Provisioning ecosystem services in the buffer zone of the Mata do Pau-Ferro state park, Areia – PB, Brazil: mapping and conflicts between supply and demand
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-7723_32-extra1_19Keywords:
Atlantic Forest, State Park, ecosystem services, conflictsAbstract
Natural forests provide products to populations around them all over the world. In Brazil, the Buffer Zone of the Mata do Pau-Ferro State Park is an important area that offers ecosystem services, but it has faced conflicts between supply and demand. Given this, the present work aimed to map the provisioning ecosystem services provided by the forest ecosystems of the zone and identify the conflicts that occur. For the mapping of services and identification of conflicts, the matrix method was adopted, enabling the cross-referencing of supply and demand data. The results showed that supply capacity varies from high to not relevant, while demand varies between high and low. Conflict between supply and demand was observed in at least three services: nutrition from wild plants and animals, and energy from wild plants. It is clear that the agriculture and livestock farming that developed in the region before the creation of the Conservation Unit led to a reduction in fragments and an increase in demand from the population.
Downloads
References
Abreu, D. B. de O., Oliveira Filho, R. B., Vasconcelos Neto, C. F. A., Lucena, C. M., Felix, L. P., & Lucena, R. F. P. (2011). Classificação etnobotânica por uma comunidade rural em um brejo de altitude no Nordeste do Brasil. Revista BioFar, 6(1), 55–74. https://docplayer.com.br/11570177-Classificacao-etnobotanica-por-uma-comunidade-rural-em-um-brejo-de-altitude-no-nordeste-do-brasil.html
Abreu, E. F., Casali, D., Costa-Araújo, R., Garbino, G. S. T., Libardi, G. S., Loretto, D., Loss, A. C., Marmontel, M., Moras, L. M., Nascimento, M. C., Oliveira, M. L., Pavan, S. E., & Tirelli, F. P. (2021). Lista de Mamíferos do Brasil (2021-2). SBMZ. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.5802047
Ahammad, R., Stacey, N., & Sunderland, T. C. H. (2019). Use and perceived importance of forest ecosystem services in rural livelihoods of Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh. Ecosystem Services, 35, 87–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.11.009
Ala-Hulkko, T., Kotavaara, O., Alahuhta, J., & Hjort, J. (2019). Mapping supply and demand of a provisioning ecosystem service across Europe. Ecological Indicators, 103, 520–529. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.04.049
Andrade, A. M. F., Alves, C. A. B., Souza, R. S., & Silva, S. da. (2019). Inventário etnobotânico e uso das espécies madeireiras e não madeireiras na comunidade de Ouricuri, Pilões-PB, Nordeste do Brasil. Revista Equador (UFPI), 8(2), 399–421. https://revistas.ufpi.br/index.php/equador/article/view/9251/5416
Arruda, L. V., Rodrigues, L. P. M., Silva, I. C., & Souza, R. S. (2022). Configuração geoambiental e dinâmica do espaço agrário atual do Brejo Paraibano (PB), Paraíba, Brasil. Revista Ciência Geográfica, 26(01), 72–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18817/26755122.26.01.2022.2874
Balvanera, P., Daily, G. C., Ehrlich, P. R., Ricketts, T. H., Bailey, S.-A., Kark, S., Kremen, C., & Pereira, H. (2001). Conserving Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Science, 291(5511), 2047–2047. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.291.5511.2047
Lei n.o 12.651, de 25 de maio de 2012, (2012). http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2012/lei/l12651.htm
Lei n.o 14.119, de 13 de janeiro de 2021, (2021). http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2021/lei/L14119.htm
Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Müller, F., & Windhorst, W. (2009). Landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services - A concept for land-cover based assessments. Landscape Online, 15(1), 1–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.200915
Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Nedkov, S., & Müller, F. (2012). Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecological Indicators, 21, 17–29.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.019
Campos, J. O., Lima, E. R. V. de, & Costa, D. F. da S. (2023). Mapeamento do serviço ecossistêmico de sequestro de carbono prestado pela cobertura florestal do Parque Estadual Mata do Pau-Ferro e sua Zona de Amortecimento, Areia, Paraíba. Revista Geográfica Acadêmica, 17(2), 115–135. https://revista.ufrr.br/rga/article/view/7888
Costa, H. C., & Bérnils, R. S. (2018). Répteis do Brasil e suas Unidades Federativas: lista de espécies. Revista Herpetologia Brasileira, 7(1), 11–57. http://public.sbherpetologia.org.br/assets/Documentos/2016/10/lista-de-repteis-2018-2.pdf
Costanza, R. (2020). Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability. Ecosystem Services, 43, 1–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101096
Costanza, R., D’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P., & van den Belt, M. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(6630), 253–260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
Costanza, R., de Groot, R., Braat, L., Kubiszewski, I., Fioramonti, L., Sutton, P., Farber, S., & Grasso, M. (2017). Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services, 28, 1–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.008
Czúcz, B., Haines-Young, R., Kiss, M., Bereczki, K., Kertész, M., Vári, Á., Potschin-Young, M., & Arany, I. (2020). Ecosystem service indicators along the cascade: How do assessment and mapping studies position their indicators? Ecological Indicators, 118, 106729. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106729
Daily, G. C. (1997). Introduction: What are ecosystem services? In G. C. Daily (Ed.), Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence On Natural Ecosystems (pp. 1–10). Island Press.
Dworczyk, C., & Burkhard, B. (2021). Conceptualising the demand for ecosystem services – an adapted spatial-structural approach. One Ecosystem, 6, 1–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.6.e65966
FAO (2020). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020. FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825en
García-Nieto, A. P., García-Llorente, M., Iniesta-Arandia, I., & Martín-López, B. (2013). Mapping forest ecosystem services: From providing units to beneficiaries. Ecosystem Services, 4, 126–138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.03.003
Gomes da Silva, M., Beltrão, N. E. S., & Morales, G. P. (2021). Avaliação e mapeamento dos serviços ecossistêmicos ofertados pela Reserva Biológica Nascentes da Serra do Cachimbo, Pará, Brasil. Geosul, 36(78), 516–536. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5007/2177-5230.2021.e71192
Gonçalves, D. M. C., Gama, J. V. R., Corrêa, J. A. J., & Oliveira Junior, R. C. (2021). Uso de produtos florestais não madeireiros em comunidades da Flona Tapajós. Nativa, 9(3), 302–309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31413/nativa.v9i3.11598
Groot, R. S., Wilson, M. A., & Boumans, R. M. J. (2002). A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics, 41(3), 393–408. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00089-7
Haines-Young, R., & Potschin, M. (2013). Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December 2012. University of Nottingham.
Haines-Young, R., & Potschin, M. (2018). Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the Application of the Revised Structure. Fabis Consulting.
Hong, N. T., & Saizen, I. (2019). Forest Ecosystem Services and Local Communities: Towards a Possible Solution to Reduce Forest Dependence in Bach Ma National Park, Vietnam. Human Ecology, 47(3), 465–476. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-019-00083-x
IPBES (2019). Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES.
Jamieson, S. (2004). Likert scales: how to (ab)use them. Medical Education, 38(12), 1217–1218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02012.x
Kandziora, M., Burkhard, B., & Müller, F. (2013). Interactions of ecosystem properties, ecosystem integrity and ecosystem service indicators—A theoretical matrix exercise. Ecological Indicators, 28, 54–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.09.006
Kopperoinen, L., Luque, S., Tenerelli, P., Zulian, G., & Viinikka, A. (2017). Mapping cultural ecosystem services. In B. Burkhard & J. Maes (Eds.), Mapping Ecosystem Services (pp. 197–209). Pensoft Publishers.
Kruse, M., & Petz, K. (2017). Mapping provisioning ecosystem services. In B. Burkhard & J. Maes (Eds.), Mapping Ecosystem Services (pp. 187–196). Pensoft Publishers.
Leite, R. S. F., Santos, H. A., & Silva, T. C. F. (2014). Importância da implementação do plano de manejo para a conservação do Parque Estadual Mata do Pau Ferro e microbacia de Vaca Brava, PB. Anais [...], 12.
Lhoest, S., Dufrêne, M., Vermeulen, C., Oszwald, J., Doucet, J. L., & Fayolle, A. (2019). Perceptions of ecosystem services provided by tropical forests to local populations in Cameroon. Ecosystem Services, 38, 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100956
Lima, V. R., & Campos, J. O. (2022). Classificação do sistema de trilhas da unidade de conservação Parque Estadual Mata do Pau-Ferro, Areia, Paraíba, Brasil. Revista de Estudios Andaluces, 43, 51–70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12795/rea.2022.i43.03
Machado, F. S. (2008). Manejo de Produtos Florestais Não Madeireiros: um manual com sugestões para o manejo participativo em comunidades da Amazônia. PESACRE e CIFOR.
Marques, A. D. L., Costa, C. R. G., & Moura, D. C. (2019). Parque Estadual Mata do Pau Ferro (Areia - Paraíba): Zona de Amortecimento e espaços de conflitos. Geoambiente On-Line, 34, 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5216/revgeoamb.v0i34.52282
MEA. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press.
Medeiros, J. F., & Cestaro, L. A. (2019). As diferentes abordagens utilizadas para definir brejos de altitude, áreas de exceção do Nordeste brasileiro. Sociedade e Território, 31(2), 97–119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21680/2177-8396.2019v31n2ID16096
Miot, H. A. (2020). Análise de dados ordinais em estudos clínicos e experimentais. Jornal Vascular Brasileiro, 19(1), 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1677-5449.200185
Miura, S., Amacher, M., Hofer, T., San-Miguel-Ayanz, J., Ernawati, & Thackway, R. (2015). Protective functions and ecosystem services of global forests in the past quarter-century. Forest Ecology and Management, 352, 35–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.03.039
MMA (2018). Mapeamento de serviços ecossistêmicos no território: cartilha metodológica segundo a experiência de Duque de Caxias – RJ. MMA/TEEB.
Ndayizeye, G., Imani, G., Nkengurutse, J., Irampagarikiye, R., Ndihokubwayo, N., Niyongabo, F., & Cuni-Sanchez, A. (2020). Ecosystem services from mountain forests: Local communities’ views in Kibira National Park, Burundi. Ecosystem Services, 45, 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101171
Nedkov, S., & Burkhard, B. (2012). Flood regulating ecosystem services—Mapping supply and demand, in the Etropole municipality, Bulgaria. Ecological Indicators, 21, 67–79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.022
Pacheco, J. F., Silveira, L. F., Aleixo, A., Agne, C. E., Bencke, G. A., Bravo, G. A., Brito, G. R. R., Cohn-Haft, M., Maurício, G. N., Naka, L. N., Olmos, F., Posso, S. R., Lees, A. C., Figueiredo, L. F. A., Carrano, E., Guedes, R. C., Cesari, E., Franz, I., Schunck, F., & de Q. Piacentini, V. (2021). Annotated checklist of the birds of Brazil by the Brazilian Ornithological Records Committee—second edition. Ornithology Research, 29(2), 94–105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43388-021-00058-x
Palomo, I., Martín-López, B., Potschin, M., Haines-Young, R., & Montes, C. (2013). National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: Mapping ecosystem service flows. Ecosystem Services, 4, 104–116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.09.001
Pastur, G. M., Perera, A. H., Peterson, U., & Iverson, L. R. (2018). Ecosystem Services from Forest Landscapes: An Overview. In A. H. Perera, U. Peterson, G. M. Pastur, & L. R. Iverson (Eds.), Ecosystem Services from Forest Landscapes: Broadscale Considerations, Springer, 1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74515-2_10
Paudyal, K., Baral, H., Burkhard, B., Bhandari, S. P., & Keenan, R. J. (2015). Participatory assessment and mapping of ecosystem services in a data-poor region: Case study of community-managed forests in central Nepal. Ecosystem Services, 13, 81–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.01.007
REFLORA (2021). Flora e Funga do Brasil. Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47871/jbrj2021001
Santos, H. A., Costa, E. G., Araújo, H. F., Mendonça, J. D. L., & Silva, T. C. F. (2020). Plano de manejo do Parque Estadual Mata do Pau-Ferro. Editora UNIESP.
Segalla, M., Berneck, B., Canedo, C., Caramaschi, U., Cruz, C. A. G., Garcia, P. C. A., Grant, T., Haddad, C. F. B., Lourenço, A. C., Mangia, S., Mott, T., Nascimento, L., Toledo, L. F., Werneck, F., & Langone, J. A. (2021). List of Brazilian Amphibians. Herpetologia Brasileira, 10(1), 121–216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4716176
SFB (2019). Inventário Florestal Nacional: principais resultados: Paraíba. MAPA.
Shi, Y., Shi, D., Zhou, L., & Fang, R. (2020). Identification of ecosystem services supply and demand areas and simulation of ecosystem service flows in Shanghai. Ecological Indicators, 115, 106418. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106418
SiBBr (2021). Sistema de Informação sobre a Biodiversidade Brasileira (SiBBR). https://ala-hub.sibbr.gov.br/ala-hub/#tab_simpleSearch
Sousa, D. S., & Pereira, W. E. (2016). Atividade agrícola do Brejo Paraibano: declínio e tendências atuais. Revista Brasileira de Agropecuária Sustentável, 6(3), 11–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21206/rbas.v6i3.347
Syrbe, R.-U., & Grunewald, K. (2017). Ecosystem service supply and demand – the challenge to balance spatial mismatches. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 13(2), 148–161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2017.1407362
Zhai, T., Wang, J., Fang, Y., Huang, L., Liu, J., & Zhao, C. (2021). Integrating Ecosystem Services Supply, Demand and Flow in Ecological Compensation: A Case Study of Carbon Sequestration Services. Sustainability, 13(4), 1668. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041668
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Territorium
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows sharing the work with recognition of authorship and initial publication in Antropologia Portuguesa journal.
