www.floodrisk.o rg.uk EPSRC Grant: EP/FP202511/1 Spatially explicit negotiation of ecosystem service synergies and trade-offs Tim Pagella 1 , Bethanna Jackson 2 , Brian Reynolds 3 , Colin Thorne 4 , Alex Henshaw 4 and Fergus Sinclair 1,5 1 Bangor University 2 Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand 3 Centre of Ecology and Hydrology, Bangor 4 University of Nottingham 5 World Agroforestry Centre, Nairobi, Kenya
8
Embed
Www.floodrisk.org.uk EPSRC Grant: EP/FP202511/1 Spatially explicit negotiation of ecosystem service synergies and trade-offs Tim Pagella 1, Bethanna Jackson.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
www.floodrisk.org.uk EPSRC Grant: EP/FP202511/1
Spatially explicit negotiation of ecosystem service synergies and trade-offs
Tim Pagella1, Bethanna Jackson2, Brian Reynolds3, Colin Thorne4, Alex Henshaw4 and Fergus Sinclair1,5
1 Bangor University2Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand3Centre of Ecology and Hydrology, Bangor4University of Nottingham5World Agroforestry Centre, Nairobi, Kenya
www.floodrisk.org.uk EPSRC Grant: EP/FP202511/1
Land management and flood risk
www.floodrisk.org.uk EPSRC Grant: EP/FP202511/1
• Ecosystem services, including flood regulation, often involve stocks and flows of material or individuals across landscapes: water, soil, carbon, organisms
• The areal extent and spatial configuration of landscape features (trees, ponds, wetlands) affect these flows and hence the provision of services
• Change in land use or management and the presence of landscape features affect multiple ecosystem services simultaneously
Ecosystem services
Ecosystem Services
Supporting Provisioning
Regulating
Cultural
www.floodrisk.org.uk EPSRC Grant: EP/FP202511/1
Polyscape specification
• Designed as a negotiation tool not a prescriptive model
• Works for any landscape, using national scale digital elevation, land use/cover and soil data
• Incorporates participatory validation and local knowledge about where farmers do and do not want trees, ensures local engagement and ownership.
• Runs fast, in real time, with resolution appropriate for informing field decisions while considering impacts at small (10 km2) to medium (1000 km2) sized landscape contexts
A multiple criteria GIS toolbox
• Spatially explicit evaluation of synergies and trade-offs in the location of trees on surface water flow, farm productivity, sediment transport, carbon storage and biodiversity (woodland habitat connectivity)