Conceptual Framework of Ecosystem Services in Landscape Planning, Malaysia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/ijbes.v3.n3.137Abstract
This paper presents the concept of ecosystem services and its trend, scale and gradient, through reviewing articles, books and internet sources. Result shows that evaluation of ecosystem services in small towns within urban-rural gradient in developing countries still not being scrutinized explicitly, especially trade-offs’ concern. Environmental damages in the developing countries are burgeoning. As land conversion from natural capital to built capital is also keep on rising for temporal economic interests. Therefore, it has induced changes in ecological functions and affected the ecosystem services supply. In the context of Peninsular Malaysia, ungoverned built capitals and flaw of policy further contribute to fallacious decision making. And yet, there is still no specific framework or initiatives directly deals with ecosystem and biodiversity. A conceptual framework has been proposed to assess and value ecosystem services through integration of InVEST model (Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs) and bundle of ecosystem services. The framework allows stakeholders to have an insight of the pros and cons about the landscape changes, be it in ecological, economic or social-cultural perspectives. Therefore, it may help to ameliorate the trade-offs and enhance the synergies of ecosystem services that eventually can contribute to attaining human well-being, and to promote sustainable growth.
References
Alberti, M. (2005). The effects of urban patterns on ecosystem function. International Regional Science Review, 28: 168-192.
Bari, M. A., Begun, R. A., Jaafar, A. H., Abidin, R. D. Z. R. Z., and Pereira, J. J. (2011). Future Scenario of Residential Energy Consumption and CO 2 Emissions in Malaysia. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, 1-11.
Bennett, E. M., Peterson, G. D., and Gordon, L. J. (2009). Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecology Letters, 12: 1–11.
Blignaut, J., Aronson, J., and de Groot, R. (2014). Restoration of Natural Capital: A Key Strategy on the Path to Sustainability. Ecological Engineering, 65: 54–61.
Bolund, P. and Hunhammar, S. (1999). Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics, 29(2): 293–301.
Caldecott, J. O., Jenkins, M. D., Johnson, T. H., and Groombridge, B. (1996). Priorities for Conserving Global Species Richness and Endemism. Biodiversity and Conservation, 5(6): 699–727.
Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., De Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., and van den Belt, M. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(5): 253–260.
Costanza, R., De Groot, R., Sutton, P., van der Ploer, S., Anderson, S.J., Kubiszewski, I., Farber, S., and Turner, R.K. (2014). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 26: 152–158.
Costanza, R., Wilson, M., Troy, A., Voinov, A., Liu, S., D'Agostino, J. (2006).The Value of New Jersey’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
Daily, G.C. (2000). Management objectives for the protection of ecosystem services. Environmental Science & Policy, 3(2000): 333–339.
De Groot, R. S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L. and Willemen, L. (2010). Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity, 7(3): 260–272.
De Groot, R.S., Wilson, M., and Boumans, R. (2002). A typology for the description, classification and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics, 41: 393–408.
ESP- The Ecosystem Service Partnership. http://www.es-partnership.org/esp. Retrieved on 10 May 2016
EPU - Economic Planning Unit. (2012). Malaysian Quality of Life, 2011. Prime Minister’s Department, Putrajaya.
Foley, J.A., De Fries, R., Asner, G.P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S.R., Chapin, F.S., Coe, M.T., Daily, G.C., Gibbs, H.K., Helkowski, J.H., Holloway, T., Howard, E.A., Kucharik, C.J., Monfreda, C., Patz, J.A., Prentice, I.C., Ramankutty, N., and Snyder, P.K., (2005). Global Consequences of Land Use. Science, 309 (5734): 570–574.
Folke, C., Jansson, A., Larsson, J. and Costanza, R. (1997). Ecosystem Appropriation by Cities. Ambio, 26(3): 167-172.
Foo, Y.S. and Hashim, M. (2014). Assessing the Impact of Landscape Development on Ecosystem Services Value in Tropical Watershed. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 18: 1-6.
Frank, S., Fürst, C., Koschke, L., and Makeschin, F. (2012). A contribution towards a transfer of the ecosystem service concept to landscape planning using landscape metrics. Ecological Indicators, 21: 30–38.
Gómez-Baggethun, E. and Barton, D.N. (2013). Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological Economics, 86: 235–245.
Gómez-Baggethun, E., De Groot, R., Lomas, P.L., and Montes, C. (2009). The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics, 69: 1209–1218.
Grêt-Regamey, A., Celio, E., Klein, T.M., and Hayek, U. W. (2013). Understanding ecosystem services trade-offs with interactive procedural modeling for sustainable urban planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 109(1): 107–116.
Haase, D., Frantzeskaki, N. and Elmqvist, T. (2014). Ecosystem services in urban landscapes: practical applications and governance implications. Ambio, 43(4): 407–12.
Halfacree, K. H. (1993). Locality and social representation: space, discourse and alternative definitions of the rural. Journal of rural studies, 9(1): 23-37.
Hein, L., van Koppen, K., De Groot, R., and van Ierland, E. C. (2006). Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics, 57: 209–228.
Hosseini, S. E., Wahid, M. A., and Aghili, N. (2013). The Scenario of Greenhouse Gases Reduction in Malaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 28: 400–409.
Hostetler, M., Allen, W. and Meurk, C. (2011) Conserving urban biodiversity? Creating green infrastructure is only the first step. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100(4): 369–371.
IPBES - Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. http://www.ipbes.net/. Retrieved on 10 May 2016.
IPBES - Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. (2013). Most nations lack means to assess biodiversity, key ecosystem services and their value. Science Daily. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131107123306.html. Retrieved on 20 January 2015.
IPS - Institute for Population Studies. (2014). Best Population Size? - The Big Picture. [Online]. From: http://www.howmany.org/big_picture.php. Retrieved on 26 November 2014.
JPBD- Federal Department of Town and Country Planning. (2006). National Urbanization Policy. Ministry of Housing and Local Government, Malaysia.
JPBD -Federal Department of Town and Country Planning. (2010). National Physical Plan, Volume 2. Ministry of Housing and Local Government.
Kontgis, C., Schneider, A., Fox, J., Saksena, S., Spencer, J. H., and Castrence, M. (2014). Monitoring Peri-Urbanization in the Greater Ho Chi Minh City Metropolitan Area. Applied Geography, 53: 377–388.
Kroll, F., Müller, F., Haase, D., and Fohrer, N. (2012). Rural–urban gradient analysis of ecosystem services supply and demand dynamics. Land Use Policy, 29(3): 521–535.
Larondelle, N. & Haase, D. (2013). Urban ecosystem services assessment along a rural–urban gradient: A cross-analysis of European cities. Ecological Indicators, 29: 179–190.
Lavelle, P., Decaëns, T., Aubert, M., Barot, S., Blouin, M., Bureau, F., Margerie, P., Mora, p. and Rossi, J.P. (2006). Soil invertebrates and ecosystem services. European Journal of Soil Biology, 42(2006): S3-S15.
Leimona, B., van Noordwijk, M., De Groot, R., and Leemans, R. (2015). Fairly Efficient, Efficiently Fair: Lessons from Designing and Testing Payment Schemes for Ecosystem Services in Asia. Ecosystem Services, 12: 16–28.
Liddle, B. (2013). Impact of population, age structure, and urbanization on carbon emissions/energy consumption: evidence from macro-level, cross-country analyses. Population and Environment, 35(3): 286–304.
Lyytimäki, J., and Sipilä, M. (2009). Hopping on One Leg - The Challenge of Ecosystem Disservices for Urban Green Management. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 8: 309–315.
Malinga, R., Gordon, L. J., Jewitt, G., and Lindborg, R. (2014). Mapping Ecosystem Services across Scales and Continents - A Review. Ecosystem Services, 13: 57–63.
McDonnell, M. J. and Pickett, S. T. A. (1990). Ecosystem structure and function along urban-rural gradients: an unexploited opportunity for ecology. Ecology, 71(4): 1232-1237.
MEA - Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2003). Ecosystems and human well-being. A framework for assessment. Island Press.
MEA- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.
MOSTE- Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment. (2002). National Policy on the Environment. MOSTE, Malaysia.
Nasongkhla, S., and Sintusingha, S. (2013). Social Production of Space in Johor Bahru, Urban Studies, 50(9): 1836–1853.
Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., et al. (2009). Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7: 4–11.
Netusil, N. R., Levin, Z., Shandas, V., and Hart, T. (2014). Valuing Green Infrastructure in Portland, Oregon. Landscape and Urban Planning, 124: 14–21.
Neuenschwander, N., Wissen Hayek, U., and Grêt-Regamey, a. (2014). Integrating an Urban Green Space Typology into Procedural 3D Visualization for Collaborative Planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 48: 99–110.
Newby, H. (1986). Locality and rurality: the restructuring of rural social relationships. Regional Studies, 20(3): 209-215.
NLD- National Landscape Department. (2011). National Landscape Policy: Malaysia Beautiful Garden Nation. Ministry of Housing and Local Government, Malaysia.
Raudsepp-Hearne, C., Peterson, G. D., and Bennett, E. M. (2010). Ecosystem Service Bundles for Analyzing Tradeoffs in Diverse Landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(11): 5242–5247.
Safaai N.S.M., Noor Z.Z., Hashim, H., Ujang, Z. and Talib, J. (2010). Projection of CO2 emissions in Malaysia. Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy, 30(4): 658–665.
Seidl, A. F. and Moraes, S. A. (2000). Global valuation of ecosystem services: application to the Pantanal da Nhecolandia, Brazil, 33, 1–6.
Seppelt, R., Dormann, C. F., Eppink, F. V., Lautenbach, S., and Schmidt, S. (2011). A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: Approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48(3): 630–636.
Shrestha, M. K., York, A. M., Boone, C. G., and Zhang, S. (2012). Land fragmentation due to rapid urbanization in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area: Analyzing the spatiotemporal patterns and drivers. Applied Geography, 32: 522-531.
Tan-Soo, J.-S., Adnan, N., Ahmad, I., Pattanayak, S.K., and Vincent, J.R. (2014). Econometric Evidence on Forest Ecosystem Services: Deforestation and Flooding in Malaysia. Environmental and Resource Economics.
TEEB - The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. (2010). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations. Earthscan, London.
TEEB - The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. (2011). TEEB Manual for Cities: Ecosystem Services in Urban Management. UNEP and the European Commission.
TEEB - The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. (2012). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for Water and Wetlands. UNEP and the European Commission.
TEEB - The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. Making Nature’s Values Visible. http://www.teebweb.org/. Retrieved on 10 May 2016.
Troy, A., and Wilson, M. A. (2006). Mapping Ecosystem Services: Practical Challenges and Opportunities in Linking GIS and Value Transfer. Ecological Economics, 60: 435–449.
Tscharntke, T., Klein, A. M., Kruess, A., Steffan-Dewenter, I., and Thies, C. (2005). Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity - ecosystem service management. Ecology Letters, 8(8): 857–874.
Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli,-Pelkonen, V. Ka´zmierczak, A., Niemela, J., and James, P. (2007). Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 81(3): 167–178.
UN-Habitat. (2011). Urban World – Waiting for a solution, IV (4): 6 -54. http://www.unhabitat.org/pmss. Retrieved on 26 November 2014.
UKNEA- UK National Ecosystem Assessment. http://uknea.unep-wcmc.org/. Retrived on 10 May 2016.
UNEP-United Nations Environment Programme. http://www.unep.org. Retrieved on 10 May 2016.
Wallace, K.J. (2007). Classification of ecosystem services: Problems and solutions. Biological Conservation, 139(3-4): 235–246.
Weber, T., Sloan, A. and Wolf, J. (2006). Maryland’s Green Infrastructure Assessment: Development of a comprehensive approach to land conservation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77(1-2): 94–110.
World Bank. (2014). World Population from 1995 to 2013. http://www.worldbank.org. Retrieved on 26 November 2014.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright of articles that appear in International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability belongs exclusively to Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Penerbit UTM Press). This copyright covers the rights to reproduce the article, including reprints, electronic reproductions or any other reproductions of similar nature.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- This Journal applies Creative Commons Licenses of CC-BY-NC-SA
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
