Abstract
The Upper Chattahoochee Watershed supplies most of the drinking water to the Atlanta Metropolitan Area, a region with one of the fastest urban growth rates in the United States. Smart conservation planning is necessary to conciliate urban development and the provision of critical ecosystem services (ESs) such as water quality, carbon storage, and wildlife habitat. We employed optimization models to compare the value of the ESs provided by alternative allocations of land parcels for conservation. We adopted boundary penalties to determine the trade-offs of choosing higher connectivity among parcels regarding economic values provided by carbon storage, wildlife habitat, and water quality. We used InVEST models to quantify and map ESs and value transfer to assign economic values to them. We set low and high ESs economic value bounds and discounted their values to perpetuity using 3% and 7% discount rates. Our results indicate that incorporating boundary penalties results in solutions with larger, fewer, and more connected parcels but yields lower economic benefits than unconstrained models. However, these differences are relatively small (between 2.6% and 7.3% loss in economic value). Additional transaction costs of purchasing more parcels and improving ecological networks provided by larger forest patches might justify the selection of solutions with higher connectivity. Decision-makers can use the developed models for estimating the economic cost of selecting connected parcels for conservation purposes at the landscape level.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aguilar FX, Obeng EA, Cai Z (2018) Water quality improvements elicit consistent willingness-to-pay for the enhancement of forested watershed ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 30:158–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.02.012
Allen KE, Moore R (2016) Moving beyond the exchange value in the nonmarket valuation of ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 18:78–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.02.002
Andrello M, Jacobi MN, Manel S, Thuiller W, Mouillot D (2015) Extending networks of protected areas to optimize connectivity and population growth rate. Ecography (Cop) 38:273–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.00975
Arponen A, Heikkinen RK, Thomas CD, Moilanen A (2005) The value of biodiversity in reserve selection: Representation, species weighting, and benefit functions. Conserv Biol 19:2009–2014. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00218.x
Bagdon BA, Huang CH, Dewhurst S (2016) Managing for ecosystem services in northern Arizona ponderosa pine forests using a novel simulation-to-optimization methodology. Ecol Modell 324:11–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.12.012
Baguette M, Blanchet S, Legrand D, Stevens VM, Turlure C (2013) Individual dispersal, landscape connectivity and ecological networks. Biol Rev 88:310–326. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12000
Ball IR, Possingham HP, Watts ME (2009) Marxan and relatives: Software for spatial conservation prioritization, Quantitative methods & computational tools. Oxford University Press, United Kingdom
Benez-Secanho FJ, Dwivedi P (2020) Analyzing the provision of ecosystem services by conservation easements and other protected and non-protected areas in the Upper Chattahoochee Watershed. Sci Total Environ 717:137218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137218
Beyer HL, Dujardin Y, Watts ME, Possingham HP (2016) Solving conservation planning problems with integer linear programming. Ecol Modell 328:14–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.02.005
Blackman A, Li Z, Liu AA (2018) Efficacy of command-and-control and market-based environmental regulation in developing countries. Annu Rev Resour Econ 10:381–404
Boumans R, Costanza R, Farley J, Wilson MA, Portela R, Rotmans J, Villa F, Grasso M (2002) Modeling the dynamics of the integrated earth system and the value of global ecosystem services using the GUMBO model. Ecol Econ 41:529–560
Boyle KJ, Parmeter, CF, 2017. Benefit transfer for ecosystem services, In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Environmental Science. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.013.455
Brans EHP (2018) The Environmental Liability Directive: Legal Background and Requirements. In: Lipton J, Özdemiroğlu E, Chapman D, Peers J (Eds.) Equivalency Methods for Environmental Liability. Springer, Dordrecht, p 3–20
Brown SL, Schroeder P, Kern JS (1999) Spatial distribution of biomass in forests of the eastern USA. Ecol Manag 123:81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00017-1
Champ, Patricia A, Boyle, Kevin, Brown TC (2017) A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation, The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources. Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht, 10.1007/978-94-007-7104-8
Chatterjee C, Triplett R, Johnson CK, Ahmed P (2017) Willingness to pay for safe drinking water: A contingent valuation study in Jacksonville, FL. J Environ Manag 203:413–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.08.008
Cooperative Extension/University of Georgia, 2017. A Guide to Corn Production in Georgia.
de Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7:260–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006
Drusch M, Del Bello U, Carlier S, Colin O, Fernandez V, Gascon F, Hoersch B, Isola C, Laberinti P, Martimort P, Meygret A, Spoto F, Sy O, Marchese F, Bargellini P (2012) Sentinel-2: ESA’s optical high-resolution mission for GMES operational services. Remote Sens Environ 120:25–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.11.026
Egoh B, Rouget M, Reyers B, Knight AT, Cowling RM, van Jaarsveld AS, Welz A (2007) Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: A review. Ecol Econ 63:714–721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.04.007
Georgia Forestry Commission, 2019. 2018 Economic benefits of the forest industry in Georgia 34.
Greenstone M, Kopits E, Wolverton A (2013) Developing a social cost of carbon for us regulatory analysis: A methodology and interpretation. Rev Environ Econ Policy 7:23–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/res015
Grêt-Regamey A, Altwegg J, Sirén EA, van Strien MJ, Weibel B (2017) Integrating ecosystem services into spatial planning—A spatial decision support tool. Landsc Urban Plan 165:206–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.003
Groothuis PA, Cockerill K, Mohr TMD (2015) Water does not flow up hill: determinants of willingness to pay for water conservation measures in the mountains of western North Carolina. J Behav Exp Econ 59:88–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2015.10.002
Hamel P, Chaplin-Kramer R, Sim S, Mueller C (2015) A new approach to modeling the sediment retention service (InVEST 3.0): Case study of the Cape Fear catchment, North Carolina, USA. Sci Total Environ 524–525:166–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.04.027
Hancock DW, Harris GH, Franks RW, Morgan SP, Green WT, 2014. Soil and Fertilizer Management Considerations for Forage Systems in Georgia. UGA Extension 1–24.
Hanley N, Banerjee S, Lennox GD, Armsworth PR (2012) How should we incentivize private landowners to “produce” more biodiversity? Stirling Econ Discuss Pap 2012-02(2):1–21
Hanson JO, Schuster R, Morrell N, Strimas-Mackey M, Watts ME, Arcese P, Bennett J, Possingham HP (2020) Prioritizr: Systematic Conservation Prioritization in R [WWW Document]. R Packag. version 5.0.1. https://cran.r-project.org/package=prioritizr (accessed 1.6.20).
Harlio A, Kuussaari M, Heikkinen RK, Arponen A (2019) Incorporating landscape heterogeneity into multi-objective spatial planning improves biodiversity conservation of semi-natural grasslands. J Nat Conserv 49:37–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2019.01.003
He J, Huang J, Li C (2017) The evaluation for the impact of land use change on habitat quality: A joint contribution of cellular automata scenario simulation and habitat quality assessment model. Ecol Modell 366:58–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.10.001
Heal G (2000) Valuing ecosystem services. Ecosystems 3:24–30. 10.1007/s
Heath LS, Smith JE, Woodall CW, Azuma DL, Waddell KL (2011) Carbon stocks on forestland of the United States, with emphasis on USDA Forest Service ownership. Ecosphere 2. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES10-00126.1
Hof J, Bevers M (1998) Spatial optimization for managed ecosystems. Columbia University Press, New York, NY
Jerath M, Bhat M, Rivera-Monroy VH, Castañeda-Moya E, Simard M, Twilley RR (2016) The role of economic, policy, and ecological factors in estimating the value of carbon stocks in Everglades mangrove forests, South Florida, USA. Environ Sci Policy 66:160–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.09.005
Kreye MM, Adams DC, Escobedo FJ, Soto JR (2016) Does policy process influence public values for forest-water resource protection in Florida? Ecol Econ 129:122–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.06.007
Kukkala AS, Moilanen A (2017) Ecosystem services and connectivity in spatial conservation prioritization. Landsc Ecol 32:5–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0446-y
LaFontaine JH, Hay LE, Viger RJ, Markstrom SL, Regan RS, Elliott CM, Jones JW (2013) Application of the precipitation-runoff modeling system (PRMS) in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint river basin in the southeastern United States. U S Geol Surv Sci Investig Rep. 2013-5162:118
Land Unlimited, 2020. Georgia property listings [WWW Document]. https://www.landunlimited.com/georgia-listings/
Land Watch, 2020. Steve Tucker - Blue Ridge Mountains, GA Land Specialist [WWW Document]. https://www.landwatch.com/Georgia_land_for_sale/White_County
Landry CE, Lewis AR, Liu H, Vogelsong H (2016) Addressing onsite sampling in analysis of recreation demand: Economic value and impact of visitation to cape hatteras national seashore. Mar Resour Econ 31:301–322. https://doi.org/10.1086/686892
Lanzas M, Hermoso V, de-Miguel S, Bota G, Brotons L (2019) Designing a network of green infrastructure to enhance the conservation value of protected areas and maintain ecosystem services. Sci Total Environ 651:541–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.164
Lee RD, Harris G, Murphy TR, Hancock DW, McCullough, P (2017). Bermudagrasses in Georgia. Univ. Georg. Ext. 1–12.
Li F, Wang L, Chen Z, Clarke KC, Li M, Jiang P (2018) Extending the SLEUTH model to integrate habitat quality into urban growth simulation. J Environ Manag 217:486–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.109
Liu S, Costanza R, Troy A, D’Aagostino J, Mates W (2010) Valuing New Jersey’s ecosystem services and natural capital: A spatially explicit benefit transfer approach. Environ Manag 45:1271–1285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9483-5
Liu T, Yang X (2015) Monitoring land changes in an urban area using satellite imagery, GIS and landscape metrics. Appl Geogr 56:42–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.10.002
Mercer DE, Cooley D, Hamilton K(2011) Taking stock: Payments for forest ecosystem services in the United States USDA For Serv 56:1–54
Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District, 2017. Water Resource Management Plan.
Moore R, Williams T, Rodriguez E, Hepinstall-Cymerman J (2013) Using nonmarket valuation to target conservation payments: an example involving Georgia’s private forests. J 111:261–270. https://doi.org/10.5849/jof.12-079
Moore, R., Williams, T., Rodriguez, E., Hepinstall-Cymmerman, J., 2011. Quantifying the value of non-timber ecosystem services from Georgia’s private forests, Georgia Forestry Foundation.
Naidoo R, Balmford A, Costanza R, Fisher B, Green RE, Lehner B, Malcolm TR, Ricketts TH (2008) Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105:9495–9500. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0707823105
Newburn DA, Berck P, Merenlender AM (2006) Habitat and open space at risk of land-use conversion: Targeting strategies for land conservation. Am Agric Econ Assoc 88:28–42
North MA (2009) A Method for Implementing a Statistically Significant Number of Data Classes in the Jenks Algorithm. 2009 Sixth Int. Conf. Fuzzy Syst. Knowl. Discov. 35–38. https://doi.org/10.1109/FSKD.2009.319
Olson JS, Watts JA, Allison LJ (2006) Olson’s major world ecosystems ranked by carbon in live vegetation: An updated database using the GLC2000 land cover product, NDP-017b. Oak Ridge, U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE), Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Tennessee, U.S.A.
Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Fang J, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz WA, Phillips OL, Shvidenko A, Lewis SL, Canadell JG, Ciais P, Jackson RB, Pacala SW, McGuire AD, Piao S, Rautiainen A, Sitch S, Hayes D (2011) A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World’s Forests. Science 333:988–993. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1201609
Pearce JL, Kirk DA, Lane CP, Mahr MH, Walmsley J, Casey D, Muir JE, Hannon S, Hansen A, Jones K (2008) Prioritizing avian conservation areas for the Yellowstone to Yukon Region of North America. Biol Conserv 141:908–924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.12.033
Peng J, Tian L, Liu Y, Zhao M, Hu Y, Wu J (2017) Ecosystem services response to urbanization in metropolitan areas: Thresholds identification. Sci Total Environ 607–608:706–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.218
PRISM Climate Group, 2019. 4km resolution annual precipitation [WWW Document]. Oregon State Univ. http://prism.oregonstate.edu (accessed 2.6.19).
PRISM Climate Group, 2018. R-factor Products [WWW Document]. http://prism.oregonstate.edu (accessed 8.29.18).
Reichard JS, Brown CM (2009) Detecting groundwater contamination of a river in Georgia, USA using baseflow sampling. Hydrogeol J 17:735–747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-008-0382-2
Schaefer M, Goldman E, Bartuska AM, Sutton-Grier A, Lubchenco J (2015) Nature as capital: Advancing and incorporating ecosystem services in United States federal policies and programs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112:7383–7389. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1420500112
Schröter M, Remme RP, Sumarga E, Barton DN, Hein L (2015) Lessons learned for spatial modelling of ecosystem services in support of ecosystem accounting. Ecosyst Serv 13:64–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.07.003
Schuster R, Hanson JO, Strimas-Mackey M, Bennett JR (2020) Exact integer linear programming solvers outperform simulated annealing for solving conservation planning problems. PeerJ 8:e9258. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9258
Seppelt R, Lautenbach S, Volk M (2013) Identifying trade-offs between ecosystem services, land use, and biodiversity: A plea for combining scenario analysis and optimization on different spatial scales. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 5:458–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.05.002
Sharp R, Tallis HT, Ricketts T, Guerry AD, Wood SA, Chaplin-Kramer R, Nelson E, Ennaanay D, Wolny S, Olwero N, Vigerstol K, Pennington D, Mendoza G, Aukema J, Foster J, Forrest J, Cameron D, Arkema K, Lonsdorf E, Kennedy C, Verutes G, Kim CK, Guannel G, Papenfus M, Toft J, Marsik M, Bernhardt J, Griffin R, Glowinski K, Chaumont N, Perelman A, Lacayo M, Mandle L, Hamel P, Vogl AL, Rogers L, Bierbower W, Denu D, Douglass J (2016) InVEST VERSION 3.4.0 User’s Guide. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, and World Wildlife Fund.
Shoemaker DA, BenDor TK, Meentemeyer RK (2019) Anticipating trade-offs between urban patterns and ecosystem service production: Scenario analyses of sprawl alternatives for a rapidly urbanizing region. Comput Environ Urban Syst 74:114–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2018.10.003
Soil Survey Staff, N.R.C.-U.S.D. of A.S., 2018. Web Soil Survey [WWW Document]. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/survey/?cid=nrcs142p2_053627 (accessed 8.30.18).
Spalding MD, Fish L, Wood LJ (2008) Toward representative protection of the world’s coasts and oceans-progress, gaps, and opportunities. Conserv Lett 1:217–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263x.2008.00030.x
Sun X, Crittenden JC, Li F, Lu Z, Dou X (2018) Urban expansion simulation and the spatio-temporal changes of ecosystem services, a case study in Atlanta Metropolitan area, USA. Sci Total Environ 622–623:974–987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.062
Tammi I, Mustajärvi K, Rasinmäki J (2017) Integrating spatial valuation of ecosystem services into regional planning and development. Ecosyst Serv 26:329–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.11.008
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2006. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use, National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme.
Timilsina N, Escobedo FJ, Cropper WP, Abd-Elrahman A, Brandeis TJ, Delphin S, Lambert S (2013) A framework for identifying carbon hotspots and forest management drivers. J Environ Manag 114:293–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.10.020
Troy A, Wilson MA (2006) Mapping ecosystem services: Practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer. Ecol Econ 60:435–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.04.007
United States Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2020. Local Area Gross Domestic Product, 2018 [WWW Document]. GDP by County, Metro, Other Areas.https://www.bea.gov/data/gdp/gdp-county-metro-and-other-areas
United States Census Bureau, 2020. 2018 Population Estimates [WWW Document]. Annu Estim Resid Popul. https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=PEP_2018_PEPANNRES&prodType=table (accessed 3.5.20).
United States Census Bureau, 2010. 2010 Census Urban and Rural Classification and Urban Area Criteria [WWW Document].https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/guidance/geo-areas/urban-rural/2010-urban-rural.html
United States Geological Survey, 2020. Protected Areas Database of the United States (PADUS) [WWW Document]. https://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/ (accessed 1.28.20).
United States Geological Survey, 2019. National Elevation Dataset (NED) [WWW Document]. https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/?basemap=b1&category=ned,nedsrc&title=3DEP View (accessed 4.10.19).
United States Geological Survey, 2018. Hydrologic Unit Maps [WWW Document]. https://water.usgs.gov/GIS/huc.html (accessed 8.30.18).
United States Government Accountability Office, 2020. Social cost of carbon. GAO Highlights GAO-20-254.
Vaissière AC, Levrel H, Hily C, Le Guyader D (2013) Selecting ecological indicators to compare maintenance costs related to the compensation of damaged ecosystem services. Ecol Indic 29:255–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.01.003
Van Houtven G, Mansfield C, Phaneuf DJ, von Haefen R, Milstead B, Kenney MA, Reckhow KH (2014) Combining expert elicitation and stated preference methods to value ecosystem services from improved lake water quality. Ecol Econ 99:40–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.12.018
Villa F, Bagstad KJ, Voigt B, Johnson GW, Portela R (2014) A Methodology for Adaptable and Robust Ecosystem Services Assessment. PLoS One 9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0091001
Villamagna A, Scott L, Gillespie J (2015) Collateral benefits from public and private conservation lands: A comparison of ecosystem service capacities. Environ Conserv 42:204–215. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892914000393
Watts ME, Stewart RR, Martin TG, Klein CJ, Carwardine J, Possingham HP (2017) Systematic conservation planning with Marxan. In: Gergel SE, Turner MG (Eds.) Learning Landscape Ecology. Springer, New York, NY, p 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6374-4_14
Williams SH, Scriven SA, Burslem DFRP, Hill JK, Reynolds G, Agama AL, Kugan F, Maycock CR, Khoo E, Hastie AYL, Sugau JB, Nilus R, Pereira JT, Tsen SLT, Lee LY, Juiling S, Hodgson JA, Cole LES, Asner GP, Evans LJ, Brodie JF (2020) Incorporating connectivity into conservation planning for the optimal representation of multiple species and ecosystem services. Conserv Biol 34:934–942. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13450
Yang L, Jin S, Danielson P, Homer C, Gass L, Bender SM, Case A, Costello C, Dewitz J, Fry J, Funk M, Granneman B, Liknes GC, Rigge M, Xian G (2018) A new generation of the United States National Land Cover Database: Requirements, research priorities, design, and implementation strategies. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 146:108–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2018.09.006
Zhang Y, (2006) Development and validation of a Watershed Forest Management Information System. Dr Diss Available from Proquest AAI3242323, 1–145.
Zhang Y, Barten PK (2009) Watershed Forest Management Information System (WFMIS). Environ Model Softw 24:569–575
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Benez-Secanho, F.J., Dwivedi, P., Ferreira, S. et al. Trade-offs Between the Value of Ecosystem Services and Connectivity Among Protected Areas in the Upper Chattahoochee Watershed. Environmental Management 69, 937–951 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01584-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01584-6