Overview of studies on ecosystem services in riparian zones: a systematic review.

• Autor(a) principal: PRADO, R. B.
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: DAMASCENO, G. M. S, AQUINO, F. de G.
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da EMBRAPA (Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from EMBRAPA - Alice)
• Texto Completo: http://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/alice/handle/doc/1145425; http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S2179-975X1822
• topic: Paisagem; Valoração Econômica; Lacunas; Oportunidades; Gaps; Opportunities; Integração; Integration (economics); Landscapes; Economic valuation

Aim: Riparian zones are highly complex ecosystems, located on the banks of water bodies, with a fundamental role in maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services (ES). This study aimed to systematize the knowledge about studies on ES in riparian zones, emphasizing methodological aspects and pointing out gaps and opportunities to reinforce their importance. Methods: The study was carried out based on literature review data over a period of 21 years (2000-2020), using Scopus and Web of Science databases. In the first stage, aspects of bibliometrics were analyzed, as well as the countries that published the most on the subject. In the second stage, the methodological aspects were analyzed (with emphasis on the integrated analysis of multiple ES, which looked at the landscape, adopted multiscale or carried out economic valuation). Results: From 2000 to 2020, 6,969 publications were obtained from Scopus and 16,498 from Web of Science, applying the search terms riparian buffer or similar and 371 publications were obtained from Scopus and 1,512 from Web of Science applying ecosystem service and riparian zones or similar terms, with the USA being the country that most published about ES in riparian zones. From a total of 219 publications selected, the ES category most studied in riparian zones was Regulation (65%), followed by Support (16%), Provision (8%) and Cultural (2%). Publications that studied three or more ES corresponded to 9% of the analyzed publications. Approximately 10% of publications used methodological approaches with multiple ESs in an integrated way. Less than 10% of publications focused on economic valuation. Gaps and opportunities were identified concerning the relevance and methods for evaluating and valuing ESs in riparian zones. Conclusions: Few studies used methodological approaches integrating different ES. That calls attention to the need to carry out more studies that analyze ES in riparian zones using an integrated and multiscale approach because that is how the components of the ecosystem interact and provide joint responses that may assist in decision making.