Display options
Cite
Schröter M, Albert C, Marques A, et al. National Ecosystem Assessments in Europe: A Review. Bioscience. 2016;66(10):813-828doi: 10.1093/biosci/biw101.
Schröter, M., Albert, C., Marques, A., Tobon, W., Lavorel, S., Maes, J., Brown, C., Klotz, S., & Bonn, A. (2016). National Ecosystem Assessments in Europe: A Review. Bioscience, 66(10), 813-828. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw101
Schröter, Matthias, et al. "National Ecosystem Assessments in Europe: A Review." Bioscience vol. 66,10 (2016): 813-828. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw101
Schröter M, Albert C, Marques A, Tobon W, Lavorel S, Maes J, Brown C, Klotz S, Bonn A. National Ecosystem Assessments in Europe: A Review. Bioscience. 2016 Oct 01;66(10):813-828. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biw101. Epub 2016 Aug 17. PMID: 28533561; PMCID: PMC5421311.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Bioscience. 2016 Oct 01;66(10):813-828. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biw101. Epub 2016 Aug 17.

National Ecosystem Assessments in Europe: A Review.

Bioscience

Matthias Schröter, Christian Albert, Alexandra Marques, Wolke Tobon, Sandra Lavorel, Joachim Maes, Claire Brown, Stefan Klotz, Aletta Bonn

Affiliations

  1. Matthias Schröter ([email protected]) is a postdoctoral researcher and environmental scientist at UFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research and the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig; his expertise is in spatial modeling and the assessment of ecosystem services. Christian Albert ([email protected]) is a junior professor in landscape planning at Leibniz Universität Hanover; he studies the integration of ecosystem services in spatial planning and management. He is also affiliated with the UFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research. Alexandra Marques ([email protected]) is a postdoctoral researcher and Wolke Tobon ([email protected]) is a researcher at the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv). Alexandra is also affiliated with the Institute of Biology at Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg and the Institute of Environmental Sciences CML at Leiden University. Alexandra's expertise is in the ecological-economic analysis of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Wolke works on spatial prioritization of conservation and restoration. Sandra Lavorel ([email protected]) is a senior researcher at CNRS and Laboratoire d'Ecologie Alpine; she is a functional ecologist with expertise in biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and services. Joachim Maes ([email protected]) is a scientific and technical officer at the Joint Research Council of the European Commission; he is leading the Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem Services initiative of the European Union. Claire Brown ([email protected]) is a senior program officer for ecosystem assessments at UNEP-WCMC. Stefan Klotz ([email protected]) is a community ecologist at UFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research and the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig; his expertise is in biodiversity assessment. Aletta Bonn ([email protected]) is professor of ecosystem services at UFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Friedrich-Schiller University Jena, and the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig; her focus is on ecosystem services and participatory conservation research at the science-policy interface.

PMID: 28533561 PMCID: PMC5421311 DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biw101

Abstract

National ecosystem assessments form an essential knowledge base for safeguarding biodiversity and ecosystem services. We analyze eight European (sub-)national ecosystem assessments (Portugal, United Kingdom, Spain, Norway, Flanders, Netherlands, Finland, and Germany) and compare their objectives, political context, methods, and operationalization. We observed remarkable differences in breadth of the assessment, methods employed, variety of services considered, policy mandates, and funding mechanisms. Biodiversity and ecosystem services are mainly assessed independently, with biodiversity conceptualized as underpinning services, as a source of conflict with services, or as a service in itself. Recommendations derived from our analysis for future ecosystem assessments include the needs to improve the common evidence base, to advance the mapping of services, to consider international flows of services, and to connect more strongly to policy questions. Although the context specificity of national ecosystem assessments is acknowledged as important, a greater harmonization across assessments could help to better inform common European policies and future pan-regional assessments.

Keywords: IPBES; boundary object; conservation; ecosystem service mapping; quantification

References

  1. Nature. 2012 Jun 06;486(7401):59-67 - PubMed
  2. Trends Ecol Evol. 2012 Jan;27(1):19-26 - PubMed
  3. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2010 Sep 27;365(1554):2959-71 - PubMed
  4. Nature. 2012 May 02;486(7401):105-8 - PubMed
  5. Nature. 2014 Nov 6;515(7525):27-8 - PubMed
  6. Science. 2013 Jan 18;339(6117):277-8 - PubMed
  7. J Appl Ecol. 2015 Jun;52(3):641-653 - PubMed
  8. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Jun 16;112(24):7356-61 - PubMed

Publication Types