The promise of the ecosystem services concept for planning and decision-making

GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 232-236

  Hauck, Jennifer ^a   Schweppe Kraft, Burkhard ^b   Albert, Christian ^a,b   Görg, Christoph ^a,b   Jax, Kurt ^a,b   Jensen, Rita ^a,b   Fürst, Christine ^a,b   Maes, Joachim ^a,b   Ring, Irene ^a,b   Hönigová, Iva ^a,b   Burkhard, Benjamin ^a,b   Mehring, Marion ^a,b   Tiefenbach, Maria ^a,b   Grunewald, Karsten ^a,b   Schwarzer, Markus ^a,b   Meurer, Julian ^a,b   Sommerhäuser, Mario ^a,b   Priess, Jörg A ^a,b   Schmidt, Jenny ^a,b   Grêt Regamey, Adrienne ^a,b  

^a HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

^b Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN)   (Germany)

Author keywords

Application; Ecosystem services; Landscape planning; Research needs; Valuation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84890770576     PISSN: 09405550     EISSN: 26255413     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.14512/gaia.22.4.6     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Albert, C., C. von Haaren, C. Galler. 2012. Ö kosystemdienstleistungen - alter Wein in neuen Schläuchen oder Impuls für die Landschaftsplanung? Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung 44/5: 142-148.
2. Burkhard, B., F. Kroll, S. Nedkov, F. Müller. 2012. Mapping supply, demand and budgets of ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators 21: 17-29.
3. D 2000/60/EC. 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy. L 327: 1-72.
4. Eppink, F.V., A. Werntze, S. Mäs, A. Popp, R. Seppelt. 2012. Land management and ecosystem services: How collaborative research programmes can support better policies. GAIA 21/1: 55-63.
5. European Commission. 2011. Our life insurance, our natural capital: An EU biodiver - si ty strategy to 2020.COM(2011) 244 final. Brussels: European Commission.
6. Gee, K., B. Burkhard. 2010. Cultural ecosystem services in the context of offshore wind farming: A case study from the west coast of Schleswig- Holstein. Ecological Complexity 7: 349-358.
7. Grêt-Regamey, A., E. Celio, T. M. Klein, U. Wissen Hayek. 2013. Understanding ecosystem services trade-offs with interactive procedural modeling for sustainable urban planning. Landscape and Urban Planning 109: 107-116.
8. Grunewald, K., R.-U.Syrbe, C. Wachler. 2012. Analyse der ästhetischen und monetären Wertschätzung der Landschaft am Erzgebirgskamm durch Touristen. GEO-ÖKO 33: 34-65.
9. Haines-Young, R., M. Potschin, F. Kienast. 2012. Indicators of ecosystem service potential at European scales: Mapping marginal changes and trade-offs. Ecological Indicators 21: 39-53.
10. Hauck, J., C. Görg, C., R. Varjopuro, O. Ratamäki, K. Jax. 2013. Benefits and limitations of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy and decision making: Some stakeholder perspectives. Environmental Science and Policy 25: 13-21.
11. Jahn, T., M. Bergmann, F. Keil. 2012. Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and marginalization. Ecological Economics 79: 1-10.
12. Jax, K. 2010. Ecosystem functioning. Cambridge, UK: University Press.
13. Jax, K. et al. 2013. Ecosystem services and ethics. Ecological Economics 93: 260-268.
14. Maes, J. et al. 2013. Mainstreaming ecosystem services into EU policy. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5: 128-134.
15. Naturkapital Deutschland - TEEB DE. 2012. Der Wert der Natur für Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft - eine Einführung. Munich, Leipzig, Bonn: ifuplan, Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung - UFZ, Bundesamt für Naturschutz (BfN).
16. Oteros-Rozas, E., J. A. Gonzalez, B. Martin-Lopez, C. A. Lopez,, P. Zorrilla- Miras, C. Montes. 2012. Evaluating ecosystem services in transhumance cultural landscapes An interdisciplinary and participatory framework. GAIA 21/3: 185-193.
17. Plieninger, T., S. Dijks, E. Oteros-Rozas, C. Bieling. 2013. Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy 33: 118-129.
18. Ring, I. 2002. Ecological public functions and fiscal equalisation at the local level in Germany. Ecological Economics 42: 415- 427.
19. Ring, I., B. Hansjürgens, T. Elmqvist, H. Wittmer, P. Sukhdev. 2010. Challenges in framing the economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: The TEEB initiative. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2: 15-26.
20. Schaich, H., C. Bieling, T. Plieninger. 2010. Linking ecosystem services with cultural landscape research. GAIA 19/4: 269-277.
21. Sommerhäuser, M. 2012. Was ist uns die Natur wert? Ökosystemleistungen und die wirtschaftliche Bedeutung biologischer Vielfalt. www.emscherplayer.de/main.yum?mainAction=magazin&id=83783 (accessed June 6, 2013).
22. TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity). 2010. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity. Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. www.teebweb.org/our-publications/teeb-study-reports/synthesisreport/#. Ul1QeCSm7-5 (accessed June 6, 2013).
23. von Haaren, C., C. Albert. 2011. Integrating ecosystem services and environmental planning: Limitations and synergies. International Journal of Biodiver sity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 7/3: 150-167.