How to analyse ecosystem services in landscapes—A systematic review

Ecological Indicators

Volumn 73, Issue , 2017, Pages 492-504

  Englund, Oskar ^a   Berndes, Göran ^a   Cederberg, Christel ^a  

^a CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Ecosystem services; Landscape; Mapping; Methods; Spatial analysis; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

DATA INTEGRATION; ECOLOGY; MAPPING; TERMINOLOGY;

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; LANDSCAPE; METHODS; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

ECOSYSTEMS;

ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; INDIVIDUAL VARIATION; LANDSCAPE PLANNING; LITERATURE REVIEW; SERVICE PROVISION; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; TERMINOLOGY;

EID: 84994627563     PISSN: 1470160X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.10.009     Document Type: Review

References (79)

1. Andrew, M.E., Wulder, M.A., Nelson, T.A., Potential contributions of remote sensing to ecosystem service assessments. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 38:3 (2014), 328–353.
2. Andrew, M.E., Wulder, M.A., Nelson, T.A., Coops, N.C., Spatial data, analysis approaches, and information needs for spatial ecosystem service assessments: a review. GI Sci. Remote Sens. 52:3 (2015), 344–373.
3. Bastian, O., Grunewald, K., Syrbe, R.-U., Space and time aspects of ecosystem services, using the example of the EU Water Framework Directive International Journal of Biodiversity Science. Ecosyst. Serv. Manage. 8:1–2 (2012), 5–16.
4. Bastian, O., Lupp, G., Syrbe, R.-U., Steinhäußer, R., Ecosystem services and energy crops −spatial differentiation of risks. Ekológia (Bratislava) 32:1 (2013), 13–29.
5. Bastian, O., Grunewald, K., Syrbe, R.U., Walz, U., Wende, W., Landscape services: the concept and its practical relevance. Landscape Ecol. 29:9 (2014), 1463–1479.
6. Bormann, F.H., Likens, G.E., Catastrophic disturbance and the steady state in Northern Hardwood Forests: a new look at the role of disturbance in the development of forest ecosystems suggests important implications for land-use policies. Am. Sci. 67:6 (1979), 660–669.
7. Boyd, J., Banzhaf, S., What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol. Econ. 63:2–3 (2007), 616–626.
8. Boyd, J., Nonmarket benefits of nature: what should be counted in green GDP?. Ecol. Econ. 61:4 (2007), 716–723.
9. Brown, G., Fagerholm, N., Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: a review and evaluation. Ecosyst. Serv. 13 (2015), 119–133.
10. Burel, F., Baudry, J., Landscape Ecology. 2003, Science Publishers.
11. Burkhard, B., Crossman, N., Nedkov, S., Petz, K., Alkemade, R., Mapping and modelling ecosystem services for science policy and practice. Ecosyst. Serv. 4 (2013), 1–3.
12. Conrad, E., Christie, M., Fazey, I., Is research keeping up with changes in landscape policy? A review of the literature. J. Environ. Manage. 92:9 (2011), 2097–2108.
13. Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., van den Belt, M., The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387 (1997), 253–260 Available from: http://www.esd.ornl.gov/benefits_conference/nature_paper.pdf.
14. Costanza, R., Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biol. Conserv. 141:2 (2008), 350–352.
15. Council of Europe, European Landscape Convention. 2000, Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
16. Council of Europe, Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society. 2005, Council of Europe, Faro.
17. Crossman, N.D., Burkhard, B., Nedkov, S., Willemen, L., Petz, K., Palomo, I., Drakou, E.G., Martín-López, B., McPhearson, T., Boyanova, K., Alkemade, R., Egoh, B., Dunbar, M.B., Maes, J., A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 4 (2013), 4–14.
18. Daily, G., Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. 1997, Island Press, Washington DC.
19. Daily, G.C., Developing a scientific basis for managing Earth's life support systems. Ecol. Soc., 3(2), 1999, 14.
20. de Groot, R., Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable, multi-functional landscapes. Landscape Urban Plann. 75:3–4 (2006), 175–186.
21. De Groot, R.S., Wilson, M.A., Boumans, R., A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol. Econ. 41:3 (2002), 393–408.
22. DeVries, B., Decuyper, M., Verbesselt, J., Zeileis, A., Herold, M., Joseph, S., Tracking disturbance-regrowth dynamics in tropical forests using structural change detection and Landsat time series. Remote Sens. Environ. 169 (2015), 320–334.
23. Dee, N., Baker, J., Drobny, N., Duke, K., Whitman, I., Fahringer, D., An environmental evaluation system for water resource planning. Water Resour. Res. 9 (1973), 523–535.
24. EEA, 2013. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) v. 4.3 (January 2013). European Environment Agency (EEA). Available from: http://cices.eu/content/uploads/sites/8/2015/09/CICES-V4-3-_-17-01-13a.xlsx.
25. Egoh, B., Drakou, E.G., Dunbar, M.B., Maes, J., Willemen, L., Indicators for Mapping Ecosystem Services: a Review. 2012, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
26. Ehrlich, P.R., Ehrlich, A.H., Extinction: the Causes and Consequences of the Disappearance of Species. 1981, Random House, New York.
27. Eigenbrod, F., Armsworth, P.R., Anderson, B.J., Heinemeyer, A., Gillings, S., Roy, D.B., Thomas, C.D., Gaston, K.J., The impact of proxy-based methods on mapping the distribution of ecosystem services. J. Appl. Ecol. 47:2 (2010), 377–385.
28. Eigenbrod, F., Armsworth, P.R., Anderson, B.J., Heinemeyer, A., Gillings, S., Roy, D.B., Thomas, C.D., Gaston, K.J., Error propagation associated with benefits transfer-based mapping of ecosystem services. Biol. Conserv. 143:11 (2010), 2487–2493.
29. Eppink, F.V., Werntze, A., Mäs, S., Popp, A., Seppelt, R., 2012. Land Management and Ecosystem Services. How Collaborative Research Programmes Can Support Better Policies. Gaia: Okologische Perspektiven in Natur-, Geistes- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften, 21 (1), 55–63.
30. Fagerholm, N., Kayhko, N., Ndumbaro, F., Khamis, M., Community stakeholders' knowledge in landscape assessments − Mapping indicators for landscape services. Ecol. Indic. 18 (2012), 421–433.
31. Fisher, B., Turner, R.K., Ecosystem services: classification for valuation. Biol. Conserv. 141:5 (2008), 1167–1169.
32. Fisher, B., Turner, R.K., Morling, P., Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol. Econ. 68:3 (2009), 643–653.
33. Forman, R.T.T., Godron, M., Landscape Ecology. 1986, John Wiley & Sons Incorporated.
34. Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M., Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): 2011 Update. 2011, European Environment Agency.
35. Hainz-Renetzeder, C., Schneidergruber, A., Kuttner, M., Wrbka, T., Assessing the potential supply of landscape services to support ecological restoration of degraded landscapes: a case study in the Austrian-Hungarian trans-boundary region of Lake Neusiedl. Ecol. Modell. 295 (2015), 196–206.
36. Hamel, P., Chaplin-Kramer, R., Sim, S., Mueller, C., A new approach to modeling the sediment retention service (InVEST 3.0): Case study of the Cape Fear catchment North Carolina, USA. Sci. Total Environ. 524–525 (2015), 166–177.
37. Hauck, J., Görg, C., Varjopuro, R., Ratamäki, O., Maes, J., Wittmer, H., Jax, K., ‘Maps have an air of authority’: Potential benefits and challenges of ecosystem service maps at different levels of decision making. Ecosyst. Serv. 4 (2013), 25–32.
38. Helliwell, D.R., Valuation of wildlife resources. Reg. Stud. 3:1 (1969), 41–47.
39. Herlin, I.S., New challenges in the field of spatial planning: landscapes. Landscape Res. 29:4 (2007), 399–411.
40. Hermann, A., Schleifer, S., Wrbka, T., The concept of ecosystem services regarding landscape research: a review. Liv. Rev. Landsc. Res. 5:1 (2011), 1–37.
41. Hermann, Á., Kuttner, M., Hainz-Renetzeder, C., Konkoly-Gyuró, É., Tirászi, Á., Brandenburg, C., Allex, B., Ziener, K., Wrbka, T., Assessment framework for landscape services in European cultural landscapes: an Austrian Hungarian case study. Ecol. Indic. 37 (2014), 229–240 PART A.
42. Higgins, S., Mahon, M., McDonagh, J., Interdisciplinary interpretations and applications of the concept of scale in landscape research. J. Environ. Manage. 113 (2012), 137–145.
43. Hoyer, R., Chang, H., Assessment of freshwater ecosystem services in the tualatin and Yamhill basins under climate change and urbanization. Appl. Geogr. 53 (2014), 402–416.
44. King, R.T., Wildlife and man. N. Y. Conserv. 20:6 (1966), 8–11.
45. Koschke, L., Fuerst, C., Frank, S., Makeschin, F., A multi-criteria approach for an integrated land-cover-based assessment of ecosystem services provision to support landscape planning. Ecol. Indic. 21 (2012), 54–66.
46. Krovakova, K., Semeradova, S., Mudrochova, M., Skalos, J., Landscape functions and their change—a review on methodological approaches. Ecol. Eng. 75 (2015), 378–383.
47. Lacoste, M., Minasny, B., McBratney, A., Michot, D., Viaud, V., Walter, C., High resolution 3D mapping of soil organic carbon in a heterogeneous agricultural landscape. Geoderma 213 (2014), 296–311.
48. Lamarque, P., Quetier, F., Lavorel, S., The diversity of the ecosystem services concept and its implications for their assessment and management. Comp. Rendus Biol. 334:5–6 (2011), 441–449.
49. MEA, Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005, Island Press, Washington DC.
50. MEA, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: A Framework for Assessment. 2003, Island Press, Washington DC.
51. Maes, J., Egoh, B., Willemen, L., Liquete, C., Vihervaara, P., Schägner, J.P., Grizzetti, B., Drakou, E.G., Notte, A.L., Zulian, G., Bouraoui, F., Luisa Paracchini, M., Braat, L., Bidoglio, G., Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst. Serv. 1:1 (2012), 31–39.
52. Malinga, R., Gordon, L.J., Jewitt, G., Lindborg, R., Mapping ecosystem services across scales and continents—a review. Ecosyst. Serv. 13 (2015), 57–63.
53. Mao, Q.Z., Huang, G.L., Wu, J.G., Urban ecosystem services: a review. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 26:4 (2015), 1023–1033.
54. Martinez-Harms, M.J., Balvanera, P., Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review. Int. J. Biodiver. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manage. 8:1–2 (2012), 17–25.
55. Mastrangelo, M.E., Weyland, F., Villarino, S.H., Barral, M.P., Nahuelhual, L., Laterra, P., Concepts and methods for landscape multifunctionality and a unifying framework based on ecosystem services. Landscape Ecology 29:2 (2014), 345–358, 10.1007/s10980-013-9959-9.
56. Meyer, M.A., Chand, T., Priess, J.A., Comparing bioenergy production sites in the southeastern US regarding ecosystem service supply and demand. PLoS One, 10(3), 2015, e0116336.
57. Nassauer, J.I., Landscape as medium and method for synthesis in urban ecological design. Landscape Urban Plann. 106:3 (2012), 221–229.
58. Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Cameron, D.R., Chan, K.M.A., Daily, G.C., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P.M., Lonsdorf, E., Naidoo, R., Ricketts, T.H., Shaw, M.R., Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front. Ecol. Environ. 7:1 (2009), 4–11.
59. Nemec, K.T., Raudsepp-Hearne, C., The use of geographic information systems to map and assess ecosystem services. Biodiver. Conserv. 22:1 (2013), 1–15.
60. Portman, M.E., Ecosystem services in practice: challenges to real world implementation of ecosystem services across multiple landscapes—a critical review. Appl. Geogr. 45 (2013), 185–192.
61. Potschin, M., Haines-Young, R., Heink, U., Jax, K., 2014. OpenNESS Glossary (V2.0). [online]. Available from: http://www.openness-project.eu/library/reference-book.
62. Seppelt, R., Dormann, C.F., Eppink, F.V., Lautenbach, S., Schmidt, S., A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J. Appl. Ecol. 48:3 (2011), 630–636.
63. Seppelt, R., Fath, B., Burkhard, B., Fisher, J.L., Grêt-Regamey, A., Lautenbach, S., Pert, P., Hotes, S., Spangenberg, J., Verburg, P.H., van Oudenhoven, A.P.E., Form follows function?: proposing a blueprint for ecosystem service assessments based on reviews and case studies. Ecol. Indic. 21 (2012), 145–154.
64. Soto, C., Palomares, F., Coexistence of sympatric carnivores in relatively homogeneous Mediterranean landscapes: functional importance of habitat segregation at the fine-scale level. Oecologia, 2015.
65. Stephens, P.A., Pettorelli, N., Barlow, J., Whittingham, M.J., Cadotte, M.W., Management by proxy? The use of indices in applied ecology. J. Appl. Ecol. 52:1 (2015), 1–6.
66. TEEB, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations. 2010, Earthscan, London.
67. TEEB, 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. doc.teebweb.org.
68. Termorshuizen, J.W., Opdam, P., Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecol. 24:8 (2009), 1037–1052.
69. Troy, A., Wilson, M.A., Mapping ecosystem services: practical challenges and opportunities in linking GIS and value transfer. Ecol. Econ. 60:2 (2006), 435–449.
70. Turner, M.G., Landscape ecology—the effect of pattern on process. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20:1 (1989), 171–197.
71. UNESCO, 2003. Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. unesdoc.unesco.org. Paris: The General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural. Organization (UNESCO).
72. Ungaro, F., Zasada, I., Piorr, A., Mapping landscape services: spatial synergies and trade-offs. A case study using variogram models and geostatistical simulations in an agrarian landscape in North-East Germany. Ecol. Indic. 46 (2014), 367–378.
73. Vallés-Planells, M., Galiana, F., Van Eetvelde, V., A classification of landscape services to support local landscape planning. Ecol. Soc., 19(1), 2014 (art44).
74. Vihervaara, P., Kumpula, T., Tanskanen, A., Burkhard, B., Ecosystem services–A tool for sustainable management of human–environment systems. Case study Finnish Forest Lapland. Ecol. Complexity 7:3 (2010), 410–420.
75. Wallace, K.J., Classification of ecosystem services: problems and solutions. Biol. Conserv. 139:3–4 (2007), 235–246.
76. Willemen, L., Hein, L., Verburg, P.H., Evaluating the impact of regional development policies on future landscape services. Ecol. Econ. 69:11 (2010), 2244–2254.
77. Willemen, L., Veldkamp, A., Verburg, P.H., Hein, L., Leemans, R., A multi-scale modelling approach for analysing landscape service dynamics. J. Environ. Manage. 100 (2012), 86–95.
78. Willemen, L., Burkhart, B., Crossman, N., Drakou, E.G., Palomo, I., Editorial: best practices for mapping ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 13 (2015), 1–5.
79. Zhang, W., Ricketts, T.H., Kremen, C., Carney, K., Swinton, S.M., Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture. Ecol. Econ. 64:2 (2007), 253–260.