Tashie Arik, Ringold Paul
Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) Research Participant, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 USA.
Department of Geological Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599 USA.
Ecosphere. 2019 Mar 18;10(3). doi: 10.1002/ecs2.2665.
The last decade has seen a proliferation of studies describing the benefits people accrue from natural processes by translation of spatially explicit land use and landcover data to ecosystem service provision. Yet, critical assessment of systemic bias resulting from reliance on land use and landcover data is limited. Here, we evaluate an extensive collection of ecosystem service-related data based on land use and landcover according to a broadly applicable ecosystem service framework-Final Ecosystem Goods and Services (FEGS). In this framework, ecosystems are viewed from the perspective of a comprehensive set of beneficiaries and the biophysical features directly relevant to each. In this examination, we create a database identifying over 14,000 linkages between 255 data layers from EnviroAtlas and FEGS beneficiaries. Through these linkages, we identify major gaps in beneficiary identification and systemic biases resulting from the utilization of translations from land use and landcover data. Importantly, we find that for many beneficiaries there is an absence of data on FEGS at extensive scales in the United States. We provide a roadmap for the integration of extant ecosystem service research efforts using the FEGS classification scheme and critically appraise this scheme, highlighting inconsistent specification among beneficiary categories and environmental classes. We also explore the benefits of crosswalking different ecosystem service data and frameworks for researchers, by reducing the otherwise high buy-in cost of data exploration, and for data developers, by increasing the exposure of their work.
在过去十年中，大量研究描述了人们通过将空间明确的土地利用和土地覆盖数据转化为生态系统服务提供而从自然过程中获得的益处。然而，对依赖土地利用和土地覆盖数据所导致的系统偏差的批判性评估却很有限。在此，我们根据一个广泛适用的生态系统服务框架——最终生态系统产品和服务（FEGS），对基于土地利用和土地覆盖的大量生态系统服务相关数据进行评估。在这个框架中，从一系列全面的受益者以及与之直接相关的生物物理特征的角度来审视生态系统。在此次审查中，我们创建了一个数据库，识别出环境地图集（EnviroAtlas）的255个数据层与FEGS受益者之间超过14000个联系。通过这些联系，我们识别出受益者识别方面的主要差距以及因利用土地利用和土地覆盖数据的转化而产生的系统偏差。重要的是，我们发现对于许多受益者而言，在美国广泛尺度上缺乏关于FEGS的数据。我们提供了一个路线图，以利用FEGS分类方案整合现有的生态系统服务研究工作，并对该方案进行批判性评估，突出受益者类别和环境类别之间不一致之处。我们还探讨了通过降低数据探索原本高昂的投入成本，为研究人员交叉对照不同生态系统服务数据和框架带来的益处，以及通过增加数据开发者工作的曝光度，为他们带来的好处。
