Journal Pre-proof

Ecosystem service valuation of a natural reserve region for sustainable management

of natural resources

Srikanta Sannigrahi, Suman Chakraborti, Anushna Banerjee, Shahid Rahmat,

Sandeep Bhatt, Shouvik Jha, L.K. Singh, Saikat Kumar Paul, Somnath Sen

PII: S2665-9727(19)30014-5
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2019.100014
Reference: INDIC 100014

To appear in: Environmental and Sustainability Indicators

Received Date: 21 May 2019

Revised Date: 26 November 2019
Accepted Date: 27 November 2019

Please cite this article as: Sannigrahi, S., Chakraborti, S., Banerjee, A., Rahmat, S., Bhatt, S., Jha, S.,
Singh, L.K., Paul, S.K., Sen, S., Ecosystem service valuation of a natural reserve region for sustainable
management of natural resources, Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.indic.2019.100014.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition
of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of
record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published
in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that,
during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal
disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2019 Published by Elsevier Inc.

 Ecosystem service valuation of a natural reserve region for sustainable
management of natural resources

Srikanta Sannigrahia*, Suman Chakrabortib, Anushna Banerjee b, Shahid Rahmata, Sandeep

Bhattc, Shouvik Jhad, L.K. Singhe, Saikat Kumar Paula, Somnath Sena

a*
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning, Indian Institute of Technology

Kharagpur-721302, India

b
Center for the Study of Regional Development (CSRD), Jawaharlal Nehru University, New

Delhi, 110067, India

c
Department of Geology & Geophysics, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, West

Bengal 721302, India

d
Indian Centre for Climate and Societal Impacts Research (ICCSIR), Kachchh, Gujarat,

370465, India

e
AgFE Department, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur 721 302, West

Bengal, India

*Corresponding author: Srikanta Sannigrahi

E-mail: (Srikanta Sannigrahi*) : [email protected]

 1 Ecosystem service valuation of a natural reserve region for sustainable
2 management of natural resources

3
4 Abstract:

5 The mangrove ecosystem is highly important for providing essential ecosystem services,
6 which are crucial for subsistence and human well-being. Using time-series satellite data
7 products and different unit values, the spatially explicit Ecosystem Service Value (ESV) of
8 six eco-regions of the Sundarbans Biosphere Reserve (SBR), India, has been calculated for
9 four reference years, viz. 1973, 1988, 2002 and 2013. The maximum ESV (million US$
10 year1) is provided by the mangrove forest (2292 – 44468), followed by water surface (65 –
11 4244), cropland (26 – 3938), and sparse vegetation cover (0 – 326). The total ESV (million
12 US$ year1) of Sundarbans was estimated as 16629.5, 20175.7, 19733.4, and 16761.3 for
13 1973, 1988, 2002, and 2013, respectively. The regulation of gas and climate, raw material
14 production, and cultural ecosystem services are entirely dependent on the mangrove
15 ecosystem, while the waste treatment, cultural, and water regulation services are found to be
16 highly sensitive to the changes of water bodies. The food production and biodiversity services
17 exhibiting higher sensitivity to the changes of cropland and water regulation and soil
18 formation and retention services show higher sensitivity to the changes in mixed vegetation
19 cover. The current study has thoroughly evaluated the sensitivity and response behavior of six
20 ecoregions of Sundarbans. The outcome of this study will enable the decision-makers,
21 planners, researchers to adopt necessary action plans for strengthening and protecting the
22 natural resources of this biosphere reserve.

23

24 Keywords: Land use change; Carbon sequestration; Sundarbans; Mangrove; Remote

25 sensing

26

27

28

29

30

1
31

32 1. Introduction

33

34 The Ecosystem Services (ESs) are the combination of goods and services that entail
35 enhancement of community well-being and human welfare (Costanza et al., 1997, 2014, Brat
36 and Groot, 2012). Ecosystem Service Value (ESV) is an elaborative valuation approach to
37 measure the market values of common ecological functions that often leads to deliver
38 invaluable ecosystem services and eventually helps to realize the socioecological importance
39 of this naturally occurring functions that embedded in generating natural capital and boosting
40 green economy of a region (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). Among the four
41 group of ESs, the provisioning services (food, fiber, timber production) and regulating
42 services (climate regulation, air quality regulation, disturbance regulation, water purification,
43 soil erosion regulation) are considered to be the most relevant as these services supports the
44 production of renewable resources and eventually shape the ESs supply and demand disparity
45 of a region (Olver, 2012; Yang et al., 2018, 2019).

46 Most of the earth's ESs have been transformed due to the pressure of anthropogenic
47 activities such as changes in land use and land cover (LULC), deforestation, grazing on
48 natural resources, which have grown substantially and become inevitable nowadays.
49 Amongst all driving forces that bring about the changes, LULC is considered to be the most
50 crucial factor. A number of studies have discussed the superior effect of LULC change on
51 ESs at multiple ecosystem scale, extending from global estimates of ESV’s (Costanza et al.,
52 2014, Sannigrahi et al., 2018), considering the uncertainties in satellite-derived global land-
53 use products (Song, 2018), the impact of urbanization and land encroachment on wetland
54 services (Mondal et al., 2017; Malekmohammadi and Jahanishakib, 2017), identifying the
55 factors affecting the trade-off and synergies of urban ecosystem services (Dennis and James,
56 2017), and exploring the ESV provision of a protected forest (Keesstra et al., 2019; Kibria et
57 al., 2017, Sannigrahi et. al., 2019a). Few other attempts have analyzed the trade-offs in water
58 and grassland carbon ecosystem service (Kim et al., 2016), and inspected the landscape
59 capacity to provide ecosystem services (Burkhard et al., 2009, 2014; Sannigrahi et al.,
60 2019b).

61 The current study explicitly intends to evaluate the relevant ESs through remote
62 sensing-based approaches and biophysical modeling. Depending on the availability of remote

2
63 sensing data products and ancillary information, the per-unit ESVs of the Sundarbans
64 Biosphere Region (SBR) is estimated from 1973 to 2013. The Sundarban mangroves are
65 known for yielding bulk ESs (fishing, honey collection, crab collection, fuelwood, timber,
66 tannin, thatch, tourism) that supports nearly 20 million peoples living in this region. The key
67 ecological functions of SBR include breeding, spawning, hatching and nursing grounds for
68 marine and pelagic species. This ecosystem has also been earmarked as the first defense
69 system to the recurring natural calamities and hazardous events, as the large, above-ground
70 aerial root systems of the mangrove species are proven to be highly effective to attenuate
71 wave actions by dissipating the energy (Dahdouh-Guebas et al., 2005). The Sundarban
72 mangrove regions are strategically located where man-sea interaction is persistent, and that
73 makes it a coastal vulnerable zone. Therefore, providing array of information on various ESs
74 of this region is indispensable for upgrading the overall socio-ecological status and managing
75 the natural resources of SBR. Additionally, the present study aimed to assess the importance
76 of Sundarban mangroves in delivering valued regulating, supporting, provisioning, and
77 cultural ecosystem services for sustainable coastal resource management. The objectives of
78 this study are (1) to classify the region into several ecosystem units; (2) to quantify the
79 spatially explicit ESVs of the various natural capitals of Sundarbans; (3) to examine the
80 sensitivity of different ESs to LULC changes.

81

82 2. Materials and methods

83 2.1 Study area

84 The Sundarbans mangrove ecosystem is the world’s largest coastal mangrove

85 ecosystem. The Sundarbans is located in the confluence of Ganga, Brahmaputra, and Meghna
86 rivers. It is also one of the ecologically and biologically diverse ecosystems in India. The
87 Sundarbans ecosystem is consisting of a number of biodiversity zones, Wildlife Sanctuaries,
88 i.e., Sajnekhali, Haliday Island and the Lothian Island, Sundarbans National Park, Sundarban
89 Tiger Reserve, (Fig. 1). According to Nandy and Kushwaha, 2011, the Sundarbans comprises
90 of four distinct eco-regions, i.e., the core zone (1,700 km2), a buffer zone (2,400 km2),
91 restoration zone (230 km2), and the development zone (5,300 km2). The Sundarbans Tiger
92 Reserve is mostly located within the distant core zone of Sundarbans (Nandy and Kushwaha,
93 2011). The elevation of Sundarbans ranges from 1m to 4m above MSL.

94

3
 95

96 2.2 Methodology

97 2.2.1 Land use land cover change analysis

98 The LANDSAT multispectral (MSS), Thematic Mapper (TM), Enhanced Thematic

99 Mapper (ETM+), and Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI) and Thermal Infrared Sensor
100 (TIRS) data products were used to classify the region into several ecosystem units. The MSS
101 (60m spatial resolution, 4 spectral bands) data acquired for November 1973, the TM data
102 (60m spatial resolution, 6 bands) obtained for November 1988, the ETM data (30m spatial
103 resolution, 8 bands) acquired for December 2002, and OLI/TIRS data (30m spatial resolution,
104 11 bands) was retrieved for December 2013 with the paths and rows 138/44 and 138/45
105 (http://earthexplorer.usgs.gov). The aforementioned satellite data products were collected in
106 the post-monsoon season (October – January) to get a consistent and cloud-free observation.
107 The necessary pre-processing of the satellite images, including the atmospheric corrections,
108 was performed on the stated data products. A supervised classification algorithm, Maximum
109 Likelihood Classification (MLC), was implemented for classifying the region into several
110 LULC classes, i.e., mangrove forest, water bodies (including inland wetlands, artificial water
111 surface made for pisciculture practices, rivers etc.), sparse/mixed vegetation, cropland, urban
112 land, and sandy coast/beach, respectively. Several post-classification assessments, including
113 user’s and producer’s accuracy, overall accuracy, kappa statistics were performed to examine
114 the accuracy and reliability of the classification estimates. The stratified random sampling
115 approach was adopted to collect ground samples for the six LULC types that represent the
116 actual earth objects. The overall accuracy of the classification estimates ranges from 80% to
117 95% for the consecutive years.

118 2.2.2 Estimation of ESV

119 To estimate the spatially explicit ESVs of six eco-regions, we have used several unit
120 values, i.e., Costanza et al., (1997), (2014), [C97a, C97b, C97c], de Groot et al., (2012)
121 [D12], Xie et al., (2003, 2008) [X03, X08]. Additionally, this study has explicitly used the
122 Benefit Transfer Method (BTM), proposed by Costanza et al., (1997), which assumes spatial
123 homogeneity and transferring the equivalent value coefficient from one or more
124 experimental sites to another areas to be ecologically and socio-economically comparable
125 (Brouwer, 2000; Kindu et al., 2016). The LULC estimates for the reference years has been
126 taken as a proxy to estimate the total ESVs of a particular land-use type. The value

4
127 coefficient of each ecosystem service functions has been adjusted for the Sundarbans region
128 using the Costanza et al., (1997), Xie et al., (2003, 2008) unit value given in Table. 1, 2, 3.
129 Then the adjusted value coefficients for a particular ecosystem service function were
130 multiplied by the area (hectare) to estimate the ESVs for a specific land-use type. The sum of
131 the values of all ecosystem service functions and land use types represent the total ecosystem
132 service value of the landscape for an experimental year.

133 ESVk = ∑ Ak × VCkf (1)

f

134 ESV f = ∑ Ak × VCkf (2)

k

135 ESV = ∑∑ Ak × VCkf (3)

f k

136 Where ESVk is refer to ESV of LULC category k , ESV f is the ESV of an ecosystem

137 function f , and ESV is the total estimated ESV, Ak is the area (ha) of LULC category k ,

138 VCkf is the equivalent value coefficient (US $ ha-1 year-1) of LULC category k and ecosystem

139 function f , respectively (Kindu et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2012; Costanza et al., 2014; Yoshida
140 et al., 2010;).

141 The Coefficient of Sensitivity (CS) of ESVs to LULC change have analyzed using the
142 concept of elasticity, i.e., the percentage changes of output for a given changes in the input.

(ESV j − ESVi ) / ESVi

143 CS = (4)
(VC jk − VCik ) / VCik

144 Where ESV is the ecosystem service value, VC is the value coefficient, ‘ i ’ and ‘ j ’ refers to

145 the unadjusted and adjusted values, and ‘ k ’ represents the LULC category. It has been
146 observed that when the ESV and adjusted VC go above the critical value (>1), ESV would be
147 elastic with changes of VC. Additionally, when the CS <1, the value would be inelastic to the
148 changes of VC. (Yoshida et al., 2010; Kreuter et al., 2001; Li et al. 2010; Aschonitis et al.,
149 2016).

150 3. Results and discussion

151 The cropland, mangrove, and water bodies, including rivers, inland water
152 bodies (pisciculture), small channels and their tributaries, and saline seawater, are the major

5
153 LULC types in the Sundarbans (Fig. 1b, Fig. 2). The South Western portion of the
154 Sundarbans is covered by the dense mangrove/swamp forest. Cropland contributed 50.76% of
155 the total land area, followed by water bodies (24.34%), mangrove forests (16.46%), and
156 sparse vegetation (8.1%) in 1973. In 1988, the cropland area reduced to 41.36%, whereas
157 water bodies (28.15%) and mangroves (20.89%) area increased substantially during this
158 period (1973 – 1988). In 2002 and 2013, the water bodies and mangrove decreased with time.
159 These changes can be attributed to several physical and anthropogenic factors. The natural
160 factors can be enlisted as (i) changes of mean sea level of Sundarbans delta. Data recorded at
161 Sagar Island Station shows that Sundarban has exhibited a substantial sea-level rise at a rate
162 of 2.6–4 mm year-1 during 1985 to 2010 (Bakshi et al., 2001; Allison et al., 2003; Samanta &
163 Hazra, 2017), thereby leading to a consequent decrease in coastal mangrove coverage. The
164 resultant increase in tidal creeks and flooded coastal areas create a suitable condition for the
165 formation of saline banks, which in turn leads to the removal of dense forest patches
166 (Samanta and Hazra, 2017). (ii) The increasing trends of air and surface temperature varied
167 between 0.019 °C year-1 to 0.045 °C year-1 in and around the Sundarbans and Bay of Bengal
168 during the last century enhanced the rate of sea-level rise from 3.14 mm year-1 to 8 mm year-1
169 (Hazra and Baksi 2003, Hazra et al. 2010; Alam 2003; Pethick and Orford 2013; Samanta &
170 Hazra, 2017). However, the increasing pattern of surface temperature in Sundarbans can also
171 be aligned to the degradation of dense/open forest patches in the study region (Sahana,
172 Sajjad, & Ahmed, 2015). (iii) The disproportion between the deposition and erosion in the
173 riverine system affecting the natural process of the estuary formation as the erosion rates are
174 gradually surpassing the aggradation rates, which would significantly alter the dynamics of
175 the major and minor streams stretched through this region (Ghosh et al., 2015).
176 During 1973 – 1988, the urban built-up categories expanded more rapidly
177 compared to mangrove (1.79%) and water bodies (1.04%) classes. The high level of
178 urbanization and resultant conversion of cultivated land to urban land as well as severe
179 coastal erosion, especially during and post-Aila catastrophe, which stuck in 2009, accounts
180 for the reduction of cropland in this region. During the entire study period, a net loss of water
181 bodies (-0.2%), cropland (-0.07%), and sparse vegetation cover (-0.52%) is observed, while
182 the urban areas (36.74%), open beach surface (0.36%), and mangrove forest (0.07%) have
183 shown an increasing trend during the experimental period (Table. 5). These findings are in
184 confirmation with Datta & Deb (2012) observations.

6
185 The ESV of Sundarbans derived from the five unit values are shown in Table. 6.
186 Among all classes, the maximum ESV (million US$ year1) is provided by mangrove forest
187 (2292 – 44468), followed by water surface (65 – 4244), cropland (26 – 3938), and sparse
188 vegetation cover (0 – 326). The total ESV (million US$ year1) is estimated at 16629.5,
189 20175.7, 19733.4, and 16761.3 for 1973, 1988, 2002, and 2013. The total ESV has been
190 increased during the study period due to the increase of mangrove and water bodies ESVs.
191 However, a substantial amount of ESVs has decreased (2972.1 Million US$) during the last
192 phase of the research period (2002 – 2013). This can be due to the destruction of mangrove
193 caused by cyclone ‘Aila’ which struck the Indian and Bangladesh Sundarbans in 2009. This
194 study has revealed that the mangrove ecosystem has contributed substantially to provide
195 multiple supporting, regulating, provisioning, and cultural ecosystem services throughout the
196 study period. The study by Donato et al., (2011) discovered that mangroves are among the
197 most productive forests in the tropics, and the organic-rich soils of mangrove, which range
198 from 0.5m to >3m in-depth, account for 49–98% of carbon storage. Donato et al. (2011) have
199 also revealed that mangrove deforestation released 0.02–0.12 Pg carbon per year, close to
200 10% of emissions from deforestation globally, despite covering only 0.7% of tropical forest
201 area.

202 The biomass production of mangroves in SBR is primarily controlled by the influx of
203 freshwater input from the Himalayan Glaciers, which further channeled through the Farakka
204 dam (Mitra et al., 2011). During 1999 – 2003, the pre-monsoon, monsoon, and post-monsoon
205 discharge from Farakka was measured as 1.2±0.09 ×103m3 s−1, 3.2±1.2×103m3 s−1, and
206 2.1±0.98×103 m3 s−1, respectively (Mitra et al., 2011). Additionally, the abundant annual
207 rainfall (1400mm average rainfall) and high surface runoff (60,000km2 catchment areas of
208 Ganga–Bhagirathi–Hooghly system and their tributaries) expedite the dilution factor of the
209 Hooghly estuary in the western part of Indian Sundarbans, hence augmenting the production
210 of mangrove biomass (Mitra et al., 2011). Additionally, the inclusion of spatial variables, i.e.,
211 landscape connectivity, patch density, neighbourhood analysis should be incorporated in the
212 valuation process as complements to the mangrove areas , since the value of individual
213 mangroves are boosted when there is a larger extent of other mangrove patches in the
214 neighboring area (Brander et al., 2012; Mukherjee et al., 2014). However, in most cases, the
215 trade-off and synergies of ecosystem services are assessed through linear approximation,
216 which incurs substantial measurement biases within the valuation process (Das & Vincent,
217 2009; Barbier et al., 2008).

7
218 The spatiotemporal changes of ESV during four different study periods (1973 – 1988,
219 1988 – 2002, 2002 – 2013, and 1973 – 2013) are presented in Table. 7. A significant positive
220 change (15.63%) in ESV was documented for water bodies during 1973 – 1988. However,
221 from 1988, the differences of ESV for water surface were found to be mostly negative,
222 accounts for -3.8% during 1988 – 2002, -7.87% during 1973 – 2013 and -17.17% during
223 2002 – 2013 (Table. 7). It can be noticed that while the ESV of mangrove has substantially
224 increased during the first half of the study period (1973-1988), and throughout the entire
225 study period (1973-2013) in general (26.91% and 2.62% respectively), during the periods of
226 2002-2013 and 1988-2002, a declined trend can be observed, with the ESV ranging from -
227 17.52% and -1.97%. (Table. 7). Using all the unit values, it has been noted that while the
228 cropland ESV shows negative values during the periods 1973-1988 (-18.5%) and 1988-2002
229 (-7.81%), and during the overall study period, 1973-2013 (-2.73%), there is an evident
230 increase in the trend during 2002-2013. Concerning the sparse vegetation eco-regions, the
231 estimated ESV reflects an incremental trend during the first (1973 – 1988) and second (1988
232 – 2002) evaluation periods, while the aforementioned changes were found to be negative
233 during 2002 – 2013 and 1973 – 2013, respectively (Table. 7). The study by Akhand et al.
234 (2016) on Indian Sundarbans has documented a net loss of mangrove cover, especially in the
235 periphery regions, which can be attributed to coastal erosion and the “Aila” super cyclone.
236 Datta et al. (2012), on the other hand have observed a net expansion of mangrove covers
237 during the last few decades, especially the dense mangrove cover, mainly due to the
238 community-based forest management policies taken by Government and local forest
239 authority.

240 Using all three unit values, the total ESVs of Sundarbans were estimated for nine ESs
241 for 1973, 1988, 2002, and 2013 (Fig. 4). The mangrove and water bodies are providing a
242 substantial amount of ESVs, where, Water bodies are providing the highest ESs for water
243 purification, waste treatment, and freshwater supply, whereas, mangrove ecosystem
244 contributes significantly in providing biodiversity maintenance service, gas and climate
245 regulation service, recreation, cultural and aesthetic services (Fig. 4).

246 The coefficient of sensitivity was measured for all nine ecosystem services to LULC
247 changes (Fig. 5). The C97c unit values demonstrate that the gas regulation, climate
248 regulation, raw material production, and cultural services entirely depend on the mangrove
249 ecosystem, while the waste treatment, cultural, and water regulation services are found to be
250 highly sensitive to the changes of water bodies. The food production and biodiversity services

8
251 have higher sensitivity to the changes of cropland, water regulation, and soil formation, while
252 retention services exhibit higher sensitivity to sparse vegetation changes (Fig. 5).
253 Alternatively, the X03 and X08 unit values show that the gas regulation, soil formation, and
254 retention, and biodiversity services are found to be highly sensitive to the changes in sparse
255 vegetation, while the food production, raw material production, and soil formation and
256 retention services tend to be strongly affected by the changes in cropland ecosystem. Also,
257 it’s important to notice that there is a vigorous reciprocal impact of any undesirable changes
258 in mangrove ecosystem on the crucial regulation services, e.g., climate regulation and water
259 regulation, which are observed and presented in Fig. 5. The sensitivity of ecosystem services
260 to land use and land cover changes are discussed in Table. 8. The results have shown that the
261 mangrove and water bodies ESV are most sensitive to any undesirable land alterations. These
262 findings have echoed the absolute importance of protecting this enriched biosphere and
263 complex River networks for providing valuable ecosystem services. The services derived
264 from the Sundarbans are not only essential for maintaining the livelihood of local
265 communities, but also for regulating climate and regional warming, and the protection of
266 millions of peoples of Sundarbans and Kolkata megacity form the frequent natural calamities.

267 The sensitivity behavior of different land units and ESs observed in this study are in
268 accordance with the study by Tolessa et al., (2017); Fu et al., (2016); Yang et al., (2011); Yi
269 et al., (2017). Although the valuation method proposed by Costanza et al., (1997) may
270 underestimate several ESs due to the assumption of spatial homogeneity, it is still embedded
271 with a comprehensive calculation for determining the direct benefits of many (semi) natural
272 to managed ecosystem services. The proper economic valuation of ecosystem services carries
273 a high degree of subjectivity and impressions. These depend on the local economic
274 conditions. However, to address the uncertainties and biases that remain in the valuation
275 process, we have adopted eight different unit values to estimate the spatially explicit ESs of
276 Sundarbans. The calculation of ecosystem services involves uncertainties, which need to be
277 taken into consideration while counting the monetary values ecosystem goods and services of
278 any given ecosystem.

279 4. Conclusion

280 This study quantifies the ecosystem service values of different natural capitals in the
281 Sundarbans Biosphere reserve region, the largest mangrove ecosystem in the world. Using
282 multiple valuation approaches, the total ESV (million US$ year1) of SBR is estimated as

9
283 16629.5, 20175.7, 19733.4, and 16761.3 for 1973, 1988, 2002, and 2013, respectively. The
284 total ESV of the SBR has been increased during the study period. This is primarily due to the
285 increases in mangrove and water bodies ESV’s. The ESV hotspots were mainly concentrated
286 over the mangrove and water surface ecoregions. This denotes the significance of coastal
287 wetland ecosystems (mangrove, saline tidal flat, mudflat, and freshwater swamps) in order to
288 produce the valued ecosystem goods and services for community well-being. Additionally,
289 the Sundarbans is not only essential for maintaining the livelihood of many local
290 communities, but also for regulating the micro-climatic environment of this region. The
291 outcome of this research could be a reference for effective decision making and policy
292 formulation for sustainable uses of natural resources of Sundarbans. The sensitivity
293 approximation between the valued ESs and LULC changes can be a reference and solution to
294 the concerned stakeholders to effectively demarcate the vulnerable eco-regions in any given
295 ecosystem. Further study is welcome to carefully evaluate the impact of human
296 appropriations, especially the construction dams and barrage to control water flow regulation
297 on the necessary ecosystem services of Sundarbans.

298

299 References

300

301 Akhand, A., Mukhopadhyay, A., Chanda, A., Mukherjee, S., Das, A., Das, S., … Rao, K.
302 H. (2016). Potential CO2 Emission Due to Loss of Above Ground Biomass from the
303 Indian Sundarban Mangroves During the Last Four Decades. Journal of the Indian
304 Society of Remote Sensing, 45(April), 147–154. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-016-
305 0567-4

306 Aschonitis, V. G., Gaglio, M., Castaldelli, G., & Fano, E. a. (2016). Criticism on elasticity-
307 sensitivity coefficient for assessing the robustness and sensitivity of ecosystem services
308 values. Ecosystem Services, 20, 66–68. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.004

309 Barbier, E. B., Koch, E. W., Silliman, B. R., Hacker, S. D., Wolanski, E., Primavera, J., …
310 Reed, D. J. (2008). Coastal ecosystem-based management with nonlinear ecological
311 functions and values - supporting material. Science (New York, N.Y.), 319(5861), 321–3.
312 http://doi.org/10.1126/science.1150349

313 Brouwer, R., Brander, L., Kuik, O., Papyrakis, E., & Bateman, I. (2013). A synthesis of

10
314 approaches to assess and value ecosystem services in the EU in the context of TEEB.
315 TEEB Follow-up Study for Europe, (May), 144.

316 Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Müller, F., & Windhorst, W. (2009). Landscapes’ capacities to
317 provide ecosystem services - A concept for land-cover based assessments. Landscape
318 Online, 15(1), 1–22. http://doi.org/10.3097/LO.200915

319 Costanza, R., de Groot, R., Sutton, P., van der Ploeg, S., Anderson, S. J., Kubiszewski, I., …
320 Turner, R. K. (2014). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global
321 Environmental Change, 26, 152–158. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.002

322 Costanza, R., Arge, R., Groot, R. De, Farber, S., Hannon, B., Limburg, K et al., 1997. The
323 Value of the World Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital by. Nature, 387(May),
324 253–260. http://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0

325 Dahdouh-Guebas, F., Jayatissa, L. P., Di Nitto, D., Bosire, J. O., Lo Seen, D., & Koedam, N.
326 (2005). Erratum: How effective were mangroves as a defence against the recent
327 tsunami? (Current Biology (2005) 15 (R443-R447)). Current Biology, 15(14), 1337–
328 1338. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2005.07.025

329 Das, S., & Vincent, J. R. (2009). Mangroves protected villages and reduced death toll during
330 Indian super cyclone. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(18), 7357–
331 7360. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0810440106

332 Datta, D., & Deb, S. (2012). Analysis of coastal land use/land cover changes in the Indian
333 Sunderbans using remotely sensed data. Geo-Spatial Information Science, 15(4), 241–
334 250. http://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2012.714104

335 Dennis, M., & James, P. (2017). Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens:
336 Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level. Ecosystem Services,
337 26, 17–26. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.05.009

338 Donato, D. C., Kauffman, J. B., Murdiyarso, D., Kurnianto, S., Stidham, M., & Kanninen, M.
339 (2011). Mangroves among the most carbon-rich forests in the tropics. Nature
340 Geoscience, 4(5), 293–297. http://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1123

341 Fu, B., Li, Y., Wang, Y., Zhang, B., Yin, S., Zhu, H., & Xing, Z. (2016). Evaluation of
342 ecosystem service value of riparian zone using land use data from 1986 to 2012.
343 Ecological Indicators, 69, 873–881. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.05.048

11
344 Ghosh, A., Schmidt, S., Fickert, T., & N??sser, M. (2015). The Indian Sundarban mangrove
345 forests: History, utilization, conservation strategies and local perception. Diversity, 7(2),
346 149–169. http://doi.org/10.3390/d7020149

347 Keesstra, S., Nunes, J., Novara, A., Finger, D., Avelar, D., Kalantari, Z., & Cerdà, A. (2018).
348 The superior effect of nature based solutions in land management for enhancing
349 ecosystem services. Science of the Total Environment, 610, 997-1009.

350 Kibria, A. S. M. G., Behie, A., Costanza, R., Groves, C., & Farrell, T. (2017). The value of
351 ecosystem services obtained from the protected forest of Cambodia: The case of Veun
352 Sai-Siem Pang National Park. Ecosystem Services, 26, 27–36.
353 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.05.008

354 Kim, J. H., Jobb??gy, E. G., & Jackson, R. B. (2016). Trade-offs in water and carbon
355 ecosystem services with land-use changes in grasslands. Ecological Applications, 26(6),
356 1633–1644. http://doi.org/10.1890/15-0863.1

357 Kindu, M., Schneider, T., Teketay, D., & Knoke, T. (2016). Science of the Total
358 Environment Changes of ecosystem service values in response to land use / land cover
359 dynamics in Munessa – Shashemene landscape of the Ethiopian highlands. Science of
360 the Total Environment, 547, 137–147. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.12.127

361 Kreuter Harris, H.G., Matlock, M.D., Lacey, R.E, U. P. (2001). Change in ecosystem service
362 values in the San Antonio are, Texas. Ecological Economic, 39, 333–346.
363 http://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00250-6

364 Li, J., Wang, W., Hu, G., & Wei, Z. (2010). Changes in ecosystem service values in Zoige
365 Plateau, China. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 139(4), 766–770.
366 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2010.10.019

367 Li, X., Yu, X., Jiang, L., Li, W., Liu, Y., & Hou, X. (2014). How important are the wetlands
368 in the middle-lower Yangtze River region: An ecosystem service valuation approach.
369 Ecosystem Services, 10, 54–60. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.09.004

370 Liu, Y., Li, J., & Zhang, H. (2012). An ecosystem service valuation of land use change in
371 Taiyuan City, China. Ecological Modelling, 225, 127–132.
372 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.11.017

373 M. Brander, L., J. Wagtendonk, A., S. Hussain, S., McVittie, A., Verburg, P. H., de Groot, R.

12
374 S., & van der Ploeg, S. (2012). Ecosystem service values for mangroves in Southeast
375 Asia: A meta-analysis and value transfer application. Ecosystem Services, 1(1), 62–69.
376 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.06.003

377 Malekmohammadi, B., & Jahanishakib, F. (2017). Vulnerability assessment of wetland

378 landscape ecosystem services using driver-pressure-state-impact-response (DPSIR)
379 model. Ecological Indicators, 82(March 2016), 293–303.
380 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.06.060

381 Mitra, A., Sengupta, K., & Banerjee, K. (2011). Standing biomass and carbon storage of
382 above-ground structures in dominant mangrove trees in the Sundarbans. Forest Ecology
383 and Management, 261(7), 1325–1335. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.01.012

384 Mitra A, Banerjee K, Sengupta K, Gangopadhyay A. Pulse of climate change in Indian

385 Sundarbans: a myth or reality? Natl Acad Sci Lett 2009;32(1&2):1e7.

386 Mondal, B., Dolui, G., Pramanik, M., Maity, S., Biswas, S. S., & Pal, R. (2017). Urban
387 expansion and wetland shrinkage estimation using a GIS-based model in the East
388 Kolkata Wetland, India. Ecological Indicators, 83(November 2016), 62–73.
389 http://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.07.037

390 Mukherjee, N., Sutherland, W. J., Dicks, L., Hugé, J., Koedam, N., & Dahdouh-Guebas, F.
391 (2014). Ecosystem Service Valuations of Mangrove Ecosystems to Inform Decision
392 Making and Future Valuation Exercises. PLoS ONE, 9(9), e107706.
393 http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107706

394 Nandy, S., & Kushwaha, S. P. S. (2011). Study on the utility of IRS 1D LISS-III data and the
395 classification techniques for mapping of Sunderban mangroves. Journal of Coastal
396 Conservation, 15(1), 123–137. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-010-0126-z

397 Sannigrahi, S. (2017). Modeling terrestrial ecosystem productivity of an estuarine ecosystem

398 in the Sundarban Biosphere Region, India using seven ecosystem models. Ecological
399 Modelling, 356, 73-90.

400 Sannigrahi, S., Bhatt, S., Rahmat, S., Paul, S. K., & Sen, S. (2018). Estimating global
401 ecosystem service values and its response to land surface dynamics during 1995–
402 2015. Journal of environmental management, 223, 115-131.

403 Sannigrahi, S., Chakraborti, S., Joshi, P. K., Keesstra, S., Sen, S., Paul, S. K., ... & Dang, K.

13
404 B. (2019). Ecosystem service value assessment of a natural reserve region for
405 strengthening protection and conservation. Journal of environmental management, 244,
406 208-227.

407 Sannigrahi, S., Joshi, P. K., Keesstra, S., Paul, S. K., Sen, S., Roy, P. S., ... & Bhatt, S.
408 (2019). Evaluating landscape capacity to provide spatially explicit valued ecosystem
409 services for sustainable coastal resource management. Ocean & Coastal Management,
410 104918.

411 Samanta, K., & Hazra, S. (2017). Environment and Earth Observation, 97–108.
412 http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46010-9

413 Silva, R., Chávez, V., Bouma, T. J., van Tussenbroek, B. I., Arkema, K. K., Martínez, M. L.,
414 ... & Mancuso, M. (2019). The Incorporation of Biophysical and Social Components in
415 Coastal Management. Estuaries and Coasts, 1-14.

416 Song, X.-P. (2018). Global Estimates of Ecosystem Service Value and Change: Taking Into
417 Account Uncertainties in Satellite-based Land Cover Data. Ecological Economics, 143,
418 227–235. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.07.019

419 TEEB, 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Eco-
420 nomics of Nature.

421 Tolessa, T., Senbeta, F., & Kidane, M. (2017). The impact of land use / land cover change on
422 ecosystem services in the central highlands of crossmark. Ecosystem Services,
423 23(December 2016), 47–54. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.11.010

424 Wang, Y., Bilsborrow, R. E., Zhang, Q., Li, J., & Song, C. (2019). Effects of payment for
425 ecosystem services and agricultural subsidy programs on rural household land use
426 decisions in China: Synergy or trade-off?. Land use policy, 81, 785-801.

427 Wang, Y., Li, X., Zhang, Q., Li, J., & Zhou, X. (2018). Projections of future land use
428 changes: Multiple scenarios-based impacts analysis on ecosystem services for Wuhan
429 city, China. Ecological indicators, 94, 430-445.

430 Xie, Gaodi, Zhen, Lin, Lu, Chunxia, Xiao, Yu, Chen, Cao, (2008). Expert knowledge based
431 valuation method of ecosystem services in China. J. Nat. Resour. 23 (5), 911–919 (in
432 Chinese).

433 Xie, G., Lu, C., Leng, Y., Zheng, D., & Li, S. (2003). Ecological assets valuation of the

14
434 Tibetan Plateau. Journal of Natural Resources, 18(2), 189e195.

435 Yang, W. (2011). Variations in ecosystem service values in response to changes in

436 environmental flows: A case study of Baiyangdian Lake, China. Lake and Reservoir
437 Management, 27(1), 95–104. http://doi.org/10.1080/07438141.2010.550706

438 Yang, S., Zhao, W., Liu, Y., Wang, S., Wang, J., & Zhai, R. (2018). Influence of land use
439 change on the ecosystem service trade-offs in the ecological restoration area: Dynamics
440 and scenarios in the Yanhe watershed, China. Science of the total environment, 644,
441 556-566.

442 Yi, H., Güneralp, B., Filippi, A. M., Kreuter, U. P., & Güneralp, Đ. (2017). Impacts of Land
443 Change on Ecosystem Services in the San Antonio River Basin , Texas , from 1984 to
444 2010, 135, 125–135. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.11.019

445 Yoshida, A., Chanhda, H., Ye, Y.-M., & Liang, Y.-R. (2010). Ecosystem service values and
446 land use change in the opium poppy cultivation region in Northern Part of Lao PDR.
447 Acta Ecologica Sinica, 30(2), 56–61. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chnaes.2010.03.002

448 Zhang, Q., Bilsborrow, R. E., Song, C., Tao, S., & Huang, Q. (2019). Rural household
449 income distribution and inequality in China: Effects of payments for ecosystem services
450 policies and other factors. Ecological Economics, 160, 114-127.

451 Zhang, Q., Song, C., & Chen, X. (2018). Effects of China’s payment for ecosystem services
452 programs on cropland abandonment: A case study in Tiantangzhai Township, Anhui,
453 China. Land use policy, 73, 239-248.

454

455

456 Figure captions:

457 Fig. 1 Location of Sundarban region, India.

458 Fig. 2 (a) LULC dynamics of Sundarban region for 1973, 1988, 2002, and 2013; (b)
459 percentage contribution of different LULC for 1973, 1988, 2002, and 2013.

460 Fig. 3 Land Use Change Intensity (per year) during the study period.

461 Fig. 4 The ESVs of different ecosystem service functions for 1973, 1988, 2002, and 2013
462 derived from C97c = Costanza et al., 1997, X03 = Xie et al., 2003; X08 = Xie et al., 2008.
15
463 Fig. 5 The coefficient of Sensitivity of different ecosystem service functions to land-use
464 changes derived from C97c = Costanza et al., 1997, X03 = Xie et al., 2003; X08 = Xie et al.,
465 2008 for 1973, 1988, 2002, and 2013.

466

16
 1973 1988 2002 2013

(a)

50.76
50 50 50
50 49.39
41.36
40 40 40 38.13
40
Percentage (%)

Percentage (%)
Percentage (%)

(b)

Percentage (%)
30 30 28.15 30 27.07 30
24.34
20.89 20.48 22.43
20 20 20
16.46 20
16.9
10.25
10 8.1 10 8.33 10 10
6.42 4.85
4.05
0.06 0.32 0.03 1.26 0.04 0.06
0 0 0 0
WB MG CL SV SC UB WB MG CL SV SC UB WB MG CL SV SC UB WB MG CL SV SC UB

LULC LULC LULC LULC

0 12.5 25 50 75 100
Miles

LULC
Cropland Mangrove forest Sandy coast

Urban built-up Waterbodies Sparse vegetation

Fig. 2
 1973 - 2013

Urban built-up 36.74

Sandy coast 0.36

Sparse vegetation -0.52

Agricultural land -0.07

Mangrove forest 0.07

Water bodies -0.20

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Land Use Change Intensity (year -1)

Fig. 3
1973
C97c X03 X08
1100 1800 1800
Urban built-up Urban built-up Urban built-up
1000
Sandy coast 1600 Sandy coast 1600 Sandy coast
900 Water bodies Water bodies Water bodies
1400 Mangrove 1400
ESV (Million US$ yr-1)

800 Mangrove Mangrove

Cropland Cropland Cropland
1200 1200
700 Sparse veg Sparse veg Sparse veg
600 1000 1000
500 800 800
400
600 600
300
400 400
200
100 200 200
0 0 0
GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC
GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC
Ecosystem service function Ecosystem service function Ecosystem service function
1988
C97c X03 X08
1300 1800 1800
Urban built-up Urban built-up
1200 Urban built-up
Sandy coast 1600 Sandy coast 1600 Sandy coast
1100 Water bodies
Water bodies Water bodies
1000 1400 Mangrove 1400
ESV (Million US$ yr-1)

Mangrove Mangrove
900 Cropland 1200
Cropland Cropland
Sparse veg 1200
800 Sparse veg Sparse veg
700 1000 1000
600 800
800
500
600
400 600
300 400
400
200
200
100 200
0 0
GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC 0
GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC
Ecosystem service function
Ecosystem service function
2002
C97c X03 X08
1300 1800 1800
Urban built-up Urban built-up
1200 Urban built-up
Sandy coast 1600 Sandy coast 1600 Sandy coast
1100 Water bodies Water bodies
Water bodies
1000 1400 Mangrove 1400 Mangrove
ESV (Million US$ yr-1)

Mangrove
900 Cropland Cropland
Cropland 1200 1200
Sparse veg Sparse veg
800 Sparse veg
1000 1000
700
600 800 800
500
600 600
400
300 400 400
200
200 200
100
0 0 0
GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC
GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC
Ecosystem service function Ecosystem service function Ecosystem service function

2013
C97c X03 X08
1100 1800 1800
Urban built-up Urban built-up Urban built-up
1000
Sandy coast 1600 Sandy coast 1600 Sandy coast
900 Water bodies Water bodies Water bodies
1400 1400
ESV (Million US$ yr-1)

800 Mangrove Mangrove Mangrove

Cropland Cropland Cropland
700 1200 1200
Sparse veg Sparse veg Sparse veg
600 1000 1000
500 800 800
400
600 600
300
400 400
200
100 200 200

0 0 0
GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC GR CR WT SFR BD FP RM ARC
Ecosystem service function Ecosystem service function

Fig. 4
 C97c X03 X08
Water bodies Mangrove Cropland Sparse veg Water bodies Mangrove Cropland Sparse veg Water bodies Mangrove Cropland Sparse veg
0% 0% 0% 1%
100 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 100 0% 2% 1% 100
4% 2%
5% 2% 5% 8% 6% 8%
14% 9% 17% 4%
18% 11% 16% 5%
27% 27%
16%
36% 80 37% 35%
80 80 11%
50% 47% 16%
51% 50% 42%
34% 45% 44%
67% 66%
64% 33%
60 28% 60 60 53%
30% 75%

CS (%)
CS (%)

CS (%)
56% 58% 30%
70%
100% 100% 100% 26% 31%
30%
0%
40 40 40 28%
72% 24% 28% 22%
0% 0%
8%
52% 53% 22% 47%
45% 47% 20%
20 20 43% 20 11% 45% 37%
33% 33% 10% 30% 33%
26% 27% 23% 24% 27%
16% 21% 20%
12% 1% 15% 13%
0%
1% 3%
0 0% 0% 0 0
GR CR WR SFR WT BD FP RM ARC GR CR WR SFR WT BD FP RM ARC GR CR WR SFR WT BD FP RM ARC

Ecosystem Service Functions Ecosystem Service Functions Ecosystem Service Functions

Fig. 5
Ecosystem service valuation of a natural reserve region for sustainable management of
natural resources

Srikanta Sannigrahia*, Suman Chakrabortib, Anushna Banerjee b, Shahid Rahmata, Sandeep

Bhattc, Shouvik Jhad, L.K. Singhe, Saikat Kumar Paula, Somnath Sena

a*
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning, Indian Institute of Technology

Kharagpur-721302, India

b
Center for the Study of Regional Development (CSRD), Jawaharlal Nehru University, New

Delhi, 110067, India

c
Department of Geology & Geophysics, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, West

Bengal 721302, India

d
Indian Centre for Climate and Societal Impacts Research (ICCSIR), Kachchh, Gujarat,

370465, India

e
AgFE Department, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur 721 302, West

Bengal, India

Conflict of Interest statement:

This article has no conflict of interest to any person or organization.
Table. 1 ESV (US$ ha-1 year-1) per unit area (ha) in Sundarban biosphere region, derived from five units of valuation.

Costanza (1997) Costanza (2014) De Groot (2012)

(1994 base price) (2007 base price) (2007 base price)
[C97a] [C97b] [C11] [D12]
LULC Equivalent Biomes 1994 1997 2011 2011
(Costanza) US$ ha-1 yr-1 US$ ha-1 yr-1 US$ ha-1 yr-1 US$ ha-1 yr-1
Cropland Cropland 92 126 5567 5567
Sparse Vegetation Grassland / rangelands 232 321 4166 2871
Mangroves Wetland / Tidal marsh 9990 13786 193843 193845
/ Mangroves
Waterbodies Lakes / Rivers 8498 11727 12512 4267
Sandy Coast Desert 0 0 0 0
Urban built-up Urban 0 0 6661 0
Table. 2 Equivalent weight of different ecosystem services per unit area (ha).

Ecosystem Service Unit value Sparse veg. Cropland Mangrove Water Sandy Urban
Functions bodies coast
GR C97c 0.13 0 2.46 0 0 0
X03 0.8 0.5 1.8 0 0 0
X08 1.5 0.72 2.41 0.51 0.06 0
CR C97c 0 0 0.08 0 0 0
X03 0.9 0.89 17.1 0.46 0 0
X08 1.56 0.97 13.55 2.06 0.13 0
WR C97c 0.06 0 0.35 0.14 0 0
X03 0.8 0.6 15.5 20.4 0.03 0
X08 1.52 0.77 13.44 18.77 0.07 0
SFR C97c 0.56 0 0 0 0 0
X03 1.95 1.46 1.71 0.01 0.02 0
X08 2.24 1.47 1.99 0.41 0.17 0
WT C97c 1.61 0 0.08 12.31 0 0
X03 1.31 1.64 18.18 18.2 0.01 0
X08 1.32 1.39 14.4 14.85 0.26 0
BD C97c 0.89 0.7 5.63 0 0 0
X03 1.09 0.71 2.5 2.49 0.34 0
X08 1.87 1.02 3.69 3.43 0.4 0
FP C97c 1.24 1 4.74 0.76 0 0
X03 0.3 1 0.3 0.1 0.01 0
X08 0.43 1 0.36 0.53 0.02 0
RM C97c 0 0 1.96 0 0 0
X03 0.05 0.1 0.07 0.01 0 0
X08 0.36 0.39 0.24 0.35 0.04 0
ARC C97c 0.04 0 26.94 4.26 0 0
X03 0.04 0.01 5.55 4.34 0.01 0
X08 0.87 0.17 4.69 4.44 0.24 0
Total C97c 4.53 1.7 42.24 17.47 0 0
X03 7.24 6.91 62.71 46.01 0.42 0
X08 11.67 7.9 54.77 45.35 1.39 0
 Table. 3 ESV (US$ ha-1 year-1) calculated from the equivalent weight factor assigned for each biomes and
ecosystem service functions.

Ecosystem Unit Sparse veg. Cropland Mangrove Water Sandy Urban

Service value bodies coast
Functions
GR C97c 16.80 0.00 317.96 0.00 0.00 0.00
X03 103.40 64.63 232.65 0.00 0.00 0.00
X08 193.88 93.06 311.50 65.92 7.76 0.00
CR C97c 0.00 0.00 10.34 0.00 0.00 0.00
X03 116.33 115.03 2210.22 59.46 0.00 0.00
X08 201.63 125.38 1751.37 266.26 16.80 0.00
WR C97c 7.76 0.00 45.24 18.10 0.00 0.00
X03 103.40 77.55 2003.42 2636.75 3.88 0.00
X08 196.46 99.52 1737.16 2426.07 9.05 0.00
SFR C97c 72.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
X03 252.04 188.71 221.02 1.29 2.59 0.00
X08 289.53 190.00 257.21 52.99 21.97 0.00
WT C97c 208.10 0.00 10.34 1591.10 0.00 0.00
X03 169.32 211.97 2349.81 2352.40 1.29 0.00
X08 170.61 179.66 1861.24 1919.40 33.61 0.00
BD C97c 115.03 90.48 727.69 0.00 0.00 0.00
X03 140.89 91.77 323.13 321.84 43.95 0.00
X08 241.70 131.84 476.94 443.34 51.70 0.00
FP C97c 160.27 129.25 612.66 98.23 0.00 0.00
X03 38.78 129.25 38.78 12.93 1.29 0.00
X08 55.58 129.25 46.53 68.50 2.59 0.00
RM C97c 0.00 0.00 253.34 0.00 0.00 0.00
X03 6.46 12.93 9.05 1.29 0.00 0.00
X08 46.53 50.41 31.02 45.24 5.17 0.00
ARC C97c 5.17 0.00 3482.07 550.62 0.00 0.00
X03 5.17 1.29 717.35 560.96 1.29 0.00
X08 112.45 21.97 606.19 573.88 31.02 0.00
Total C97c 585.51 219.73 5459.63 2258.04 0.00 0.00
X03 935.79 893.14 8105.43 5946.91 54.29 0.00
X08 1508.38 1021.10 7079.17 5861.61 179.66 0.00
Table. 4 LULC dynamics during the study period (1973 – 2013).

1973 1988 2002 2013

LULC Class Area (ha) (%) Area (ha) (%) Area (ha) (%) Area (ha) (%)
Water bodies 339200.00 24.33 392216.00 28.14 377300.00 27.07 312500.00 22.43
Mangrove 229400.00 16.46 291140 20.89 285400.00 20.48 235400.00 16.90
Cropland 707400.00 50.75 576517.60 41.36 531500.00 38.13 688100.00 49.39
Sparse 112900.00 8.10 116070.10 8.33 142900.00 10.25 89500.00 6.42
vegetation
Sandy coast 700.00 0.05 415.10 0.03 500.00 0.04 800.00 0.06
Urban built-up 4300.00 0.31 17522.20 1.26 56400.00 4.05 67500.00 4.85
Table. 5 Changes of different land use/land cover categories from 1973 to 2013.

1973 - 1988 1988 - 2002 2002 - 2013 1973 - 2013

∆Area (ha) % Changes yr-1 ∆Area (ha) % Changes yr-1 ∆Area (ha) % Changes yr-1 ∆Area (ha) % Changes yr-1

Water bodies 53016 1.04 11523 0.14 -64800 -1.56 -26700 -0.2
Mangrove 61739.7 1.79 -571.4 -0.01 -50000 -1.59 6000 0.07
Cropland -130882.4 -1.23 51391.4 0.49 156600 2.68 -19300 -0.07
Sparse vegetation 3170.1 0.19 -113394 -2.01 -53400 -3.4 -23400 -0.52
Sandy coast -284.9 -2.71 -1285 -3.27 300 5.45 100 0.36
Urban built-up 13222.2 20.5 52472 60.72 11100 1.79 63200 36.74
Table. 6 ESV (Million US$ yr-1) derived from eight unit values during 1973 – 2013.

LULC Unit values 1973 1988 2002 2013

million US$ Percentage million US$ Percentage million US$ Percentage million US$ Percentage
yr-1 (%) yr-1 (%) yr-1 (%) yr-1 (%)
Water bodies C97a 2882.52 54.74 3333.05 52.73 3206.3 52.22 2655.63 52.16
C97b 3977.8 54.75 4599.52 64.26 4424.6 52.73 3664.69 52.16
C97c 765.93 34.19 885.64 33.17 851.96 32.63 705.64 32.16
C11 4244.07 7.99 4907.41 7.53 4720.78 7.38 3910 7.21
D12 1447.37 2.88 1673.59 2.71 1609.94 2.67 1333.44 2.61
X03 2017.19 43.72 2332.47 43.88 2243.77 43.44 1858.41 41.62
X08 1988.26 44.13 2299.02 44.87 2211.58 44.32 1831.75 42.25
Mangrove C97a 2291.71 43.52 2908.49 46.01 2851.15 46.44 2351.65 46.19
C97b 3162.51 43.53 4013.65 34.29 3934.52 46.01 3245.22 46.19
C97c 1252.44 55.91 1589.52 59.54 1558.18 59.69 1285.20 58.57
C11 44467.58 83.67 56435.39 86.62 55322.79 86.48 45630.64 84.2
D12 44468.04 88.62 56435.98 91.54 55323.36 91.74 45631.11 89.38
X03 1859.39 40.30 2359.81 44.39 2313.29 44.78 1908.02 42.73
X08 1623.96 36.05 2061.03 40.22 2020.39 40.49 1666.44 38.43
Cropland C97a 65.08 1.24 53.04 0.84 48.9 0.8 63.31 1.24
C97b 89.13 1.23 72.64 0.88 66.97 0.84 86.7 1.24
C97c 155.44 6.94 126.68 4.74 116.79 4.47 151.20 6.89
C11 3938.1 7.41 3209.47 4.93 2958.86 4.63 3830.65 7.07
D12 3938.1 7.85 3209.47 5.21 2958.86 4.91 3830.65 7.5
X03 631.80 13.69 514.91 9.69 474.70 9.19 614.57 13.76
X08 722.32 16.03 588.68 11.49 542.71 10.88 702.62 16.20
Sparse veg. C97a 26.19 0.5 26.93 0.43 33.15 0.54 20.76 0.41
C97b 36.24 0.5 37.26 0.57 45.87 0.43 28.73 0.41
C97c 66.10 2.95 67.96 2.55 83.67 3.21 52.40 2.39
 C11 470.34 0.88 483.55 0.74 595.32 0.93 372.86 0.69
D12 324.14 0.65 333.24 0.54 410.27 0.68 256.95 0.5
S12 17.39 0.3 17.88 0.28 22.01 0.35 13.79 0.24
X03 105.65 2.29 108.62 2.04 133.72 2.59 83.75 1.88
X08 170.30 3.78 175.08 3.42 215.55 4.32 135.00 3.11
Sandy coast C97a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C97b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C97c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
X03 0.04 0 0.02 0 0.03 0 0.04 0
X08 0.13 0.00 0.07 0 0.09 0 0.14 0
Urban built-up C97a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C97b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C97c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C11 28.64 0.05 116.72 0.18 375.68 0.59 449.62 0.83
D12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
X03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
X08 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total ESV C97a 5265.5 100 6321.51 100 6139.49 100 5091.34 100
C97b 7265.68 100 8723.07 100 8471.96 100 7025.34 100
C97c 2239.91 100 2669.79 100 2610.59 100 2194.44 100
C11 53148.73 100 65152.54 100 63973.43 100 54193.77 100
D12 50177.64 100 61652.27 100 60302.43 100 51052.16 100
X03 4614.07 100 5315.84 100 5165.51 100 4464.79 100
X08 4504.96 100 5123.87 100 4990.33 100 4335.95 100
Average 16629.5 20175.7 19733.4 16761.3
Table. 7 Temporal dynamics of ESV (million US$) during 1973 – 2013 estimated using eight unit values.

Changes of E
ESV (million US$)
LULC Unit 1973 - 1988 1988 - 2002 2002 - 2013 1973 - 2013
values
Changes (%) (%) year-1 Changes (%) (%) year-1 Changes (%) (%) year-1 Changes (%) (%) year-1
Water bodies C97a 450.53 15.63 1.04 -126.76 -3.8 -0.27 -550.67 -17.17 -1.56 -226.9 -7.87 -0.2
C97b 621.72 -174.92 -759.91 -313.11
C97c 119.71 -33.68 -146.32 -60.29
C11 663.34 -186.63 -810.78 -334.07
D12 226.219 -63.647 -276.502 -113.929
X03 315.28 -88.70 -385.36 -158.78
X08 310.76 -87.43 -379.83 -156.50
Mangrove C97a 616.78 26.91 1.79 -57.34 -1.97 -0.14 -499.5 -17.52 -1.59 59.94 2.62 0.07
C97b 851.14 -79.13 -689.3 82.72
C97c 337.08 -31.34 -272.98 32.76
C11 11967.81 -1112.6 -9692.15 1163.06
D12 11967.93 -1112.612 -9692.25 1163.07
X03 500.43 -46.52 -405.27 48.63
X08 437.07 -40.63 -353.96 42.48
Cropland C97a -12.04 -18.5 -1.23 -4.14 -7.81 -0.56 14.41 29.46 2.68 -1.78 -2.73 -0.07
C97b -16.49 -5.67 19.73 -2.43
C97c -28.76 -9.89 34.41 -4.24
C11 -728.62 -250.61 871.79 -107.44
D12 -728.622 -250.613 871.792 -107.443
X03 -116.90 -40.21 139.87 -17.24
X08 -133.64 -45.97 159.90 -19.71
Sparse veg. C97a 0.74 2.81 0.19 6.22 23.12 1.65 -12.39 -37.37 -3.4 -5.43 -20.73 -0.52
C97b 1.02 8.61 -17.14 -7.51
C97c 1.86 15.71 -31.27 -13.70
 C11 13.21 111.77 -222.46 -97.48
D12 9.101 77.029 -153.311 -67.181
X03 2.97 25.11 -49.97 -21.90
X08 4.78 40.47 -80.55 -35.30
Sandy coast C97a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C97b 0 0 0 0
C97c 0 0 0 0
C11 0 0 0 0
D12 0 0 0 0
X03 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 -0.06 0.01 -0.04
X08 -0.05 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.05 -0.19 0.02 -0.13
Urban built-up C97a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C97b 0
C97c 0
C11 88.07 75.94 5.06 258.97 341.71 24.41 73.94 -449.62 -40.87 420.98 -31.97 -116.72
D12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
X03 0
X08 0
Table. 8 Coefficient of Sensitivity (CS) of ESV to LULC changes during 1973 – 2013 estimated using eight unit values.

LULC Unit values 1973 1988 2002 2013

% CS % CS % CS % CS
Water body VC ± 50% C97a 27.37 0.55 27.85 0.56 26.11 0.52 26.08 0.52
C97b 27.37 0.55 26.36 0.53 26.11 0.52 26.08 0.52
C97c 17.10 0.34 16.59 0.33 16.32 0.33 16.08 0.32
C11 3.99 0.08 3.77 0.08 3.69 0.07 3.61 0.07
D12 1.44 0.03 1.36 0.03 1.33 0.03 1.31 0.03
X03 21.86 0.44 21.94 0.44 21.72 0.43 20.81 0.42
X08 22.07 0.44 22.43 0.45 22.16 0.44 21.12 0.42

Mangrove VC ± 50% C97a 21.76 0.44 24.3 0.49 23.22 0.46 23.09 0.46
C97b 21.76 0.44 23.01 0.46 23.22 0.46 23.1 0.46
C97c 27.96 0.56 29.77 0.60 29.84 0.60 29.28 0.59
C11 41.83 0.84 43.31 0.87 43.24 0.86 42.1 0.84
D12 44.31 0.89 45.77 0.92 45.87 0.92 44.69 0.89
X03 20.15 0.40 22.20 0.44 22.39 0.45 21.37 0.43
X08 18.02 0.36 20.11 0.40 20.24 0.40 19.22 0.38

Cropland VC ± 50% C97a 0.62 0.01 0.44 0.01 0.4 0.01 0.62 0.01
C97b 0.61 0.01 0.42 0.01 0.4 0.01 0.62 0.01
C97c 3.47 0.07 2.37 0.05 2.24 0.04 3.44 0.07
C11 3.7 0.07 2.46 0.05 2.31 0.05 3.53 0.07
D12 3.92 0.08 2.6 0.05 2.45 0.05 3.75 0.08
X03 6.85 0.14 4.84 0.10 4.59 0.09 6.88 0.14
X08 8.02 0.16 5.74 0.11 5.44 0.11 8.10 0.16

Sparse vegetation VC ± 50% C97a 0.25 0 0.22 0 0.27 0.01 0.2 0

C97b 0.25 0 0.21 0 0.27 0.01 0.2 0
C97c 1.48 0.03 1.27 0.03 1.60 0.03 1.19 0.02
C11 0.44 0.01 0.37 0.01 0.47 0.01 0.34 0.01
D12 0.32 0.01 0.27 0.01 0.34 0.01 0.25 0.01
 X03 1.14 0.02 1.02 0.02 1.29 0.03 0.94 0.02
X08 1.89 0.04 1.71 0.03 2.16 0.04 1.56 0.03

Urban built-up VC ± 50% C97a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

C97b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C97c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C11 0.03 0 0.09 0 0.29 0.01 0.41 0.01
D12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
X03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
X08 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0