Identification, Prioritization and Mapping of Ecosystem Services in the Panchase Mountain Ecological Region of Western Nepal
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Primary Data Collection
2.2.1. Field Methods
2.2.2. Key Informant Interview
2.2.3. Focus Group Discussion
2.2.4. Transect Walk and Field Observation
2.3. Secondary Data Collection
2.4. Data Analysis
2.4.1. Qualitative and Quantitative Data Analysis
2.4.2. Mapping of Land Use and ES
3. Results
3.1. Identification of ES
3.2. Prioritizations of ES
3.3. Mapping of Changes in Land Use and ES
4. Discussion
4.1. Identification of ES
4.2. Prioritization of ES
4.3. Mapping of ES
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bhatta, L.D.; Van Oort, B.E.H.; Stork, N.E.; Baral, H. Ecosystem services and livelihoods in a changing climate: Understanding local adaptations in the Upper Koshi, Nepal. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 2015, 11, 145–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Birch, J.C.; Thapa, I.; Balmford, A.; Bradbury, R.B.; Brown, C.; Butchart, S.H.; Gurung, H.; Hughes, F.M.; Mulligan, M.; Pandeya, B. What benefits do community forests provide, and to whom? A rapid assessment of ecosystem services from a Himalayan forest, Nepal. Ecosyst. Serv. 2014, 8, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Oort, B.; Bhatta, L.D.; Baral, H.; Rai, R.K.; Dhakal, M.; Rucevska, I.; Adhikari, R. Assessing community values to support mapping of ecosystem services in the Koshi river basin, Nepal. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 13, 70–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adhikari, S.; Baral, H.; Nitschke, C. Adaptation to Climate Change in Panchase Mountain Ecological Regions of Nepal. Environments 2018, 5, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paudyal, K.; Baral, H.; Burkhard, B.; Bhandari, S.P.; Keenan, R.J. Participatory assessment and mapping of ecosystem services in a data-poor region: Case study of community-managed forests in central Nepal. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 13, 81–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pan, Y.; Marshall, S.; Maltby, L. Prioritising ecosystem services in Chinese rural and urban communities. Ecosyst. Serv. 2016, 21, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albert, C.; Galler, C.; Hermes, J.; Neuendorf, F.; Von Haaren, C.; Lovett, A. Applying ecosystem services indicators in landscape planning and management: The ES-in-Planning framework. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 61, 100–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Inostroza, L.; König, H.J.; Pickard, B.; Zhen, L. Putting ecosystem services into practice: Trade-off assessment tools, indicators and decision support systems. Ecosyst. Serv. 2017, 26, 303–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spash, C.L. Bulldozing biodiversity: The economics of offsets and trading-in Nature. Biol. Conserv. 2015, 192, 541–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martínez-Harms, M.J.; Balvanera, P. Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: A review. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 2012, 8, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baral, H.; Keenan, R.J.; Stork, N.E.; Kasel, S. Measuring and managing ecosystem goods and services in changing landscapes: A south-east Australian perspective. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2014, 57, 961–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burkhard, B.; Kroll, F.; Nedkov, S.; Müller, F. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 21, 17–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galicia, L.; Zarco-Arista, A.E. Multiple ecosystem services, possible trade-offs and synergies in a temperate forest ecosystem in Mexico: a review. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 2014, 10, 275–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maes, J.; Egoh, B.; Willemen, L.; Liquete, C.; Vihervaara, P.; Schägner, J.P.; Grizzetti, B.; Drakou, E.G.; La Notte, A.; Zulian, G.; et al. Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst. Serv. 2012, 1, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peh, K.S.H.; Thapa, I.; Basnyat, M.; Balmford, A.; Bhattarai, G.P.; Bradbury, R.B.; Brown, C.; Butchart, S.H.; Dhakal, M.; Gurung, H.; et al. Synergies between biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision: Lessons on integrated ecosystem service valuation from a Himalayan protected area, Nepal. Ecosyst. Serv. 2016, 22, 359–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Baral, H.; Jaung, W.; Bhatta, L.D.; Phuntsho, S.; Sharma, S.; Paudyal, K.; Zarandian, A.; Sears, R.; Sharma, R.; Dorji, T.; et al. Approaches and Tools for Assessing Mountain Forest Ecosystem Services; Centre for International Forestry Research: Bogor, Indonesia, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Pandey, S.S.; Cockfield, G.; Maraseni, T.N. Assessing the roles of community forestry in climate change mitigation and adaptation: A case study from Nepal. For. Ecol. Manag. 2016, 360, 400–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neugarten, R.A.; Langhammer, P.F.; Osipova, E.; Bagstad, K.J.; Bhagabati, N.; Butchart, S.H.; Dudley, N.; Elliott, V.; Gerber, L.R.; Arrellano, C.G.; et al. Tools for Measuring, Modelling, and Valuing Ecosystem Services: Guidance for Key Biodiversity Areas, Natural World Heritage Sites, and Protected Areas; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Shah, R.; Adhikari, A.; Khanal, R. Scoping of Piloting Ecosystem Based Adaptation in Panchase A Report; IUCN Nepal: Lalitpur, Nepal, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Bhattarai, K.R.; Måren, I.E.; Chaudhary, R.P. Medicinal plants and plant based knowledge in the Panchase region, Middle Hills of Nepal in the Himalayas. Banko Janakari 2011, 21, 31–39. [Google Scholar]
- Baral, S.; Adhikari, A.; Khanal, R.; Basnyat, B. Building Resilience of Forest Ecosystem in the Panchase Area; IUCN: Lalitpur, Nepal, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- WWF Nepal. Chitwan Annapurna Landscape (CHAL): A Rapid Assessment; World Wildlife Fund Nepal: Kathmandu, Nepal, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Klain, S.C.; Satterfield, T.A.; Chan, K.M. What matters and why? Ecosystem services and their bundled qualities. Ecol. Econ. 2014, 107, 310–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hennink, M.M. Focus Group Discussions; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Monique, H.; Hutter, I.; Bailey, A. Qualitative Research Methods; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Azeem, M.; Salfi, N.A.; Dogar, A. Usage of NVivo software for qualitative data analysis. Acad. Res. Int. 2012, 2, 262–266. [Google Scholar]
- Dunn, C.E. Participatory GIS—A people’s GIS? Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2007, 31, 616–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elwood, S. Critical issues in participatory GIS: Deconstructions, reconstructions, and new research directions. Trans. GIS 2006, 10, 693–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MEA. Ecosystems and Human Well-Bein; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Baral, H.; Keenan, R.J.; Fox, J.C.; Stork, N.E.; Kasel, S. Spatial assessment of ecosystem goods and services in complex production landscapes: A case study from south-eastern Australia. Ecol. Complex. 2013, 13, 35–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bennett, E.M.; Peterson, G.D.; Gordon, L.J. Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol. Lett. 2009, 12, 1394–1404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Dobbs, C.; Kendal, D.; Nitschke, C.R. Multiple ecosystem services and disservices of the urban forest establishing their connections with landscape structure and sociodemographics. Ecol. Indic. 2014, 43, 44–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koto, R.; Bani, A.; Haxhialushi, R.; Dautaj, A. The Identification of Ecosystem Goods and Services Provided by Karavasta Lagoon. Albanian J. Agric. Sci. 2015, 14, 162–168. [Google Scholar]
- Vihervaara, P.; Kumpula, T.; Tanskanen, A.; Burkhard, B. Ecosystem services—A tool for sustainable management of human–environment systems. Case study Finnish Forest Lapland. Ecol. Complex. 2010, 7, 410–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baral, H. Ecosystem Goods and Services in Production Landscapes in South-Eastern Australia. Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia, October 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Fleming, B.; Fleming, J.P. A watershed conservation success story in Nepal: Land use changes over 30 years. Waterlines 2009, 28, 29–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nepal, S.K. Mountain ecotourism and sustainable development: Ecology, economics, and ethics. Mt. Res. Dev. 2002, 22, 104–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jose, S. Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: an overview. Agrofor. Syst. 2009, 76, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swinton, S.M.; Lupi, F.; Robertson, G.P.; Hamilton, S.K. Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 64, 245–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casalegno, S.; Bennie, J.J.; Inger, R.; Gaston, K.J. Regional Scale Prioritisation for Key Ecosystem Services, Renewable Energy Production and Urban Development. PLoS ONE 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pandey, S.S.; Cockfield, G.; Maraseni, T.N. Dynamics of carbon and biodiversity under REDD+ regime: A case from Nepal. Environ. Sci. Policy 2014, 38, 272–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pandey, S.S.; Maraseni, T.N.; Cockfield, G. Carbon stock dynamics in different vegetation dominated community forests under REDD+: A case from Nepal. For. Ecol. Manag. 2014, 327, 40–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Maraseni, T.N.; Pandey, S.S. Can vegetation types work as an indicator of soil organic carbon? An insight from native vegetations in Nepal. Ecol. Indic. 2014, 46, 315–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maraseni, T.N.; Mitchell, C. An assessment of carbon sequestration potential of riparian zone of Condamine Catchment, Queensland, Australia. Land Use Policy 2016, 54, 139–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maraseni, T.N.; Neupane, P.R.; Lopez-Casero, F.; Cadman, T. An assessment of the impacts of the REDD+ pilot project on community forests user groups (CFUGs) and their community forests in Nepal. J. Environ. Manag. 2014, 136, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jaquet, S.; Schwilch, G.; Hartung-Hofmann, F.; Adhikari, A.; Sudmeier-Rieux, K.; Shrestha, G.; Liniger, H.P.; Kohler, T. Does outmigration lead to land degradation? Labour shortage and land management in a western Nepal watershed. Appl. Geogr. 2015, 62, 157–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bryan, B.A.; Crossman, N.D. Systematic regional planning for multiple objective natural resource management. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 88, 1175–1189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Butler, J.R.; Wong, G.Y.; Metcalfe, D.J.; Honzák, M.; Pert, P.L.; Rao, N.; van Grieken, M.E.; Lawson, T.; Bruce, C.; Kroon, F.J. An analysis of trade-offs between multiple ecosystem services and stakeholders linked to land use and water quality management in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2013, 180, 176–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raudsepp-Hearne, C.; Peterson, G.D.; Bennett, E. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 5242–5247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Rodríguez, J.P.; Beard, T.D.; Bennett, E.M.; Cumming, G.S.; Cork, S.J.; Agard, J.; Dobson, A.P.; Peterson, G.D. Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecol. Soc. 2006, 11, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanon, S.; Hein, T.; Douven, W.; Winkler, P. Quantifying ecosystem service trade-offs: The case of an urban floodplain in Vienna, Austria. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 111, 159–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stoate, C.; Báldi, A.; Beja, P.; Boatman, N.; Herzon, I.; Van Doorn, A.; De Snoo, G.; Rakosy, L.; Ramwell, C. Ecological impacts of early 21st century agricultural change in Europe—A review. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 91, 22–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Balvanera, P.; Daily, G.C.; Ehrlich, P.R.; Ricketts, T.H.; Bailey, S.-A.; Kark, S.; Kremen, C.; Pereira, H. Conserving Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Science 2001, 291, 2047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Turner, W.R.; Brandon, K.; Brooks, T.M.; Costanza, R.; Da Fonseca, G.A.; Portela, R. Global conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. BioScience 2007, 57, 868–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daily, G.C.; Matson, P.A. Ecosystem services: From theory to implementation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 9455–9456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Naidoo, R.; Balmford, A.; Costanza, R.; Fisher, B.; Green, R.E.; Lehner, B.; Malcolm, T.; Ricketts, T.H. Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 9495–9500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Nelson, E.; Mendoza, G.; Regetz, J.; Polasky, S.; Tallis, H.; Cameron, D.; Chan, K.M.; Daily, G.C.; Goldstein, J.; Kareiva, P.M. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tallis, H.; Kareiva, P.; Marvier, M.; Chang, A. An ecosystem services framework to support both practical conservation and economic development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 9457–9464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Zak, M.R.; Cabido, M.; Cáceres, D.; Díaz, S. What drives accelerated land cover change in central Argentina? Synergistic consequences of climatic, socioeconomic, and technological factors. Environ. Manag. 2008, 42, 181–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Niraula, R.R.; Gilani, H.; Pokharel, B.K.; Qamer, F.M. Measuring impacts of community forestry program through repeat photography and satellite remote sensing in the Dolakha district of Nepal. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 126, 20–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Casado-Arzuaga, I.; Madariaga, I.; Onaindia, M. Perception, demand and user contribution to ecosystem services in the Bilbao Metropolitan Greenbelt. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 129, 33–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Palomo, I.; Martín-López, B.; Potschin, M.; Haines-Young, R.; Montes, C. National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: Mapping ecosystem service flows. Ecosyst. Serv. 2013, 4, 104–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plieninger, T.; Dijks, S.; Oteros-Rozas, E.; Bieling, C. Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy 2013, 33, 118–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wolff, S.; Schulp, C.; Verburg, P. Mapping ecosystem services demand: A review of current research and future perspectives. Ecol. Indic. 2015, 55, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orenstein, D.E.; Groner, E. In the eye of the stakeholder: Changes in perceptions of ecosystem services across an international border. Ecosyst. Serv. 2014, 8, 185–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ericksen, P.; de Leeuw, J.; Said, M.; Silvestri, S.; Zaibet, L. Mapping ecosystem services in the Ewaso Ng’iro catchment. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 2012, 8, 122–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
SN | Ecosystem Services | Features | Beneficiary | Scale | Local Trend | Reason for Changes | Units of Measurement |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(A) Provisioning Services (Ecosystem goods) | |||||||
1 | Forest products | Provision of forest products especially timber, firewood, fodder from the forests | Private | O-L | + | Forest management activities Agriculture land converted into shrub and forest land | Timber—ft3 Firewood and fodder—kg and Bhari in local unit. |
2 | Food production from farmland | Food grains from farmlandsVegetables and fruits | Private | O | - | -Farmland abandonment -Effect of natural hazards-floods, droughts, -Shifting profession from farm-based to other sectors | ha; tons per ha |
3 | Forest foods and fruits | Fruits and vegetable from forest such as wild fruits (lapsi, Kaphal berries), mushrooms, Honey | Private | O-L | - | -Decrease in the number and quality of fruit trees/products -Forest food producing understory area is invaded by bushy and unwanted species. | Area = ha, products in tons per ha, and Number of fruit trees and species |
4 | Provision of water | Drinking and irrigation water | Public and private | O-R | - | -Largely unknown, though increase in forest area, provision of water is decreasing. | Area in ha, Number of traditional water sources |
5 | Local medicine | Different plant species with medicinal and aromatic values-trees, shrubs and herbs species | Public and Private | L-R | - | -Decrease in number and production of medicinal plants -Potentially due to changes in species composition | Number of medicinal plants per ha Kg or tons per ha |
6 | Energy | Fire wood as a major source of energy, also supported by biogas. | Private | O-L | 0 | -Easy access to firewood -Number of biogas plants in the village is also increasing | Number and area covered by firewood species, Number of households using biogas plants |
7 | Ornamental resources | Presence of varieties of ornamental and flowering species in the forest | Public and private | O-R | ? | -Largely unknown, but some of the respondents identified decreasing numbers of such plant species | Number of species and trees with ornamental values in the landscape, Area covered in ha. |
8 | Genetic resources | Different varieties and genes of tree, shrubs and herbs species. | Public and private | L-G | ? | -No systematic studies regarding the genetic diversity among different plant species | Number and varieties of species |
9 | Support to local agriculture and livestock | Support to farming practices through leaf/litters/organic manure, protection from wind and erosion, and fodder and forage for livestock. | Private | O-L | 0 and/or + | -Sufficient supply of fodder and litter in the upland. -more or less similar or a decrease in these services in the lowland | Number of household and livestock, and area of farmland supported by forest |
(B) Regulating Services | |||||||
1 | Climate regulation | Amelioration of local climatic condition and improve microclimate | Public and Private | L-R | ? | -There is no detailed study on these regards, but respondents state that forests in the surrounding landscape have been helping to improve local climate | Area improved by forests |
2 | Flood regulation | Control and regulation of floods | Public and Private | O-R | + | -Generally improved flood control scenario especially in upland regions, but the lowland is still affected by floods | Number of prevented floods, and Reclaimed flood affected area by forest |
3 | Water source protection & purification | Availability of pure water in the streams and water ponds | Public and private | O-R | + | Overall, water sources have been protected by forests. In contrast, availability of water has decreased in the pond and streams | Cubic meter per hectare Number and area of water sources protected by forests |
4 | Water regulation | Role of vegetation in the forest in regulating hydrological flows | Public and private | O-R | ? | No proper research so far, but most of the respondents believe in a positive role of forest on water regulation | Cubic meter per hectare |
5 | Erosion and landslide regulation | Vegetation on the farm and forest area, supporting on erosion control and prevent from landslide | Public and private | O-R | + | Due to forest and vegetation, landslides and erosion have decreased especially in the upland area as trees and vegetation act as a buffer against these kind of hazards | Number of landslide per year, Area affected by landslide and erosion in hectare. |
6 | Pest regulation | Local ecosystem and services could reduce the harmful insect and animal in the landscape | Public and Private | O-L | ? | -Not much systematic study conducted so far -Some of the respondents view local ecosystems and services as a means of regulating harmful insects and pests. | Number of cases of reduced pest infestation in the locality |
7 | Disease regulation | Fresh air, and water supplied from nearby forest and streams reduce the cases of disease. | Public and Private | O-L | ? and/or + | -Not many systematic studies. -Numbers of water borne diseases are reduced. | Number of diseases and effects among local inhabitants |
8 | Pollution control | Forest and surrounding ecosystem help reduce land, water and noise pollution | Public and Private | O-R | + | Decreased case of land, and water-based hazards | Number and area of the effect in hectare |
9 | Fresh air and air quality regulation | Trees/forests absorbs dust particles and carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, provide fresh air and oxygen | Public and Private | O-G | + | -Due to increase in forest area, increase in fresh air and thereby increased air quality. -No scientific study in this regard | Total leaf area (TLA) per ha, and amount of pollutant in the air. |
10 | Crop pollination | Some wild species such as birds and bees play crucial roles in crop pollination of both forest and farm species | Public and Private | O-R | ? and/or + | -There is no systematic study, but respondents agree with the positive role of birds and bee species in crop pollination | Number per ha, Tons per ha |
11 | Carbon sequestration | Forest capture atmospheric carbon through trees, shrubs and herbs. | Public and Private | O-G | + | With the increase in forest and vegetation cover, carbon sequestration also increases | Tons per ha or Mg per ha per year Both on an annual basis |
13 | Nutrient regulation | Forest provides various nutrients through decayed leaf litters and other organic matters | Public and Private | O-L | + | Increased nutrient regulation through decaying (and other process) of leaf litter and regulating of nutrients status of the forest itself and nearby farmland | - |
(C) Cultural Services | |||||||
1 | Religious value (temples, festivals) | Panchase region has different religious sites such as temples and stupas. | Public and Private | O-L | + | With the publicity of religious values of the sites and temples, large number of people are visiting the places | Number of religious sites, Number of visitors |
2 | Cultural and spiritual value | Presence of culturally significant indigenous Gurung culture, and their associated traditions and values | Public and Private | O-R | + | -Growing awareness of local and indigenous cultural values | Number of cultural sites, Number of visitors |
3 | Recreational value and lifestyle | Overall, the landscape provides and functions as a recreational site | Public and Private | O-R | + | -The site is increasingly becoming a recreational site | Number of visitors, and area covered by recreational landscape. |
4 | Aesthetic value and inspiration | Mosaic landscape have aesthetic and inspirational value through breathtaking views and an inspiring environment | Public and Private | O-G | + | -Increased aesthetic beauty and inspiring environment | Area covered as an aesthetic and inspiring environment. |
5 | Ecotourism | Aesthetic forest is also a source of ecotourism as means of recreation and ecotourism | Public and Private | O-G | + | -Increased number of tourists -Promotion of ecotourism activities such as homestay business | -Number of tourist visiting the places -The number of people engaged in ecotourism business |
6 | Sense of place | Increased sense of place among local communities due to their identity and attachment with the place and also the characteristic feature of the study landscape as a whole | Public and Private | O-L | + | -Due to the growing awareness and interest among local inhabitants, an increased sense of place was found among them both for their identity and the special features of the place | Number of people acknowledging their identity, value and the place of their origin. |
7 | Knowledge and education | Due to the diverse array of socio-ecological features, it is becoming an educational hub and natural laboratory. | Public and Private | O-G | + | -Increased research and study in the region | Number of studies |
8 | Social relation | Diverse groups and society in a small landscape provides an operational relationship and link between these groups, culture and communities. | Public and Private | O-L | + | -As a result of growing traditions of managing different ecosystems together through local institution and governance -Cooperation and supporting behavior in different social activities | Social value, culture, norms Institutional values. |
(D) Supporting Services | |||||||
1 | Nutrient cycling | Nutrient cycling in the ecosystem is influenced by the use of additional inputs such as fertilizers, livestock waste and so on. | Public and Private | O-L | ? | ||
2 | Soil formation and conservation | Prevent erosion and help conserve and further support for soil formation | Public and Private | O-L | + | Due to increased forest cover especially in the upland area, decreased soil erosion and thereby enhanced soil formation process. | Net annual saving of soil per hectare, i.e., tons per hectare per year |
3 | Wildlife habitat | Forest provides habitat support for large numbers of plants and animals | Public and Private | O-R | + | Increased forest cover has provided more habitats for different plan and animal species. | Presence of plant and animals in the forest. |
4 | Photosynthesis | Trees use the sun’s energy for photosynthesis, provide us with the oxygen to breathe and also store carbon below and above ground in the forest. | Public and Private | O-G | ? and/or + | As forest area is increasing, there might be increased oxygen through photosynthesis and storage of carbon in the forest. | |
5 | Water cycling | Water cycling may be affected by different human and natural factors such as structural changes to rivers | Public and Private | O-R | ? | The role of forest ecosystem, water cycling and availability of water resources needs further study in the region. | |
6 | Primary production | Net primary productivity is affected by different seasonal and inter-annual climatic variability | Public and Private | O-L | ? | Either increase or decrease in NPP in the face of different socio-ecological factors would also be an interesting area to investigate. | |
7 | Biodiversity conservation | Number of flora and fauna species in the farm and forest ecosystem | Public and Private | O-G | - | -Number of traditional species are decreasing, and invasive alien species are invading the farm and forest land | Area covered in ha. |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Adhikari, S.; Baral, H.; Nitschke, C.R. Identification, Prioritization and Mapping of Ecosystem Services in the Panchase Mountain Ecological Region of Western Nepal. Forests 2018, 9, 554. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9090554
Adhikari S, Baral H, Nitschke CR. Identification, Prioritization and Mapping of Ecosystem Services in the Panchase Mountain Ecological Region of Western Nepal. Forests. 2018; 9(9):554. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9090554
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdhikari, Shankar, Himlal Baral, and Craig R. Nitschke. 2018. "Identification, Prioritization and Mapping of Ecosystem Services in the Panchase Mountain Ecological Region of Western Nepal" Forests 9, no. 9: 554. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9090554