The consequences of four land‐use scenarios for forest ecosystems and the services they provide

Anticipating landscape- to regional-scale impacts of land use on ecosystems and the services they provide is a central challenge for scientists, policymakers, and resource managers. Working with a panel of practitioners and regional experts, we developed and analyzed four plausible but divergent land-use scenarios that depict the future of Massachusetts from 2010 to 2060 to address two questions: (1) “How do the magnitude and spatial distribution of ecosystem service provisioning vary under the different land-use regimes?” and (2) “What are the synergies and trade-offs among direct human uses, ecosystem services, and habitat quality?” Each scenario specifies the detailed prescriptions for the major uses of the forests, including conversion to residential and commercial development, clearing new farmland, shifting silvicultural practices, and designating forests protected from development. We simulated the land-use scenarios and their interactions with anticipated climate change by coupling statistical models of land use to the LANDIS-II landscape model and then evaluated the outcomes in terms of the magnitude and spatial distribution of (1) direct human uses of the landscape (residential and commercial development, agricultural, timber harvest), (2) ecosystem services (carbon storage, flood regulation, nutrient retention), and (3) habitat quality (forest tree species composition, interior forest habitat). Across all scenarios, conflicts occurred between dispersed residential development and the supply of ecosystem services and habitat quality. In all but the scenario that envisioned a significant agricultural expansion, forest growth resulted in net increases in aboveground carbon storage, despite the concomitant forest clearing and harvesting. One scenario, called Forests as Infrastructure, showed the potential for synergies between increased forest harvest volume through the sustainable practices that encouraged the maintenance of economically and ecologically important tree species, and carbon storage. This scenario also showed trade-offs between development density and water quantity and quality at the watershed scale. The process of integrated scenario analysis led to important insights for land managers and policymakers in a populated forested region where there are tensions among development, forest harvesting, and land conservation. More broadly, the results emphasize the need to consider the consequences of contrasting land-use regimes that result from the interactions between human decisions and spatially heterogeneous landscape dynamics.

[1]  Mark E. Borsuk,et al.  Methods for translating narrative scenarios into quantitative assessments of land use change , 2016, Environ. Model. Softw..

[2]  Jonathan R. Thompson,et al.  A LANDIS-II extension for incorporating land use and other disturbances , 2016, Environ. Model. Softw..

[3]  Jonathan R. Thompson,et al.  Timber Harvesting Behaviour in Massachusetts, USA: Does Price Matter to Private Landowners? , 2016, Small-scale Forestry.

[4]  Jonathan R. Thompson,et al.  Land‐use impacts on the quantity and configuration of ecosystem service provisioning in Massachusetts, USA , 2015 .

[5]  Jiangxiao Qiu,et al.  Spatial interactions among ecosystem services in an urbanizing agricultural watershed , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  Grazia Zulian,et al.  Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem service supply, biodiversity, and habitat conservation status in Europe , 2012 .

[7]  Arnim Wiek,et al.  Scenario Studies as a Synthetic and Integrative Research Activity for Long-Term Ecological Research , 2012 .

[8]  D. Foster,et al.  The influence of land use and climate change on forest biomass and composition in Massachusetts, USA. , 2011, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[9]  C. Dormann,et al.  A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead , 2011 .

[10]  Kris A. Johnson,et al.  The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota , 2011 .

[11]  Sara B. Levin,et al.  Factors influencing riverine fish assemblages in Massachusetts , 2011 .

[12]  Laura Schmitt Olabisi,et al.  Using Scenario Visioning and Participatory System Dynamics Modeling to Investigate the Future: Lessons from Minnesota 2050 , 2010 .

[13]  A. Shvidenko,et al.  Predicting global change effects on forest biomass and composition in south-central Siberia. , 2010, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[14]  W. Keeton,et al.  Wildland and Woodlands: A Forest Vision for New England , 2010 .

[15]  John W. Coulston,et al.  The Forest Inventory and Analysis Database Version 4.0: Database Description and Users Manual for Phase 3 , 2010 .

[16]  Garry D. Peterson,et al.  Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[17]  K. Johnson,et al.  Research, part of a Special Feature on Historical and Future Ranges of Variability Is There Potential for the Historical Range of Variability to Guide Conservation Given the Social Range of Variability? , 2009 .

[18]  G. Daily,et al.  Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales , 2009 .

[19]  B. Butler,et al.  Estimating ownerships and parcels of nonindustrial private forestland in Massachusetts , 2008 .

[20]  Claire A. Montgomery,et al.  Where to put things? Spatial land management to sustain biodiversity and economic returns , 2008 .

[21]  Joseph Alcamo,et al.  Chapter Two Towards Guidelines for Environmental Scenario Analysis , 2008 .

[22]  Christopher J. Bellucci Stormwater and Aquatic Life: Making the Connection Between Impervious Cover and Aquatic Life Impairments for TMDL Development in Connecticut Streams , 2007 .

[23]  Elinor Ostrom,et al.  Complexity of Coupled Human and Natural Systems , 2007, Science.

[24]  G. Daily,et al.  Evaluating the Potential for Conservation Development: Biophysical, Economic, and Institutional Perspectives , 2007, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[25]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Ecology for transformation. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[26]  D. Foster,et al.  Forest harvesting and land-use conversion over two decades in Massachusetts , 2006 .

[27]  C. Jaeger,et al.  Science-based stakeholder dialogues: Theories and tools , 2006 .

[28]  S. Klein,et al.  GFDL's CM2 Global Coupled Climate Models. Part I: Formulation and Simulation Characteristics , 2006 .

[29]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Global Consequences of Land Use , 2005, Science.

[30]  D. Mladenoff,et al.  A spatially interactive simulation of climate change, harvesting, wind, and tree species migration and projected changes to forest composition and biomass in northern Wisconsin, USA , 2005 .

[31]  M. D. Anderson,et al.  Ecosystem Management across Ownerships: the Potential for Collision with Antitrust Laws , 2004 .

[32]  Jeffrey R. Deacon,et al.  Estimation of Total Nitrogen and Phosphorus in New England Streams Using Spatially Referenced Regression Models , 2004 .

[33]  Paul C. Sutton,et al.  SPECIAL ISSUE: The Dynamics and Value of Ecosystem Services: Integrating Economic and Ecological Perspectives Evaluating scale dependence of ecosystem service valuation: a comparison of NOAA-AVHRR and Landsat TM datasets , 2002 .

[34]  Alexei G. Sankovski,et al.  Special report on emissions scenarios : a special report of Working group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , 2000 .

[35]  Alexei G. Sankovski,et al.  Special report on emissions scenarios , 2000 .

[36]  Hong S. He,et al.  Spatial simulation of forest succession and timber harvesting using LANDIS. , 2000 .

[37]  R. Forman,et al.  The Ecological Road‐Effect Zone of a Massachusetts (U.S.A.) Suburban Highway , 2000 .

[38]  V. Pope,et al.  The impact of new physical parametrizations in the Hadley Centre climate model: HadAM3 , 2000 .

[39]  W. G. Strand,et al.  Parallel climate model (PCM) control and transient simulations , 2000 .

[40]  R. O'Neill,et al.  The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital , 1997, Nature.

[41]  Thomas Webler,et al.  “Right” Discourse in Citizen Participation: An Evaluative Yardstick , 1995 .