Assessing Land Use Change Impact on Ecosystem Services (Case Study: Wetland And Biosphere Reserve of Miankaleh)

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

2 Kish International Campus, University of Tehran, Kish, Iran.

Abstract

Changes in land use sometimes lead to changes in the natural functioning of the environment and the long term, affect the provision of ecosystem goods and services. Therefore, today, the investigation of land use changes has become one of the most important factors in land management decisions. In this study, with different defined scenarios, land use was modeled and the impact of each scenario on selected ecosystem services in Miankale biosphere reserve in Mazandaran province was mapped. At first, the current situation was determined and the land use map was drawn using satellite images. Land use scenario writing based on questionnaires completed by experts and decision-makers in the field of environment and natural resources, including environmental conservation, economic development, and sustainable development, and the scenario of continuing the existing process, and at the end, land use change modeling and mapping of selected ecosystem services (water supply, habitat provision, air regulation, and soil erosion), under the applied scenarios, the output of the modeling of selected ecosystem services was evaluated. The results showed that in the 3 ecosystem services of soil erosion protection, water supply, and habitat provision, the highest value of better quality ecosystem services is available for the environmental, sustainable development, economic, and trend scenarios. For better air regulation services the environmental scenario, The sustainable development scenario, the existing trend scenario, and the existing economic scenario provided the most ecological services. Also, the current trend of land use changes is the most destructive mode of providing ecosystem services in the future. To reduce the environmental effects of the current trend of land use changes, it is suggested to prevent the construction and development of industries, especially petrochemical industries and power plants in the region, and to systematically preserve wetland and forest uses by relying on the participation of local communities.
 
Extended Abstract
1-Introduction
Ecosystems are a crucial part of the Earth, providing a foundation for the continuation of human and terrestrial life. They can supply goods and services essential for human needs. Rapid population growth will result in significant changes in economic activities, increased urbanization, and alterations in land use to meet demands for food, freshwater, and other ecosystem goods. Therefore, to prevent further destruction of ecosystems, maintaining ecosystem services has become a key concept in local policy-making, land conservation planning, and environmental valuation. The Miankaleh biosphere reserve and wildlife refuges, located in the north of the Bandargaz- Behshahr watershed, comprise two parts of the aquatic and terrestrial environment. The health of this area is crucial for maintaining the overall health of the Caspian Sea. Given its unique features and the problems arising from mismanagement and land use changes due to population growth and pressure on the Miankaleh ecosystem, this study simulates various land use policy scenarios by examining past land use changes and developing future scenarios. Integrated scenario writing methods involving decision-makers, managers, experts, local people, and stakeholders. Markov chain-based tools and InVEST software were used to identify and model the continuation of existing land use trends under different scenarios.
2-Materials and Methods
In this study, four ecosystem services—water supply, habitat provision, air regulation, and soil erosion—were evaluated in the Miankaleh biosphere reserve for current land use and three future land use scenarios. These scenarios were developed through questionnaires, which included weighting and preferential valuation of each land use by 120 decision-makers and experts, analyzed using superdecision software and the scenario generator tool in InVEST 3.12.0 software. To examine the trend of land use changes over 30 years, land use maps were used, created through supervised classification in Idrisi TerrSet software using Landsat 5 (1990), Landsat 7, and 8 ETM+ (2005 and 2020) satellite images. To predict land use changes over the next 30 years, LCM models in Idrisi software were employed. Scenarios were based on the direct and indirect values of ecosystem services. In the economic scenario, the highest importance was given to direct or market ecosystem services, while in the environmental and sustainable development scenarios, non-market services were prioritized. The results demonstrate how the provision of ecosystem services and their economic valuation methods are effective in various land use management and planning strategies.
 
3- Results and Discussion
In Scenario A1, the land use change scenario for 2050 was mapped using Markov chain analysis based on the past 30 years of maps. Scenario A2 focuses on environmental protection, emphasizing the preservation and restoration of the Miankaleh wetland and forest areas, and preventing their conversion to residential, agricultural, or pasture lands. Scenario A3 is purely economically driven, largely neglecting the protection of natural resources and non-market ecosystem services. In Scenario A4, both environmental and economic aspects are considered together. This study identified land use change as the most significant factor affecting ecosystem services. Land use scenarios were developed by decision-makers, managers, experts, natural resources and environmental specialists, and local people to model the impacts of different land use scenarios on ecosystem services. In Scenarios A1 and A3, non-market ecosystem services were not considered, focusing solely on economic development, which led to a significant reduction in ecosystem services. Scenario A1 was identified as the most destructive. In Scenarios A2 and A4, both market and non-market ecosystem services were considered. Scenario A2 focused on natural resource conservation, leading to an increase in ecosystem services. In Scenario A4, ecosystem services were somewhat preserved, with a slight decrease compared to the base year. The results showed that for soil erosion protection, water supply, and habitat provision, the highest value of ecosystem services was found in the environmental, sustainable development, economic, and current trend scenarios, respectively. For air regulation services, the order was environmental, sustainable development, current trends, and economic scenarios. The current trend of land use changes is the most destructive for future ecosystem services.
 
4- Conclusion
Land use change modeling is challenging due to economic, political, social, and ecological complexities. The InVEST scenario modeling tool provides a practical and comprehensive method for this purpose. The results indicated that land use changes generally reduce ecosystem services. Therefore, regional and spatial planning should be revised, prioritizing environmental assessment and protection. Following the environmental scenario can help decision-makers in more effective ecosystem conservation. A basic guide for wetland valuation can assist users in identifying values and implementing appropriate management and planning policies. It is recommended to prevent the establishment and development of industries, especially petrochemical and power plants, in the region and to systematically preserve wetland and forest uses with local community participation.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Abdollahi, S. (2023). Analytical study of parameters affecting the supply of ecosystem services in the central part of Isfahan province. Natural Environment, 76(4), 593-603. doi: 10.22059/jne.2023.357122.2541 (In Persian).
Ali, M. A., & Kamraju, M. (2023). Ecosystem services. In Natural Resources and Society: Understanding the Complex Relationship Between Humans and the Environment (pp. 51-63). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-46720-2.
Asadollahi, Z., & Salman Mahini, A. (2017). Assessing the Impact of Land Use Change on Ecosystem Services Supply ) Carbon Storage and Sequestration). Environmental Researches, 8 (15), 203-214. doi: 20.1001.1.20089597.1396.8.15.24.0 (In Persian).
BadamFirooz, J. & Mousazadeh, R,. (2020). A Guiding Model for Economic Valuation and Estimation of Environmental Damage Costs To the Iranian Wetland Ecosystem Services. Environment and interdisciplinanary development,  5 (67), 76-94. doi: 10.22034/envj.2020. 181148 (In Persian).
Badamfirooz, J., & Mousazadeh, R. (2019). Quantitative assessment of land use/land cover changes on the value of ecosystem services in the coastal landscape of Anzali International Wetland. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 191(11), 694.‏ doi: 10.1007/s10661-019-7802-8
Baral, H., Keenan, R. J., Fox, J. C., Stork, N. E., & Kasel, S. (2012). Spatial assessment of ecosystem goods and services in complex production landscapes: A case study from south-eastern Australia. Ecological Complexity, 13, 35-45.‏ doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2012.11.001
Clarke, B., Thet, A. K., Sandhu, H., & Dittmann, S. (2021). Integrating Cultural Ecosystem Services valuation into coastal wetlands restoration: A case study from South Australia. Environmental Science & Policy, 116, 220-229. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2020.11.014
Cordier, M., Agúndez, J. A. P., Hecq, W., & Hamaide, B. (2014). A guiding framework for ecosystem services monetization in ecological–economic modeling. Ecosystem Services, 8, 86-96. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.03.003
Costanza, R. (1997). Model goodness of fit: a multiple resolution procedure. In Frontiers in Ecological Economics (249-265). Edward Elgar Publishing. doi: doi: 10.4337/ 9781035303427.00025
Costanza, R. (2020). Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability. Ecosystem Services, 43, 101096. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2020. 101096
Darvishmotevali, M., Rasoolimanesh, S. M., & Dorbeiki, M. (2023). Community-based model of tourism development in a biosphere reserve context. Tourism Review, 79(3), 525-540. doi: 10.1108/tr-10-2022-0529
De Groot, R. S., Wilson, M. A., & Boumans, R. M. (2002). A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological economics, 41(3), 393-408. doi: 10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00089-7
Dehmardeh,M., Mahmood Ghasemi, M., Ghasemi I., (2021). Evaluation of Conservation and Recreational Functions of Hamoon Wetland, Using Conditional Valuation Approach. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research., 53(1), 129-143. doi: 10.22059/ijaedr.2021.332234.669091(In Persian).
Ecosystem Services Valuation Database (ESVD). (2024). Foundation for Sustainable Development, 2021. ESVD database version APR2024V1.1 - Technical implementation by Co-Capacity.
Estoque, R. C., Myint, S. W., Wang, C., Ishtiaque, A., Aung, T. T., Emerton, L., Ooba, M., Hijioka, Y., Myat S., Mon, M. S., Wang, Z., & Fan, C. (2018). Assessing environmental impacts and change in Myanmar's mangrove ecosystem service value due to deforestation (2000–2014). Global change biology, 24(11), 5391-5410. doi: 10.1111/gcb.14409
Everard, M. (2021). Ecosystem services: key issues. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003182313
Fang, Z., Ding, T., Chen, J., Xue, S., Zhou, Q., Wang, Yin.,  Wang, Yix., Huang, Z., & Yang, S. (2022). Impacts of land use/land cover changes on ecosystem services in ecologically fragile regions. Science of the Total Environment, 831, 154967. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154967
Fei, L., Shuwen, Z., Jiuchun, Y., Liping, C., Haijuan, Y., & Kun, B. (2018). Effects of land use change on ecosystem services value in West Jilin since the reform and opening of China. Ecosystem Services, 31, 12-20.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.009
Felipe-Lucia, M. R., Comín, F. A., & Bennett, E. M. (2014). Interactions among ecosystem services across land uses in a floodplain agroecosystem. Ecology and society, 19(1).‏ doi: 10.5751/ES-06249-190120
Fu, B., Zhang, L., Xu, Z., Zhao, Y., Wei, Y., & Skinner, D. (2015). Ecosystem services in changing land use. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 15, 833-843.‏ doi: 10.1007/s11368-015-1082-x
Gao, L., Tao, F., Liu, R., Wang, Z., Leng, H., & Zhou, T. (2022). Multi-scenario simulation and ecological risk analysis of land use based on the PLUS model: A case study of Nanjing. Sustainable Cities and Society, 85, 104055. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2022.104055
Geneletti, D. (2013). Assessing the impact of alternative land-use zoning policies on future ecosystem services. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 40, 25-35. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar. 2012.12.003
Gomes, E., Inácio, M., Bogdzevič, K., Kalinauskas, M., Karnauskaitė, D., & Pereira, P. (2021). Future land-use changes and its impacts on terrestrial ecosystem services: A review. Science of The Total Environment, 781, 146716.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146716
Habib, T. J., Heckbert, S., Wilson, J. J., Vandenbroeck, A. J., Cranston, J., & Farr, D. R. (2016). Impacts of land-use management on ecosystem services and biodiversity: an agent-based modelling approach. PeerJ, 4, e2814. doi: 10.7717/peerj.2814
Hasan, S. S., Zhen, L., Miah, M. G., Ahamed, T., & Samie, A. (2020). Impact of land use change on ecosystem services: A review. Environmental Development, 34, 100527.‏ doi: 10.1016/j. envdev.2020.100527
Jackson, C. A., Hernandez, C. L., Yee, S. H., Nash, M. S., Diefenderfer, H. L., Borde, A. B., Harwell, M. C., & Dewitt, T. H. (2024). Identifying priority ecosystem services in tidal wetland restoration. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 12, 1260447. doi: 10.3389/fevo. 2024.1260447
Lawler, J. J., Lewisb, D. J., Nelsonc, E., Plantingad, A. J., Polaskye, S., Witheyf, J. C., Helmersg, D., P., Martinuzzig, S., Derric Penningtonh, D., & Radeloffg, V. C. (2014). Projected land-use change impacts on ecosystem services in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(20), 7492-7497. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1405557111
Ledoux, L., & Turner, R. K. (2002). Valuing ocean and coastal resources: a review of practical examples and issues for further action. Ocean & Coastal Management, 45(9-10), 583-616. doi: 10.1016/S0964-5691(02)00088-1
Li, Y., Zhan, J., Liu, Y., Zhang, F., & Zhang, M. (2018). Response of ecosystem services to land use and cover change: A case study in Chengdu City. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 132, 291-300.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.03.009
Liiri, M., Häsä. M., Haimi, J., & Setälä, H. (2012) History of land-use intensity can modify the relationship between functional complexity of the soil fauna and soil ecosystem services – A microcosm study. Appl Soil Ecol, 55, 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2011.12.009
Long, X., Lin, H., An, X., Chen, S., Qi, S., & Zhang, M. (2022). Evaluation and analysis of ecosystem service value based on land use/cover change in Dongting Lake wetland. Ecological Indicators, 136, 108619.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108619
Mandishona, E., & Knight, J. (2022). Inland wetlands in Africa: a review of their typologies and ecosystem services. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 46(4), 547-565
McGranahan,G., Songsore, J., M Kjellén M. (2021). The Earthscan reader in sustainable cities. Sustainability, poverty and urban environmental transitions (107-133). doi: 10.4324/ 9781315800462-8
Millennium Assessment. (2005). Overview of the Milliennium Ecosystem Assessment. https://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/Index-2.html. Sustainability, poverty and urban environmental transitions
Mirzaei, A. & Zibaei, M. (2018). Estimating the Economic Benefits of Jazmourian Wetland Restoration and Preservation Programs. Agricultura Ecomoic Researces, 11(41), 53-80. doi: 20.1001.1.20086407.1398.11.41.4.9 (In Persian).
Mirzaei, A., & Zibaei, M. (2018). Estimating the Economic Benefits of Jazmourian Wetland Restoration and Preservation Programs. Agricultura Ecomoic Researces, 11(41), 53-80. doi: 20.1001.1.20086407.1398.11.41.4.9 (In Persian).
Mobareghee, N., & Barghjelve, Sh. (2011).  Feasibility of Combining Two Issues “Environmental Impact Assessment” and "Ecosystem Services Valuation” in Iran. Environmental Researches, 2(3), 49-64. doi: 20.1001.1.20089597.1390.2.3.5.5(In Persian).
Morsali, H., Mirsanjari, M., & Mohammadyari F. (2020). Economic valuation Recreational of the Pirsalman wetland of Hamedan province using the travel cost method. Wetland Ecobiology, 12(45), 87-100. http://www.jweb.iauahvaz.org (In Persian).
Morsali, H., Mirsanjari, M., & Mohammadyari F. (2020). Economic valuation Recreational of the Pirsalman wetland of Hamedan province using the travel cost method. Wetland Ecobiology, 12(45), 87-100. http://www.jweb.iauahvaz.org (In Persian).
Mushet, D. M., & Roth, C. L. (2020). Modeling the supporting ecosystem services of depressional wetlands in agricultural landscapes. Wetlands, 40(5), 1061-1069. doi: 10.1007/s13157-020-01297-2
Orsi, F., Ciolli, M., Primmer, E., Varumo, L., & Geneletti, D. (2020). Mapping hotspots and bundles of forest ecosystem services across the European Union. Land use policy, 99, 104840. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104840
Peng, J., Xia, P., Liu, Y., Xu, Z., Zheng, H., Lan, T., & Yu, S. (2023). Ecosystem services research: From golden era to next crossing. Transactions in Earth, Environment, and Sustainability, 1(1), 9-19. doi: 10.1177/2754124X231165935
Peng, K., Jiang, W., Ling, Z., Hou, P., & Deng, Y. (2021). Evaluating the potential impacts of land use changes on ecosystem service value under multiple scenarios in support of SDG reporting: A case study of the Wuhan urban agglomeration. Journal of Cleaner Production, 307, 127321. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127321
Pereira, P., Inacio, M., Kalinauskas, M., Bogdzevič, K., Bogunovic, I., & Zhao, W. (2022). Land-use changes and ecosystem services. In Mapping and Forecasting Land Use (1-27). Elsevier.‏ doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-90947-1.00007-7
Pinke, Z., Kiss, M., & Lövei, G. L. (2018). Developing an integrated land use planning system on reclaimed wetlands of the Hungarian Plain using economic valuation of ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 30, 299-308.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.007.
Rahimi, A., Rastkhadiv & A., Ketabollahi, K.,(2023). Urban Agriculture as a New Potential for Development of Urban Green Spaces in Marivan City. Geography and Planning. doi: 10.22034/gp.2024.59592.3215 (In Persian).
Schirpke, U., Tasser, E., Borsky, S., Braun, M., Eitzinger, J., Gaube, V., Getzner, M., Glatzel, S., Gschwantneri, T., Kirchnerj, M., Leitinger, G., Mehdi-Schulz, B., Mitterl, H., Helfried Scheifinger, H., Thaler, S., Dominik Thom, D., & Thaler, T. (2023). Past and future impacts of land-use changes on ecosystem services in Austria. Journal of Environmental Management, 345, 118728.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118728
Shamsoddini, Sh. & Iranmanesh, Y., (2020). Using of Contingent Valuation Method in Estimating of recreational Value of Gandoman International Wetland,  Wetland Ecology 12(44), 79-80. https://sid.ir/paper/359980/fa (In Persian).
Tabatabaei Yazdi, F. & Broumand, A., (2022). A) Comparison of recreational and non-consumer values (existential and for future generations) of Lake Bazengan. Wetland Ecobiology.14(2), 77-92 (In Persian).
Tabatabaei Yazdi, F. & Broumand, A., (2022). B) Ecosystem Restoration: An Effective Approach to Achieve Urban Sustainability. Popularization of Science, 13(1), 140-165. doi: 10.22034/ popsci.2022.328154.1160 (In Persian).
Wang, Z., Li, X., Mao, Y., Li, L., Wang, X., & Lin, Q. (2022). Dynamic simulation of land use change and assessment of carbon storage based on climate change scenarios at the city level: A case study of Bortala, China. Ecological Indicators, 134, 108499. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind. 2021.108499
Xu ZhiHong, X. Z., & Chen ChengRong, C. C. (2006). Fingerprinting global climate change and forest management within rhizosphere carbon and nutrient cycling processes.‏ doi: 10.1065/ espr2006.08.340
Xu, X., Chen, M., Yang, G., Jiang, B., & Zhang, J. (2020). Wetland ecosystem services research: A critical review. Global Ecology and Conservation, 22, e01027. doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2020. e01027
Yirsaw, E., Wu, W., Shi, X., Temesgen, H., & Bekele, B. (2017). Land use/land cover change modeling and the prediction of subsequent changes in ecosystem service values in a coastal area of China, the Su-Xi-Chang Region. Sustainability, 9(7), 1204. DOI:10.3390/su9071204.
Yousefzade, E. et al. (2018). Resiliency of Ecological Services in Urban Environment(Case Study: Yazd). Environmental Researches, 8(16), 15-28. DOI:20.1001.1.20089597.1396.8.16.7.5 (In Persian).
Zorrilla-Miras, P., Palomo, I., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Martín-López, B., Lomas, P. L., & Montes, C. (2014). Effects of land-use change on wetland ecosystem services: A case study in the Doñana marshes (SW Spain). Landscape and Urban Planning, 122, 160-174.‏ doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.09.013