Comprehensively Assessing Ecosystem Service Dynamics in

Comprehensively AssessingEcosystem Service Dynamics in Savannas:

ISSEC – An SES Framework

Urs P. KreuterJoan Negley Kelleher Endowed Professor

Ecosystem Science & [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Thought for the Day

“If our western science is to move beyond that sterility

that views the world as object then it too must be willing

to enter into new logical forms and new orders … that will

tolerate ambiguity, paradox, metaphor, … yet at the same

time preserve the integrated balance of the whole.”

F. David Peat. 2005. Pathways of Chance. Pari Publishing, Grosetto, Italy.

2018 Savanna Science Network Meeting

Systems Thinking

Karl Ludwig von Bertalanffy. 1968. General Systems Theory:

• A system is a complex entity that refers to itself and, through self-reference, resists influences from its environment and, therefore, persists in its composition.


Peter M. Senge. 1990. The Fifth Discipline – The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Random House, New York, NY:

• We are taught to simplify complexity by breaking “wholes” into parts … [but in so doing] the whole is stripped of an essential quality – Interrelatedness!

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment


Strength of links between categories of ecosystem services and components of human well-being (includes indications of extent to which socioeconomic factors can mediate the linkage).

In situ services

Extractable goods

Context – Kruger to Canyons Biosphere

• The Kruger to Canyons (K2C) biosphere was established to promote

solutions to reconcile the objectives of biodiversity conservation and

sustainable development.

• Primary land uses lead to different ecosystem responses: Public

protected areas (KNP); Private nature reserves (PNRs); Communal

lands; Others (cropping, mining, urban, etc.).


The Issue• Inequitable distribution of conservation-related benefits for people

within the K2C is socio-politically unsustainable.

• Semi-arid areas, in which dynamic savannas generally occur, will likely experience more erratic and extreme weather events.

• Natural capital and the delivery of ecosystem services provided by savannas will likely also become less predictable.

• To adapt to anticipated socio-political and climatic changes, a research and management approach is needed that integrates the biophysical and socio-economic elements of savannas (i.e., social-ecological systems approach).


The Challenge

• Social-ecological systems (SES) approaches to adapt to changing biophysical and socio-political conditions are hindered by:

Complex multi-scale interactions between the biophysical and socio-economic factors affecting ecosystem function (Nicholson et al., 2009).

Small spatial & short temporal scales that generally characterize land management decisions tend to inhibit comprehensive assessment of long-term tradeoffs related to “development” (Allred et al., 2015).

Inconsistent use of concepts and terms (e.g., resilience) to describe complex social-ecological systems (Ostrom, 2009).


A Useful Framework

• Sustainable Rangeland Roundtable (SRR) was established ~2000 to identify key criteria (5) and indicators (64) for federal agencies to quantify effectiveness of federal investments in land management.

• SRR developed Integrated Social, Economic & Ecological Conceptual (ISEEC) framework to disentangle complexity of interactions affecting the delivery and use of ecosystem services on rangelands (Fox et al., 2009).

• ISEEC is a useful tool for systematically identifying interactionsaffecting the integrity of social-ecological systems and indicators to monitor and evaluate these linkages (Kreuter et al., 2012, 2016).


Social-Economic Capital (t0)

HumanCondition (t0)

Social- Economic Capital (t1)

HumanCondition (t1)

Soci

al-E

con

om

ic p

roce

sses

(so

cio

eco

no

mic

fu

nct

ion

s)

Social-economic Subsystem

Per capita income; Health and security;

Environmental awareness/concerns

Coordinated decisions;Investment capital;Policy and incentive

structures/institutions

Natural Capital (t0)

Biophysical Condition (t0)



Bio

ph

ysic

al p

roce

sses

(Eco

logi

cal f

un

ctio

ns)

Biophysical Subsystem

Amount and composition of biomass

Net primary productivity:

Hardwoods, grasses,forbs, weeds

ISEEC Framework

Ecosystem Services

Extractable

Goods

Extraction

of Goods

Tangible & Intangible Services

In Situ Use of

Services

External Outcomes

t1

t2

t1

t2

Framework for Ecosystem Heterogeneity


State t1

Agent(1o agent)

Controller(2o agent)

State t2

Responderset

Pickett, S.T.A., Cadenasso, M.L. & Benning, T.L. 2003. Biotic and abiotic variability as key determinants of savanna heterogeneity at multiple spatiotemporal scales. Pages 22-40 in: J.T. du Toit, K.H. Rogers and H.C. Biggs (eds.) The Kruger Experience: Ecology and Management of Savanna Heterogeneity. Island Press, Washington, DC, USA.

Biophysical Drivers in KNP


Ecological processes

Soil nutrients, insects (dung

beetles, termites), avifauna,

predators, etc.

Natural capital & conditions t2

Shrubland, less grass

Natural capital & conditions t1

Savanna,grass/tree

Elephants Impalas

Socioeconomic Drivers in Savannas


Social-economic processes

Conservation, Protection

Security,

Materials,

Health,

Social relations

Social-econ capital& conditions t2

Social-econ capital& conditions t1

Production,Utilitarian

Managers Organizations

D

Putting the Framework Together – ISEEC Applied in KNP


Social-economic

Subsystem

Ma

na

ge

rsO

rgs

Preservation

Responders:Security,

Materials,

Health,

Social relations

Utilitarian

Ecosystem Services:

Extractable: Provisioning

In situ: Regulating, Cultural,

Supporting

Feedbacks:Negative, Positive

SE layers

Pub./private

investments,

Capacity

building

Production

of material

goods and

services

Laws,

Regulations,

Policies

Socia

l-econom

ic P

rocesses

Biophysical

Subsystem

Responders:Nutrients,

Insects,

Avifauna

Predators

Savannas

Shrublands

Ele

phants

Imp

ala

s

Ecolo

gic

al P

rocesses

Germination,

Establishment,

Reproduction,

Net growth

Soil type,

Herbaceous/

woody plant

composition

Climate Chg,

CO2, H2O,

temperature

BP layers

Process Drivers and Social Variables in the K2C

KNP

• Process DriversAgents: fire, elephants,

impalas, managers

[protection], organizations


PNRs

• Process DriversAgents: fire, elephants,

impalas, landowners

[clearing], organizations

Communal

• Process DriversAgents: fire, cattle, goats,

people [harvesting],

organizations

• Social variablesValues: biodiversity, wildlife

dispersal, landscape

heterogeneity, large trees

Policy: water distribution, fire

management, population

management

• Social variablesValues: access to big five,

luxury accommodations, off

road access, fire damage

Policy: water holes, tree

thinning (fire vs other),

hunting/culling

• Social variablesValues: livestock grazing,

thatching, fuel wood, wild

fruit, wildlife threat

Policy: livestock water and

grazing access, fuelwood

harvest, protected trees

Linking to Agent Based Modelling

Peter Checkland & Jim Scholes. 1990. Soft Systems Methodology in Action. J. Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.


System

Thinking

Real

World

3. Root Definitions

(Agents, attributes,

behaviors)

4. Conceptual

models

2. Problem,

situation,

appreciated

5. Compare

2 & 4

1. Problem,

situation,

unstructured

6. Desirable

& feasible

changes

7. Implementation

Multi Agent Research & Simulation

• Individual entities (agents)– Have properties

– Sense environment

– Act to achieve goals

– Interact with other agents

– Interact with environment


Layers in MARS

• Layers are the parts of the environment

• Layers contain information

• Timeseries data

• Geospatial data

• Agents live on layers

• Human layer

• Elephant layer

• Impala layer

• Tree layer


Conclusion

• K2C was established to promote solutions to reconcile biodiversity conservation and sustainable development in a savanna ecosystem in the face of climatic and socio-political uncertainties.

• Savanna ecosystems are complex, dynamic multi-scale adaptive SYSTEMS that contain interacting biological and human agents.

• Complexity, self-organization, and emergent behavior in such ecosystems make predicting future system states problematic.


Conclusion

• An integrated SES approach is needed to comprehend and adapt to anticipated changes in savanna systems.

• To predict future scenarios under changing biophysical and socio-political environments in K2C a network of expertise is needed in biophysical and social sciences, systems analysis and multi-agent simulation modeling (to operationalize integration in complex adaptive systems).

• In this way can we accommodate ambiguity, paradox and metaphor while preserving the integrated balance in complex social-ecological systems, represented by savannas within the K2C.


Thank You


ReferencesAllred, B.W., et al. 2015. Ecosystem services lost to oil and gas in North America. Science 348, 401-402.

Fox, W.E., et al. 2009. An integrated social, economic, and ecologic conceptual framework for considering rangeland sustainability. Society & Natural Resources 22, 593-606.

Kreuter, U.P., et al. 2012. Framework for comparing ecosystem impacts of developing unconventional energy resources on western US rangelands. Rangeland Ecology & Management 65, 433-443

Kreuter, U.P., et al. 2016. State of knowledge about energy development impacts on North American rangelands: An integrative approach. J. Environmental Management. 180, 1-9.

Nicholson, E., et al. 2009. Priority research for ecosystem services in a changing world. J. Applied Ecology 46, 1139-1144.

Ostrom, E. 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325, 419e422.

Peat, F.D. 2005. Pathways of Chance. Pari Publishing, Grosetto, Italy.

Pickett, S.T.A., Cadenasso, M.L. & Benning, T.L. 2003. Biotic and abiotic variability as key determinants of savanna heterogeneity at multiple spatiotemporal scales. Pages 22-40 in: J.T. du Toit, K.H. Rogers and H.C. Biggs (eds.) The Kruger Experience: Ecology and Management of Savanna Heterogeneity. Island Press, Washington, DC, USA

Senge. P.M. 1990. The Fifth Discipline:The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Random House, New York, NY:


Ecosystem Services in ISEEC

• In Savanna systems “key” ecosystem can include:– Extractable goods:

• provisioning – water, forage, fuel wood, thatching materials, plant-based foods, wild meat, honey, medicinal plants, etc.

– In situ services • regulating – water filtration, carbon storage, pollination;

• cultural – aesthetic quality, biodiversity;

• supporting – biodiversity, nutrient cycling; etc.

• Value placed on various ESs differs among public (KNP), private (PNRs) and communal land users.


Social-Economic Capital (t0)

HumanCondition (t0)

Social- Economic Capital (t1)

HumanCondition (t1)

Soci

al-E

con

om

ic p

roce

sses

(so

cio

eco

no

mic

fu

nct

ion

s)

Social-economic Subsystem

Per capita income; Health and security;

Environmental awareness/concerns

Coordinated decisions;Investment capital;Policy and incentive

structures/institutions





Bio

ph

ysic

al p

roce

sses

(Eco

logi

cal f

un

ctio

ns)

Biophysical Subsystem

Amount and composition of biomass

Net primary productivity:

Hardwoods, grasses,forbs, weeds

ISEEC Framework

Ecosystem Services

Extractable

Goods

Extraction

of Goods

Tangible & Intangible Services

In Situ Use of

Services

External Outcomes

t1

t2

t1

t2

Measuring SustainabilitySocial criteria

Ecological criteria

Economic criteria

Sustainable

At Risk

Unsustainable

Study Area Sustainability

Space

100

100100

0


Documents

Comprehensively Assessing Ecosystem Service Dynamics in