Assessing ecosystem condition at the national level in Hungary - indicators, approaches, challenges

IF 1.8 Q3 ECOLOGY One Ecosystem Pub Date : 2022-05-05 DOI:10.3897/oneeco.7.e81543
E. Tanács, Ákos Bede‐Fazekas, A. Csecserits, Lívia Kisné Fodor, L. Pásztor, I. Somodi, T. Standovár, A. Zlinszky, Zita Zsembery, Á. Vári
{"title":"Assessing ecosystem condition at the national level in Hungary - indicators, approaches, challenges","authors":"E. Tanács, Ákos Bede‐Fazekas, A. Csecserits, Lívia Kisné Fodor, L. Pásztor, I. Somodi, T. Standovár, A. Zlinszky, Zita Zsembery, Á. Vári","doi":"10.3897/oneeco.7.e81543","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The availability of robust and reliable spatial information on ecosystem condition is of increasing importance in informing conservation policy. Recent policy requirements have sparked a renewed interest in conceptual questions related to ecosystem condition and practical aspects like indicator selection, resulting in the emergence of conceptual frameworks, such as the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting - Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA-EA) and its Ecosystem Condition Typology (ECT). However, while such frameworks are essential to ensure that condition assessments are comprehensive and comparable, large-scale practical implementation often poses challenges that need to be tackled within stringent time and cost frames.\n We present methods and experiences of the national-level mapping and assessment of ecosystem condition in Hungary. The assessments covered the whole country, including all major ecosystem types present. The methodology constitutes four approaches of quantifying and mapping condition, based on different interpretations of naturalness and hemeroby, complemented by two more using properties that ‘overarch’ ecosystem types, such as soil and landscape attributes. In order to highlight their strengths and drawbacks, as well as to help reconcile aspects of conceptual relevance with practical limitations, we retrospectively evaluated the six mapping approaches (and the resulting indicators) against the indicator selection criteria suggested in the SEEA-EA. The results show that the various approaches have different strengths and weaknesses and, thus, their joint application has a higher potential to address the specific challenges related to large-scale ecosystem condition mapping.","PeriodicalId":36908,"journal":{"name":"One Ecosystem","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"One Ecosystem","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.7.e81543","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

The availability of robust and reliable spatial information on ecosystem condition is of increasing importance in informing conservation policy. Recent policy requirements have sparked a renewed interest in conceptual questions related to ecosystem condition and practical aspects like indicator selection, resulting in the emergence of conceptual frameworks, such as the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting - Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA-EA) and its Ecosystem Condition Typology (ECT). However, while such frameworks are essential to ensure that condition assessments are comprehensive and comparable, large-scale practical implementation often poses challenges that need to be tackled within stringent time and cost frames. We present methods and experiences of the national-level mapping and assessment of ecosystem condition in Hungary. The assessments covered the whole country, including all major ecosystem types present. The methodology constitutes four approaches of quantifying and mapping condition, based on different interpretations of naturalness and hemeroby, complemented by two more using properties that ‘overarch’ ecosystem types, such as soil and landscape attributes. In order to highlight their strengths and drawbacks, as well as to help reconcile aspects of conceptual relevance with practical limitations, we retrospectively evaluated the six mapping approaches (and the resulting indicators) against the indicator selection criteria suggested in the SEEA-EA. The results show that the various approaches have different strengths and weaknesses and, thus, their joint application has a higher potential to address the specific challenges related to large-scale ecosystem condition mapping.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估匈牙利国家一级的生态系统状况——指标、方法和挑战
关于生态系统状况的可靠空间信息的可用性在为保护政策提供信息方面越来越重要。最近的政策要求引发了人们对与生态系统状况和指标选择等实际方面有关的概念问题的新兴趣,导致出现了概念框架,如环境经济核算体系-生态系统核算及其生态系统状况类型学。然而,尽管这些框架对于确保条件评估的全面性和可比性至关重要,但大规模的实际实施往往会带来挑战,需要在严格的时间和成本框架内加以解决。我们介绍了匈牙利国家级生态系统状况测绘和评估的方法和经验。评估覆盖了整个国家,包括所有主要的生态系统类型。该方法包括四种量化和绘制条件的方法,基于对自然度和裙带率的不同解释,再加上另外两种使用“超越”生态系统类型的特性的方法,如土壤和景观属性。为了突出它们的优点和缺点,并帮助协调概念相关性和实际局限性,我们根据SEEA-EA中建议的指标选择标准,对六种绘图方法(以及由此产生的指标)进行了回顾性评估。结果表明,各种方法有不同的优势和劣势,因此,它们的联合应用更有可能解决与大规模生态系统状况测绘相关的具体挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
One Ecosystem
One Ecosystem Environmental Science-Nature and Landscape Conservation
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
CH4 and N2O emissions and their potential control by rice biomass biochar: The case of continuously flooded paddy fields in Indonesia - A review The influence of naturalness of the landscape structure on children’s connectedness to Nature in north-eastern Italy Historical reconstruction of the invasions of four non-native tree species at local scale: a detective work on Ailanthus altissima, Celtis occidentalis, Prunus serotina and Acer negundo As green infrastructure, linear semi-natural habitats boost regulating ecosystem services supply in agriculturally-dominated landscapes Practical framework for cultural ecosystem service in urban landscape design
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1