4.7 Article

Impact assessment of land use changes using local knowledge for the provision of ecosystem services in northern Ghana, West Africa

期刊

ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS
卷 103, 期 -, 页码 156-172

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.04.002

关键词

Stakeholder; Participatory assessment; Urbanization; Deforestation; Land use modeling; Trade-off; Synergy; Agriculture; Ghana

资金

  1. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) through the West African Science Service Center on Climate Change and Adapted Land Use (WASCAL) [00100218, 5260.0109.3288]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An integrative perspective on assessing land use impacts requires the understanding of relationships between land use and the provision of ecosystem services. This study presents a stakeholder-based modeling approach to assess the potential impact of land use patterns and land use changes on ecosystem services in two districts of northern Ghana. First, the most legitimate group of stakeholders considering their influence and interest in the agricultural sector was selected. Second, ecosystem services and quantitative indicators that are relevant to land uses were determined based on literature and a stakeholder survey. Future land use patterns were simulated considering land use changes caused by urbanization and deforestation in the local context. Subsequently, simulated land use patterns were integrated with the potential values of ecosystem services provided by different land use types to analyze the capacity of ecosystem services provision at district level in a modeling approach. The results showed the current status of ecosystem services supplied by each district, and trade-offs and synergies between ecosystem services as effects of the land use changes. The similarity and dissimilarity of land use change impacts between the districts were identified, which were attributed to the different perception by stakeholders and specific characteristics of land use patterns.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据