<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Kenneth J. Bagstad</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Brian Voigt</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Ferdinando Villa</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Ben Zank</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2016</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;Urban expansion and its associated landscape modifications are important drivers of changes in ecosystem service (ES). This study examined the effects of two alternative land use-change development scenarios in the Puget Sound region of Washington State on natural capital stocks and ES flows. Land-use change model outputs served as inputs to five ES models developed using the Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) platform. While natural capital stocks declined under managed (1.3&amp;ndash;5.8%) and unmanaged (2.8&amp;ndash;11.8%) development scenarios, ES flows increased by 18.5&amp;ndash;56% and 23.2&amp;ndash;55.7%, respectively. Human development of natural landscapes reduced their capacity for service provision, while simultaneously adding beneficiaries, particularly along the urban fringe. Using global and local Moran&amp;rsquo;s I, we identified three distinct patterns of change in ES due to projected landuse change. For services with location-dependent beneficiaries &amp;ndash; open space proximity, viewsheds, and flood regulation &amp;ndash; urbanization led to increased clustering and hot-spot intensities. ES flows were greatest in the managed land-use change scenario for open space proximity and flood regulation, and in the unmanaged land-use change scenario for viewsheds&amp;mdash;a consequence of the differing ES flow mechanisms underpinning these services. We observed a third pattern &amp;ndash; general declines in service provision &amp;ndash; for carbon storage and sediment retention, where beneficiaries in our analysis were not location dependent. Contrary to past authors&amp;rsquo; finding of ES declines under urbanization, a more nuanced analysis that maps and quantifies ES provision, beneficiaries, and flows better identifies gains and losses for specific ES beneficiaries as urban areas expand.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.01.004</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Elsevier</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Modeling the effects of urban expansion on natural capital stocks and ecosystem service flows: A case study in the Puget Sound, Washington, USA</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>