Integrating participatory geographic information system for ecosystem services and land management in Adina Deer Park (forest) and its surroundings: A pathway to achieve Sustainable Development Goals

Abstract

Earlier studies have highlighted the significance of the socio-economic aspects of ecosystem services (ES) and their critical role in planning and decision-making processes. However, more research is required to comprehend the variations in people's perceptions of ES and land management preferences (LMP) in various contexts. This study aims to examine the spatial distribution of ES and LMP to reveal possible trade-offs and synergies among them, particularly in relation to the Adina Deer Park (ADP) (forest) and surrounding 1-km buffer. A paper-based participatory geographic information system (PGIS) method was used to collect empirical data on ES and LMP. Results show that hotspots for regulating ecosystem services (RES) are strongly associated with conservation preferences (CP) (r = 0.68), and weak (r = 0.22) association with cultural ecosystem services (CES). Additionally, hotspots for CES and CP show a strong association (r = 0.72). Hotspots of LMP have a weak association with hotspots of provisioning ecosystem services (PES) (r = 0.36) but no association with hotspots of CP and CES (r = 0.10 and r = 0.11, respectively). Most hotspots for RES and CES (78.64% and 82.67%, respectively) are located within the forest area (FA), while 89.02% of the PES hotspot is located in the non-forest area (NFA). Additionally, 87.56% of CES and 82.87% of RES are provided by the FA (10.57% of the total area), suggesting that the FA provides a broad range of resources supporting local livelihoods and well-being. The results highlighted the relevance of integrating local values of ES and LMP in conservation planning, especially in ecologically sensitive locations such as ADP (forest). This approach increases effective, inclusive land use planning that balances development and conservation, contributing directly and indirectly toward Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and ecological resilience.

Keywords

Participatory geographic information system / Ecosystem services / Land management / Hotspot / Trade-offs and synergies / Sustainable development goals

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Arijit Das: Writing - review & editing, Supervision. Ashis Mandal: Writing - review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Methodology. Kalikinkar Das: Writing - original draft, Software, Formal analysis, Data curation. Ketan Das: Visualization, Methodology, Formal analysis. Tushar Ali: Writing - original draft, Formal analysis, Data curation.

Ethical statement

We affirm that this manuscript is an original work and has not been published elsewhere nor is it under consideration for publication elsewhere. All authors have significantly contributed to the research and preparation of this manuscript, and there is no conflict of interest. Ethical guidelines were followed in the research.

Ethical statement was waived by the institutional ethics committee of University of Gour Banga because this study did not involve any sensitive data. The interviews were conducted on a voluntary basis, and the confidantiality and rights of the respondents were fully maintained throughout the study. Informed consent was obtained from all the respondents prior to the commencement of the research.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

[1] Asadolahi Z., Salmanmahiny A., Sakieh Y., Mirkarimi S. H., Baral H., & Azimi M. (2018). Dynamic trade-off analysis of multiple ecosystem services under land use change scenarios: Towards putting ecosystem services into planning in Iran. Ecological Complexity, 36, 250-260. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2018.09.003.

[2] Bastian O., Syrbe R. U., Rosenberg M., Rahe D., & Grunewald K. (2013). The five pillar EPPS framework for quantifying, mapping and managing ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 4, 15-24. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.04.003.

[3] Basu S., Nagendra H., Verburg P., & Plieninger T. (2024). Perceptions of ecosystem services and knowledge of sustainable development goals around community and private wetlands users in a rapidly growing city. Landscape and Urban Planning, 244, Article 104989. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2023.104989.

[4] Bennett E. M., Baird J., Baulch H., Chaplin-Kramer R., Fraser E., Loring P., & Lapen D. (2021). Ecosystem services and the resilience of agricultural landscapes. Advances in Ecological Research, 64, 1-43. doi:10.1016/bs.aecr.2021.01.001.

[5] Berghoefer U., Rozzi R., & Jax K. (2010). Many eyes on nature: Diverse perspectives in the Cape Horn biosphere reserve and their relevance for conservation. Ecology and Society, 15, 18. doi:10.5751/es-03316-150118.

[6] Bernard E., Barbosa L., & Carvalho R. (2011). Participatory GIS in a sustainable use reserve in Brazilian Amazonia: Implications for management and conservation. Applied Geography, 31(2), 564-572. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.11.014.

[7] Bertram C., & Rehdanz K. (2015). Preferences for cultural urban ecosystem services: Comparing attitudes, perception, and use. Ecosystem Services, 12,187-199. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.12.011.

[8] Brondizio E., Díaz S. M., Settele J., Ngo H., Gueze M., Aumeeruddy-Thomas, Y.,... Zayas, C. (2019). Assessing a planet in transformation: Rationale and approach of the IPBES Global Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

[9] Brown G., & Fagerholm N. (2015). Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation. Ecosystem Services, 13, 119-133. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.10.007.

[10] Brown G., Hausner V. H., Grodzińska-Jurczak M., Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska A., Olszańska A., Peek B., & Lægreid E. (2015). Cross-cultural values and management prefer- ences in protected areas of Norway and Poland. Journal for Nature Conservation, 28, 89-104. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2015.09.006.

[11] Brown G., Montag J. M., & Lyon K. (2012). Public participation GIS: A method for identifying ecosystem services. Society & Natural Resources, 25(7), 633-651. doi:10.1080/08941920.2011.621511.

[12] Brown G., & Raymond C. (2007). The relationship between place attachment and landscape values: Toward mapping place attachment. Applied Geography, 27(2), 89-111. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2006.11.002.

[13] Brown G., & Raymond C. M. (2014). Methods for identifying land use conflict potential using participatory mapping. Landscape and Urban Planning, 122,196-208. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.007.

[14] Brown G., Sanders S., & Reed P. (2018). Using public participatory mapping to inform general land use planning and zoning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 177, 64-74. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.04.011.

[15] Castro A.J., Vaughn C. C., Julian J. P., & García-Llorente M. (2016). Social demand for ecosystem services and implications for watershed management. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 52(1), 209-221. doi:10.1111/1752-1688.12379.

[16] Chan K. M., Guerry A. D., Balvanera P., Klain S., Satterfield T., Basurto X.,... Woodside U. (2012). Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services?A framework for constructive engagement. BioScience, 62(8), 744-756. doi:10.1525/bio.2012.62.8.7.

[17] Costanza R., Atkins P. W., Hernandez-Blanco M., & Kubiszewski I. (2021). Common asset trusts to effectively steward natural capital and ecosystem services at mul- tiple scales. Journal of Environmental Management, 280, Article 111801. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111801.

[18] Das M., & Das A. (2021). Assessing the impact of master plan on the dynamicity and resilience of forest cover change: A study on Adina Deer Park (forest), West Ben- gal, India. GeoJournal, 86(6), 2587-2606. doi:10.1007/s10708-020-10213-4.

[19] De Groot R., Stuip M., Finlayson M., & Davidson N. (2006). Valuing wetlands:Guidance for valuing the benefits derived from wetland ecosystem services (Ramsar Tech- nical Report no.3). Gland: Secretariat of the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran), Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

[20] Esgalhado C., Guimarães M. H., Lardon S., Debolini M., Balzan M. V., Gennai-Schott S. C., & Bouchemal S. (2021). Mediterranean land system dynamics and their underlying drivers: Stakeholder perception from multiple case studies. Landscape and Urban Planning, 213, Article 104134. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104134.

[21] Fagerholm N., Eilola S., Kisanga D., Arki V., & Käyhkö N. (2019). Place-based landscape services and potential of participatory spatial planning in multifunctional rural landscapes in Southern Highlands, Tanzania. Landscape Ecology, 34, 1769-1787. doi:10.1007/s10980-019-00847-2.

[22] Fagerholm N., Käyhkö N., Ndumbaro F., & Khamis M. (2012). Community stakeholders’ knowledge in landscape assessments—Mapping indicators for landscape ser- vices. Ecological Indicators, 18, 421-433. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.12.004.

[23] Fitz-Gibbon C. T., & Morris L. L. (1987). How to analyze data. Vol. 8.Sage.

[24] Grizzetti B., Liquete C., Pistocchi A., Vigiak O., Zulian G., Bouraoui F., & Cardoso A. C. (2019). Relationship between ecological condition and ecosystem services in European rivers, lakes and coastal waters. Science of the Total Environment, 671, 452-465. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.155.

[25] Haslett J. R., Berry P. M., Bela G., Jongman R. H., Pataki G., Samways M.J., & Zobel M. (2010). Changing conservation strategies in Europe: A framework integrating ecosystem services and dynamics. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19, 2963-2977. doi:10.1007/s10531-009-9743-y.

[26] Hausner V. H., Brown G., & Lægreid E. (2015). Effects of land tenure and protected areas on ecosystem services and land use preferences in Norway. Land Use Policy, 49, 446-461. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.08.018.

[27] Karimi A., & Jones K. (2020). Assessing national human footprint and implications for biodiversity conservation in Iran. Ambio, 49(9), 1506-1518. doi:10.1007/s13280-019-01305-8.

[28] Karimi A., Tulloch A. I., Brown G., & Hockings M. (2017). Understanding the effects of different social data on selecting priority conservation areas. Conservation Biology, 31(6), 1439-1449. doi:10.1111/cobi.12947.

[29] Karimi A., Yazdandad H., & Fagerholm N. (2020). Evaluating social perceptions of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and land management: Trade-offs, synergies and implications for landscape planning and management. Ecosystem Services, 45, Article 101188. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101188.

[30] Keiding N., & Louis T. A. (2016). Perils and potentials of self-selected entry to epidemiological studies and surveys. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 179(2), 319-376. doi:10.1111/rssa.12136.

[31] Loc H. H., Van Binh D., Park E., Shrestha S., Dung T. D., Son V. H., & Seijger C. (2021). Intensifying saline water intrusion and drought in the Mekong Delta: From physical evidence to policy outlooks. Science of the Total Environment, 757, Article 143919. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143919.

[32] Maes J., Egoh B., Willemen L., Liquete C., Vihervaara P., Schägner J. P., & Bidoglio G. (2012). Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosystem Services, 1(1), 31-39. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.06.004.

[33] Milcu A. I., Hanspach J., Abson D., & Fischer J. (2013). Cultural ecosystem services: A literature review and prospects for future research. Ecology and Society, 18(3), 44. doi:10.5751/ES-05790-180344.

[34] Ng C. N., Xie Y.J., & Yu X.J. (2013). Integrating landscape connectivity into the evaluation of ecosystem services for biodiversity conservation and its implications for landscape planning. Applied Geography, 42, 1-12. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.04.015.

[35] Palomo I., Martín-López B., Potschin M., Haines-Young R., & Montes C. (2013). National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: Mapping ecosystem service flows. Ecosystem Services, 4, 104-116. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.09.001.

[36] Palomo I., Montes C., Martin-Lopez B., González J. A., Garcia-Llorente M., Alcorlo P., & Mora M. R. G. (2014). Incorporating the social-ecological approach in protected areas in the Anthropocene. BioScience, 64(3), 181-191. doi:10.1093/biosci/bit033.

[37] Plieninger T., Dijks S., Oteros-Rozas E., & Bieling C. (2013). Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy, 33, 118-129. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.12.013.

[38] Plieninger T., Torralba M., Hartel T., & Fagerholm N. (2019). Perceived ecosystem services synergies, trade-offs, and bundles in European high nature value farming landscapes. Landscape Ecology, 34, 1565-1581. doi:10.1007/s10980-019-00775-1.

[39] Ramirez-Gomez S. O., Brown G., & Fat A. T. S. (2013). Participatory mapping with indigenous communities for conservation: Challenges and lessons from Suriname. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 58(1), 1-22. doi:10.1002/j.1681-4835.2013.tb00409.x.

[40] Ramirez-Gomez S. O. I., Brown G., Verweij P. A., & Boot R. (2016). Participatory mapping to identify indigenous community use zones: Implications for conservation planning in southern Suriname. Journal for Nature Conservation, 29, 69-78. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2015.11.004.

[41] Raudsepp-Hearne C., Peterson G. D., & Bennett E. M. (2010). Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(11), 5242-5247. doi:10.1073/pnas.0907284107.

[42] Ruiz-Frau A., Hinz H., Edwards-Jones G., & Kaiser M.J. (2013). Spatially explicit economic assessment of cultural ecosystem services: Non-extractive recreational uses of the coastal environment related to marine biodiversity. Marine Policy, 38, 90-98. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2012.05.023.

[43] Sasmito S. D., Basyuni M., Kridalaksana A., Saragi-Sasmito M. F., Lovelock C. E., & Murdiyarso D. (2023). Challenges and opportunities for achieving Sustainable De- velopment Goals through restoration of Indonesia’s mangroves. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 7(1), 62-70. doi:10.1038/s41559-022-01926-5.

[44] Singh K., Byun C., & Bux F. (2022). Ecological restoration of degraded ecosystems in India: Science and practices. Ecological Engineering, 182, Article 106708. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2022.106708.

[45] Turner K. G., Odgaard M. V., Bøcher P. K., Dalgaard T., & Svenning J. C. (2014). Bundling ecosystem services in Denmark: Trade-offs and synergies in a cultural land- scape. Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, 89-104. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.02.007.

[46] Turnock D. (2001). Cross-border conservation in east Central Europe: The Danube-Carpathian complex and the contribution of the World Wide Fund for Nature. GeoJournal, 55(2), 655-681. doi:10.1023/A:1021709515847.

[47] Tyrväinen L., Mäkinen K., & Schipperijn J. (2007). Tools for mapping social values of urban woodlands and other green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 79(1), 5-19. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.03.003.

[48] Vanek M. (1945). The development of a green opposition in czechoslovakia: The role of international contacts. Transnational Moments of Change in Europe, 1968,1989.

[49] Wegner G., & Pascual U. (2011). Cost-benefit analysis in the context of ecosystem services for human well-being: A multidisciplinary critique. Global Environmental Change, 21(2), 492-504. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.12.008.

[50] Wood S. L., Jones S. K., Johnson J. A., Brauman K. A., Chaplin-Kramer R., Fremier A., & DeClerck F. A. (2018). Distilling the role of ecosystem services in the Sustainable Development Goals. Ecosystem Services, 29, 70-82. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.010.

[51] Yamane T. (1967). Elementary sampling theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

[52] Zarandian A., Baral H., Stork N. E., Ling M. A., Yavari A. R., Jafari H. R., & Amirnejad H. (2017). Modeling of ecosystem services informs spatial planning in lands ad- jacent to the Sarvelat and Javaherdasht protected area in northern Iran. Land Use Policy, 61, 487-500. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.12.003.

[53] Zhu X., Pfueller S., Whitelaw P., & Winter C. (2010). Spatial differentiation of landscape values in the Murray River region of Victoria, Australia. Environmental Management, 45(5), 896-911. doi:10.1007/s00267-010-9462-x.