Integrating multiple landscape management strategies to optimise conservation under climate and planning scenarios: a case study in the Iberian Peninsula
Miguel Cánibe Iglesias , Virgilio Hermoso , João C. Azevedo , João C. Campos , José Salgado-Rojas , Ângelo Sil , Adrián Regos
{"title":"Integrating multiple landscape management strategies to optimise conservation under climate and planning scenarios: a case study in the Iberian Peninsula","authors":"Miguel Cánibe Iglesias , Virgilio Hermoso , João C. Azevedo , João C. Campos , José Salgado-Rojas , Ângelo Sil , Adrián Regos","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Global change demands dynamic landscape management that integrates different strategies (e.g. promoting rewilding or traditional farming practices) to address the impact of climate and land use change. Planning for management strategies individually can lead to severe trade-offs between objectives, high opportunity costs and challenging implementation. Integrated management plans are needed to optimise the combination of multiple management strategies. We used the multi-action planning tool ‘Prioriactions’ to prioritise the spatial allocation of four management strategies (Afforestation, Rewilding, Farmland Return and Agroforestry Return) in the Meseta Ibérica transboundary Biosphere Reserve. We aimed to achieve targets for conservation of species suitable area and ecosystem services supply while minimising fire hazard under different climate scenarios. We tested this approach under contrasting planning scenarios depicting different management priorities (<em>Equally Weighted, Forest Maximising</em> and <em>Open Maximising</em>). By integrating multiple management strategies, we could achieve management goals for biodiversity and ecosystem services under different planning scenarios, minimising trade-offs and deriving recommendations easier to uptake. The spatial allocation and extent of management strategies varied according to climate change and planning scenarios. Afforestation was needed when putting more priority on forest species and carbon sequestration, while more Farmland Return was allocated when preserving open habitat species and agriculture. Fire hazard was higher in Rewilding areas and lower in Farmland Return and Agroforestry Return areas. The novelty of our approach lies in its capacity to combine different management strategies and provide an optimised spatial arrangement based on management features, making it suitable for planning in dynamic and complex environments where multiple pressures and objectives must be considered.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101742"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystem Services","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041625000464","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Global change demands dynamic landscape management that integrates different strategies (e.g. promoting rewilding or traditional farming practices) to address the impact of climate and land use change. Planning for management strategies individually can lead to severe trade-offs between objectives, high opportunity costs and challenging implementation. Integrated management plans are needed to optimise the combination of multiple management strategies. We used the multi-action planning tool ‘Prioriactions’ to prioritise the spatial allocation of four management strategies (Afforestation, Rewilding, Farmland Return and Agroforestry Return) in the Meseta Ibérica transboundary Biosphere Reserve. We aimed to achieve targets for conservation of species suitable area and ecosystem services supply while minimising fire hazard under different climate scenarios. We tested this approach under contrasting planning scenarios depicting different management priorities (Equally Weighted, Forest Maximising and Open Maximising). By integrating multiple management strategies, we could achieve management goals for biodiversity and ecosystem services under different planning scenarios, minimising trade-offs and deriving recommendations easier to uptake. The spatial allocation and extent of management strategies varied according to climate change and planning scenarios. Afforestation was needed when putting more priority on forest species and carbon sequestration, while more Farmland Return was allocated when preserving open habitat species and agriculture. Fire hazard was higher in Rewilding areas and lower in Farmland Return and Agroforestry Return areas. The novelty of our approach lies in its capacity to combine different management strategies and provide an optimised spatial arrangement based on management features, making it suitable for planning in dynamic and complex environments where multiple pressures and objectives must be considered.
期刊介绍:
Ecosystem Services is an international, interdisciplinary journal that is associated with the Ecosystem Services Partnership (ESP). The journal is dedicated to exploring the science, policy, and practice related to ecosystem services, which are the various ways in which ecosystems contribute to human well-being, both directly and indirectly.
Ecosystem Services contributes to the broader goal of ensuring that the benefits of ecosystems are recognized, valued, and sustainably managed for the well-being of current and future generations. The journal serves as a platform for scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders to share their findings and insights, fostering collaboration and innovation in the field of ecosystem services.