Zarrineh N., Abbaspour C., Van Griensven A., Jeangros B., Holzkämper A. (2018). Model-based evaluation of land management strategies with regard to multiple ecosystem services. Sustainability, 01/11/2018, vol. 10, n. 11, p. 1-21.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10113844
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10113844
Titre : | Model-based evaluation of land management strategies with regard to multiple ecosystem services (2018) |
Auteurs : | N. Zarrineh ; C. Abbaspour ; A. Van Griensven ; B. Jeangros ; A. Holzkämper |
Type de document : | Article |
Dans : | Sustainability (vol. 10, n. 11, 01/11/2018) |
Article en page(s) : | p. 1-21 |
Langues : | Anglais |
Langues du résumé : | Anglais |
Catégories : |
Thésaurus IAMM AGROECOSYSTEME ; UTILISATION DES TERRES ; CONFLIT D'USAGE ; MODELE DE SIMULATION ; UTILISATION DE L'EAU ; GAZ A EFFET DE SERRE ; SUISSECatégories principales 07 - ENVIRONNEMENT ; 7.4 - Ressources Naturelles : Paysage, Biodiversité, Patrimoine naturel |
Résumé : | In agroecosystem management, conflicts between various services such as food provision and nutrient regulation are common. This study examined the trade-offs between selected ecosystem services such as food provision, water quantity and quality, erosion and climate regulations in an agricultural catchment in Western Switzerland. The aim was to explore the existing land use conflicts by a shift in land use and management strategy following two stakeholder-defined scenarios based on either land sparing or land sharing concepts. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) was used to build an agro-hydrologic model of the region, which was calibrated and validated based on daily river discharge, monthly nitrate and annual crop yield, considering uncertainties associated with land management set up and model parameterization. The results show that land sparing scenario has the highest agricultural benefit, while also the highest nitrate concentration and GHG emissions. The land sharing scenario improves water quality and climate regulation services and reduces food provision. The management changes considered in the two land use scenarios did not seem to reduce the conflict but only led to a shift in trade-offs. Water quantity and erosion regulation remain unaffected by the two scenarios. |
Cote : | En ligne |
URL / DOI : | https://doi.org/10.3390/su10113844 |