|
nif:isString
|
-
2. 2.1. The Manicouagan-Uapishka World Biosphere Reserve (MUWBR): Created in 2007, the MUWBR is one of the largest World Biosphere Reserve on the planet covering an area of 54 800 km2, limited by the Saint Lawrence River to the south and the Manicouagan reservoir to the north (Fig 1). Figure data removed from full text. Figure identifier and caption: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205935.g001 Localisation of the MUWBR. The MUWBR includes varied ecosystems hosting several species of interest. It contains several remarkable elements at the natural, social and landscape levels. For Manicouagan-Uapishka, the potential for demonstrating sustainable development is at the heart of the Committee’s vision and motivation to work together and to contribute to the Millennium Development Goals. The Manicouagan-Uapishka territory is heavily exploited for its natural resources and the committee wants to make this territory an integrating model of the social, economic and environmental dimensions. It has been working with all sectors of the region for many years to include elements of sustainable development in regional planning [34].
2.2. Because it is a hotspot of biodiversity [35] and supports different types of activities, MUWBR can provide multiple ES offering benefits at local scales (e.g. flood regulation, recreation) to global scales (e.g. timber, climate regulation). Key ES have been selected by a literature review of the existing international classifications [4,13,36] and a focus group held with academic experts of the forest ecosystem services in northern Quebec. Key ES are defined as those ES that are both significant and relevant for the case study, and for which ecological or economic data are available and can be mobilized within the constraints of time and budget [37]. Some adaptations were made to establish the final list of ES on the basis of pre-existing ES studies in Quebec [38–40]. These adaptations reflect the characteristics of the target site, anticipate the use of transfer value, and aim to avoid double counting. This reclassification results in a selection of 7 key ES for the MUWBR: timber, human food from agriculture, freshwater for energy production, global climate regulation (sequestration and storage of greenhouse gases), habitat provision for biodiversity, recreation and tourism, cultural heritage and cultural diversity i.e. values that humans place on the maintenance of historically important landscapes and forms of land use.
2.3. ES supply and demand are both assessed using an articulation between spatial analysis and economic valuation (Fig 2). On the one hand, a spatial analysis is conducted in order to identify ecosystem Service Providing Unit (SPU) area. SPU area is defined as the spatial unit that is the source of an ES [41] and is considered as one of the most important concept regarding ES supply [42]. On the other hand, an economic valuation is conducted in order to understand how much the ecosystems of the MUWBR contribute to local and regional economic activities and society.
Figure data removed from full text. Figure identifier and caption: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205935.g002 Methodology for the ES assessment. 2.3.1. Spatial analysis is realised through ArcGIS 10.3 software and is based primarily on three cartographic databases [43–45], as well as on layers provided by the MUWBR team (i.e. reserve boundaries, protected areas, controlled exploited areas and outfitters, localisation of hydroelectric power stations). Firstly, each key ES is associated with the one or more particular land use classes of the Quebec Land Cover Mapping which are involved in its production. The classes are then grouped into broader land use categories. This clustering allows a better reading of the land uses which are then mapped. Secondly, based on these clustered categories, SPU areas are mapped and calculated for each ES. SPU is the combination of all the land use categories involved in the its production. It allows to study the distribution of the ES supply in the MUWBR. Calculation of the SPU (ha) also provides a weighting factor which will be useful for the economic valuation. Finally, an overlay map of the 7 SPU areas is created and informs us about the existence and location of important ES hotspots in the MUWBR defined as small areas that provide multiple key ES.
2.3.2. As mentioned above, the TEV is usually invoked for economic ES assessment. TEV of ecosystems is classically divided between values of uses and non-uses [46–47]. Use values are the benefits derived from the asset consumption by an agent and from practices related to assets but not involving their consumption (i.e. consumptive and non-consumptive uses) whereas non-use value are the benefits derived by others, provided that the agent’s utility function incorporate ethical or altruistic preferences [48]. The construction of the TEV implies an aggregation of these different values. However, the experts involved in the valuation process favoured use values by considering that the methods of estimating non-use values are less robust and their legitimacy more contested [49]. Use values are estimated through direct market valuation, which has the advantage of using data from actual markets to reflect actual preferences or costs to individuals [50]. Three specific methods are used here: Market price-based approaches are used to obtain the value of provisioning services whose products are usually sold in an existing market;Cost-based approaches are based on estimations of the costs that would be incurred if ES benefits didn’t existed or needed to be restored or replaced through artificial means;Production function-based approaches estimate how much a given ecosystem service contributes to the enhancement of income or productivity.The benefit transfer method is used when data from actual markets doesn’t exist for the study site. This method allows ES valuation by transferring an existing service valuation estimate from a site with similar characteristics and a similar context [50]. In this study, only values based on similar ecosystems in Quebec through direct market valuation methods are used for benefit transfer. Monetary values are identified and estimated for 5 of the 7 key ES. Indeed, habitat provision for biodiversity and cultural heritage and diversity are not related to use values so no relevant economic indicators have been identified. The valuation methods used for each ES are presented in Table 1.
Table data removed from full text. Table identifier and caption: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205935.t001 Methods and indicators used for the ES valuation. Finally, the total use value for the MUWBR is calculated and informs us about the relative contribution of each ES to the annual flow of services provided by the reserve.
|
![[This page as RDF]](http://data.gesis.org/somesci/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}