Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment: Experiences from real world situations

Ecosystem Services

Volumn 29, Issue , 2018, Pages 499-514

  Dunford, Rob ^a,b   Harrison, Paula ^b   Smith, Alison ^a   Dick, Jan ^b   Barton, David N ^c   Martin Lopez, Berta ^d   Kelemen, Ezsther ^e,f   Jacobs, Sander ^g   Saarikoski, Heli ^h   Turkelboom, Francis ^g   Verheyden, Wim ^g   Hauck, Jennifer ^i,j   Antunes, Paula ^k   Aszalós, Réka ^l   Badea, Ovidu ^m   Baró, Francesc ^n,ae   Berry, Pam ^a   Carvalho, Laurence ^b   Conte, Giulio ^ad   Czúcz, Bálint ^l,o   Garcia Blanco, Gemma ^p   Howard, Dave ^b   Giuca, Relu ^q   Gomez Baggethun, Erik ^c,n,r   Grizetti, Bruna ^s   Izakovicova, Zita ^t   Kopperoinen, Leena ^h   Langemeyer, Johannes ^n,ae   Luque, Sandra ^u   Lapola, David M ^v   Martinez Pastur, Guillermo ^w   Mukhopadhyay, Raktima ^x   Roy, S B ^x   Niemelä, Jari ^y   Norton, Lisa ^b   Ochieng, John ^z   Odee, David ^z   Palomo, Ignacio ^aa   Pinho, Patricia ^ab   Priess, Joerg ⁱ   Rusch, Graciella ^c   Saarela, Sanna Riikka ^h   Santos, Rui ^k   van der Wal, Jan Tjalling ^ac   Vadineanu, Angheluta ^q   Vári, Ágnes ^l   Woods, Helen ^b   Yli Pelkonen, Vesa ^y   more..

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b CENTRE FOR ECOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY   (United Kingdom)

^c NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE FOR NATURE RESEARCH   (Norway)

^d LEUPHANA UNIVERSITY OF LÜNEBURG   (Germany)

^e Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG)   (Hungary)

^f Institute of Entrepreneurship and Innovation   (Hungary)

^g RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR NATURE AND FOREST INBO   (Belgium)

^h FINNISH ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE   (Finland)

ⁱ HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

^j Finnish Environment Institute ^*  (Germany)

^k UNIVERSIDADE NOVA DE LISBOA   (Portugal)

^l INSTITUTE OF ECOLOGY AND BOTANY   (Hungary)

^m Institutul de Cercetari si Amenajari Silvice Romania   (Romania)

ⁿ INSTITUT DE CIÈNCIA I TECNOLOGIA AMBIENTALS   (Spain)

^o MUSÉUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE   (France)

^p Parque Tecnologico de Bizkaia   (Spain)

^q UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST   (Romania)

^r NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES   (Norway)

^s JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE   (Italy)

^t INSTITUTE OF CHEMISTRY   (Slovakia)

^u CEMAGREF   (France)

^v SÃO PAULO STATE UNIVERSITY UNESP   (Brazil)

^w CENTRO AUSTRAL DE INVESTIGACIONES CIENTÍFICAS CADIC CONICET   (Argentina)

^x Indian Institute of Bio Social Research and Development   (India)

^y UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^z KENYA FORESTRY RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Kenya)

^aa BASQUE CENTRE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE BC3   (Spain)

^ab UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^ac WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^ad IRIDRA   (Italy)

^ae HOSPITAL DEL MAR   (Spain)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85033781971     PISSN: 22120416     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.014     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Bagstad, K.J., Semmens, D.J., Waage, S., Winthrop, R., A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation. Ecosyst. Serv. 5 (2013), E27–E39.
2. Bateman, I.J., Harwood, A.R., Abson, D.J., Andrews, B., Crowe, A., Dugdale, S., Fezzi, C., Foden, J., Hadley, D., Haines-Young, R., Hulme, M., Kontoleon, A., Munday, P., Pascual, U., Paterson, J., Perino, G., Sen, A., Siriwardena, G., Termansen, M., Economic analysis for the UK national ecosystem assessment: synthesis and scenario valuation of changes in ecosystem services. Environ. Resour. Econ. 57 (2014), 273–297.
3. Barton, Stange, Blumentrath, Traaholt, 2015. Economic valuation of ecosystem services for policy a pilot study on green infrastructure in Oslo”, NINA report 1114. Available online at http://www.openness-project.eu/sites/default/files/NINA%20Report%201114%20%20%20Ecosystem%20service%20valuation%20Oslo%20pilot_final_web.pdf.
4. Barton, D.N., Kelemen, E., Dick, J., Martin-Lopez, B., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Jacobs, S., Hendriks, C.M.A., Termansen, M., García- Llorente, M., Primmer, E., Dunford, R., Harrison, P.A., Turkelboom, F., Saarikoski, H., van Dijk, J., Rusch, G.M., Palomo, I., Yli-Pelkonen, V.J., Carvalho, L., Baró, F., Langemeyer, J., van der Wal, J.T., Mederly, P., Priess, J.A., Luque, S., Berry, P., Santos, R., Odee, D., Pastur, G.M., García Blanco, G., Saarela, S-R.-R., Silaghi, D., Pataki, G., Masi, F., Vădineanu, A., Mukhopadhyay, R., Lapola, D.M., 2018. (Dis) integrated valuation – Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support. Ecosyst. Serv. 29, 529–541.
5. Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Nedkov, S., Müller, F., Mapping Ecosystem Service supply, demand and budgets. Ecological Indicators 21 (2012), 17–29.
6. Dick, J., Verweij, P., Carmen, E., Rodela, R., Andrews, C., Testing the ecosystem service cascade framework and QUICKScan software tool in the context of land-use planning in Glenlivet Estate Scotland. Int. J. Biodiv. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manage. Open Access, 2016.
7. Eigenbrod, F., Anderson, B., Armsworth, P., Heinemeyer, A., Gillings, S., Roy, D., Thomas, C., Gaston, K., Representation of ecosystem services by tiered conservation strategies. Conservation Letters, 2010, 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00102.x.
8. García-Llorente, M., Iniesta-Arandia, I., Willaarts, B., Harrison, P.A., Berry, P., Bayo, M.M., Castro, A.J., Montes, C., Martín-López, B., Biophysical and socio-cultural factors underlying spatial tradeoffs of ecosystem services in semiarid watersheds. Ecol. Soc., 20(3), 2015, 39, 10.5751/ES-07785-200339.
9. Gómez-Baggethun,E., Barton, D., Berry, P., Dunford, R.W., Harrison, P.A., (2016) “Concepts and methods in ecosystem services valuation”. In: Potschin, M., et al., Routledge Handbook of Ecosystem Services, Routledge ISBN-10: 1138025089.
10. Gonzalez-Redin J, Luque, S., Poggio, L., Smith, R., Gimona, A., 2016. Spatial Bayesian belief networks as a planning decision tool for mapping ecosystem services trade-offs on forested landscapes. Environmental Research Volume 144, Part B, Pages 15–26 Special Issue: The Provision of Ecosystem Services in Response to Global Change doi:10.1016/j.envres.2015.11.009.
11. Grêt-Regamey, A., Sirén, E., Brunner, S.H., Weibel, B., Review of decision support tools to operationalize the ecosystem services concept. Ecosyst. Serv., 2017 (in press).
12. Haines-Young and Potschin, 2010 The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. Raffaelli, D., Frid, C., (eds.) Ecosystem Ecology: A New Synthesis, 2010, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 110–139.
13. Harrison, Paula A., Dunford, Rob, Barton, David N., Kelemen, Eszter, Martín-López, Berta, Norton, Lisa, Termansen, Mette, Saarikoski, Heli, Hendriks, Kees, Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, Czúcz, Bálint, García-Llorente, Marina, Howard, David, Jacobs, Sander, Karlsen, Martin, Kopperoinen, Leena, Madsen, Anders, Rusch, Graciela, van Eupen, Michiel, Verweij, Peter, Smith, Ron, Tuomasjukka, Diana, Zulian, Grazia, Selecting methods for ecosystem service assessment: a decision tree approach. Ecosyst. Serv. 29 (2018), 481–498.
14. Hirons, M., Comberti, C., Dunford, R., Valuing cultural ecosystem services. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 41 (2016), 545–574.
15. IPBES, Preliminary guide regarding diverse conceptualization of multiple values of nature and its benefits, including biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services (deliverable 3 (d)). Intergovernmental Sci. Policy Platform Biodivers. Ecosyst. Serv., 2015.
16. Jacobs, S., Martín-López, B., Barton, D., Dunford, R., Harrison, P., Kelemen, E., Saarikoski, H., Termansen, M., García-Llorente, M., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Kopperoinen, L., Luque, S., Palomo, I., Priess, J., Rusch, G., Tenerelli, P., Turkelboom, F., Demeyer, R., Hauck, J., Keune, H., Smith, R., The means determine the end – Pursuing integrated valuation in practice. Ecosyst. Serv. 29 (2018), 515–528, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.011.
17. Kopperoinen, L., Itkonen, P., Niemelä, J., Using expert knowledge in combining green infrastructure and ecosystem services in land use planning: an insight into a new place-based methodology. Landscape Ecology, 2014, 10.1007/s10980-014-0014-2.
18. Lavorel, S., Bayer, A., Bondeau, A., Lautenbach, S., Ruiz-Frau, A., Schulp, N., Seppelt, R., Verburg, P., Teeffelen, A.V., Vannier, C., Arneth, A., Cramer, W., Marba, N., Pathways to bridge the biophysical realism gap in ecosystem services mapping approaches. 2017, Indic, Ecol 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.11.015.
19. Maes, J., Teller, A., Erhard, M., Liquete, C., Braat, L., Berry, P., Egoh, B., Puydarrieux, P., Fiorina, F., Santos, F., Paracchini, M.L., Keune, H., Wittmer, H., Hauck, J., Fiala, I., Verburg, P., Condé, S., Schägner, J.P., San Miguel, J., Estreguil, C., Ostermann, O., Barredo, J.I., Pereira, H.M., Stott, A., Laporte, V., Meiner, A., Olah, B., Royo Gelabert, E., Spyropoulou, R., Petersen, J.E., Maguire, C., Zal, N., Achilleos, E., Rubin, A., Ledoux, L., Brown, C., Raes, C., Jacobs, S., Vandewalle, M., Connor, D. and Bidoglio, G., 2013. Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. An analytical framework for ecosystem assessments under action 5 of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. European Union.
20. Maes, J., Liquete, C., Teller, A., Erhard, M., Paracchini, M.L., Barredo, J.I., Grizzetti, B., Cardoso, A., et al. An indicator framework for assessing ecosystem services in support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. Ecosyst. Serv. 17 (2016), 14–23.
21. Martín-López, B., Palomo, I., García-Llorente, M., Iniesta-Arandia, I., Castro, A., García Del Amo, D., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Montes, C., Delineating boundaries of social-ecological systems for landscape planning: A comprehensive spatial approach. Land Use Policy 66 (2017), 90–104.
22. Martínez Pastur, G., Peri, P.L., Lencinas, M.V., García Llorente, M., Martín López, B., Spatial patterns of cultural ecosystem services provision in Southern Patagonia. Landscape Ecol. 31 (2016), 383–399.
23. Martinez-Harms, M.J., Bryan, B.A., Balvanera, P., Law, E.A., Rhodes, J.R., Possingham, H.P., Wilson, K.A., Making decisions for managing ecosystem services. Biol. Conserv. 184 (2015), 229–238.
24. McIntosh, B.S., Ascough, J.C., Twery, M., Chew, J., Elmahdi, A., Haase, D., Harou, J.J., Hepting, D., Cuddy, S., Jakeman, A.J., Chen, S., Kassahun, A., Lautenbach, S., Matthews, K., Merritt, W., Quinn, N.W.T., Rodriguez-Roda, I., Sieber, S., Stavenga, M., Sulis, A., Ticehurst, J., Volk, M., Wrobel, M., van Delden, H., El-Sawah, S., Rizzoli, A., Voinov, A., Environmental decision support systems (EDSS) development - Challenges and best practices. Environ. Model. Softw., 26, 2011, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2011.09.009.
25. Paracchini, M.L., Zulian, G., Kopperoinen, L., Maes, J., Schägner, J.P., Termansen, M., Zandersen, M., Perez-Soba, M., Scholefield, P.A., Bidoglio, G., Mapping cultural ecosystem services: a framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across the EU. Ecol. Indic. 45 (2014), 371–385, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.04.018.
26. Ruckelshaus, M., McKenzie, E., Tallis, H., Guerry, A., Daily, G., Kareiva, P., Polasky, S., Ricketts, T., Bhagabati, N., Wood, S.A., Bernhardt, J., Notes from the field: lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions. Ecol. Econ. 115 (2015), 11–21.
27. Saarikoski, Heli, Primmer, Eeva, Saarela, Sanna-Riikka, Antunes, Paula, Aszalós, Réka, Baró, Francesc, Berry, Pam, Blanco, Gemma Garcia, Goméz-Baggethun, Erik, Carvalho, Laurence, Dick, Jan, Dunford, Robert, Hanzu, Mihail, Harrison, Paula, Izakovicova, Zita, Kertész, Miklós, Kopperoinen, Leena, Köhler, Berit, Langemeyer, Johannes, Lapola, David, Liquete, Camino, Luque, Sandra, Mederly, Peter, Niemela, Jari, Palomo, Ignacio, Pastur, Guillermo Martinez, Peri, Pablo, Preda, Elena, Priess, Joerg, Santos, Rui, Schleyer, Christian, Turkelboom, Francis, Vadineanu, Angheluta, Verheyden, Wim, Vikström, Suvi, Young, Juliette, Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosyst. Serv. 29 (2018), 579–598.
28. 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.E., Form follows function? Proposing a blueprint for ecosystem service assessments based on reviews and case studies. Ecol. Indic. 21 (2012), 145–154, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.09.003.
29. TEEB, 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. TEEB ocotber 2010.
30. Tenerelli, P., Demšar, U., Luque, S., Crowdsourcing indicators for cultural ecosystem services: A geographically weighted approach for mountain landscapes. Ecol Indic 64 (2016), 237–248, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.12.042.
31. UN, Ec, FAO, Imf, OECD, Bank, W., System of Environmental-Economic Accounting 2012 - experimental ecosystem accounting. 2014, United Nations, New York.
32. UNSD, 2014, 'system of Environmental–Economic Accounting 2012, experimental ecosystem accounting’, United Nations Statistics Division, Washington, DC, USA http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seeaRev/eea_final_en.pdf accessed 13/1/2017.
33. Vatn, A., An institutional analysis of methods for environmental appraisal. Ecol. Econ. 68 (2009), 2207–2215.
34. Wijnja, van Uden, Delbaere, Ecosystem services in operation: case studies. European Commission FP7, 2016.
35. Zulian, G., Polce, C., Maes, J., ESTIMAP: a GIS-based model to map ecosystem services in the European union. Ann. di Bot. 4 (2014), 1–7, 10.4462/annbotrm-11807.