| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Harrison, Paula A., et al.
(author)
-
Identifying and prioritising services in European terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems
- 2010
-
In: Biodiversity and Conservation. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0960-3115 .- 1572-9710. ; 19:10, s. 2791-2821
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Ecosystems are multifunctional and provide humanity with a broad array of vital services. Effective management of services requires an improved evidence base, identifying the role of ecosystems in delivering multiple services, which can assist policy-makers in maintaining them. Here, information from the literature and scientific experts was used to systematically document the importance of services and identify trends in their use and status over time for the main terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems in Europe. The results from this review show that intensively managed ecosystems contribute mostly to vital provisioning services (e.g. agro-ecosystems provide food via crops and livestock, and forests provide wood), while semi-natural ecosystems (e.g. grasslands and mountains) are key contributors of genetic resources and cultural services (e.g. aesthetic values and sense of place). The most recent European trends in human use of services show increases in demand for crops from agro-ecosystems, timber from forests, water flow regulation from rivers, wetlands and mountains, and recreation and ecotourism in most ecosystems, but decreases in livestock production, freshwater capture fisheries, wild foods and virtually all services associated with ecosystems which have considerably decreased in area (e.g. semi-natural grasslands). The condition of the majority of services show either a degraded or mixed status across Europe with the exception of recent enhancements in timber production in forests and mountains, freshwater provision, water/erosion/natural hazard regulation and recreation/ecotourism in mountains, and climate regulation in forests. Key gaps in knowledge were evident for certain services across all ecosystems, including the provision of biochemicals and natural medicines, genetic resources and the regulating services of seed dispersal, pest/disease regulation and invasion resistance.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Kühn, Ingolf, et al.
(author)
-
MACIS: Minimisation of and Adaptation to Climate Change Impacts on BiodiverSity
- 2008
-
In: GAIA. - 0940-5550. ; 17:4, s. 393-395
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The recently finished EU funded project MACIS reviewed observed and projected climate change impacts on biodiversity. It assessed mitigation and adaptation options. It also reviewed and developed methods to assess future impacts of climate change on biodiversity including the identification of policy options to prevent and minimise these impacts.
|
|
| 5. |
- Luck, Gary W., et al.
(author)
-
Quantifying the Contribution of Organisms to the Provision of Ecosystem Services
- 2009
-
In: BioScience. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0006-3568 .- 1525-3244. ; 59:3, s. 223-235
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Research on ecosystem services has grown rapidly over the last decade. Two conceptual frameworks have been published to guide ecological assessments of organisms that deliver services-the concepts of service-providing units (SPUs) and ecosystem service providers (ESPs). Here, we unite these frameworks and present an SPU-ESP continuum that offers a coherent conceptual approach for synthesizing the latest developments in ecosystem service research, and can direct future studies at all levels of organization. In particular, we show how the service-provider concept call be applied tit the population, functional group, and community levels, We strongly emphasize the need to identify and quantify the organisms and their characteristics (e.g., functional traits) that provide services, and to assess service provision relative to the demands of human beneficiaries. We use key examples from the literature to illustrate the new approach and to highlight gaps in knowledge, particularly in relation to the impact of species interactions and ecosystem dynamics on service provision.
|
|
| 6. |
- Pascual, Unai, et al.
(author)
-
Valuing nature's contributions to people : the IPBES approach
- 2017
-
In: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. - : Elsevier BV. - 1877-3435. ; 26-27, s. 7-16
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Nature is perceived and valued in starkly different and often conflicting ways. This paper presents the rationale for the inclusive valuation of nature's contributions to people (NCP) in decision making, as well as broad methodological steps for doing so. While developed within the context of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), this approach is more widely applicable to initiatives at the knowledge–policy interface, which require a pluralistic approach to recognizing the diversity of values. We argue that transformative practices aiming at sustainable futures would benefit from embracing such diversity, which require recognizing and addressing power relationships across stakeholder groups that hold different values on human nature-relations and NCP.
|
|
| 7. |
- Primmer, Eeva, et al.
(author)
-
Caught between personal and collective values : biodiversity conservation in European decision-making
- 2017
-
In: Environmental Policy and Governance. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1756-932X .- 1756-9338. ; 27:6, s. 588-604
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Individual decision-makers at different governance levels operate in social contexts, which means that they sometimes need to compromise their personal values. Yet, this dissonance is rarely the direct target of empirical analyses of environmental decision-making. We undertake a Q-analysis of decision-makers' personal perspectives and the perspectives they perceive to dominate in their decision-making contexts. Our empirical analysis addresses biodiversity conservation, which has traditionally been justified with intrinsic value- and science-based arguments. The arguments have recently been broadened with the concept of ecosystem services, highlighting human benefits and values. This evolving context is interesting because of the new rise of anthropocentric values, which can lead to decision-makers experiencing dissonance. Our analysis of interviews with 43 biodiversity conservation decision-makers from nine European countries reveals four personally held perspectives that highlight different, yet partly overlapping, values – intrinsic, human benefit, conservation and connection – as well as three perspectives perceived to dominate in decision-making – utilitarian, insurance and knowledge values. The comparison of personally held and perceived dominant perspectives points to one major conflict: those decision-makers who personally associate with intrinsic values and perceive utilitarian values to dominate in decision-making experience dissonance. By contrast, personally held human benefit values are accommodated well in decision-making contexts and decision-makers who perceive insurance values to dominate experience the least conflict with personally held values. These findings demonstrate the potential of arguments stressing long-term benefits for easing tension and conflicts in conservation decision-making, and the usefulness of empirically testing of the coincidence of individual and social values.
|
|
