Selecting and applying quantification models for ecosystem services to forest ecosystems in South Korea
Hyun-Ah Choi , Woo-Kyun Lee , Cholho Song , Nicklas Forsell , Seongwoo Jeon , Joon Soon Kim , So Ra Kim
Journal of Forestry Research ›› 2016, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (6) : 1373 -1384.
Selecting and applying quantification models for ecosystem services to forest ecosystems in South Korea
There is growing interest in using ecosystem services to aid development of management strategies that target sustainability and enhance ecosystem support to humans. Challenges remain in the search for methods and indicators that can quantify ecosystem services using metrics that are meaningful in light of their high priorities. We developed a framework to link ecosystems to human wellbeing based on a stepwise approach. We evaluated prospective models in terms of their capacity to quantify national ecosystem services of forests. The most applicable models were subsequently used to quantify ecosystem services. The Korea Forest Research Institute model satisfied all criteria in its first practical use. A total of 12 key ecosystem services were identified. For our case study, we quantified four ecosystem functions, viz. water storage capacity in forest soil for water storage service, reduced suspended sediment for water purification service, reduced soil erosion for landslide prevention service, and reduced sediment yield for sediment regulation service. Water storage capacity in forest soil was estimated at 2142 t/ha, and reduced suspended sediment was estimated at 608 kg/ha. Reduced soil erosion was estimated at 77 m3/ha, and reduced sediment yield was estimated at 285 m3/ha. These results were similar to those reported by previous studies. Mapped results revealed hotspots of ecosystem services around protected areas that were particularly rich in biodiversity. In addition, the proposed framework illustrated that quantification of ecosystem services could be supported by the spatial flow of ecosystem services. However, our approach did not address challenges faced when quantifying connections between ecosystem indicators and actual benefits of services described.
Classification / Ecosystem services / Quantification / Stepwise approach
| [1] |
Bagstad KJ, Villa F, Johnson G, Voigt B (2011) ARIES—artificial intelligence for ecosystem services: a guide to models and data, version 1.0. ARIES report series, 1.0. The Aries Consortium. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seeaRev/meeting2013/EG13-BG-7.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
Bouwman AF, Kram T, Goldewijk KK (2006) Integrated modelling of global environmental change, an overview of IMAGE 2.4. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), Bilthoven. http://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/500110002.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
CICES (Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services) (2013) CICES V4.3. European Environment Agency. www.cices.eu. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
European Union (2014) Mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services: indicators for ecosystem assessments under action 5 of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. Publications office of the European Union, Luxembourg. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/knowledge/ecosystem_assessment/pdf/2ndMAESWorkingPaper.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
GFERI (Gyeongsangnamdo Forest Environmental Research Institute) (2014) New forest technology. Gyeongsangnamdo Forest Environmental Research Institute. http://tree.gndo.kr/05research/020703.jsp. Accessed 13 May 14 (in Korean) |
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
KFRI (Korea Forest Research Institute) (2011) The 5th national forestry inventory report. Korea Forest Research Institute Press, pp 30–36 (in Korean) |
| [27] |
KFS (Korea Forest Service) The effect of forest tending works for improving the green infrastructure function. 2007, Daejeon: Korea Forest Service Press, 11 22 (in Korean) |
| [28] |
KFS (Korea Forest Service) Forest tending works manual. 2010, Daejeon: Korea Forest Service Press, 1 10 (in Korean) |
| [29] |
Kim JH, Kim KD, Kim RH, Park CR, Youn HJ, Lee SW, Choi HT, Kim JJ (2010) A study on the estimation and the evaluation methods of public function of forest. Korea Forest Research Institute. http://book.nifos.go.kr/KFRICAB/IMG/006/001/155077.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 (in Korean) |
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
Layke C (2009) Measuring nature’s benefits: a preliminary roadmap for improving ecosystem service indicators. World Resources Institute, Washington. http://pdf.wri.org/measuring_natures_benefits.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being. Island Press Washington, DC. http://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.356.aspx.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
MOE (Korea Ministry of Environment) (2014) Republic of Korea’s fifth national report to the convention on biological diversity. Ministry of Environment. https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/kr/kr-nr-05-en.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
Mulligan M, Guerry A, Arkema K, Bagstad K, Villa F (2010) Capturing and quantifying the flow of ecosystem services. In: Silvestri S, Kershaw F (eds) Framing the flow: innovative approaches to understand, protect and value ecosystem services across linked habitats. UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, UK. http://www.unep.org/pdf/Framing_the_Flow_lowres_20final.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
Paltsev S, Reilly JM, Jacoby HD, Eckaus RS, McFarland JR, Sarofim MC, Asadoorian MO, Babiker MH (2005) The MIT emissions prediction and policy analysis (EPPA) model: version 4. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change. http://globalchange.mit.edu/files/document/MITJPSPGC_Rpt125.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 03 2016 |
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
Schröter D, Acosta-Michlik L, Arnell A, Araújo M, Badeck F, Bakker M, Bondeau A, Bugmann H, Carter T, Vega-Leinert A (2004) Advanced terrestrial ecosystem analysis and modelling. ATEAM Final report 2004. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam. https://www.pik-potsdam.de/ateam/ateam_final_report_sections_5_to_6.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [49] |
Sharp R, Tallis HT, Ricketts T, Guerry AD, Wood SA, Chaplin-Kramer R, Nelson E, Ennaanay D, Wolny S, Olwero N, Vigerstol K, Pennington D, Mendoza G, Aukema J, Foster J, Forrest J, Cameron D, Arkema K, Lonsdorf E, Kennedy C, Verutes G, Kim CK, Guannel G, Papenfus M, Toft J, Marsik M, Bernhardt J, Griffin R, Glowinski K, Chaumont N, Perelman A, Lacayo M, Mandle L, Hamel P, Vogl AL (2014) InVEST +VERSION+ user’s guide. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford. http://data.naturalcapitalproject.org/nightly-build/invest-users-guide/InVEST_+VERSION+_Documentation.pdf. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [50] |
TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity) (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. http://www.teebweb.org/publication/mainstreaming-the-economics-of-nature-a-synthesis-of-the-approach-conclusions-and-recommendations-of-teeb/. Accessed 11 Mar 2016 |
| [51] |
|
| [52] |
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |