Quantitative of Ecosystem Services and Disservices Studies in the Tropics
Received Date: Sep 20, 2018 / Accepted Date: Sep 29, 2018 / Published Date: Oct 05, 2018
The tropics host about 80% of the planet’s terrestrial species and over 95% of its corals. A well-known tropical forest ecosystem to provide significant global regulating services has declined at a rate of 5.5 M ha per year from 1990 to 2015, while another region noted an increase per year. This region is almost covered by developing countries which environmental literacy and research capacity are more fragile than the rest of the world. Despite these facts, there is evidence that tropical region ecosystem services and disservices are the least studied in the world. This study quantified none and peer review papers in the tropics, then analysed from peer review papers the neglected ecosystem type, service category, assessment mode, applied techniques and dependence analysis between ecosystem type, service category mode and techniques.
The Google Scholar and Web of Science were used to collect all ES & ED studies in the form of articles, books, short communications, research reports and others were available online from 1960 to December 2017. This review covered 102 countries, 1061 studies, of which 578 were peer reviewed papers (articles) and 483 non-peer reviewed papers. The study showed a dramatic increase of articles in the last three years as more than 50% of articles were published after the year of 2014. The top countries in high articles were Mexico (n=53), India (n=43), and Brazil (n=35). The ES & ED assessment tools and techniques are barely applied in tropics as only social based techniques such as interviews and questionnaire take over 45%, while biophysical tools like remote sensing and GIS appeared only in 20%, InVEST only in 3% while the rest tools are less than 1% even none such as ARIES model. Urban and marine ecosystem types, disservices category and trade-off assessment mode were the least studied.
The review concluded that thigh policy analysis ES & ED studies do not reflect the trade-offs and synergy analysis between different services which hinder the development of pragmatic policy and decisions toward ES sustainable management in the tropics. The rampant urbanisation in the tropics is subjected to destroy existing ES. Thus, this review highly suggested a high concern of urbanisation and its impacts on ecosystem services. This study also calls for great academic research to give attention to the tropical rainforest region as most African countries to host such forest have not even a single article on ES & ED.
Keywords: Ecosystem services; Disservices; Tropics, Country-basis; Choice dependence
The world is divided into different regions based not only on the economic development index or continental boundary, but based on climatic patterns, which influence the earth ecosystem distribution patterns. With the climatic segregation in view, the tropics provide ecosystem services in enormous quantities and qualities. For instance, as the most diverse region of the earth, the tropics host about 80% of the planet’s terrestrial species and over 95% of corals and mangroves [1,2]. Moreover, the tropical rainforest sequesters carbon and has been considered as the lung of the world . Regardless of its benefits to the wellbeing of the entire planet, an estimated 35% of its hosted species are threatened, at least 35% of mangrove forest area was lost worldwide during the 1980s and 1990s alone, about 47% of its coral reef is at high risk. The primary forest is being lost at 0.5% (>4 million hectares) per annum and the tropical forest area declined at a rate of 5.5 M ha per year from 1990 to 2015 [1,2,4-6].
The social, demographic and economic facts are keys influencing the environmental degradation; the tropical regions are developing countries dominated except for Australia and Singapore . Around 40% of the world’s population lives in the tropics . At current rates of population growth, by 2050 more than half of the world’s people will live in tropical regions with the most significant population growth in Africa .
Over the past 30 years, economic growth in the tropics has outperformed the rest of the world by almost 20% which resulted in high natural resources use and overexploitation. Despite this ecosystem degradation in the tropics, there is a restoration or ecosystem recovery in some regions as from 1990 to 2015, the temperate forest area expanded at a rate of 2.2 M ha per year, forest area has also expanded in Europe, North America, but declined in Central America, South America, South and Southeast Asia and all three sub-regions of Africa . Despite these facts about the tropics, there is evidence that tropical region ecosystem services and disservices are the least studied in the world. For instance, almost 60% all ES & ED were taken in Europe and North America .
Therefore, the overall objectives of this review are (i) to analyse trend of ES & ED studies and its geographic distribution in the tropics; (ii) to analyse ES &ED studies based on ecosystem type, services category, mode of assessment, and applied tool/techniques (iii) to analyse the choice dependence for selecting mode of assessment, service category or choose of techniques in the study.
This review aimed at contributing to the scientific understanding of ecosystem services in the tropics then identifying the neglected ES & ED category, ecosystem type, alienated sub region, country for paving a new way for further studies.
Material and Methods
Geographically, the study encompassed the tropical regions hereafter known as tropics. It lies between at 23.5 degrees north of the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn at 23.5 degrees south of the equator. Based on the defined latitude ranges, some countries were straddling to tropical regions. In case of straddling, a country with less than a quarter of total country size inside the defined boundaries was deliberately taken out such as China, Qatar, and others.
A broad literature review of peer review papers (known as articles in this review) and non-peer-review papers (e.g., academic theses, organization technical reports, working papers, conference proceedings, books, and book sections) available online from 1960 until 2017 were consulted to describe the state of ES &ED in tropics, then only the peer review papers (articles) were further analysed. Only studies published in English or French were considered.
Since the term “ecosystem services” has evolved and used differently by different authors, the online terms and Boolean operators were carefully selected. For instance, the ecosystem services concept emerged in the 1970s as ‘environmental services’ by Wilson and Matthews in 1970 and was re-named ‘ecosystem services’ in the mid-1980s , Schumacher in 1973 used the concept of natural capital and shortly after several authors started referring to “ecosystem (or ecological, or environmental, or nature’s) services” . The term Natural Capital (NC), which was developed by a group of environmental economists and ecological economists such as Robert Costanza and Rudolf de Groot was also considered [11,12]. In summary, the following terms or key word of ES & ED available only in paper title and in keywords with Boolean operators were used as themes in Google Scholar and Web of Science search engine to identify studies suitable for inclusion. (i) ecosystem and service(s), or disservices; (ii) environmental services; (iii) payment and ES or ED; (iv) Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES), (v) natural and capital; (vi) ecological and services or disservices; (vii) Ecosystem and functions; (viii) services and écosystémiques; (ix) PSE (Payement pour les services écosystémiques); (x) services and écologiques; (xi) services and environnementales or environnementaux; (xii) Resources and naturelles; (xiii) Capital and Naturels. These search terms and Boolean operators were followed by the name of each country and country nationality in English or French such as Kenya and Kenyan, Kényan(e). Africa, Asia, Latin America, South America, and Caribbean terms were added as countries to include studies carried at regional scale.
All paper resulted in search were imported into Mendeley (Mendeley Ltd.; https://www.mendeley.com/ ) for paper title, authors, year of publication and paper type accuracy assessment and for further reference purpose. Duplicated papers were removed, then the final checked list was transferred into Microsoft Excel for descriptive analysis. Lastly, review paper such as country review of ecosystem services, sub-region ecosystem review Romero , Wangai et al.  were excluded from analysis. The articles were organised in table with their title, publication year, assessed ecosystem category, mode of assessment, applied techniques, number of assessed services and disservices, assessed services and disservices names. The voyant tool, an open-source, web-based application for performing text analysis which supports scholarly reading and interpretation of texts or corpus was then applied to investigate the frequencies services and disservices such as erosion control, climate regulations, carbon sequestration, pollination, recreation, crop-raiding, allergenic pollen, disease vectors, decreased aesthetics, fear of crime, safety hazards and others) [15-17].
Ecosystem services and disservices are assessed by using many tools/techniques [18-20]. In most cases methods are different from tool or technique used to gather and analyze data. For example biophysical modelling method uses remote sensing or GIS as tools to analyse satellites images; socio-cultural methods mostly involves stakeholder (interview and questionnaires) techniques to gather data; monetary valuation method uses contingent valuation technique [19,21]. Many articles did not clearly describe its method such as in Boon , Chinangwa et al.  but, most of them showed either used techniques to collect data or applied tools to analyse data. Therefore, the present study assessed tools and techniques than methods.
Further, the analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to explore if there is any dependence between choice of tool/techniques (interview and questionnaire, remote sensing and GIS, contingent valuation, integrated valuation of ecosystem services and trade-offs (InVEST) and others), and mode of assessment such as (quantification, qualification, valuation and others) or choice of target ecosystem service category (such as provisional, regulating and others) [24-28].
Geographical distribution, trends of ES studies
The study covered 50 countries from Africa, six from Australia and Pacific Islands, 29 from Central, Latin America and the Caribbean (C.L.A.C), and 17 from Asia (Figure 1). Table 1 provides the results of the articles and non-peer reviews paper resulted from Mendeley referencing software and categorised into study regions. Overall, 1061 papers were recorded, which included 578 articles, 128 conference proceedings, 151 academic theses (Master’s or PhD programs), 104 working papers, 62 reports and 38 books and book sections. The average article publication per country was 5.8. Most of papers (n=387, 36%) was recorded in Africa whereas the least was inter-continental scale 11 paper representing 1% of total papers. The majority of the articles (n=218, 38%) were published in C.L.A.C compared to Africa (n=188, 32%) (Tables 1 and 2).
Abbreviation: A: Article; B: Book and Book section; C: Conference proceeding; MT: Master Thesis; PT: PhD Thesis; R: Report; WP: Working Paper.
Table 1: Geographic distribution of ES and ED studies.
|Criteria||Vihervaara et al. ||Seppelt et al. ||Martinez and Balvanera ||Egoh et al. ||Crossman et al. ||Wangai et al. ||This review|
|Number of paper (articles)||353||153||70||67||122||52||578|
|Type of ES||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Source of data||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Type of data||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Extent of study area||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Country of research||No||No||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Reason for mapping||No||No||No||No||Yes||No||No|
|Country of first author||No||No||No||No||No||Yes||No|
|Institute of first author affiliation||No||no||No||No||No||Yes||No|
|Number of ES assessed||No||Yes||No||No||No||Yes||Yes|
|Number of non-peer Review studies listed||No||No||No||No||No||No||Yes|
Table 2: Comparison of peer review studies on ecosystem services studies expanded from Wangai et al. .
Regarding country specificity, Mexico had the highest number of article (n=53, 24% of C.L.A.C) followed by India (43, 31% of Asia), Brazil (35, 16% of C.L.A.C). Approximately, 45% of all assessed countries are still categorised as none article publication, for example, Algeria, Niger, Saudi Arabia, Cuba and Somalia and others (Figure 1).
With regard to publication age, there were three oldest papers published in 2000 from Brazil, Mexico and El Salvador [34-36]. The trend analysis showed that the majority articles were published in the recent three years, from 2015 to 2017, which represents a half of articles (Figure 2a). Apart from articles, the oldest publication was a working paper published in 1992  while the oldest thesis was in 2002  and more than 80% of non-peer review papers were published after 2009 (Figure 2b) (Figure 2).
Studies based on ecosystem types
All articles were categorised into seven ecosystem types namely agro-ecosystems (AE), forest ecosystems (FE), wetland ecosystems (WE), urban ecosystems (UE), marine ecosystems (MrE), mixed ecosystem (ME) and non-described ecosystems (NDE).
About 33% (n=188) of articles reported agro-ecosystem among them 115 uniquely studied AE such as coffee cultivation in Latin America  while 73 were a mixture of ecosystem type such as AE and FE such as in ecosystem services of native trees: experiences from two traditional agroforestry systems in Karnataka, Southern India . Here are some examples of articles combined AE and other ecosystem type like in mountain ecosystem assessment based on ecosystem services and human activities combined AE & WE , AE & UE in environment diversity and ecosystem services in Amazonian homegardens of Ecuador . Among all AE studies, only one covered AE & MrE when studying spatial and temporal dynamics of multidimensional well-being, livelihoods and ecosystem services in coastal Bangladesh  (Figure 3).
Forest ecosystem related articles were 25% (n=144) of total articles in which only 95 solely explored FE. The wetland ecosystem related studies were 16% (n=96) of articles and only 56 studies were uniquely WE. The mixed ecosystem (ME) in which the study covered more than two ecosystem types were 14%. The 16 % of the studies did not describe their ecosystem type and were considered as non-described ecosystem (NDE) such as understanding the governance of the payment for environmental services programme in Costa Rica . Urban ecosystem (UE) related studies were 41 articles almost 7% of the total articles.
The present study found 11 articles on UE in C.L.A.C such in Brazil, Chile, Ecuador [42,45,46]. The least concerned was marine ecosystem (MrE) with 29 articles or 5% of articles. Detected MrE studies in this paper are the pioneer of coastal and marine ecosystem services in the tropics as the recent review studies showed that none marine ecosystem studies were conducted in Africa nor C.L.A.C . These MrE studies presently are in Africa [48-50], Mauritania and Martinique [51,52] but more than a half of MrE studies were published in South America and Mexico.
Studies distribution based on ecosystem service categories
Ecosystem services were categorised differently by diverse framework which include the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES), the Millennium Assessment Framework (MA), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB), Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) [53-57]. This study used the MA ecosystem services categories  plus ecosystem disservices category firstly introduced by Lyytimäki .
The total of 106 articles (18% of all articles) studied the combination of provisional, regulation, supporting and cultural services. Two hundred and thirty two articles representing 40% of all articles did not describe ecosystem service category targeted in their study (G) such as ecosystem services to enhance coastal resilience in Mexico; the gap between the perceptions of decision-makers and academics; Payment of environmental services in Costa Rica; evaluating impact and possibilities; the impact of payments for environmental services on communal lands; an analysis of the factors driving household landuse behavior in Ecuador; How to finance biodiversity conservation policies in a developing country through ecosystem Services, case of Mozambique (Figure 4A) [59-62] (Figure 4).
Provisional services were the most discussed service with level of 48% (n=279 over 578), regulating services in 41 % (238), supporting in 28% (164), cultural services in 27% (156), and disservices only appeared in 1% (6) (Figure 4).
The voyant text analysis tool (http://voyant-tools.org) provided a schematic view of the 239 different services were studied (Figure 5). The ten most expressed services were food provision assessed in 101 articles, erosion control (64), biodiversity (62), recreational (58), climate regulation (51), firewood (48), carbon sequestration, medicine provision, water supply, habitat and medicine in 44 articles. The least studied services include regulating human disease only mentioned in the study of Mhango et al. , cyclone protection service in Madagascar only Zaehringer et al. . The number of articles with disservices concern has increased in the tropics as in published 578 articles, disservices word appeared in 34 articles with 317 instances. In the first six papers in which most disservices instances were found, four papers were from Africa and one from India and Brazil. Three articles were distributed across Ethiopia like desegregated ecosystem services and disservices in the cultural landscapes; balancing ecosystem services and disservices; long-term changes in soil-based ecological services [65- 67]; local knowledge regarding ecosystem services and disservices from invasive alien plants in the arid Kalahari, South Africa, that captures all ecosystem categories and disservices ; In Brazil, Sánchez et al. valued Alternative biodiesel feedstock systems in the Semi-arid region of Brazil: Implications for ecosystem services. The last was in India valuing forest ecosystem services and disservices .
The Assessment mode for ecosystem services and disservices
The study identified six modes of assessment, which included mapping (M), quantification (Q), qualification (Ql), economic valuation (EV), policy analysis (PA) and trade-offs (ToF). Policy analysis was the most applied mode as it appeared in 44% of all articles (n=256) followed by quantification 31% (n=181) and the least applied mode was trade-offs analysis with 12% (n=67). More than a half articles used single mode 60% (n=345) in which policy analysis as uniquely applied in whole article was the leading with 58% then qualification with 30% of 345 articles [70-72]. The rest modes were almost mixed with other as only nine articles uniquely used mapping and none article used uniquely trade-offs (Figure 6A). Articles with a combined mode of assessment were 40% (n=233) with 49 combinations in which the most represented combination was quantification and qualification (n=23) while the 29 combinations were represented by less than two articles. For example only one article represented the combined of EV, Q, Ql and ToF , EV, M, PA and ToF (Figure 6B)  (Figure 6).
Ecosystem services and disservices assessment tool and techniques
The present study identified more than ten tool/techniques aggregated into Interview and Questionnaire (IQ), Review, Remote sensing and GIS (RS & GIS), Contingent Valuation (CV) Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Trade-offs (InVEST), field survey, Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), Choice Experiment (CE), Multi-criteria Analysis (MCA) and Non-monetary Valuation Scheme (NMVS). The Interview and Questionnaire (IQ) technique was the most applied with 44% (n=262) articles. The field survey technique involves sampling techniques such transect, biomass quantifying using field measurement, laboratory analysis, such as soil was in the second position with 29% (n=167) of all articles [75-77]. The reviewing technique used the historical data (secondary data) then combine with current data to complete intended study appeared in 27% (n=158) such as in Atwell , Bak et al. , Garcia et al. . Remote sensing and GIS were applied in almost 20% (n=116), Contingent Valuation (CV) appeared in 12% (n=69), InVEST model 3% (n=17) while each of CE, SWAT and NMVS and others were represented 1% or less than that of the total articles.
Choice dependence between ecosystem type, service category, assessment mode and applied techniques
The present review showed over 70% of 256 articles of policy analysis assessment mode did not described the ecosystem services categories while other modes such as quantification, trade-offs analysis modes addressed carefully the service category on focus. For instance, 61% of articles with quantification as mode of assessment addressed provisional services. The trade-offs analysis mode was the least applied mode and has focused mostly on provisional services at 69% of its articles (Appendix A).
The distribution of articles based on applied tools/techniques, 262 articles applied Interview and Questionnaire. Some articles used I&Q in more than one mode of assessment as 135 articles were PA, 137 qualification, 58 quantification, 56 mapping, 61 economic valuation and 44 Trade-offs (Figure 7).
The Welch robust test of one-way ANOVA at confidence interval of 95% showed that the choice of techniques does not depend on mode of assessment with p-value of 0.379. Also, the same test showed none dependence between ecosystem type and selection of services categories with p-value=0.451. Contrarily, the assessment mode was significantly associated to the ecosystem service type (p-value=0.001) with post-hoc analysis which showed that this significant was due to disservices category.
ES & ED Studies Distribution
The first kind ES study in the tropic region dates back in 1992 and was not explicitly focusing on ecosystem service where report used natural capital concept than ecosystem services . Only three articles in the tropics were published before the launch of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005, including countries such as Mexico, Brazil and El-Salvador [34-36]. This reaffirms the impacts of the MEA on ecosystem service awareness and their studies. The article on ecosystem services was first recorded in C.L.A.C in 2000, Asia 2008, Australia in 2005, Africa in 2007 and Asia in 2008. Until 2017, the whole tropical countries were not yet covered by ecosystem service studies as a half of African countries, 10 to 29 C.L.A.C countries and 5 to 17 in Asia have not yet any article. This study acknowledges the cumulative impact of the contribution of MA, TEEB and IPBES framework [53,55,57].
Additionally, a good number of African countries moved from none article list and get at least one article such as Rwanda, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Zimbabwe and others while Kenya has taken over the South Africa as the first countries in Africa with high articles when compared to review of 2014 .
The geographical disparities in ES and ED studies may be attributable to the environmental awareness propounded by Rachel Carson in the 1960s throughout the American regions before reaching furthest geographic locations . Mexico witnessed the emergence of an environmental movement which grew in size and strength and that, by the mid-1990s, had gained national visibility. More importantly, during a series of environmental reforms implemented during the 1990s, Mexican environmentalists were successful in influencing national environmental policy and achieved a series of significant policy triumphs . The environmental movement is also the primary cause of environmental literacy and environmental policy development which results in high research output on the matter of environmental related studies. This is typical for the first two top ranked African countries tropics Kenya (4th) and South Africa (5th). These two first African countries experienced a pronounced environmental movement than other African countries such as the Green Belt environmental movement started in 1977 in Kenya [83-85]. The environmental literacy factor of ES & ED publication is an evidence as other reviewing studies found that more ES & ED studies are more available in Europe and North America where environmental literacy is high [8,86-88].
The countries with no ES & ED article were concentrated in central Africa region (Burundi, Chad, Central Africa Republic) despite hosting the most substantial part of tropical rainforest in Africa . On this no article list are the north African countries (e.g., Algeria, Niger, Libya) and all West Africa except Ghana and Nigeria, who are French speakers which correlates to this study results in which only five articles were published in French. Thus, a critical gap of ecosystem services related studies is suspected in African French-speaking countries than English speaking countries. English as a requirement for publication limits the contributions from countries where English is not an academic language of instruction as English is also the most dominant academic language worldwide . All reviewed articles were in English except five conducted in West Africa (Senegal and Burkina Faso) and one from Kenya with the author from France [29-33] and were published in three journals “[VertigO] La revue électronique en sciences de l’environnement; International Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences, L’Espace géographique”. African countries with a high number of articles are English speaking countries such as Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Nigeria. Thus, English seems to be a publication hindrance as most of the ecosystem-related studies are published in English. The Asiatic sub-tropical region is ranked the best region to have an even distribution of publications as more countries were more than five publications, and only Lao was the only mainland country with none article. This sub-region, English is the first foreign language a long time ago such as Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines and Brunei or second language. Recently English become also the first foreign language in Cambodia, Thailand and Vietnam, which have boosted their international integration and academic writing in English .
Ecosystem type, services, disservices and trade-offs in tropical regions
The study remarked the lack of interest in urban ecosystem while previous studies have stated that urbanization can easily lead to ecosystem trade-off and exacerbate degradation and disrupt connectivity of interconnected ecosystem providing unit [28,92-94]. This low number of UE in tropical region reflects the result of Haase et al.  when reviewing global urban ecosystem as their study stated that most of the studies were in developed countries (Europe and North America) and China. This study showed a slight increase of UE articles as in Africa as only South Africa was the only one country with urban ecosystem service article, but now Tanzania, Nigeria and Ethiopia have at least one [95-97]. In this review, two cases typically analysed the conversion land-type to urban land in the aspect of trade-offs such as agricultural land to urban in Santiago-Valparaõ Âso Chile and economic value decline due to urbanisation in Chiang Rai Province, Thailand [45,98]. Urbanisation and ecosystem services trade-off analysis is still uncovered in the tropics which implies that land conversion to urban is being conducted without ES trade-offs and synergy analysis. This is apparently leading to the reduction or losses of other ecosystem services [99,100]. This study witnessed an improvement of MrE as in the past ES review study, MrE was barely considered [14,87,101,102].
The ES trade-off analysis is critical gap in analysis aspect as urbanization and urban growth trend showed that 90% of 2030 projected changes are expected to take place in the tropics, such as Africa  and also the world’s 20 fastest-growing urban regions are in Africa and in Asia . The tropics are more vulnerable to urbanisation effects than others because not only of negative urbanisation effects but also it’s limited resources to cope and to address environmental degradation impacts resulted from ecosystem degradation [14,105,106].
In 2008, Lyytimäki et al.  described negatives function and services from UE, for example, aesthetic issues, safety and security and health issues, economic issues, mobility issues. In 2010 ecosystem disservices got high attention through global mapping of ecosystem disservices as an unspoken reality that nature sometimes kills us . Since then, some ecosystem framework has been designed which account services and disservices . This correlate with the present study results as ecosystem disservices have gained attention with six articles while in all past review studies disservices seem to be side-lined. Shackleton et al.  argued that overlooking ecosystem disservices is problematic for following reasons: (1) they are real and environmental management systems should take them into account, (2) ignoring them will imply that the positive links between ecosystem services, biodiversity and human well-being will be constrained or suboptimal, (3) it will prevent recognition of actions that reduce ecosystem disservices to improve well-being and (4) only looking at ecosystem services and ways to increase them may fail to consider the potential simultaneous increase in magnitude of disservices. Vaz et al.  suggested that accounting for disservices could help in pinpointing management alternatives that minimise them. Despite progress discussion of ecosystem disservices in developed countries such as Europe and North America, ED concept is not yet either integrated into academia in tropics as only six articles now prompted to clearly discuss disservices in whole tropics [66-69,111].
The Caveat of this Present Review Paper
The present study might have left out some existing studies related to ecosystem services as our search only discovered the papers with the key word of ES & ED available only in paper title and keywords. In additional, papers published not in English or French were not covered in this review paper and non-online research were not covered as the possibility to access them was not possible for us.
Since the publication of Millennium Assessment in 2005 and other frameworks (such as TEEB, IPBES) developed later, ecosystem services have gained much attention and have been used to drive various policies. Regardless the increment in publications, ecosystem services and disservices are barely studied in central African region which host larger proportion of African rainforest.
The environmental literacy level influences distribution of studies in tropic as most countries with the environmental movement of 1960s, and late 90s has a higher number of publications on ecosystem services such as South Africa, Kenya, and Mexico.
French-speaking countries have academic writing barrier as most journals publish articles in English and study revealed that most studies are conducted in the countries where English is one of national official language and English is an academic language of instruction. On the side of Asia and publication language barrier, most Asiatic countries have adopted English as the first foreigner language, which has fastened their publication in the recent years.
Ecosystem services and disservices in the tropics are mostly focusing on policy analysis, profoundly discussing payment of ecosystem services than quantifying, mapping and valuation. This policy analysis aspect is not helping policy and decision makers as a critical aspect of ES & ED trade-offs and synergy analysis is left out in most undertaken studies.
Despite rampant urbanisation and urban growth in the tropics than the rest of the world, the urban ecosystem is the least concerned with a marine ecosystem which subjects this region to the massive ecosystem degradation from urban expansion.
Thus ES & ED studies with focus on urbanisation aspect is highly recommended as well as ecosystem service trade-offs analysis. English as language barriers in publication, the publisher would discuss this matter specifically in West Africa context to accommodate publications in French in which the authors are purely French.
This study is part of a PhD project funded by Africa Union Commission research Grant through Pan-African University. We sincerely thank Dr Jones, Laurence from the Centre of Ecology and Hydrology, Edinburgh, UK for his inspiration to start this review paper.
- Edelman A, Gedling A, Konovalov E, McComiskie R, Penny A, et al. (2014) The state of the Tropics. Australia: James Cook University and the State of the Tropics leadership group
- Dale A, Ustan TS, Tan D, Waltham N, Laurance WF, et al. (2017) State of the Tropics: Sustainable Infrastructure for the Tropics. Townsville, Australia: James Cook University Townsville.
- Gullison RE, Frumhoff PC, Canadell JG, Field CB, Nepstad DC, et al. (2007) Tropical forests and climate policy. Science 316: 985-986.
- Keenan RJ, Reams GA, Achard F, de Freitas JV, Grainger A, et al. (2015) Dynamics of global forest area: Results from the FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecol Manag 352: 9-20.
- Lamb D, Erskine PD, Parrotta JA (2005) Restoration of degraded tropical forest landscapes. Science 310: 1628-1632.
- Romañach SS, DeAngelis DL, Koh HL, Li Y, Teh SY, et al. (2018) Conservation and restoration of mangroves: Global status, perspectives, and prognosis. Ocean and Coastal Management 54: 72-82.
- UN (2017) World Economic Situation and Prospects 2017. United Nations. New York, USA.
- Malinga R, Gordon LJ, Jewitt G, Lindborg R (2015) Mapping ecosystem services across scales and continents - A review. Ecosystem Services 13: 57-63.
- Ehrlich PR, Mooney HA (1983) Extinction, Substitution, Ecosystem Services. BioScience 33: 248-254.
- Gómez-baggethun E, Groot R, Lomas PL, Montes C (2010) The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice : From early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecol Econom 69: 1209-1218.
- Costanza R (1997) The value of the world´s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253-260.
- Costanza R, D’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, et al. (1998) The value of ecosystem services: putting the issues in perspectives. Ecol Econom 25: 67-72.
- Romero HG (2012) Payments for environmental services: Can they work? The case of Mexico. Field Actions Science Report 6: 1-6.
- Wangai PW, Burkhard B, Muller F (2016) A review of studies on ecosystem services in Africa. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 5: 225-245.
- Eisenstein J, Sun I, Klein L (2014) Exploratory Thematic Analysis for Historical Newspaper Archives. Digital Humanities.
- Klein LF, Eisenstein J, Sun I (2015) Exploratory thematic analysis for digitized archival collections. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 30: 130-141.
- McIlroy T (2013) Exploring Poetry and Identity in a Language Learning Environment. Studies in Linguistics and Language Teaching 24: 31-45.
- Bagstad KJ, Semmens DJ, Waage S, Winthrop R (2013) A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation. Ecosystem Services 5: 27-39.
- Dunford R, Harrison P, Smith A, Dick J, Barton DN, et al. (2018) Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment: Experiences from real world situations. Ecosystem Services 29: 499-514.
- Harrison PA, Dunford R, Barton DN, Kelemen E, Martín-López B, et al. (2017) Selecting methods for ecosystem service assessment: A decision tree approach. Ecosystem Services 29: 481-498.
- Hattam C, Böhnke-Henrichs A, Börger T, Burdon D, Hadjimichael M, et al. (2015) Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment and valuation: Mixed methods or mixed messages. Ecol Econom 120: 126-138.
- Boon E (2013) Assessing Climate Change Impacts on Ecosystem Services and Livelihoods in Ghana: Case Study of Communities around Sui Forest Reserve. J Ecosyst Ecogr 3
- Chinangwa L, Gasparatos A, Saito O (2017) Forest conservation and the private sector: stakeholder perceptions towards payment for ecosystem service schemes in the tobacco and sugarcane sectors in Malawi. Sustain Sci 12: 727-746.
- Vihervaara P, Rönkä, M, Walls M (2010) Trends in ecosystem service research: Early steps and current drivers. Ambio 39: 314-324.
- Seppelt R, Dormann CF, Eppink FV, Lautenbach S, Schmidt S (2011) A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: Approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J Appl Ecol 48: 630-636.
- Martínez-Harms MJ, Balvanera P (2012) Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 8: 17-25.
- Egoh B, Drakou EG, Maes J, Willemen L (2012) Indicators for mapping ecosystem services : A review. JRC Scientific and Policy Reports.
- Crossman ND, Burkhard B, Nedkov S, Willemen L, Petz K, et al. (2013) A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services 4: 4-14.
- Dieng SD, Diop M, Goudiaby A, Niang-diop F, Faye C, et al. (2016) Characterization of the ecosystem services provided by Cordyla pinnata in the periphery of the Patako Classified Forest in Senegal. VertigO - The Electronic Journal in Environmental Sciences 16: 1-18.
- Kotoudéni Bene A, Fournier A (2015) Reflection on the notion of ecological services: case study in Kotoudéni (Burkina Faso). VertigO - The Electronic Journal in Environmental Sciences 15: 1-18.
- Ngom D, Charahabil MM, Sarr O, Bakhoum A, Akpo LE (2014) Community Perceptions of Ecosystem Supply Services Provided by the Woody Stand of the Ferlo Biosphere Reserve (Senegal). VertigO - The Electronic Journal In Environmental Sciences 14.
- Rouillé G, Blanchon D, Calas B, Temple-Boyer É (2015) Environment, greening politics and territorialization: the new water policies (gire and pse) in Kenya. Geographical Space pp. 131-146.
- Schumann K, Hahn K (2015) Strategies for adaptation to the reduction of ecosystem services: the case of the potential for substitution of three forest species in southwestern Burkina Faso. International Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences 9: 1194-s1208.
- Herrador D, Dimas L (2000) Payment for Environmental Services in El Salvador. Mt Res Dev 20: 306-309.
- Kaplowitz MD (2000) Identifying ecosystem services using multiple methods : Lessons from the mangrove wetlands of Yucatan, Mexico. Agric Human Values 17: 169-179.
- Nhecolandia P, Seidl AF, Steffens A (2000) Global valuation of ecosystem services : application to the Pantanal da Nhecolandia, Brazil. Ecol Econom 33: 1-6.
- Salih SA (1992) Managing Renewable Natural capital in Africa (97 No. 97). Helsinki.
- Shepande C (2002) Soils and land use with particular attention to land evaluation for selected land use types in the Lake Naivasha Basin, Kenya. ITC, Netherlands.
- Williams-guillen K, Otterstrom S (2014) Market-Based Incentives for the Conservation of Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Landscapes: Examples from Coffee Cultivation in Latin America. Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems 4: 172-185.
- Dhanya B, Sathish BN, Viswanath S, Purushothaman S (2014) Ecosystem services of native trees : experiences from two traditional agroforestry systems in Karnataka, Southern India. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 10: 101-111.
- Purnamasari U (2015) Mountain Ecosystem Assessment based on Ecosystem Services and Human Activities: A Case in Upper Part of Bogowonto Watershed, Indonesia. The SIJ Transactions on Advances in Space Research & Earth Exploration (ASREE) 3: 8-13.
- Caballero-serrano V, Onaindia M, Alday JG, Caballero D, Carlos J, et al. (2016) Plant diversity and ecosystem services in Amazonian homegardens of Ecuador. Agric Ecosyst Environ 225: 116-125.
- Adams H, Adger WN, Ahmad S, Ahmed A, Begum D, et al. (2016) Data Descriptor: Spatial and temporal dynamics of multidimensional well-being, livelihoods and ecosystem services in coastal Bangladesh. Nature 3: 1-11.
- Le Coq JF, Froger G, Pesche D, Legrand T, Saenz F (2015) Understanding the governance of the Payment for Environmental Services Programme in Costa Rica: A policy process perspective. Ecosystem Services 16: 253-265.
- Montoya-Tangarife C, De La Barrera F, Salazar A, Inostroza L (2017) Monitoring the effects of land cover change on the supply of ecosystem services in an urban region: A study of Santiago-Valparaíso, Chile. PLoS ONE 12: 1-23.
- Souza JR De, Santos RC, Silva IR, Elliff CI, Filho JRDS, et al. (2014) Evaluation of recreational quality , carrying capacity and ecosystem services supplied by sandy beaches of the municipality of Camaçari, northern coast Bahia, Brazil. J Coast Res 70: 527-532.
- Martin CL, Momtaz S, Gaston T, Moltschaniwskyj N A (2016) A systematic quantitative review of coastal and marine cultural ecosystem services: Current status and future research. Marine Policy 74: 25-32.
- Abunge C, Coulthard S, Daw TM (2013) Connecting Marine Ecosystem Services to Human Well-being : Insights from Participatory Well-being Assessment in Kenya. Ambio 42: 1010-1021.
- Awuor M, Icely J, Newton A, Nyunja J, Otieno P, et al. (2017) Mapping of ecosystem services flow in Mida Creek,Kenya. Ocean Coast Manag 140: 11-21.
- Mahajan SL, Daw T (2016) Perceptions of ecosystem services and benefits to human well-being from community-based marine protected areas in Kenya. Marine Policy 74: 108-119.
- Binet T, Failler P, Chavance PN, Mayif MA (2013) First international payment for marine ecosystem services: The case of the Banc d’Arguin National Park, Mauritania. Glob Environ Change 23: 1434-1443.
- Faillera P, Pètrea É, Bineta T, Maréchalb JP (2015) Valuation of marine and coastal ecosystem services as a tool for conservation: the case of Martinique in the Caribbean. Ecosystem Services 11: 67-75.
- Díaz S, Demissew S, Carabias J, Joly C, Lonsdale M, et al. (2015) The IPBES Conceptual Framework-connecting nature and people. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 14: 1-16.
- La A, Amato DD, Mäkinen H, Luisa M, Liquete C, et al. (2017) Ecosystem services classification : A systems ecology perspective of the cascade framework. Ecol Indic 74: 392-402.
- MA (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, USA: Island Press.
- Maes J, Fabrega N, Zulian G, Barbosa A, Vizcaino P, et al. (2013) Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services: An analytical framework for ecosystem assessments under action 5 of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. Luxembourg, Belgium: European Union (EU).
- TEEB (2008) The economics of ecosystems & biodiversity. Cambridge, UK: UNEP.
- Lyytimäki J, Petersen LK, Normander B, Bezák P (2008) Nature as a nuisance ? Ecosystem services and disservices to urban lifestyle. J Environ Sci 5: 161-172.
- Cozzolino G, Piazzi A (2017) How to Finance Biodiversity Conservation Policies in a Developing Country through Ecosystem Services : the Case of Mozambique. Natural Resources and Conservation 5: 56-64.
- Lithgow D, Martínez ML, Silva R, Geneletti D, Gallego JB, et al. (2017) Ecosystem Services to Enhance Coastal Resilience in Mexico : The Gap between the Perceptions of Decision-Makers and Academics. J Coastal Res 77: 116-126.
- Russo T, Candela TG (2006) Payment of environmental services in Costa Rica: Evaluating impact and possibilities. Tierra Tropical Journal 2: 1-13.
- Sarukhan J, Jimenez R (2016) Generating intelligence for decision making and sustainable use of natural capital in Mexico. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 19: 153-159.
- Mhango J, Dick J (2011) Analysis of fertilizer subsidy programs and ecosystem services in Malawi. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, pp: 200-207.
- Zaehringer JG, Schwilch G, Andriamihaja OR, Ramamonjisoa B, Messerli P (2017) Remote sensing combined with social-ecological data : The importance of diverse land uses for ecosystem service provision in north-eastern Madagascar. Ecosystem Services 25: 140-152.
- Abebe S, Hurni H, Zeleke G (2013) Long-term changes in soil-based ecological services at three sites in Ethiopia. J Ecol Nat Environ 5: 172-180.
- Ango TG, Börjeson L, Senbeta F, Hylander K (2014) Balancing Ecosystem Services and Disservices : Smallholder Farmers Use and Management of Forest and Trees in an Agricultural Landscape in Southwestern Ethiopia. Ecol Soc 19: 30.
- Dorresteijn I, Schultner J, French N, Kristoffer C, Senbeta F, et al. (2017) Disaggregating ecosystem services and disservices in the cultural landscapes of southwestern Ethiopia: a study of rural perceptions. Landscape Ecol 32: 2151-2165.
- Shackleton SE, Shackleton RT (2017) Local knowledge regarding ecosystem services and disservices from invasive alien plants in the arid Kalahari , South Africa. Journal of Arid Environments, pp: 1-12.
- Ninan KN, Kontoleon A (2016) Valuing forest ecosystem services and disservices – Case study of a protected area in India. Ecosystem Services 10: 1-14.
- Fisher B, Kulindwa K, Mwanyoka I, Turner RK, Burgess ND (2010) Common pool resource management and PES : Lessons and constraints for water PES in Tanzania. Ecol Econom 69: 1253-1261.
- García-Amado LR, Pérez MR, Escutia FR, García SB, Mejía EC (2011) Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico. Ecol Econom 70: 2361-2368.
- Kumar P (2011) Capacity constraints in operationalisation of payment for ecosystem services (PES) in India : Evidence from land degradation. Land Degrad Dev 443: 432-443.
- Ajwang R, Kitaka N, Oduor SO (2016) Assessment of provisioning and cultural ecosystem services in natural wetlands and rice fields in Kano floodplain, Kenya. Ecosystem Services 21: 166-173.
- Thompson BS, Primavera JH, Friess DA (2017) Governance and implementation challenges for mangrove forest Payments for Ecosystem Services ( PES): Empirical evidence from the Philippines. Ecosystem Services 23: 146-155.
- Abdar MR (2014) Seasonal Diversity of Birds and Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Area of Western Ghats, Maharashtra State, India. J Environ Sci Toxicol Food Technol 8: 100-105.
- Giday K, Eshete G, Barklund P, Aertsen W, Muys B (2013) Wood biomass functions for Acacia abyssinica trees and shrubs and implications for provision of ecosystem services in a community managed exclosure in Tigray, Ethiopia. J Arid Environ 94: 80-86.
- Jujnovsky J, Almeida-leñero L, Bojorge-garcía M, Monges YL, Cantoral-uriza E, et al. (2010) Hydrologic ecosystem services : water quality and quantity in the Magdalena River, Mexico City. Hidrobiológica 20: 113-126.
- Atwell MA, Wuddivira MN, Wilson M (2017) Sustainable management of tropical small island ecosystems for the optimization of soil natural capital and ecosystem services : a case of a Caribbean soil ecosystem-Aripo savannas Trinidad. J Soils Sediments 18: 1654-1667.
- Bak YL, Said I, Saito K, Ling G, Teck H (2016) Conceptual Framework of Ecosystem Services in Landscape Planning , Malaysia. International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability 3: 142-149.
- Garcia G, Antônio L, Freitas D, Oliveira G, Ximenes C, et al. (2015) The challenges of implementing a legal framework for Payment for Ecosystem Services in Santa Catarina, Brazil. Nature & Conservation 14: 132-136.
- Chris B, Carino M (2013) Mexico’s Environmental Revolutions. In Leal C, Pádua JA, Solur J editors. New Environmental Histories of Latin America and the Caribbean. Munich, Germany: RCC Perspectives, pp: 9-15.
- Díez J (2008) The Rise and Fall of Mexico’ s Green Movement. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies pp. 81-99.
- Cock J (2004) Connecting the Red, Brown and Green: The Environmental Justice Movement in South Africa. Voices of Protest: Social Movements in Post-Apartheid South Africa. Durban, South Africa.
- Death C (2014) Environmental Movements, Climate Change, and Consumption in South Africa. J South Afr Stud 40: 1215-1234.
- Obi CI (2005) Environmental Movements in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Political Ecology of Power and Conflict. Geneva.
- Abiolu OA, Okere OO (2012) Environmental literacy and the emerging roles of information professionals in developing economies. IFLA Journal 38: 53-59.
- Haase D, Larondelle N, Andersson E, Artmann M, Gomez-baggethun E, et al. (2014) A Quantitative Review of Urban Ecosystem Service Assessments: Concepts, Models, and Implementation. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 43: 413-433.
- Okere AA, Oluchi OO (2011) Environmental literacy and the emerging roles of information professionals in developing economies. In Sustainable innovation and green information for all. Puerto Rico, pp: 10-11.
- FAO (2013) Country Programming Framework 2013-2017. KInshasa, DRC.
- Altbach PG (2007) The Imperial Tongue: English as the Dominating Academic Language. Econ Polit Wkly 42: 3608-3611.
- Hashim A, Low EL (2014) Introduction: English in Southeast Asia. World Englishes 33: 423-425.
- Burkhard B, Kiel C (2014) Ecosystem Service Potentials, Flows and Demands-Concepts for Spatial Localisation, Indication and Quantification. Ecosystem Services 34: 1-32.
- Crossman ND, Burkhard B, Nedkov S, Willemen L, Petz K, et al. (2013) A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services 4: 4-14.
- Goldstein JH, Caldarone G, Duarte TK, Ennaanay D, Hannahs N, et al. (2012) Integrating ecosystem-service tradeoffs into land-use decisions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109: 7565-7570.
- Rodríguez JP, Beard TD, Bennett EM, Cumming GS, Cork SJ, et al. (2006) Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecol Soc 11: 1.
- Ifatimehin O, Oluseyi P, Olu T (2014) Ecosystem Regulatory Services and Human Comfort in an Outdoor Environment of Lokoja, Nigeria. Br J Appl Sci Technol 18: 2576-2589.
- Lupala JM, Mdemu MV, Butungo SP (2014) Effects of Peri-Urban Land Use Changes on Forest Ecosystem Services : The Case of Settlements Surrounding Pugu and Kazimzumbwi Forest Reserves in Tanzania. Journal of Geography and Geology 6: 231-240.
- Tekle Woldegerima, Yeshitela K, Lindley S (2017) Ecosystem services assessment of the urban forests of Addis, Ethiopia. Urban Ecosystems.
- Intralawan A, Rueangkitwat I (2016) Ecosystem Services Tradeoffs: A Case Study of Chiang Khong, Thailand. Environment Asia 9: 64-71.
- Bruno L, Pablo I, Wunder S (2013) Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services in Costa Rica. Environ Conserv 41: 27-36.
- Grêt-regamey A, Celio E, Klein TM, Hayek UW (2013) Understanding ecosystem services trade-offs with interactive procedural modeling for sustainable urban planning. Landsc Urban Plan 109: 107-116.
- Portman M E (2013) Ecosystem services in practice: Challenges to real world implementation of ecosystem services across multiple landscapes - A critical review. Appl Geogr 45: 185-192.
- Von Döhren P, Haase D (2015) Ecosystem disservices research: A review of the state of the art with a focus on cities. Ecol Indic 52: 490-497.
- UN-HABITAT (2015) Issue paper on smart cities: 21 smart cities (3 No. 3). New York, USA.
- Elmqvist T, Fragkias M, Goodness J, Güneralp B, Marcotullio PJ, et al. (2013) Urbanization, Biodiversity and Ecosystem services: Challenges and Opportunities. A Global Assessment.
- Buhaug H, Urdal H (2013) An urbanization bomb ? Population growth and social disorder in cities. Glob Environ Change 23: 1-10.
- Haregeweyn N, Fikadu G, Tsunekawa A, Tsubo M, Meshesha DT (2012) The dynamics of urban expansion and its impacts on land use / land cover change and small-scale farmers living near the urban fringe : A case study of Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. Landsc Urban Plan 106: 149-157.
- Dunn RR (2010) Global Mapping of Ecosystem Disservices : The Unspoken Reality that Nature Sometimes Kills us. Biotropica 42: 555-557.
- Dobbs C, Escobedo FJ, Zipperer WC (2011) A framework for developing urban forest ecosystem services and goods indicators. Landsc Urban Plan 99: 196-206.
- Shackleton CM, Ruwanza S, Sinasson Sanni GK, Bennett S, De Lacy P, et al. (2016) Unpacking Pandora’s Box: Understanding and Categorising Ecosystem Disservices for Environmental Management and Human Wellbeing. Ecosystems 19: 587-600.
- Vaz AS, Kueffer C, Kull CA, Richardson DM, Vicente JR ,et al. (2017) Integrating ecosystem services and disservices: insights from plant invasions. Ecosystem Services, 23: 94–107.
Citation: Rutebuka E, Olorunnisola, Taiwo, Mwaru F, Asamoah EF, et al. (2018) Quantitative of Ecosystem Services and Disservices Studies in the Tropics. J Ecosys Ecograph 8: 258. DOI: 10.4172/2157-7625.1000258
Copyright: © 2018 Rutebuka E, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Share This Article
- Total views: 791
- [From(publication date): 0-0 - Feb 26, 2020]
- Breakdown by view type
- HTML page views: 717
- PDF downloads: 74