Spatio-temporal dynamics of ecosystem service values under land use/land cover change in Southern Togo
Résumé fourni par la source
Land use and land cover (LULC) change is a major driver of ecosystem degradation in coastal West Africa, yet its effects on ecosystem service values (ESVs) remain poorly constrained in data-scarce regions such as Togo. This study quantifies LULC dynamics in the Maritime Region from 2000 to 2020 and evaluates their impacts on ESVs, with projections to 2050 using a Cellular Automata-Markov model validated with Kappa statistics. ESVs were estimated using the benefit transfer approach. Results showed that croplands increased from 131,552 ha to 144,211 ha (+1.99%) and urban areas from 49,353 ha to 69,325 ha (+3.14%), whereas savannah mosaics declined from 319,080 ha to 298,747 ha (−3.20%) and forest mosaics from 98,278 ha to 86,624 ha (−1.83%). Despite these losses, total ESV increased slightly (+1.03%). Sensitivity analysis demonstrates that this increase is largely driven by high valuation coefficients assigned to urban and cropland classes and does not reflect actual ecological gains. These findings highlight structural biases in conventional valuation approaches and call for ecologically grounded frameworks for sustainable land-use planning. Rapid cropland and urban expansion drives LULC change in southern Togo.Forest and savannah loss leads to declining regulating ecosystem services.Apparent ESV increase is driven by high urban valuation coefficients.Sensitivity analysis reveals methodological bias in benefit transfer.CA-Markov projections indicate continued land-use intensification to 2050. Rapid cropland and urban expansion drives LULC change in southern Togo. Forest and savannah loss leads to declining regulating ecosystem services. Apparent ESV increase is driven by high urban valuation coefficients. Sensitivity analysis reveals methodological bias in benefit transfer. CA-Markov projections indicate continued land-use intensification to 2050.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.