One Ecosystem :
Research Article
|
Corresponding author: Ioannis N Vogiatzakis (ioannis.vogiatzakis@ouc.ac.cy)
Academic editor: Joachim Maes
Received: 29 Oct 2019 | Accepted: 20 Dec 2019 | Published: 15 Jan 2020
© 2020 Ioannis Vogiatzakis, Savvas Zotos, Vassilis Litskas, Paraskevi Manolaki, Dimitrios Sarris, Menelaos Stavrinides
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Vogiatzakis IN, Zotos S, Litskas VD, Manolaki P, Sarris D, Stavrinides MC (2020) Towards implementing Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services in Cyprus: A first set of indicators for ecosystem management. One Ecosystem 5: e47715. https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.5.e47715
|
|
Ecosystems deliver a range of services that are important for human well-being. Although Ecosystem Services (ES) assessments have been carried out worldwide in different geographical areas, islands are still under-represented. This research presents the first set of indicators developed for Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) provided by the ecosystems of Cyprus, as required by the EU Biodiversity Strategy, along with the rationale behind the selection criteria. In total, 269 potential indicators were assessed in terms of data availability at the national/subnational level and their suitability for MAES and were classified using a "traffic light" system on the basis of overall suitability (i.e. conceptually and in terms of datasets). The results showed that 89 indicators (Green indicators) can be directly used for assessing ES in Cyprus. Amongst these 89 Green indicators, 28 are considered to be new additions to the EU MAES list, since they were proposed solely for Cyprus ecosystems, as a result of consultation with local stakeholders. Provisioning and cultural services could be adequately mapped, but lack of data was observed for several regulating services (e.g. erosion, pollution, carbon sequestration). Not all Green indicators, identified herein, are relevant for assessing ES provided by ecosystems in Cyprus, whereas Green indicators which measure similar ES might be redundant. For a given geographical context, there might be relevant (and important) indicators which are not included in the MAES list and this is why consultation with stakeholders is advisable. Knowledge gaps and needs for further improving MAES on the island are also discussed.
Ecosystem services, decision-making, Mediterranean islands, policy, planning, sustainability
Ecosystems can deliver a range of services that are important for human well-being including food production, air and water purification and conservation of genetic diversity for future use (
Target 2 (Maintain and restore ecosystems and their services) of the EU Biodiversity Strategy and Action 5 therein, aim to improve the knowledge about Ecosystem Services (ES) in the EU territory. According to this action, Member States (MS) need to map and assess the state of the ecosystems and their services, to evaluate their economic value and promote the incorporation of such information in their reporting schemes, by 2020 (
Work for ES mapping and assessment has been undertaken in all EU countries, Switzerland and several Balkan countries (
Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services is an ongoing process in most of the countries at national, regional or case-study level (i.e.
The coastal, marine and inland ecosystems of islands provide valuable regulating, provisioning and cultural services to more than 500 million people (
The development of a national ES assessment is an obligation for Cyprus, an island state, stemming from the country's obligation as a full EU member and due to the fact that the island is one of the ten Mediterranean Basin hotspots, based on plant endemism and richness (
The aim of this paper is to guide policy- and decision-makers in Cyprus through the process of MAES with a view to contextualise its application nationally. This is done by presenting and discussing the results of the first approach taken to define, assess and map indicators for the implementation of MAES in the country. Accordingly, the objectives were to:
The methodological steps and rationale employed for ES indicators assessment are given in Fig.
Step 1 - Ecosystem types : Following the guidance for large scale assessments (
Step 2 - Potential indicators : The potential indicators that could be useful for MAES in Cyprus were identified, for each broad ecosystem type and each category of services (provisioning, regulating and cultural) according to CICES (
Step 3 - Data evaluation : Two criteria were employed to evaluate suitability-validity of all available data sources as potential for ES indicators’ mapping in Cyprus: a) suitability – based on the quality and characteristics of the data (e.g. spatial resolution, credibility, easily perceived by the users, age of the data, % of land covered), b) availability and short term accessibility – based on the availability and format of the data (e.g. ownership, non-spatial format). For example, the data (to determine a potential indicator) were considered suitable in the case that they cover the whole island (e.g. agricultural land, forest area), they were systematically monitored (e.g. water consumption for drinking or irrigation purpose), they had fine spatial resolution (e.g. less than or equal to 1 km) and they were recently monitored (e.g. for the distribution of the agricultural land, the most recent data available). If the criteria for the suitability were met, the availability and short-term accessibility were assessed (e.g. the public service/authority is capable of providing them for free in the short term). It should be mentioned that, due to the political situation on the island, consistent data are available and monitored and, therefore, submitted to the EU only for the Area effectively Controlled by the Government of the Republic of Cyprus (ACGRC), since the acquis communitaire is suspended in the northern part. Truly island-wide data exist only on EU related portals (ESDB, Eurostat), but these are usually of coarse spatial resolution, with the exception of Copernicus CLMS, which makes the implementation of MAES difficult at a local scale.
Moreover, data sources that could be used for MAES were also identified and include: 1. The Eratosthenes database (joint data from the public sector, maintained by the Department of Geological Survey) which is the main source for mapping biophysical data at a national level/sub national level; 2. The Statistical Service of Cyprus (http://www.mof.gov.cy) which is the source for relevant statistical non-spatial data; 3. Additional data from several government Departments (e.g. Environment, Geological Survey, Forests, Agriculture) which are now open and publicly available (www.data.gov.cy); 4. Cyprus Agricultural Payments Organization (CAPO): The CAPO dataset holds the land parcel information system (LPIS) for 2013 and provides information on the type of farm and type of crops cultivated on each plot, including grasslands; 5. European Datasets including European Soil Data Centre (ESDAC) - https://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/; COPERNICUS (https://www.copernicus.eu/en) and Eurostat (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat).
Based on the aforementioned criteria of data suitability, availability and short term accessibility, datasets were then assigned to three categories using a "traffic light" system, following
Evaluation of ES indicators for a) forests and shrublands, b) agricultural and pasture and c) freshwater ecosystems (and numbers of potential indicators per category). The characterisation on a scale from very low to very high is a function of an indicator's conceptual suitability and existing data suitability for its mapping (traffic light system: green, orange, red).
Step 4 - Indicators evaluation : This step was a combined evaluation of indicators and the datasets available for mapping the indicators (e.g. an indicator might be appropriate conceptually for mapping a given ES, but the quality of respective data might be poor to map; see sections 2 and 3 above). For the indicators' assessment, we followed the classification that is provided in Fig.
Step 5 - Proposed indicators (at a sub-national level) : Considering the above mapping methodologies and the indicator evaluation method (Fig.
Ecosystem service indicators of very high suitability per ecosystem type and the proposed method for their mapping [A,B,C,D,E]. Underlined are the indicators proposed by the stakeholders.
Agricultural & pasture land |
Forests & shrublands |
Freshwater |
Provisioning ecosystem services |
||
1. Agricultural area [Ε] 2. Hunting areas and seasons [Ε] 3. Areas important for groundwater abstraction in agro-ecosystems [Α] 4. Areas with access to treated municipal wastewater for irrigation [Α] 5. Agricultural areas equipped with irrigation facilities [E] 6. Groundwater bodies location in the island [Ε] 7. Yields of feed or food crops (tonnes/ha; tonnes dry matter/ha; MJ/ha) [Α] 8. Area of energy crops (ha) [Α] 9. Biofuel, biodiesel, bioethanol (kToe) [Α] |
1. Hunting areas and seasons [Α] 2. Important areas for groundwater abstraction [Ε] 3. Forest biomass stock [Ε] 4. Forest biomass increment [Α] 5. Forest for timber, pulp wood etc. production [Α] 6. Commercial forest tree volume & harvesting rates [Α] 7. Trees (presence): pines for resins [Α] 8. Tree species (timber trees) [Α] 9. Wood consumption (industrial roundwood, fuelwood) [Α] |
1. Number and area of the dams that fishing is allowed [Ε] 2. Number and production (per species) of fish farms [Ε] 3. Freshwater aquaculture production (e.g. trout production) [Α] 4. Water consumption for drinking [Α] 5. Number and capacity of dams [Ε] 6. Number of boreholes in watersheds [Ε] 7. Volume of water bodies [Α] 8. Stream water discharge [Α] 9. Extent of permanent flow section per stream [Ε] |
Regulating and maintenance ecosystem services |
||
1. High Nature Value farmland (HNVf) [Ε] 2. Number of floods/year that cause problems in agricultural areas [Ε] 3. Traditional plantations/orchards area (ha) [Ε] 4. Area cultivated with legumes [Ε] 5. Humidity Index [Ε] 6. Land Use Change [Ε] |
1. C storage in forest [D] 2. C sequestration by forest (NPP; NEP) [D] 3. Forest soil condition: chemical soil properties [D] 4. Areas where aquifers are located [Ε] 5. Forest area (ha) [Ε] 6. Area of peri-urban forests (ha) [Ε] 7. Forest species distribution [Ε] 8. Investments in forests maintenance/ management [Α] 9. Protected Areas for nursery populations [Ε] 10. Forest area designated for habitat-landscape protection: Natura2000 etc. [Ε] |
1. Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZs) [Ε] 2. Area of riparian forests [Ε] 3. Number and efficiency of wastewater treatment plants [Α] 4. Volume of treated wastewater (tonnes/year) [Α] 5. Area of wetlands [Ε] 6. Floodplains areas (and record of annual floods) [Α] 7. Floodplains area [Ε] 8. Area of wetlands located in flood risk zones [Ε] 9. Ecological status [Α] 10. Morphological status [Ε] 11. Number of introduced vertebrates in rivers and riparian areas [Α] 12. Chemical status [Α] 13. Surface of flood-prone areas [Ε] 14. Percentage of wetlands covered by Natura 2000 areas [Ε] |
Cultural ecosystem services |
||
1. Density and number of bicycle routes and trails into agricultural and forest land [Ε] 2. Number of environmental info centres into agricultural areas [Ε] 3. Number of agricultural/ traditional festivals [Ε] 4. Religious monuments, pilgrim paths in agro-ecosystems [Ε] 5. Number of traditional, PDO (Protected Designation of Origin) and PGI (Protected Geographical Indication) products in an area [Ε] 6. Number of nature/agricultural landscape photos uploaded on web portals [Ε] 7. Number and capacity of agritourist hotels/ motels in an area [Ε] 8. Degree of hemeroby [Ε] 9. Agricultural landscape structure [Α] 10. Symbolic species [Α] 11. Percentage of agricultural land into protected areas [Ε] |
1. Density and number of bicycle routes and (natural) trails into agricultural and forest land [Ε] 2. Number of environmental information/education centres [Ε] 3. Number of visitors [Ε] 4. Number and density of natural trails or nature study trails [Ε] 5. Number of nature/agricultural landscape photos uploaded on web portals [Ε] 6. Distribution of sites of emblematic plants/forest/species [Α] 7. Religious monuments [Α] 8. Number and capacity of hotels/ motels in forest areas [Α] 9. Percentage of agricultural land into forest areas [Ε] |
1. National Parks and Natura 2000 sites [Ε] 2. Waterfalls [Ε] 3. Fishing reserves [Ε] 4. Classified sites (world heritage, label European tourism) [Ε] 5. Number of Environmental Centres in wetlands areas [Ε] 6. Natural heritage and cultural sites [Ε] 7. Number of visitors (surface or number of wetlands located next to a bike path) [Ε] 8. Number or area of wetlands near nature study trails or natural trails for walking [Ε] 9. Number or area of wetlands that have birdwatching or facilities for educating/ informing citizens [Ε] 10. Contrasting landscapes (lakes close to mountains) [Ε] 11. Sacred/religious sites (catastrophic events, religious places) [Ε] 12. Proximity to urban areas of scenic rivers or lakes [Ε] |
Based on the MAES methodology (
Step 6 - Indicators Mapping : Following the rationale above, we present in this paper four mapped indicators from different categories of ecosystem services, namely distribution of cultivated land (provisioning), distribution of HNVfs and ecological status of freshwater (regulating) and tourism potential (cultural). The selection of these indicator/maps was based on the importance of the service at a national level and their relevance at the planning level. All four services are directly linked to the main economic sectors of the island and therefore any threats to these and the resulting changes in their amount and spatial extent might upset the balance on this insular environment. The mapping method for each of the indicators presented was as follows:
1. Distribution of cultivated land: this was mapped by including all cropland and pasture lands as per the CAPO data for 2013.
2. Distribution of HNVfs: The potential HNV farmland was delimited by combining the three HNV farmland-groups described in the European HNV indicator study (
3. Ecological status: the Green indicator for assessing important regulating services for freshwater, is available through the competent authority of the Water Development Department of Cyprus and it concerns the results from biomonitoring programmes from the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD; 2000/60/EC). According to the WFD, ecological status is classified into 4 quality classes (High, Good, Moderate, Poor and Bad), through comparison of biological quality elements (BQEs; benthic invertebrate fauna, phytobethos, macrophytes and fish fauna) with reference conditions, i.e. the communities indicative of undisturbed or minimally disturbed sites.
4. Recreation/tourism potential: Recreation was mapped, based on spatial and temporal analysis of geocoded images uploaded on flickr (flickr.com®) content-sharing application for the period 2005- 2014. The analysis relied on the IVEST recreation model (
In the supplementary materials (see Suppl. material
The maps for four important/representative services, one per major ES category are shown in Figs. 3-6. The potential of agricultural land for food provision is presented, based on the major crop types on the island (Fig.
Integration of ecosystem services assessment in planning from municipal to country level is currently considered of utmost importance for achieving sustainability (
This is the first study in Cyprus which attempts the development of an ES assessment methodology on an island scale following similar studies at the European level. As such, it contributes directly to the implementation of MAES in Cyprus, thus fulfilling the EU biodiversity strategy’s objective 2, Action 5. In addition, the study should be seen as a facilitation exercise to guide mainly government departments which are called to embrace relatively new terms and methodology and apply it at the local level. It highlights that the time is right for a national ecosystem assessment, since there are now at hand a plethora of well-tested methodologies, but also datasets readily available to contribute towards mapping and assessment of ES. A major benefit of MAES, beyond its contribution to the EU biodiversity strategy, is the establishment of a national reference system for planning and decision-making which could control whether local decisions meet national requirements.
The series of methodological papers produced by the European Commission and Joint Research Centre (
The Green indicators regarding the provisioning services in agro-ecosystems involve the production potential (agricultural land) and groundwater bodies presence/water exploitation in agricultural areas, which is an issue of major importance for the island. Energy crop production, although belonging to the green indicators, is not important presently for Cyprus. The respective indicators for the regulating services involve processes, such as carbon sequestration and proxy indicators for pollination (e.g. HNVfs) and N uptake from the atmosphere (e.g. legumes crops). Many additional indicators could be mapped (e.g. bicycle routes, Protected Designation of Origin products (PDOs), festivals for the cultural services provided by agroecosystems). Although this is a positive outcome of this exercise, there are still important MAES indicators, especially those linked to regulating services, that have been categorised as Red indicators, since their mapping is quite difficult at present, considering the methodology described herein and the MAES framework. These are available in the Table S1 (Suppl. material
In the case of forest ecosystems, there is better distribution of Green indicators across the three groups of services. Major provisioning services can be readily mapped, including forest biomass, wood consumption and hunting and groundwater abstraction areas (see Suppl. material
Regarding freshwater ecosystems, there is a slight variation in the number of Green indicators across the three groups of services with indicators for regulating and cultural services to be the most abundant (14 and 12, respectively), while the number of Green indicators for provisioning services is limited to nine (9). The most important provisioning services are related, as is expected in semi-arid regions worldwide, to the water resources supply i.e. volume of water bodies, number and capacity of dams etc. Important regulating services, provided by freshwater habitats in Cyprus, can be assessed using indicators mainly derived by the (bio)monitoring programmes i.e. ecological and chemical status or from the implementation of other European Directives like Floods Directive (2007/60/EC). Important Orange indicators might also be used to assess mainly regulating and cultural services (i.e. water volume and hydrological flow and nutrient load).
In addition to the indicators proposed by MAES, we have added a number of new indicators (Table
According to the fifth MAES report (
The available data and the indicators, as assessed in detail in this work, show that the ES supply in Cyprus could be estimated, mapped and monitored. Although, taking into account the demand, in addition to the ES supply, is also a fundamental step in ES assessment (
Due to their importance for island communities, agricultural land, pollination, tourism and water provision are often some of the key ecosystem services assessed in island-related studies (see review in
The distribution of HNVfs on the island is a useful indicator for pollination and pest control, as shown in several studies regarding HNVf (
Freshwater ecosystems in the island provide goods and services of critical importance, yet they are amongst the most heavily altered ecosystems, due to alterations of natural flow regimes by man-made dams, land-use changes and water abstraction which has profound impacts on lotic communities. As presented in Fig.
Regarding the cultural service "providing opportunities for recreation", we used the number of photos uploaded in webpages/apps (e.g. Flickr) per area. This was used as a proxy for the popularity of each area. In this case, higher photo upload from a location, means higher popularity for an area and higher number of visitors. Urban areas were not excluded, as cultural services could also be provided there and keeping it is a useful comparison between urban and rural areas popularity.
The accuracy of our mapping results, regardless of method, is a function of the assumptions and the quality of the data. Biophysical data (e.g. land cover variables) are mostly used for MAES (
The information that is provided in this first attempt for Cyprus could offer new insights to consider synergies and trade-offs between ES and landscape planning, in order to safeguard and enhance, where possible, the long-term supply of ES. The key messages stemming from this work are summarised below:
For further research, the following issues are regarded as crucial for the implementation of the MAES methodology in Cyprus:
Amongst the issues that should be further considered, are what kind of information could be useful for the decision-makers, for which type of decisions and by whom. In order to achieve this, there is a need for elaborating on a roadmap for implementation of the framework for ES evaluation which will include the development of a national database for MAES, establishment of working groups for MAES (e.g. involving scientists and stakeholders) and active participation in international networks, such as the Ecosystem Service Partnership.
The authors acknowledge the funding support from the Department of Environment and the Water Development Department (WDD); Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development and Environment. We will also like to thank Mr. Th. Koumpis for analysing the recreation data.