Exploring management objectives and ecosystem service trade-offs in a semi-arid rangeland basin in southeast Iran

Título traducido de la contribución: Exploración de objetivos de gestión y tradeoffs en servicios ecosistémicos en un pastizal de cuenca semiárida en el sureste de Irán

Azam Khosravi Mashizi, Gholam Ali Heshmati, Abdol Rasool Salman Mahini, Francisco J. Escobedo

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaArtículo

Resumen

Los servicios de los ecosistemas se incluyen cada vez más como objetivos de manejo de pastizales, junto con el pastoreo, la restauración y la conservación. Estos objetivos a menudo conflictivos pueden interactuar y dar lugar a concesiones en las que la gestión de un servicio de ecosistema (SE) puede resultar en detrimento de otro. Sin embargo, existe escasa información para los sistemas de pastizales de Asia central. Este estudio tiene como objetivo evaluar las interacciones entre los diferentes SE en una cuenca semiárida en Irán con siglos de historia de pastoreo. Utilizamos datos de campo, el modelo de Valoración Integrada de Servicios de los Ecosistemas y análisis espaciales para explorar la interacción y distribución espacial de la salud de los pastizales y sus efectos en: la producción de forraje, el rendimiento de agua, el stock de carbono, la retención de suelo y la formación de suelo. Resumimos los SE en dos paquetes: 1. producción de forraje y almacenamiento de carbono y 2. rendimiento de agua, retención de suelo y formación de suelo. Se determinó la salud de los pastizales en las tres regiones fisiográficas diferentes del área de estudio y se mapearon los grupos de interacción SE. También se desarrolló un sistema de clasificación de interacciones de ganar-ganar (W-W), ganar-perder (W-L) y perder-perder (L-L) bajo los regímenes de manejo actuales utilizando datos de campo y análisis estadísticos. Los hallazgos muestran una interacción W-L entre los SE en la región de la cuenca media. Aunque esta región proporcionó la mayor cantidad de forraje y almacenamiento de carbono; las prácticas de manejo del pastoreo deben considerar la provisión sostenible de rendimiento de agua, retención de suelo y formación de suelo. Sin embargo, las clases de interacción fueron W-W en las regiones aguas arriba donde los objetivos de conservación eran una prioridad. Aguas abajo, las clases de interacción fueron L-L debido al sobrepastoreo y la urbanización; Por lo tanto, la restauración y la mejora de la gestión necesitan priorización. Comprender la distribución espacial de las interacciones de SE puede ayudar a los administradores a planificar y equilibrar los recursos con su suministro sostenible.
Idioma originalEnglish (US)
Páginas (desde-hasta)794-803
Número de páginas10
PublicaciónEcological Indicators
Volumen98
DOI
EstadoPublished - mar 1 2019

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Decision Sciences(all)
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Ecology

Citar esto

Khosravi Mashizi, Azam ; Heshmati, Gholam Ali ; Salman Mahini, Abdol Rasool ; Escobedo, Francisco J. / Exploring management objectives and ecosystem service trade-offs in a semi-arid rangeland basin in southeast Iran. En: Ecological Indicators. 2019 ; Vol. 98. pp. 794-803.
@article{d6aa91e788c9450d9ff0e08ecdeaf423,
title = "Exploring management objectives and ecosystem service trade-offs in a semi-arid rangeland basin in southeast Iran",
abstract = "Ecosystem services are increasingly being included as rangeland management objectives along with grazing, restoration, and conservation. These often conflicting objectives can interact and result in tradeoffs where managing for one ecosystem service (ES) can result in the detriment of another. However, there is scarce information for rangeland systems of central Asia. This study aims to assess tradeoffs interactions between different ES in a semi-arid watershed in Iran with centuries of grazing history. We use field data, the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services model, and spatial analyses to explore the interaction and spatial distribution of rangeland health and its effects on: forage production, water yield, carbon stock, soil retention, and soil formation. We summarized ESs into two bundles: 1. forage production and carbon storage and 2. water yield, soil retention and soil formation. Rangeland health across the study area's three different physiographic regions was determined and ES interaction groups mapped. A classification system of win-win (W-W), win-lose (W-L) and lose-lose (L-L) interactions under current management regimes was also developed using field data and statistical analyses. Findings show a W-L interaction among ESs in the mid-watershed region. Although this region provided the most forage and carbon storage; grazing management practices need to consider the sustainable provision of water yield, soil retention and soil formation. Interaction classes were however W-W in upstream regions where conservation objectives were a priority. Downstream, interaction classes were L-L due to overgrazing and urbanization; thus, restoration and improved management need prioritization. Understanding the spatial distribution of ES interactions can help managers plan for and balance resources with their sustainable supply.",
author = "{Khosravi Mashizi}, Azam and Heshmati, {Gholam Ali} and {Salman Mahini}, {Abdol Rasool} and Escobedo, {Francisco J.}",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.11.065",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "98",
pages = "794--803",
journal = "Ecological Indicators",
issn = "1470-160X",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Exploring management objectives and ecosystem service trade-offs in a semi-arid rangeland basin in southeast Iran. / Khosravi Mashizi, Azam; Heshmati, Gholam Ali; Salman Mahini, Abdol Rasool; Escobedo, Francisco J.

En: Ecological Indicators, Vol. 98, 01.03.2019, p. 794-803.

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaArtículo

TY - JOUR

T1 - Exploring management objectives and ecosystem service trade-offs in a semi-arid rangeland basin in southeast Iran

AU - Khosravi Mashizi, Azam

AU - Heshmati, Gholam Ali

AU - Salman Mahini, Abdol Rasool

AU - Escobedo, Francisco J.

PY - 2019/3/1

Y1 - 2019/3/1

N2 - Ecosystem services are increasingly being included as rangeland management objectives along with grazing, restoration, and conservation. These often conflicting objectives can interact and result in tradeoffs where managing for one ecosystem service (ES) can result in the detriment of another. However, there is scarce information for rangeland systems of central Asia. This study aims to assess tradeoffs interactions between different ES in a semi-arid watershed in Iran with centuries of grazing history. We use field data, the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services model, and spatial analyses to explore the interaction and spatial distribution of rangeland health and its effects on: forage production, water yield, carbon stock, soil retention, and soil formation. We summarized ESs into two bundles: 1. forage production and carbon storage and 2. water yield, soil retention and soil formation. Rangeland health across the study area's three different physiographic regions was determined and ES interaction groups mapped. A classification system of win-win (W-W), win-lose (W-L) and lose-lose (L-L) interactions under current management regimes was also developed using field data and statistical analyses. Findings show a W-L interaction among ESs in the mid-watershed region. Although this region provided the most forage and carbon storage; grazing management practices need to consider the sustainable provision of water yield, soil retention and soil formation. Interaction classes were however W-W in upstream regions where conservation objectives were a priority. Downstream, interaction classes were L-L due to overgrazing and urbanization; thus, restoration and improved management need prioritization. Understanding the spatial distribution of ES interactions can help managers plan for and balance resources with their sustainable supply.

AB - Ecosystem services are increasingly being included as rangeland management objectives along with grazing, restoration, and conservation. These often conflicting objectives can interact and result in tradeoffs where managing for one ecosystem service (ES) can result in the detriment of another. However, there is scarce information for rangeland systems of central Asia. This study aims to assess tradeoffs interactions between different ES in a semi-arid watershed in Iran with centuries of grazing history. We use field data, the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services model, and spatial analyses to explore the interaction and spatial distribution of rangeland health and its effects on: forage production, water yield, carbon stock, soil retention, and soil formation. We summarized ESs into two bundles: 1. forage production and carbon storage and 2. water yield, soil retention and soil formation. Rangeland health across the study area's three different physiographic regions was determined and ES interaction groups mapped. A classification system of win-win (W-W), win-lose (W-L) and lose-lose (L-L) interactions under current management regimes was also developed using field data and statistical analyses. Findings show a W-L interaction among ESs in the mid-watershed region. Although this region provided the most forage and carbon storage; grazing management practices need to consider the sustainable provision of water yield, soil retention and soil formation. Interaction classes were however W-W in upstream regions where conservation objectives were a priority. Downstream, interaction classes were L-L due to overgrazing and urbanization; thus, restoration and improved management need prioritization. Understanding the spatial distribution of ES interactions can help managers plan for and balance resources with their sustainable supply.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057811242&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057811242&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.11.065

DO - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.11.065

M3 - Article

VL - 98

SP - 794

EP - 803

JO - Ecological Indicators

JF - Ecological Indicators

SN - 1470-160X

ER -