Impact of Land Use Intensity on Ecosystem Services: An Example from the Agro-Pastoral Ecotone of Central Inner Mongolia

Land use intensity is an important indicator of human activities, so we quantified the land use intensity and five ecosystem services (soil conservation, water conservation, carbon storage, net primary productivity (NPP), and crop production) in 13 subbasins of the Tabu River Basin in an agro-pastoral ecotone in central Inner Mongolia. Furthermore, we analyzed the relationships among ecosystem services and the responses of the services to the impact of land use intensity. The primary conclusions were as follows: (1) All five ecosystem services gradually diminished from the upper to the lower reaches of the Tabu River Basin; (2) Water conservation exhibited a trade-off relationship with soil conservation, NPP, and crop production, but it exhibited a synergistic relationship with carbon storage. There were also synergistic relationships between soil conservation, carbon storage, NPP, and crop production; (3) As land use intensity increased, soil conservation, NPP and crop production monotonically increased. In contrast, water conservation exhibited a monotonically decreasing trend, and carbon storage followed a unimodal curve; (4) In this region, suitable ecosystem services were sustained at a land use intensity of approximately 3.95.

[1]  M. Grasso.  Ecological–economic model for optimal mangrove trade off between forestry and fishery production: comparing a dynamic optimization and a simulation model , 1998 .

[2]  T. Ponsioen,et al.  Calculating land use change in carbon footprints of agricultural products as an impact of current land use , 2012 .

[3]  Y. Lü,et al.  Quantifying the impacts of grassland restoration on biodiversity and ecosystem services in China: A meta-analysis , 2016 .

[4]  Hong Wang,et al.  The influence of climate change and human activities on ecosystem service value , 2016 .

[5]  John J Mack,et al.  Landscape as a predictor of wetland condition: an evaluation of the Landscape Development Index (LDI) with a large reference wetland dataset from Ohio , 2006, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[6]  Oliver R W Pergams,et al.  Evidence for a fundamental and pervasive shift away from nature-based recreation , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Garry D. Peterson,et al.  Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  M. Cohen,et al.  FLORISTIC QUALITY INDICES FOR BIOTIC ASSESSMENT OF DEPRESSIONAL MARSH CONDITION IN FLORIDA , 2004 .

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

[10]  Margriet Caswell,et al.  Agriculture and Ecosystem Restoration in South Florida: Assessing Trade‐Offs from Water‐Retention Development in the Everglades Agricultural Area , 2001 .

[11]  G. Daily,et al.  Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services , 2011 .

[12]  Ying Xu,et al.  Effects of land-use intensity on ecosystem services and human well-being: a case study in Huailai County, China , 2016, Environmental Earth Sciences.

[13]  Pål Börjesson,et al.  Agricultural crop-based biofuels – resource efficiency and environmental performance including direct land use changes , 2011 .

[14]  Feng Li,et al.  Variation in ecosystem services across an urbanization gradient: A study of terrestrial carbon stocks from Changzhou, China , 2015 .

[15]  Ryan A. Chisholm,et al.  Trade-offs between ecosystem services: Water and carbon in a biodiversity hotspot , 2010 .

[16]  Garry D. Peterson,et al.  Trade-offs across Space, Time, and Ecosystem Services , 2006 .

[17]  K. Esler,et al.  Exploring the Gap between Ecosystem Service Research and Management in Development Planning , 2014 .

[18]  Mark T. Brown,et al.  LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY INDEX , 2005, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[19]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Science for managing ecosystem services: Beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[20]  W. H. Wischmeier,et al.  Predicting rainfall-erosion losses from cropland east of the Rocky Mountains , 1965 .

[21]  G. Mace,et al.  Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. , 2012, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[22]  Mengistie Kindu,et al.  Changes of ecosystem service values in response to land use/land cover dynamics in Munessa-Shashemene landscape of the Ethiopian highlands. , 2016, The Science of the total environment.

[23]  P. Nilsson.  Environmental Accounting—EMERGY and Environmental Decision Making , 1997, Forest Science.

[24]  Anne Larigauderie,et al.  Evolution of natural and social science interactions in global change research programs , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  Sandra Lavorel,et al.  Using plant functional traits to understand the landscape distribution of multiple ecosystem services , 2011 .

[26]  Helmut Haberl,et al.  Land use and sustainability indicators. An introduction. , 2004 .

[27]  Tarja Söderman,et al.  Using the ecosystem services approach for better planning and conservation of urban green spaces: a Finland case study , 2010, Biodiversity and Conservation.

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

[29]  A. Eneji,et al.  Understanding Relationships among Agro-Ecosystem Services Based on Emergy Analysis in Luancheng County, North China , 2014 .

[30]  T. Lynam,et al.  Measuring conditions and trends in ecosystem services at multiple scales: the Southern African Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (SAfMA) experience , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[31]  H. Setälä,et al.  History of land-use intensity can modify the relationship between functional complexity of the soil fauna and soil ecosystem services – A microcosm study , 2012 .

[32]  E. Bennett,et al.  Interactions Among Ecosystem Services Across Land Uses in a Floodplain , 2014 .

[33]  F. Chapin,et al.  EFFECTS OF BIODIVERSITY ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING: A CONSENSUS OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE , 2005 .

[34]  J. Niu,et al.  Understanding Grassland Degradation and Restoration from the Perspective of Ecosystem Services: A Case Study of the Xilin River Basin in Inner Mongolia, China , 2016 .

[35]  Patricia Balvanera,et al.  The future of production systems in a globalized world , 2007 .

[36]  J. Randerson,et al.  Terrestrial ecosystem production: A process model based on global satellite and surface data , 1993 .

[37]  Martin Schaefer,et al.  Land use intensification alters ecosystem multifunctionality via loss of biodiversity and changes to functional composition , 2015, Ecology letters.

[38]  R. Costanza,et al.  SPECIAL ISSUE: The Dynamics and Value of Ecosystem Services: Integrating Economic and Ecological Perspectives Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services , 2002 .

[39]  M. Marchetti,et al.  Where Land Use Changes Occur: Using Soil Features to Understand the Economic Trends in Agricultural Lands , 2017 .

[40]  C. Lepczyk,et al.  Using indicators of land-use development intensity to assess the condition of coastal wetlands in Hawai‘i , 2014, Landscape Ecology.

[41]  D. Richardson,et al.  Spatial congruence between biodiversity and ecosystem services in South Africa , 2009 .

[42]  B. Halpern,et al.  Evaluating tradeoffs among ecosystem services to inform marine spatial planning , 2013 .