp R, Villa F (2012) Service path attribution networks (SPANs): a network flow approach to ecosystem service assessment. Int J Agric Environ Inf Syst 3:54–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones KB, Neale AC, Nash MS, Van Remotel RD, Wickham JD, Riitters KH, O’Neill RV (2001) Predicting nutrient and sediment loadings to streams from landscape metrics: a multiple watershed study from the United States Mid-Atlantic Region. Landscape Ecol 16:301–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones KB, Neale AC, Wade TG, Cross CL, Wickham JD, Nash MS, Edmonds CM, Riitters KH, O’Neill RV, Smith ER, Van Remortel R (2006) Multiscale relationships between landscape characteristics and nitrogen concentrations in streams. In: Wu J, Jones KB, Li H, Loucks OL (eds) Scaling and Uncertainty Analysis in Ecology: Methods and Applications. Springer, The Netherlands, pp 205–224

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones KB, Slonecker ET, Nash MS, Neale AC, Wade TC, Hamann S (2010a) Riparian habitat changes across the continental United States (1972–2003) and potential implications for sustaining ecosystem services. Landscape Ecol 25:1261–1275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones KB, Bogena H, Vereecken H, Weltzin JF (2010b) Design and importance of multi-tiered ecological monitoring networks. In: Müller F et al (eds) Long-Term Ecological Research: Between Practice and Theory. Springer, The Netherlands, pp 355–374

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kie JG, Bowyer T, Nicholson MC, Boroski BB, Lofts ER (2002) Landscape heterogeneity at differing scales: effects on spatial distribution of mule deer. Ecology 83:530–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kienast F, Bolliger J, Potschin M, de Groot RS, Verburg PH, Heller I, Wascher D, Haines-Young R (2009) Assessing landscape functions with broad-scale environmental data: insights gained from a prototype development for Europe. Environ Manag 44:1099–1120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight KW, Schultz RC, Mabry CM, Isenhart TM (2010) Ability of remnant riparian forests, with and without grass filters, to buffer concentrated surface runoff. J Am Water Res Assoc 46:311–322

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kong F, Nakagoshi N (2006) Spatial-temporal gradient analysis of urban green spaces in Jinan, China. Landsc Urban Plan 78:147–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landguth EL, Cushman SA (2010) CDPOP: a spatially explicit cost distance population genetics program. Mol Ecol Resour 10:156–161

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lange R, Diekotter T, Schiffmann LA, Wolters V, Durka W (2012) Matrix quality and habitat configuration interactively determine functional connectivity in a widespread bush cricket at a small spatial scale. Landscape Ecol 27:381–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lees AC, Peres CA (2008) Conservation value of remnant riparian forests corridors of varying quality for Amazonian birds and mammals. Conserv Biol 22:439–449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Levick LR, Semmens DJ, Guertin DP, Burns IS, Scott SN, Unkrich CL, Goodrich DC (2004) Adding Global Soils Data to the Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment Tool (AGWA). In: Proceedings 2nd SAHRA, (Sustainability of Semi-Arid Hydrology and Riparian Areas), University of Arizona, international symposium on transboundary water management, 16–19 November 2004, Tucson, AZ, pp 1–9

  • Lindenmayer et al (2008) A checklist for ecological management of landscapes for conservation. Ecol Lett 11:78–91

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liu M, Tian H (2010) China’s land cover and land use change from 1700 to 2005: Estimations from high-resolution satellite data and historical archives. Glob Biogeochem CY 24:GB3003. doi:10.1029/2009GB003687

  • Liu J, Liu M, Tian HQ, Zhuang D, Zhang Z, Zhang W, Tang X, Deng X (2005) Spatial and temporal patterns of China’s cropland during 1990–2000: an analysis based on Landsat TM data. Remote Sens Environ 98:442–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowrance R, Todd R, Fail J Jr, Hendrickson O Jr, Lenard R, Asmussen L (1984) Riparian forests as nutrient filters in agricultural watersheds. Bioscience 34:374–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luck M, Wu J (2002) A gradient analysis of urban landscape pattern: a case study from the Phoenix metropolitan region, Arizona, USA. Landscape Ecol 17:327–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig JA, Wilcox BP, Breshears DD, Tongway DJ, Imeson AC (2005) Vegetation patches and runoff-erosion as interacting ecohydrological processes in semiarid landscapes. Ecology 86:288–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luque S, Saura S, Fortin M-J (2012) Landscape connectivity analysis for conservation: insights from combining new methods with ecological and genetic data. Landscape Ecol 27:153–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manel S, Schwartz MK, Luikart G, Taberlet P (2003) Landscape genetics: combining landscape ecology and population genetics. Trends Ecol Evol 18:189–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer PM, Todd AH, Okay JA, Dwire KA (2010) Introduction to the featured collection on riparian ecosystems and buffers. J Am Water Res Assoc 2:207–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy JJ, Canziani OF, Leary NA, Dokken DJ, White KS (2001) Climate change (2001) Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, IPCC Third Assessment Report

    Google Scholar 

  • McCook LJ et al (2010) Adaptive management of the Great Barrier Reef: a globally significant demonstration of the benefits of networks of marine reserves. PNAS 107:18278–18285

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell MJ, Pickett STA, Groffman P, Bohlen P, Pouyat RV, Zipperer WC, Parmelee RW, Carreior MM, Medley K (2001) Ecosystem processes along an urban-to-rural gradient. Urban Ecosyst 1:21–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K, Cushman S (2002) Comparative evaluation of experimental approaches to the study of habitat fragmentation. Ecol Appl 12:335–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McRae BH, Dickson BG, Keitt TH, Shah VB (2008) Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation. Ecology 89:2712–2734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mech SG, Hallett JG (2001) Evaluating the effectiveness of corridors: a genetic approach. Conserv Biol 15:467–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metzger M, Schroter D, Leemans R, Cramer W (2008) A spatially explicit and quantitative vulnerability assessment of ecosystem service change in Europe. Reg Environ Change 8:91–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montanarella L, Jones RJA, Hiederer R (2006) The distribution of peatland in Europe. Mires Peat 1:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore CT, Conroy MJ (2006) Optimal regeneration planning for old-growth forests: addressing scientific uncertainty in endangered species recovery through adaptive management. For Sci 52:155–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy HT, Lovett-Doust J (2004) Context and connectivity in plant metapopulations and landscape mosaics: does the matrix matter? Oikos 105:3–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musacchio LR (2009a) The scientific basis for the design of landscape sustainability: a conceptual framework for translational landscape research and practice of designed landscapes and the six Es of landscape sustainability. Landscape Ecol 24:993–1013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musacchio LR (2009b) The ecology and culture of landscape sustainability: emerging knowledge and innovation in landscape research and practice. Landscape Ecol 24:989–992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naidoo R, Ricketts TH (2006) Mapping the economic costs and benefits of conservation. PLoS Biol 4(11):e360. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040360

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Naidoo R, Balmford A, Costanza R, Fisher B, Green RE, Lehner B, Malcolm TR, Ricketts TH (2008) Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. PNAS 105(28):9495–9500

    Google Scholar 

  • Naiman RJ, Decamps H, Pollock M (1993) The role of riparian corridors in maintaining regional biodiversity. Ecol Appl 3:209–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nassauer JI, Opdam P (2008) Design in science: extending the landscape ecology paradigm. Landscape Ecol 23:633–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neel MC, McGarigal K, Cushman SA (2004) Behavior of class-level landscape metrics across gradients of class aggregation and area. Landscape Ecol 19:435–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson E, Mendozal G, Regetz J, Polasky S, Tallis H, Cameron DR, Chan KMA, Daily GD, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Lonsdorf E, Naidoo R, Ricketts TH, Shaw MB (2009) Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front Ecol Environ 7:4–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Runge MC, Johnson FA, Williams BK (2007) Adaptive harvest management of North American waterfowl populations: a brief history and future prospects. J Ornithol 148(Suppl 2):S343–S349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyakatawa EZ, Reddy KC, Lemunyon JL (2001) Predicting soil erosion in conservation tillage cotton production systems using the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). Soil Tillage Res 57:213–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell TJ, Jackson LE, Brooks RP (2000) Bird guilds as indicators of ecological condition in the central Appalachians. Ecol Appl 10:1706–1721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor RJ et al (1996) Spatial partitioning of environmental correlates of avian biodiversity in the conterminous United States. Biodiver Lett 3:97–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell TK, Galat DL (2008) Evaluating success criteria and project monitoring in river enhancement within an adaptive management framework. Environ Manage 41:90–105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Farrell PJ, Reyers B, Le Maitre DC, Milton SJ, Egoh B, Maherry A, Colvin C, Atkinson D, De Lange W, Blignaut JN, Cowling RM (2010) Multi-functional landscapes in semi arid environments: implications for biodiversity and ecosystem services. Landscape Ecol 25:1231–1246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ojima DS, Galvin KA, Turner BL II (1994) The global impact of land-use change. Bioscience 44:300–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oneal AS, Rotenberry JT (2009) Scale-dependent habitat relations of birds in riparian corridors in an urbanizing landscape. Landscape Urban Plan 92:264–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P (2010) Learning science from practice. Landscape Ecol 25:821–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P, Wascher D (2004) Climate changes meets habitat fragmentation: linking landscape and biogeographical scale levels in research and conservation. Biol Conserv 117:285–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P, Verboom J, Pouwels R (2003) Landscape cohesion: an index for the conservation potential of landscapes for biodiversity. Landscape Ecol 18:113–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P, Steingrover E, Van Rooij S (2006) Ecological networks: a spatial concept for multi-actor planning of sustainable landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 75:322–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PAD-US (2009) A map for the future: creating the next generation of protected area inventories in the United States. Report of the Protected Areas Partnership

  • Parr TW, Siera ARJ, Battarbeeb RW, Mackayb A, Burgessc J (2003) Detecting environmental change: science and society—perspectives on long-term research and monitoring in the 21st century. Sci Total Environ 310:1–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson DM, Gorman JT (2010) Exploring the relevance of a landscape ecological paradigm for sustainable landscapes and livelihoods: a case-application from the Northern Territory Australia. Landscape Ecol 25:1169–1183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson DM, McAlpine CA (2010) Landscape ecology: an integrated science for sustainability in a changing world. Landscape Ecol 25:1151–1154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters DPC, Groffman PM, Nadelhoffer KJ, Grim NB, Collins SL, Michener WK, Huston MA (2008) Living in an increasingly connected world: a framework for continental-scale environmental science. Front Ecol Environ 6:229–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potschin M, Haines-Young R (2006) ‘Rio ?10’, sustainability science and landscape ecology. Landsc Urban Plan 75:162–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricketts TH (2001) The matrix matters: effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am Nat 158:87–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Riitters KH, Vogt P, Soille P, Kozak J, Estreguil C (2009) Neutral model analysis of landscape patterns from mathematical morphology. Landscape Ecol 22:1033–1043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan JG, McAlpine CA, Ludwig JA (2010) Integrated vegetation designs for enhancing water retention and recycling in agroecosystems. Landscape Ecol 25:1277–1288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagarin R (2009) In support of observational studies. Front Ecol Environ 8:379–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagarin R, Pauchard A (2010) Observational approaches in ecology open new ground in a changing world. Front Ecol Environ 5:296

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauer JR, Fallon JE, Johnson R (2003) Use of North American Breeding Bird Survey data to estimate population change for bird conservation regions. J Wildl Manag 67:372–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumaker NH (1996) Using landscape indices to predict habitat connectivity. Ecology 77:1210–1225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shea K, Possingham HP, Murdoch WW, Roush R (2002) Active adaptive management in insect pest and weed control: intervention with a plan for learning. Ecol Appl 12:927–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short Bull RA, Cushman SA, Mace R, Chilton T, Kendall KC, Landguth EL, Schwartz MC, Kelvey K, Allenddorf FW, Luikart G (2011) Why replication is important in landscape genetics: American black bear in the Rocky Mountains. Mol Evol 20:1092–1107

    Google Scholar 

  • Spackman SC, Hughes JW (1995) Assessment of minimum stream corridor width for biological conservation: species richness and distribution along mid-order streams in Vermont, USA. Biol Conserv 71:325–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steffan-Dewenter I (2003) Importance of habitat area and landscape context for species richness of bees and wasps in fragmented orchard meadows. Conserv Biol 17:1036–1044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steingrover EG, Geertsema W, Wingerden WKRE (2010) Designing agricultural landscapes for natural pest control: a transdisciplinary approach in the Hoeksche Waard (The Netherlands). Landscape Ecol 25:825–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stirling K, Derocher AE (2007) Melting under pressure: the real scoop on climate warming and polar bears. Wildl Prof (Fall), pp 24–27

  • Storey RG, Cowley DR (1997) Recovery of three New Zealand rural streams as they pass through native forest remnants. Hydrobiologia 353:63–76

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney BW, Bott TL, Jackson JK, Kaplan LA, Newbold JD, Standley LJ, Horwitz RJ, Hession WC (2004) Riparian deforestation, stream narrowing, and loss of stream ecosystem services. PNAS 101:14132–14137

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Termorshuizen JW, Opdam P (2009) Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecol 24:1037–1052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theobald DM, Romme WH (2007) Expansion of the US wildland–urban interface. Landsc Urban Plan 88:340–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theobald DM, Reed SE, Fields K, Soule M (2012) Connecting natural landscapes using a landscape permeability model to prioritize conservation activities in the US. Conserv Lett 5:123–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thuiller W, Araujo MB, Lavorel S (2004) Do we need land-cover data to model species distributions in Europe? J Biogeogr 31:353–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Troy A, Wilson MA (2006) Mapping ecosystem services: practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer. Ecol Econ 60:435–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tubelis D, Lindenmayer DB, Cowling A (2004) Novel patch-matrix interactions: patch width influences matrix use by birds. Oikos 107:634–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG (1989) Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 20:171–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG (2005) Landscape Ecology: what is the state of the science? Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:319–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG, Crow TR, Liu J et al (2002) Bridging the gap between landscape ecology and nature resource management. In: Liu J, Taylor WW (eds) Integrating landscape ecology into natural resource management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 433–460

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Urban D, Keitt T (2001) Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology 82:1205–1218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Sickle J, Hawkins CP, Larsen DP, Herlihy AT (2005) A null model for the expected macroinvertebrate assemblage in streams. J N Am Benthol Soc 24:178–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verboom J, Schippers P, Cormont A, Sterk M, Vos CC, Opdam PFM (2010) Population dynamics under increasing environmental variability: implications of climate change for ecological network design criteria. Landscape Ecol 25:1289–1298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vernier PR, Preston MI, Bunnell FL, Tyrrel A (2009) Adaptive monitoring framework for warblers at risk in northeastern British Columbia: using models and expert opinion to refine monitoring. Wildl Afield 6:3–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogelmann JE, Howard SM, Yang L, Larson C, Wylie BK, Van Driel JN (2001) Completion of the 1990’s National Land Cover Data Set for the conterminous United States. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 67:650–662

    Google Scholar 

  • Voinov A, Costanza R, Boumans RMJ, Maxwell T, Voinov H (2004) Patuxent landscape model: integrated modeling of a watershed. In: Costanza R, Voinov A (eds) Landscape simulation modeling. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 197–232

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Walters CJ (1986) Adaptive management of renewable resources. MacMillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters CJ, Holling CS (1990) Large-scale management experiments and learning by doing. Ecology 71:2060–2068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westerling AL, Hidalgo HG, Cayan DR, Swetnam TW (2006) Warming and earlier spring increases western U.S. forest wildlife activity. Science 313:940–943

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Western Governors’ Association (2008) Wildlife Corridors. Draft Science Committee Report to the Western Governors—May 19, 2008 Wildlife Corridors Initiative

  • Wickham JD, Wade TG (2002) Watershed level risk assessment of nitrogen and phosphorous export. Comput Electron Agric 37:15–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickham JD, O’Neill RV, Riitters KH, Smith ER, Wade TG, Jones KB (2002) Geographic targeting of increases in nutrient export due to future urbanization. Ecol Appl 12:93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickham JD, Riitters KH, Wade TG, Homer C (2008) Temporal change in fragmentation of continental US forests. Landscape Ecol 23:891–898

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickham JD, Riitters KH, Wade TG, Vogt P (2010) A national assessment of green infrastructure and change for the conterminous United States using morphological image processing. Landsc Urban Plan 94:186–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickham JD, Wade TG, Riitters KH (2011) An environmental assessment of United States drinking water watersheds. Landscape Ecol 26:605–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA (2009) Landscape ecology as a foundation for sustainable conservation. Landscape Ecol 24:1053–1065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA, Schooley RL, Weeks RD Jr (1997) Patchy landscapes and animal movements: do beetles percolate? Oikos 78:257–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA, Seavy NE, Jongsomjit (2011) Protected areas in climate space: what will the future bring? Biol Conserv 144:2119–2125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willemen L, Verburg PH, Hein L, van Mensvoort MEF (2008) Spatial characterization of landscape functions. Landsc Urban Plan 88:34–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams BK (2012) Reducing uncertainty about objective functions in adaptive management. Ecol Model 225:61–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams BK, Brown ED (2012) Adaptive management: The U.S. Department of the Interior Applications Guide. Adaptive Management Working Group, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC, 120 pp

  • With KA, Pavuk DM (2011) Habitat area trumps fragmentation effects on arthropods in an experimental landscape system. Landscape Ecol 26:1035–1048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J (2010) Urban sustainability: an inevitable goal of landscape research. Landscape Ecol 25:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Hobbs R (2002) Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: an idiosyncratic synthesis. Landscape Ecol 17:355–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Hobbs R (2007) Landscape ecology: the state-of-the-science. In: Wu J, Hobbs R (eds) Key topics in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 271–287

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wylie BK, Zhang L, Bliss N, Ji L, Tieszen LL, Jolly WM (2009) Integrating modelling and remote sensing to identify ecosystem performance anomalies in the boreal forest, Yukon River Basin, Alaska. Int J Digit Earth 1:196–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xian G, Homer C, Fry J (2009) Updating the 2001 National Land Cover Database land cover classification to 2006 by using Landsat imagery change detection methods. Remote Sens Environ 113:1133–1147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young SS, Harris R (2005) Changing patterns of global scale vegetation photosynthesis, 1982–1999. Int J Remote Sens 26:4537–4563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang C, Tian HQ, Pan S, Lockaby G, Schilling EB, Stanturf J (2008) Effects of forest regrowth and urbanization on ecosystem carbon storage in a rural-urban gradient in the Southeast US. Ecosystems 11:1211–1222

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the US Geological Survey’s National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center for support of the landscape sciences that led to many of the ideas highlighted in this paper. We also thank Samuel A. Cushman of the US Forest Service and Jeffrey W. Hollister of the US Environmental Protection Agency for reviews of earlier versions of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Desert Research Institute, 755 East Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, NV, 89119, USA

    K. Bruce Jones

  2. Landscape Ecology Laboratory, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences and Technologies, University of Salento, Ecotekne (Campus), Strada per Monteroni, 73100, Lecce, Italy

    Giovanni Zurlini, Irene Petrosillo & Nicola Zaccarelli

  3. Landscape Ecology Group WSL/ETHZ, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL, 03, Birmensdorf, Switzerland

    Felix Kienast

  4. US Geological Survey, Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, Logan, UT, 84322, USA

    Thomas Edwards

  5. US Environmental Protection Agency, Landscape Ecology Branch (E243-05), Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, USA

    Timothy G. Wade

  6. College of Natural and Agriculural Science, University of California, Riverside, 4133 Batchelor Hall, Keen Hall, Riverside, CA, 92521, USA

    Bai-lian Li

Authors
  1. K. Bruce Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giovanni Zurlini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Felix Kienast
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Irene Petrosillo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thomas Edwards
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Timothy G. Wade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Bai-lian Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Nicola Zaccarelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Bruce Jones.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jones, K.B., Zurlini, G., Kienast, F. et al. Informing landscape planning and design for sustaining ecosystem services from existing spatial patterns and knowledge. Landscape Ecol 28, 1175–1192 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-012-9794-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-012-9794-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation