Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services in Costa Rica
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services in Costa Rica
Do you wish to request the book?
Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services in Costa Rica
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services in Costa Rica
2014
Overview
Ecosystems services have become a key concept in understanding the way humans benefit from ecosystems. In Costa Rica, a pioneer national scheme of payment provides compensation for forest conservation that is assumed to jointly produce services related to biodiversity conservation, carbon storage, water and scenic beauty, but little is known about the spatial correlations among these services. A spatial assessment, at national scale and with fine resolution, identified the spatial congruence between these services, by considering the biophysical potential of service provision and socioeconomic demand. Services have different spatial distributions but are positively correlated. Spatial synergies exist between current policies (national parks and the payment scheme) and the conservation of ecosystem services: national parks and areas receiving payments provide more services than other areas. Biodiversity hotspots have the highest co-benefits for other services, while carbon hotspots have the lowest. This finding calls for cautiousness in relation to expectations that forest-based mitigation initiatives such as REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) can automatically maximize bundled co-benefits for biodiversity and local ecosystem services.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press,Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
/ Animal, plant and microbial ecology
/ Biological and medical sciences
/ Bundling
/ carbon
/ Climatology. Bioclimatology. Climate change
/ Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife
/ Exact sciences and technology
/ Forests
/ Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
/ humans
/ Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking
/ Payments
/ REDD
/ water
