Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services

Autores
Mastrangelo, Matías Enrique; Weyland, Federico; Villarino, Sebastian Horacio; Barral, Maria Paula; Nahuelhual, Laura; Laterra, Pedro
Año de publicación
2014
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
The potential of landscapes to supply multiple benefits to society beyond commodities production has received increasing research and policy attention. Linking the concept of multifunctionality with the ecosystem services (ES) approach offers a promising avenue for producing scientific evidence to inform landscape planning, e.g., about the relative utility of land-sharing and land-sparing. However, the value for decision-making of ES-based multifunctionality assessments has been constrained by a significant conceptual and methodological dispersion. To contribute towards a cohesive framework for landscape multifunctionality, we analyse case studies of joint ES supply regarding ten criteria designed to ultimately answer four aspects: (i) the multifunctionality of what (e.g., landscapes), (ii) the type of multifunctionality (e.g., based on ES synergies), (iii) the procedure of multifunctionality assessments, and (iv) the purpose of multifunctionality. We constructed a typology of methodological approaches based on scores for criteria describing the evaluation method and the level of stakeholder participation in assessments of joint ES supply. Surveyed studies and underlying types of methodological approaches (spatial, socio-spatial, functional, spatio-functional) differed in most criteria. We illustrate the influence of methodological divergence on planning recommendations by comparing two studies employing contrasting approaches (spatial and functional) to assess the joint supply of wildlife habitat and agricultural production in the Argentine Chaco. We distinguish between a pattern-based and process-based multifunctionality, where the latter can only be detected through approaches considering the ecological processes (e.g., ES complementarities) supporting the supply of multiple ES (functional and spatio-functional). Finally, we propose an integrated approach for assessing a socially-relevant process-based multifunctionality.
EEA Balcarce
Fil: Mastrangelo, Matias Enrique. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Weyland, Federico. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Villarino, Sebastian Horacio. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Barral, Maria Paula. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Nahuelhual, Laura. Universidad Austral de Chile. Instituto de Economía Agraria; Chile. Fundación Centro de los Bosques Nativos; Chile. Center for Climate and Resilience Research; Chile
Fil: Laterra, Pedro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fuente
Landscape Ecology 29 (2) : 345–358 (February 2014)
Materia
Paisaje
Ecosistema
Agentes Interesados
Evaluación
Landscape
Ecosystems
Stakeholders
Assessment
Servicios Ecosistémicos
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso restringido
Condiciones de uso
Repositorio
INTA Digital (INTA)
Institución
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
OAI Identificador
oai:localhost:20.500.12123/4028
Acceder
id INTADig_3c9451869c9f57de02d298a86b1626f8
oai_identifier_str oai:localhost:20.500.12123/4028
network_acronym_str INTADig
repository_id_str l
network_name_str INTA Digital (INTA)
spelling Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem servicesMastrangelo, Matías EnriqueWeyland, FedericoVillarino, Sebastian HoracioBarral, Maria PaulaNahuelhual, LauraLaterra, PedroPaisajeEcosistemaAgentes InteresadosEvaluaciónLandscapeEcosystemsStakeholdersAssessmentServicios EcosistémicosThe potential of landscapes to supply multiple benefits to society beyond commodities production has received increasing research and policy attention. Linking the concept of multifunctionality with the ecosystem services (ES) approach offers a promising avenue for producing scientific evidence to inform landscape planning, e.g., about the relative utility of land-sharing and land-sparing. However, the value for decision-making of ES-based multifunctionality assessments has been constrained by a significant conceptual and methodological dispersion. To contribute towards a cohesive framework for landscape multifunctionality, we analyse case studies of joint ES supply regarding ten criteria designed to ultimately answer four aspects: (i) the multifunctionality of what (e.g., landscapes), (ii) the type of multifunctionality (e.g., based on ES synergies), (iii) the procedure of multifunctionality assessments, and (iv) the purpose of multifunctionality. We constructed a typology of methodological approaches based on scores for criteria describing the evaluation method and the level of stakeholder participation in assessments of joint ES supply. Surveyed studies and underlying types of methodological approaches (spatial, socio-spatial, functional, spatio-functional) differed in most criteria. We illustrate the influence of methodological divergence on planning recommendations by comparing two studies employing contrasting approaches (spatial and functional) to assess the joint supply of wildlife habitat and agricultural production in the Argentine Chaco. We distinguish between a pattern-based and process-based multifunctionality, where the latter can only be detected through approaches considering the ecological processes (e.g., ES complementarities) supporting the supply of multiple ES (functional and spatio-functional). Finally, we propose an integrated approach for assessing a socially-relevant process-based multifunctionality.EEA BalcarceFil: Mastrangelo, Matias Enrique. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Weyland, Federico. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Villarino, Sebastian Horacio. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Barral, Maria Paula. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Nahuelhual, Laura. Universidad Austral de Chile. Instituto de Economía Agraria; Chile. Fundación Centro de los Bosques Nativos; Chile. Center for Climate and Resilience Research; ChileFil: Laterra, Pedro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaSpringer2018-12-07T15:11:24Z2018-12-07T15:11:24Z2014-02info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfhttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10980-013-9959-9http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/40280921-29731572-9761https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9959-9Landscape Ecology 29 (2) : 345–358 (February 2014)reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariaenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess2025-10-23T11:16:45Zoai:localhost:20.500.12123/4028instacron:INTAInstitucionalhttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/oai/requesttripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:l2025-10-23 11:16:46.272INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services
title Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services
spellingShingle Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services
Mastrangelo, Matías Enrique
Paisaje
Ecosistema
Agentes Interesados
Evaluación
Landscape
Ecosystems
Stakeholders
Assessment
Servicios Ecosistémicos
title_short Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services
title_full Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services
title_fullStr Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services
title_full_unstemmed Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services
title_sort Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Mastrangelo, Matías Enrique
Weyland, Federico
Villarino, Sebastian Horacio
Barral, Maria Paula
Nahuelhual, Laura
Laterra, Pedro
author Mastrangelo, Matías Enrique
author_facet Mastrangelo, Matías Enrique
Weyland, Federico
Villarino, Sebastian Horacio
Barral, Maria Paula
Nahuelhual, Laura
Laterra, Pedro
author_role author
author2 Weyland, Federico
Villarino, Sebastian Horacio
Barral, Maria Paula
Nahuelhual, Laura
Laterra, Pedro
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Paisaje
Ecosistema
Agentes Interesados
Evaluación
Landscape
Ecosystems
Stakeholders
Assessment
Servicios Ecosistémicos
topic Paisaje
Ecosistema
Agentes Interesados
Evaluación
Landscape
Ecosystems
Stakeholders
Assessment
Servicios Ecosistémicos
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv The potential of landscapes to supply multiple benefits to society beyond commodities production has received increasing research and policy attention. Linking the concept of multifunctionality with the ecosystem services (ES) approach offers a promising avenue for producing scientific evidence to inform landscape planning, e.g., about the relative utility of land-sharing and land-sparing. However, the value for decision-making of ES-based multifunctionality assessments has been constrained by a significant conceptual and methodological dispersion. To contribute towards a cohesive framework for landscape multifunctionality, we analyse case studies of joint ES supply regarding ten criteria designed to ultimately answer four aspects: (i) the multifunctionality of what (e.g., landscapes), (ii) the type of multifunctionality (e.g., based on ES synergies), (iii) the procedure of multifunctionality assessments, and (iv) the purpose of multifunctionality. We constructed a typology of methodological approaches based on scores for criteria describing the evaluation method and the level of stakeholder participation in assessments of joint ES supply. Surveyed studies and underlying types of methodological approaches (spatial, socio-spatial, functional, spatio-functional) differed in most criteria. We illustrate the influence of methodological divergence on planning recommendations by comparing two studies employing contrasting approaches (spatial and functional) to assess the joint supply of wildlife habitat and agricultural production in the Argentine Chaco. We distinguish between a pattern-based and process-based multifunctionality, where the latter can only be detected through approaches considering the ecological processes (e.g., ES complementarities) supporting the supply of multiple ES (functional and spatio-functional). Finally, we propose an integrated approach for assessing a socially-relevant process-based multifunctionality.
EEA Balcarce
Fil: Mastrangelo, Matias Enrique. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Weyland, Federico. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Villarino, Sebastian Horacio. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Barral, Maria Paula. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Nahuelhual, Laura. Universidad Austral de Chile. Instituto de Economía Agraria; Chile. Fundación Centro de los Bosques Nativos; Chile. Center for Climate and Resilience Research; Chile
Fil: Laterra, Pedro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
description The potential of landscapes to supply multiple benefits to society beyond commodities production has received increasing research and policy attention. Linking the concept of multifunctionality with the ecosystem services (ES) approach offers a promising avenue for producing scientific evidence to inform landscape planning, e.g., about the relative utility of land-sharing and land-sparing. However, the value for decision-making of ES-based multifunctionality assessments has been constrained by a significant conceptual and methodological dispersion. To contribute towards a cohesive framework for landscape multifunctionality, we analyse case studies of joint ES supply regarding ten criteria designed to ultimately answer four aspects: (i) the multifunctionality of what (e.g., landscapes), (ii) the type of multifunctionality (e.g., based on ES synergies), (iii) the procedure of multifunctionality assessments, and (iv) the purpose of multifunctionality. We constructed a typology of methodological approaches based on scores for criteria describing the evaluation method and the level of stakeholder participation in assessments of joint ES supply. Surveyed studies and underlying types of methodological approaches (spatial, socio-spatial, functional, spatio-functional) differed in most criteria. We illustrate the influence of methodological divergence on planning recommendations by comparing two studies employing contrasting approaches (spatial and functional) to assess the joint supply of wildlife habitat and agricultural production in the Argentine Chaco. We distinguish between a pattern-based and process-based multifunctionality, where the latter can only be detected through approaches considering the ecological processes (e.g., ES complementarities) supporting the supply of multiple ES (functional and spatio-functional). Finally, we propose an integrated approach for assessing a socially-relevant process-based multifunctionality.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014-02
2018-12-07T15:11:24Z
2018-12-07T15:11:24Z
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10980-013-9959-9
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/4028
0921-2973
1572-9761
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9959-9
url https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10980-013-9959-9
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/4028
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9959-9
identifier_str_mv 0921-2973
1572-9761
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
eu_rights_str_mv restrictedAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Landscape Ecology 29 (2) : 345–358 (February 2014)
reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)
instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
reponame_str INTA Digital (INTA)
collection INTA Digital (INTA)
instname_str Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.name.fl_str_mv INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.mail.fl_str_mv tripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.ar
_version_ 1846787515720138752
score 12.982451

Publicaciones similares