TY - JOUR
T1 - Birds and bioenergy within the americas
T2 - A cross‐national, social–ecological study of ecosystem service tradeoffs
AU - Knowlton, Jessie L.
AU - Halvorsen, Kathleen E.
AU - Flaspohler, David J.
AU - Webster, Christopher R.
AU - Abrams, Jesse
AU - Almeida, Sara M.
AU - Arriaga‐weiss, Stefan L.
AU - Barnett, Brad
AU - Cardoso, Maíra R.
AU - Cerqueira, Pablo V.
AU - Córdoba, Diana
AU - Dantas‐santos, Marcos Persio
AU - Dunn, Jennifer L.
AU - Eastmond, Amarella
AU - Jarvi, Gina M.
AU - Licata, Julian A.
AU - Mata‐zayas, Ena
AU - Medeiros, Rodrigo
AU - Azahara Mesa‐Jurado, M.
AU - Moo‐culebro, Lízbeth Yamily
AU - Moseley, Cassandra
AU - Nielsen, Erik
AU - Phifer, Colin C.
AU - Pischke, Erin C.
AU - Schelly, Chelsea
AU - Selfa, Theresa
AU - Silva, Chelsea A.
AU - Souza, Tatiana
AU - Sweitz, Samuel R.
AU - Vázquez‐navarrete, César J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2021/3
Y1 - 2021/3
N2 - Although renewable energy holds great promise in mitigating climate change, there are socioeconomic and ecological tradeoffs related to each form of renewable energy. Forest‐related bioenergy is especially controversial, because tree plantations often replace land that could be used to grow food crops and can have negative impacts on biodiversity. In this study, we examined public perceptions and ecosystem service tradeoffs between the provisioning services associated with cover types associated with bioenergy crop (feedstock) production and forest habitat‐related supporting services for birds, which themselves provide cultural and regulating services. We combined a social survey‐based assessment of local values and perceptions with measures of bioenergy feedstock production impacts on bird habitat in four countries: Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, and the USA. Respondents in all countries rated birds as important or very important (83–99% of respondents) and showed lower enthusiasm for, but still supported, the expansion of bioenergy feedstocks (48–60% of respondents). Bioenergy feedstock cover types in Brazil and Argentina had the greatest negative impact on birds but had a positive impact on birds in the USA. In Brazil and Mexico, public perceptions aligned fairly well with the realities of the impacts of potential bioenergy feedstocks on bird communities. However, in Argentina and the USA, perceptions of bioenergy impacts on birds did not match well with the data. Understanding people’s values and perceptions can help inform better policy and management decisions regarding land use changes.
AB - Although renewable energy holds great promise in mitigating climate change, there are socioeconomic and ecological tradeoffs related to each form of renewable energy. Forest‐related bioenergy is especially controversial, because tree plantations often replace land that could be used to grow food crops and can have negative impacts on biodiversity. In this study, we examined public perceptions and ecosystem service tradeoffs between the provisioning services associated with cover types associated with bioenergy crop (feedstock) production and forest habitat‐related supporting services for birds, which themselves provide cultural and regulating services. We combined a social survey‐based assessment of local values and perceptions with measures of bioenergy feedstock production impacts on bird habitat in four countries: Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, and the USA. Respondents in all countries rated birds as important or very important (83–99% of respondents) and showed lower enthusiasm for, but still supported, the expansion of bioenergy feedstocks (48–60% of respondents). Bioenergy feedstock cover types in Brazil and Argentina had the greatest negative impact on birds but had a positive impact on birds in the USA. In Brazil and Mexico, public perceptions aligned fairly well with the realities of the impacts of potential bioenergy feedstocks on bird communities. However, in Argentina and the USA, perceptions of bioenergy impacts on birds did not match well with the data. Understanding people’s values and perceptions can help inform better policy and management decisions regarding land use changes.
KW - Aspen
KW - Biodiversity
KW - Elaeis guineensis
KW - Eucalyptus
KW - Land use change
KW - Oil palm
KW - Populus
KW - Public perceptions
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102579902&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85102579902&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/land10030258
DO - 10.3390/land10030258
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85102579902
SN - 2073-445X
VL - 10
SP - 1
EP - 21
JO - Land
JF - Land
IS - 3
M1 - 258
ER -