4.7 Article

How to consider history in landscape ecology: patterns, processes, and pathways

期刊

LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY
卷 36, 期 8, 页码 2317-2328

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-020-01163-w

关键词

Landscape history; Landscape legacy; Landscape development; Landscape dynamic

资金

  1. University of Innsbruck
  2. Medical University of Innsbruck

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The importance of history in landscape ecology is emphasized, including legacy effects and path dependence, which influence current patterns and processes in various ways. The focus on development pathways sheds light on the process of change and reveals the role of event chains and institutional reproduction.
Context Landscape ecology early on developed the awareness that central objects of investigation are not stable over time and therefore the historical dimension must be included, or at least considered. Objectives This paper considers the importance of history in landscape ecology in terms of its impact on patterns and processes and proposes to complement these with the notion of pathways in order to provide a comprehensive analysis of landscape change. Methods We develop a conceptual framework distinguishing between legacy effects, which include pattern and processes, and path dependence, with a focus of development pathways and we illustrate these perspectives by empirical examples. Results Combined short- to long-lasting imprints and legacies of historical patterns and processes reveal how present patterns and processes are in various ways influenced by legacies of the past. The focus on inherent dynamics of development pathways sheds light on the process of change itself, and its trajectories, and reveals the role of event chains and institutional reproduction. Conclusions Understanding patterns, processes, and pathways over time, allows a more complete analysis of landscape change, and forms the base to preserve vital ecosystem services of both human-made and natural landscapes for the future.

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