Connecting Water Quality and Ecosystem Services for Valuation and Assessment of a Groundwater Reserve Area in South-East Mexico
Highlights
- Thirteen ecosystem services were identified in the geo-hydrological reserve area of Yucatan, Mexico.
- Water quality during the period studied was good to very good compared to selected regulatory parameters.
- The willingness to pay was MXN 90 per month per household.
- Analyzing ecosystem services and how they relate to water quality can help us to understand and measure their importance.
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Site Description
2.2. Hydrogeological Framework
2.3. Survey Design
- They should live in Yucatán, considering at least 80% of the sample (250 of the approximately 300 participants), represented by the City of Mérida habitants.
- They should meet the minimum age of 18 so they can work legally and have the opportunity to receive a salary (261 of the approximately 300 participants).
- Applicants must have visited a cenote, assuring a real experience (253 of the approximately 300 participants).
2.4. Ecosystem Service Identification
2.5. Water Sample Collection and In Situ Measurements
2.6. Laboratory Analysis
2.7. Color Code for Water Quality Evaluation
2.8. Color Code for Water Quality and Ecosystem Services Provided
2.9. Economic Valuation
2.10. Statistical Tools and Methods
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Survey Analysis
3.2. Ecosystem Service Identification
3.3. Socioeconomic Variables and Ecosystem Services
- Group 1.
- Millennial and generation Z, because they are critical people, familiar with technology and multitasking. They are characterized for being entrepreneurs; they value participation and collaboration; they prefer sharing over owning, and promote new values such as sustainability, transparency and social commitment. This group covers the ages of 18–33 years of the surveyed persons.
- Group 2.
- The generation X and baby-boomers who grew up in a period of prosperity, with a good educational level, with a consumerist attitude that contributed to strengthening the world economy, were little worried about the environmental impacts generated by the industry. This group consists of the ages of 34 to 72 years.
- Group 1.
- Preparatory completed except for 3 who only finished high school.
- Group 2.
- University completed.
- Group 3.
- Master’s or doctorate completed.
- Group 1.
- The people who reside within the reserve area
- Group 2.
- The people who live in Mérida.
- Group 3.
- The people who reside in any other municipality that does not form part of the reserve area or who live in the City of Mérida.
- There is a relationship between the identification of water recharge and rainwater catchment ESs and age.
- There is a relationship between the identification of all ESs and age. There is a relationship between the water recharge and rainwater catchment identification as the most important ESs and age.
- Education and rainwater catchment and water recharge ES identification are related.
- Education and the identification of water recharge as the most important ESs are related.
- The gender and identification of all ESs are related.
Description Questions (Yes/No) | Age | Educational Level | Gender | Residence Location |
---|---|---|---|---|
Sinkholes visit | – | 0.75 | 0.62 | – |
Water recharge identification as ES | 0.007 | 0.002 | – | |
Identification of all ES | 0.04 | 0.002 | – | |
Water recharge identification as the most important ES | 0.08 | 0.75 |
3.4. Water Quality of Sinkholes
3.5. Water Quality and Ecosystem Service Relationship
3.6. Statistical Exploration
3.7. Economic Valuation: Willingness to Pay
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Carpenter, S.R.; Biggs, R. Freshwaters: Managing across scales in space and time. In Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship: Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009; pp. 197–220. ISBN 038773032X. [Google Scholar]
- Falkenmark, M.; Rockström, J. Balancing Water for Humans and Nature: The New Approach in Ecohydrology; Earthscan: London, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Assessment–MEA, M.E. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Costanza, R.; Folke, C. Valuing ecosystem services with efficiency, fairness and sustainability as goals. In Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1997; pp. 49–70. [Google Scholar]
- Kløve, B.; Ala-Aho, P.; Bertrand, G.; Boukalova, Z.; Ertürk, A.; Goldscheider, N.; Ilmonen, J.; Karakaya, N.; Kupfersberger, H.; Kvœrner, J. Groundwater dependent ecosystems. Part I: Hydroecological status and trends. Environ. Sci. Policy 2011, 14, 770–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United Nations. Resolution 64/292 (A/RES/64/292) Adopted by the General Assembly on 28 July 2010. The Human Right to Water and Sanitation; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Kinzelbach, W.; Bauer, P.; Siegfried, T.; Brunner, P. Sustainable groundwater management—Problems and scientific tools. Epis. J. Int. Geosci. 2003, 26, 279–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Comisión Nacional del Agua (CONAGUA). Determinación de Zonas Críticas para la Recarga de Acuíferos; Diario Oficial de la Federación (DOF): Mexico City, Mexico, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, L.; Huang, J.; Chen, X.; Chen, Y.; Liu, M. Contributions of natural climate changes and human activities to the trend of extreme precipitation. Atmos. Res. 2018, 205, 60–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edgar Rodríguez-Huerta, M.R.C.; Hernández-Terrones, L.M. A water balance model to estimate climate change impact on groundwater recharge in Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2020, 65, 470–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graniel, C.; Morris, L.; Carrillo-Rivera, J. Effects of urbanization on groundwater resources of Mérida, Yucatán. Environ. Geol. 1999, 37, 303–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pacheco, J.; Calderón, L.; Cabrera, A. Delineación de la zona de protección hidrogeológica para el campo de pozos de la planta Mérida I, en la ciudad de Mérida, Yucatán, México. Ingeniería 2004, 8, 7–16. [Google Scholar]
- Pacheco, J.; Marín, L.; Cabrera, A. Nitrate temporal and spatial patterns in 12 water-supply wells, Yucatán, Mexico. Environ. Geol. 2001, 40, 708–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakalowicz, M. Karst groundwater: A challenge for new resources. Hydrogeol. J. 2005, 13, 148–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Escolero, O.A.; Marin, L.E.; Steinich, B.; Pacheco, A.J.; Cabrera, S.A.; Alcocer, J. Development of a Protection Strategy of Karst Limestone Aquifers: The Mérida Yucatán, Mexico Case Study. Water Resour. Manag. 2002, 16, 351–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Marsily, G.D. Creation of Hydrogeological Nature Reserves: A plea for the defense of Groundwater. Groundwater 1992, 30, 658–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Escolero, O.; Marín, L.E.; Steinich, B.; Pacheco, J.A.; Molina-Maldonado, A.; Anzaldo, J.M. Geochemistry of the hydrogeological reserve of Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico. Geofís. Int. 2005, 44, 301–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Escolero, O.A.; Marin, L.E.; Steinich, B.; Pacheco, J. Delimitation of a hydrogeological reserve for a city within a karstic aquifer: The Mérida, Yucatán example. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2000, 51, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hernández-Terrones, L.; Rebolledo-Vieyra, M.; Almazán-Becerril, A.; Valadez, F. Reporte Final Proyecto FOMIX-YUC-2008-C06108977; Centro de Investigación Científica de Yucatán A.C. Unidad de Ciencias del Agua: Cancún, Mexico, 2011; p. 128. [Google Scholar]
- DOF. Decreto que Establece el Área Natural Protegida Denominada Reserva Estatal Geohidrológica Anillo de Cenotes; Technical Report; DOF: Mérida, Mexico, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Comisión Nacional del Agua (CONAGUA). Statistics on Water in Mexico 2015 Edition; Comisión Nacional del Agua (CONAGUA): Mexico City, Mexico, 2015; 298p. [Google Scholar]
- Comité Técnico de Aguas Subterráneas para la zona geohidrológica Metropolitana de Yucatán (COTASMEY). Características Socioeconómicas y Manejo del agua en la Reserva Estatal Geohidrológica Anillo de Cenotes; COTASMEY-SEDUMA: Mérida, Mexico, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- INEGI. Principales Resultados del Censo de Población y Vivienda; INEGI: Aguascalientes, Mexico, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- INEGI. Censo de Población y Vivienda; INEGI: Aguascalientes, Mexico, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- CONAPO. Índice de marginación por localidad 2010; Secretaría de Gobernación; CONAPO: Mexico City, Mexico, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Villarejo, J.L.B.; Klemm, C.M. Traducción y comentarios al artículo de J. Eric Thompson “The role of caves in maya culture”. Bol. Am. 1992, 42, 395–424. Available online: https://raco.cat/index.php/BoletinAmericanista/article/view/98601/146198 (accessed on 1 May 2024).
- Brady, J.E.; Villarejo, J.L.B. Las cavernas en la geografía sagrada de los mayas. In Perspectivas Antropológicas en el Mundo Maya; Sociedad Española de Estudios Mayas: Madrid, Spain, 1993; pp. 75–96. [Google Scholar]
- Villarejo, J.L.B.; Sánchez, I. Las cavernas de municipio de Oxkutzcab, Yucatán, México: Nuevas aportaciones. Mayab 1991, 36–52. Available online: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2774936 (accessed on 1 May 2024).
- Ward, W.C.; Weidie, A.E.; Back, W. Frontmatter-Geology and Hydrogeology of the Yucatán and Quaternary Geology of Northeastern Yucatán Peninsula; New Orleans Geological Society: New Orleans, LA, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Schulte, P.; Alegret, L.; Arenillas, I.; Arz, J.A.; Barton, P.J.; Bown, P.R.; Bralower, T.J.; Christeson, G.L.; Claeys, P.; Cockell, C.S. The Chicxulub asteroid impact and mass extinction at the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary. Science 2010, 327, 1214–1218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hildebrand, A.R.; Penfield, G.T.; Kring, D.A.; Pilkington, M.; Camargo, Z.A.; Jacobsen, S.B.; Boynton, W.V. Chicxulub crater: A possible Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary impact crater on the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico. Geology 1991, 19, 867–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Penfield, G.T. Definition of a major igneous zone in the central Yucatán platform with aeromagnetics and gravity. In Technical Program, Abstracts and Bibliographies, 51st Annual Meeting; Society of Exploration Geophysicists: Tulsa, OK, USA, 1981; p. 37. [Google Scholar]
- Gulick, S.P.; Bralower, T.J.; Ormö, J.; Hall, B.; Grice, K.; Schaefer, B.; Lyons, S.; Freeman, K.H.; Morgan, J.V.; Artemieva, N. The first day of the Cenozoic. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 19342–19351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hernández-Terrones, L.; Martínez, L.; Szamotulski, J.; González-Partida, E.; Morgan, J.V.; Lowery, C.M.; Gulick, S.P.S.; Rebolledo-Vieyra, M.; Kring, D. Study of fluid circulation through the Chicxulub crater using Rock-Eval pyrolysis and fluid inclusions. Appl. Geochem. 2022, 137, 105194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gulick, S.P.; Barton, P.J.; Christeson, G.L.; Morgan, J.V.; McDonald, M.; Mendoza-Cervantes, K.; Pearson, Z.F.; Surendra, A.; Urrutia-Fucugauchi, J.; Vermeesch, P.M. Importance of pre-impact crustal structure for the asymmetry of the Chicxulub impact crater. Nat. Geosci. 2008, 1, 131–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perry, E.; Marin, L.; McClain, J.; Velazquez, G. Ring of cenotes (sinkholes), northwest Yucatán, Mexico: Its hydrogeologic characteristics and possible association with the Chicxulub impact crater. Geology 1995, 23, 17–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bauer-Gottwein, P.; Gondwe, B.R.; Charvet, G.; Marín, L.E.; Rebolledo-Vieyra, M.; Merediz-Alonso, G. The Yucatán Peninsula karst aquifer, Mexico. Hydrogeol. J. 2011, 3, 507–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suárez-Morales, E.; Rivera-Arriaga, E. Hidrología y Fauna Acuática de los Cenotes de la Península de Yucatán. Rev. Soc. Mex. Hist. Nat. 1998, 48, 37–47. [Google Scholar]
- Gondwe, B.R.; Lerer, S.; Stisen, S.; Marín, L.; Rebolledo-Vieyra, M.; Merediz-Alonso, G.; Bauer-Gottwein, P. Hydrogeology of the south-eastern Yucatán Peninsula: New insights from water level measurements, geochemistry, geophysics and remote sensing. J. Hydrol. 2010, 389, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Batllori-Sampedro, E.; González-Piedra, J.I.; Díaz-Sosa, J.; Febles-Patrón, J.L. Caracterización hidrológica de la región costera noroccidental del estado de Yucatán, México. In Investigaciones Geográficas; Instituto de Geografía, UNAM: Mexico City, Mexico, 2006; pp. 74–92. [Google Scholar]
- Mandujano, F. Teoría del muestreo: Particularidades del diseño muestral en estudios de la conducta social. REMA Rev. Electrón. Metodol. Apl. 1998, 3, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Kotrlik, J.; Higgins, C. Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research appropriate sample size in survey research. Inf. Technol. Learn. Perform. J. 2001, 19, 43. [Google Scholar]
- Cochran, W.G. Sampling Techniques; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
- NOM-127-SSA1-1994 (modif. 2000); Norma Oficial Mexicana Salud ambiental, agua para uso y consumo humano. Límites permisibles de calidad y tratamientos a que debe someterse el agua para su potabilización. DOF: Mexico City, Mexico, 2000; pp. 1–71.
- DOF. Criterios Ecológicos de Calidad del Agua; CE-CCA-001/89; Comisión Nacional del Agua-Subdirección General de Administración del Agua: Mexico City, Mexico, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- WHO. Guidelines for drinking-water quality. WHO Libr. Cat. Publ. Data 2011, 4, 148–153. [Google Scholar]
- Eaton, A.D.; Clesceri, L.S.; Greenberg, A.E. American Public Health Association (APHA). In Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th ed.; American Public Health Association (APHA): Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Kolstad, C. Environmental Economics, 2nd ed.; Oxford University Press Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Field, B. Economía ambiental, Una Introducción; Mc Graw Hill Interamericana S.A.: Bogota, Colombia, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Grajales, A.; Polanco-Rodriguez, A. Diagnóstico del Sector Agropecuario, Pesquero y Rural de Yucatán, México. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315775667_Diagnostico_del_Sector_Agropecuario_Pesquero_y_Rural_de_Yucatan_Mexico?channel=doi&linkId=58e3d82645851538b04ae397&showFulltext=true (accessed on 1 May 2024). [CrossRef]
- DOF. Reglamento de la Ley de Protección al Medio Ambiente del Estado de Yucatán en materia de Cenotes, Cuevas y Grutas; Technical Report; DOF: Mexico City, Mexico, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Comisión Nacional del Agua (CONAGUA). Statistics on Water in Mexico 2010 Edition; Comisión Nacional del Agua (CONAGUA): Mexico City, Mexico, 2010; 258p. [Google Scholar]
- RAMSAR. Ficha Informativa de los Humedales Ramsar-Anillo de Cenotes. 2010. p. 17. Available online: https://rsis.ramsar.org/RISapp/files/RISrep/MX2043RIS.pdf (accessed on 1 May 2024).
- Schmitter-Soto, J.J.; Ruiz-Cauich, L.E.; Herrera, R.L.; González-Solís, D. An index of biotic integrity for shallow streams of the Hondo River basin, Yucatán Peninsula. Sci. Total. Environ. 2011, 409, 844–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmitter-Soto, J.J.; Escobar-Briones, E.; Alcocer, J.; Suárez-Morales, E.; Elías-Gutiérrez, M.; Marín, L.E. Los cenotes de la Península de Yucatán. In Lagos y Presas de México; De La Lanza, G., García-Calderón, J.L., Eds.; AGT: Mexico City, Mexico, 2002; pp. 338–376. [Google Scholar]
- Brauman, K.A.; Daily, G.C.; Duarte, T.K.; Mooney, H.A. The nature and value of ecosystem services: An overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2007, 32, 67–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Ahuactzin, T.; Vieyra, M.R.; Ortega-Camacho, D.; Escobar-Morales, S.; Terrones, L.M.H. Hydrogeochemical processes and trace elements in sediments at the south-eastern Mexican karst aquifer. Mar. Freshw. Res. 2018, 70, 513–530. [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]
- de Fuentes, A.G.; Jouault, S.; Romero, D.; Fraga, J. Atlas de Turismo Alternativo en la Península de Yucatán; Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN, Unidad Mérida: Mérida, Mexico, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Yahdjian, L.; Sala, O.E.; Havstad, K.M. Rangeland ecosystem services: Shifting focus from supply to reconciling supply and demand. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2015, 13, 44–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- INEGI. Censo de Población y Vivienda 2010; INEGI: Mexico City, Mexico, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Van Riper, C.J.; Landon, A.C.; Kidd, S.; Bitterman, P.; Fitzgerald, L.A.; Granek, E.F.; Ibarra, S.; Iwaniec, D.; Raymond, C.M.; Toledo, D. Incorporating sociocultural phenomena into ecosystem-service valuation: The importance of critical pluralism. BioScience 2017, 67, 233–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ecosystem Service | Description | |
---|---|---|
Cultural | Recreation (tourism) | Income for tourism, tourist numbers, tours numbers, labels or certifications |
Environmental education | Workshops, introduction of sustainable practices in communities | |
Research | Number or project research, monitoring network, water quality indicator, public policies | |
Mayan Cosmo-vision (caves and sinkholes) | Mayan traditions preservation, tangible and intangible benefits | |
Provisioning | Water drinking supply | Compliance with regulations |
Water for irrigation | Volume of water, irrigation surface, Income for agriculture | |
Water for livestock | Income for livestock activities Available surface | |
Regulating | Water transportation | Mapping of sinkholes, caves and fractures Porosity and permeability studies |
Water purification | Biogeochemical cycles | |
Saline intrusion barrier | Halocline lens measurements, depth | |
Aquifer Recharge | Water volume available Water quality Water table | |
Habitat or supporting | Vegetation cover maintenance | Management plans in forestry and vegetation areas Presence/absence vegetation cover related with water volume |
Biodiversity preservation | Species monitoring, endangered and protected species |
Parameter | WHO (2011) Water Drinking Standards | N.O.M- 127- SSA1(1994) Modif 2000 | CE-CCA-001/89 (DOF 1989) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Water Drinking Supply | Recreative w/Primary Contac | Agriculture Irrigation | Livestock | Aquatic Life Protection (Freshwater) | |||
Sulfate (mg/L) | 400 | 500 | 130 | 0.005 | |||
Chloride (mg/L) | 250 | 250 | 250 | 147.5 | 250 | ||
Nitrate (mg/L) | 50 | 10 | 5 | 90 | |||
Nitrite (mg/L) | 3 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 10 | |||
Ammonia (mg/L) | 0.5 | 0.06 | |||||
Phosphates (mg/L) | 0.1 | 0.025 | |||||
Alkalinity (mg/L) | 500 | 500 | 400 | ||||
Fecal coliforms (MPN/100 mL) | Absence | Absence | 100 | 200 | 1000 | 200 | |
Total coliforms | Absence | Absence | |||||
Temperature (°C) | Natural condition +2.5 | Natural condition +1.6 | |||||
Total dissolved solids (mg/L) | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 | ||||
pH | 6.5–8.6 | 6.5–8.5 | 5–9 | 4.5–9 | |||
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) | 4 | 5 |
Sinkole | Campaign | Parameter | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sulfate (mg/L) | Chloride (mg/L) | Nitrate (mg/L) | Nitrite (mg/L) | Ammonia (mg/L) | Phosphates (mg/L) | Alkalinity (mg/L) | Fecal Coliforms (MPN/100 mL) | Total Coliforms (MPN/100 mL) | Temperature (°C) | Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) | pH | D.O (mg/L) | ||
A | 1 | 18.4 | 100.9 | 19.9 | <LDM | 0.43 | <LDM | 480 | <1.0 | 1011.2 | 26.6 | 1325 | 7 | 3.4 |
2 | 12.6 | 42.2 | 17.1 | <LDM | 0.21 | <LDM | 481.9 | <1.0 | 691 | 26.4 | 660 | 7.3 | 4.4 | |
B | 1 | 16.1 | 107.6 | 13.9 | <LDM | 0.09 | <LDM | 386 | <1.0 | 1011.2 | 25.9 | 1553 | 7.2 | 4.2 |
2 | 26.9 | 131.3 | 20.3 | <LDM | 0.11 | <LDM | 446 | <1.0 | 4 | 26 | 890 | 7.2 | 5.8 | |
C | 1 | 17.7 | 109.9 | 36.7 | <LDM | 0.11 | <LDM | 201 | <1.0 | 1011.2 | 26.3 | 1533 | 7.3 | 4.6 |
2 | 10.8 | 134.7 | 11.4 | <LDM | 0.3 | <LDM | 289 | ND | ND | 25.6 | 1090 | 7.5 | 6.9 | |
D | 1 | 15.7 | 58.8 | 14.3 | <LDM | 0.24 | <LDM | 240 | <1.0 | 1011.2 | 26.9 | 1242 | 7.1 | 5.1 |
2 | 28.3 | 76 | 14.4 | <LDM | 0.26 | <LDM | 487.9 | <1.0 | 173.3 | 26.7 | 790 | 7.2 | 4.1 | |
E | 1 | 15.6 | 65.1 | 15.7 | <LDM | 0.18 | <LDM | 440 | <1.0 | 1011.2 | 26.8 | 1300 | 6.9 | 3.9 |
2 | 27.7 | 68.2 | 17.3 | <LDM | 0.11 | <LDM | 505.8 | <1.0 | 1011.2 | 26.7 | 780 | 7.5 | 5.1 | |
F | 1 | 15.7 | 58.8 | 14.3 | <LDM | 0.24 | <LDM | 240 | <1.0 | 1011.2 | 26.9 | 1242 | 7.1 | 5.1 |
2 | 28.3 | 76 | 14.4 | <LDM | 0.26 | <LDM | 487.9 | <1.0 | 173.3 | 26.7 | 790 | 7.2 | 4.1 | |
G | 1 | 46.6 | 101.5 | 15.9 | <LDM | 0.13 | <LDM | 367 | <1.0 | 1011.2 | 27 | 1420 | 6.9 | 4.4 |
2 | 16.6 | 110.3 | 7.2 | <LDM | 0.09 | <LDM | 184 | ND | ND | 26.8 | 1080 | 7.3 | 6.1 | |
H | 1 | 6 | 21 | 14.1 | <LDM | 0.3 | <LDM | 515 | <1.0 | 249.5 | 24.8 | 1110 | 7.9 | 1.3 |
2 | 14.6 | 46.2 | 14.6 | <LDM | 0.19 | <LDM | 460.9 | <1.0 | 263.1 | 25 | 640 | 7.4 | 1.6 | |
I | 1 | 6.3 | 27.9 | 12.9 | <LDM | 0.32 | <LDM | 305 | <1.0 | <1.0 | 26.9 | 1120 | 7.8 | 2.1 |
2 | 19.9 | 81.4 | 21.9 | <LDM | 0.11 | <LDM | 475.9 | <1.0 | 424.5 | 26.8 | 690 | 7.5 | 6.7 | |
J | 1 | 19.4 | 109.8 | 23.4 | <LDM | 0.12 | <LDM | 383 | <1.0 | 1011.2 | 27.1 | 1430 | 7.4 | 3.9 |
2 | 19.2 | 135.8 | 17.8 | <LDM | 0.21 | <LDM | 309 | <1.0 | 173.1 | 26.8 | 1160 | 7.1 | 5.4 | |
K | 1 | 12.1 | 59.1 | 20.3 | <LDM | 0.18 | <LDM | 441 | <1.0 | <1.0 | 25.4 | 1220 | 7.7 | 4.7 |
2 | 24.2 | 75.3 | 21.2 | <LDM | 0.15 | <LDM | 457.9 | <1.0 | 691 | 25.6 | 740 | 6.8 | 5 |
Ecosystem Service with Direct Relationship | Provisioning/Regulating Human Consumption | Cultural (Recreational Sinkholes Visit) | Provisioning (Agriculture) | Provisioning (Livestock) | Habitat or Supporting (Biodiversity Conservation) | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WHO (2011) [47] | N.O.M-127-SSA1(1994) Modif 2000 [45] | Mexican Water Quality Criteria CE-CCA-001/89 [46] | ||||||||||||
Drinking Water Supply | Recreational with Primary Contact | Agriculture Irrigation | Livestock | Aquatic Life Protection Freshwater) | ||||||||||
Sinkhole | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
A | 75% | 87% | 70% | 80% | 64% | 82% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 50% | 50% |
B | 75% | 87% | 70% | 80% | 82% | 82% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 50% | 67% |
C | 65% | 83% | 70% | 67% | 82% | 80% | 100% | ND | 100% | ND | 100% | 100% | 50% | 67% |
D | 75% | 75% | 70% | 80% | 82% | 82% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 67% | 50% |
E | 75% | 75% | 70% | 70% | 64% | 82% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 50% | 67% |
F | 75% | 87% | 70% | 80% | 82% | 82% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 67% | 50% |
G | 75% | 83% | 70% | 80% | 82% | 80% | 100% | ND | 100% | ND | 100% | 100% | 50% | 67% |
H | 63% | 87% | 60% | 70% | 64% | 73% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 50% | 50% |
I | 87% | 87% | 80% | 80% | 73% | 82% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 50% | 67% |
J | 75% | 75% | 70% | 70% | 73% | 82% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 50% | 67% |
K | 87% | 87% | 80% | 80% | 73% | 82% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 50% | 50% |
Sulfates | Chlorides | Nitrates | Ammonia | Alkalinity | Temperature | TDS | pH | DO | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sulfates | 1 | 0.3718 | 0.1199 | −0.3490 | 0.1812 | 0.3792 | −0.0612 | −0.5649 | 0.259 |
Chlorides | 1 | 0.2130 | −0.3028 | −0.3290 | 0.2111 | 0.3186 | −0.3827 | 0.6325 | |
Nitrates | 1 | −0.2722 | 0.0158 | 0.0042 | 0.2134 | −0.0769 | 0.0659 | ||
Ammonia | 1 | 0.1284 | −0.0749 | −0.0203 | 0.1262 | −0.3934 | |||
Alkalinity | 1 | −0.3193 | −0.5243 | 0.0924 | −0.3344 | ||||
Temperature | 1 | 0.2083 | −0.3724 | −0.3155 | |||||
TDS1 | 1 | −0.1303 | −0.0586 | ||||||
pH | 1 | −0.2814 | |||||||
DO | 1 |
Analysis of Variance Test | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Df | Sum Sq | Mean Sq | F Value | P (>F) | ||
Sinkhole | 10 | 47,035 | 4703 | 0.035 | 1.00 | |
Campaign | 1 | 98,390 | 98,390 | 0.741 | 0.391 | |
Residuals | 186 | 24,709,918 | 132,849 | |||
Least Significant Difference Test | ||||||
Mean | Groups | |||||
Campaign | ||||||
Campaign 1 | 203.24 | a | ||||
Campaign 2 | 158.65 | b |
# of Surveys | Disposition to | No Disposition | No Answer | Persons * | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pay | to Pay | ( MX Pesos) | ||||
Gender | Women | 154 | 118 | 34 | 2 | 65 |
Man | 108 | 82 | 24 | 2 | 52 | |
Surveys | Disposition to Pay | Quantity | ||||
Persons | Persons | % | $MX pesos | |||
Education | Secondary and/or High School | 125 | 96 | 77 | 86 | |
University degree | 75 | 55 | 72 | 87 | ||
Master’s or Ph.D. degree | 54 | 43 | 80 | 99 | ||
None | 7 | 6 | 86 | 87 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
López-Monzalvo, M.L.; Batllori-Sampedro, E.; Ayala-Godoy, J.A.; Guerrero-Ruiz, E.; Hernández-Terrones, L.M. Connecting Water Quality and Ecosystem Services for Valuation and Assessment of a Groundwater Reserve Area in South-East Mexico. Water 2024, 16, 1358. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16101358
López-Monzalvo ML, Batllori-Sampedro E, Ayala-Godoy JA, Guerrero-Ruiz E, Hernández-Terrones LM. Connecting Water Quality and Ecosystem Services for Valuation and Assessment of a Groundwater Reserve Area in South-East Mexico. Water. 2024; 16(10):1358. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16101358
Chicago/Turabian StyleLópez-Monzalvo, Myrna L., Eduardo Batllori-Sampedro, Jairo A. Ayala-Godoy, Eugenio Guerrero-Ruiz, and Laura M. Hernández-Terrones. 2024. "Connecting Water Quality and Ecosystem Services for Valuation and Assessment of a Groundwater Reserve Area in South-East Mexico" Water 16, no. 10: 1358. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16101358
APA StyleLópez-Monzalvo, M. L., Batllori-Sampedro, E., Ayala-Godoy, J. A., Guerrero-Ruiz, E., & Hernández-Terrones, L. M. (2024). Connecting Water Quality and Ecosystem Services for Valuation and Assessment of a Groundwater Reserve Area in South-East Mexico. Water, 16(10), 1358. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16101358