Effects of Global Household Proliferation on Ecosystem Services - Landscape Ecology for Sustainable Environment and Culture - page 105

Table 6.1 (continued)
Type of ecosystem service Impact of household proliferation (examples)

Crop pollination Reduces habitat for pollinators (Hansen et al. 2005 ); raises

honey bees that can enhance pollination (Ogaba 2002 )

Pest and disease control Reduces habitat for natural enemies, spreads pests and

diseases (e.g., by introducing garden plants) (Schöller
et al. 1997 ), and creates habitat for pests and diseases;
creates habitat for natural enemies and destroys habitats
for pests and diseases (Altieri 1993 )

Supporting services
Nutrient cycling

Disrupts nutrient cycling through land conversion (to houses
and infrastructure such as roads and other buildings) and
creation of barriers (Kaye et al. 2006 )

Soil Uses soil as household construction material, and affects

chemical and physical properties of soils through
construction of associated infrastructure (e.g., roads,
buildings) (Graf 1975 )

Seed dispersal Prevents seed dispersal by forming impermeable surfaces

(e.g., houses, roads) (Coffin 2007 ); facilitates seed
dispersal through travel and shipping (Lodge et al. 2006 )

Primary production Damages and occupies areas for primary production through

land conversion (Liu et al. 2001 )

Cultural services
Cultural, aesthetic, intellectual and
spiritual inspiration

Destroys areas and remnants of cultural and spiritual
significance through construction of housing and
associated infrastructure (Marsh 1992 )

Recreational experiences
(including ecotourism)

Destroys through construction and occupies areas suitable
for ecotourism (Anderson and Potts 1987 )
The impacts of household proliferation are different from those of population growth because
patterns of household proliferation and population growth are not the same. For the sake of
simplicity, the impacts are phrased in a linear manner, but the actual relationships are much more
complex and are often nonlinear with thresholds

for house construction and furniture (Liu et al. 2005 ), and more fuelwood for
heating and cooking. As to fuelwood consumption, a decrease in household size
increases fuelwood consumption per capita (An et al. 2001 ) (Fig. 6.4 ). This is
because houses with different numbers of people used similar amounts of fuelwood
for heating. In terms of cooking, more fuelwood is consumed in a large household
because more food needs to be cooked for more people, but the efficiency per
capita is still higher in a larger household if other conditions are similar (Liu et al.
2005 ).
On the other hand, households can be ecosystem service producers. For
example, some households raise honey bees that are major pollinators (Ogaba
2002 ), while some other households cultivate plants and flowers in their yards to
feed pollinators that can help enhance food production. Some households create
habitat for wildlife species and enhance biodiversity, which can generate a variety