Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecosystem Services journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoser Defining core areas of ecological infrastructure to secure rural livelihoods in South Africa Ayanda Sigwela a, ⁎ , Marine Elbakidze b , Mike Powell c , Per Angelstam b a School of Life Sciences, Walter Sisulu University, Mthatha, Eastern Cape, South Africa b School for Forest Management, Faculty of Forest Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 43, SE 73921 Skinnskatteberg, Sweden c Rhodes Restoration Research Group, Department of Environmental Science, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa ARTICLE INFO Keywords: Ecosystem service Indigenous community Apartheid Communal land ABSTRACT Indigenous communities in South Africa are severely affected by land degradation and global climate change, which lead to decline in the provision of multiple ecosystem services (ES) important for rural livelihoods. Spatial planning towards functional ecological infrastructure (EI) for sustainable rural livelihoods requires evidence- based knowledge about what land covers are of most importance, why, and where they are located. This study identifies potential core areas of EI that deliver ES necessary for livelihoods of rural communities, as well as those land covers that provide disservices using the Tsitsa catchment in Eastern Cape, South Africa as a case study. Face-to-face structured interviews (n=308) were conducted to define rural and urban people's desired ES in the catchment's 23 land covers and the most unwanted land covers. Both urban and rural respondents from indigenous communities view rivers, grasslands and forest plantations as the most wanted land covers that provide multiple ES important for their livelihoods. The most unwanted are dongas, grasslands in poor condition, and barren rocks. We discuss the need for landscape restoration in order to sustain the provision of ES important for livelihoods of rural communities and develop strategies for EI management in communal lands. 1. Introduction Ecosystem degradation is significant in South Africa (Stocker et al., 2013). Approximately 38% of South Africa's population lives in ecologically degraded areas (Bai and Dent, 2007) with projected drastic economic impacts of global climate change (UNICEF, 2011). Thus, South Africa is a striking illustration of great threats that humanity faces (Millennium Assessment, 2005; Brown et al., 2007; Raleigh and Urdal, 2007) where human populations prone to multiple social and environmental pressures live under vulnerable conditions, and the effects are evidenced by increased poverty and water scarcity (Rosegrant et al., 2003). In response to this complex portfolio of socio-ecological problems, the South African government has devel- oped strategies that need to be employed to mitigate against land degradation and climate change (SA Government, 2011). One of these is to maintain ecological infrastructure (EI) (Adger et al., 2005; Demuzere et al., 2014; SANBI, 2014) aiming at supporting naturally functioning ecosystems that deliver valuable ecosystem services (ES), reducing risk and vulnerability for humans (Cadman et al., 2010; Grundling and Grobler, 2005). This can be done through conservation, restoration and protection of valuable natural and semi-natural areas and maintenance of appropriate land management. The inter-relation- ship between ecosystems and human well-being has been extensively documented (Daily, 1997; Wainger et al., 2001; Polasky et al., 2005; Boyd, 2006; Carpenter et al., 2006; Boyd and Banzhaf, 2007; Barbier et al., 2008), reflecting a growing human demand for multiple ES (De Groot et al., 2002; Zakri and Watson, 2005). Indigenous rural communities are particularly severely affected by land degradation and global climate change as it leads to reduced drinking water, subsistence food, and fodder (Millennium Assessment, 2005), and thus, to a decline in the provision of multiple ES important for their livelihoods. Rural development linked to the class structure of poverty in South Africa (Carter and May, 1999) has been one of the central programs for the South African government since 1994, with poverty alleviation and job creation being the main national develop- ment objectives (ANC, 1994; Cewuka, 2013; National Planning Commission, 2013). Due to the disproportionate access to natural resources among different social classes, rural communities become deprived of basic essentials and necessities for a minimum standard of living. The issue of land dispossession is deeply embedded in the http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.010 Received 5 December 2016; Received in revised form 18 July 2017; Accepted 23 July 2017 ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: nyathi@ecol.co.za (A. Sigwela), marine.elbakidze@slu.se (M. Elbakidze), m.powell@ru.ac.za (M. Powell), per.angelstam@slu.se (P. Angelstam). Ecosystem Services xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx 2212-0416/ © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Please cite this article as: Sigwela, A., Ecosystem Services (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.010