Ecosystem Services最新文献

Considering ecosystem services (ESs) in conservation planning represents a growing interest in global standards. However, this task has been hindered by the complexity of the ecological and socio-economic attributes of ESs, and questions remain, such as how to incorporate the demand for ESs, and ensure equity among beneficiary groups. To successfully align conservation investments with local needs, we implemented the “serviceshed” concept (the geographical area where ecosystems deliver a service to a group of beneficiaries) in a novel planning approach, setting conservation targets based on ES demand. We expand on how neglecting peoples’ location and socio-economic vulnerability status while quantifying ES demand can lead to inequity issues. We tested our conceptual framework in an urban case study with the ESs of flood and heat island attenuation using a systematic conservation planning methodology that considers population vulnerability. We compared our novel approach to one that does not consider servicesheds while prioritizing sites and tested the impact of three metrics of ES demand on addressing equity issues: i) demand area, ii) number of beneficiaries, and iii) vulnerability-weighted number of beneficiaries. We showed that accounting for the spatial location of the different beneficiaries via servicesheds increased distributional equity by a factor of five. Considering vulnerability while quantifying ES demand also ensured that socio-economic equity was addressed, by factoring in peoples’ reliance on these services. The proposed approach holds significant potential in cultivating an ‘equitable space for conservation’ by aiding practitioners in linking ES supply with local beneficiaries while accounting for their vulnerability.

The last fifteen years have been transformative in the field of biodiversity and ecosystem services finance. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) articulated a pathway to achieve the global vision of “living in harmony with nature” by 2050, with four goals and 23 targets to be met by 2030. Published reports indicate biodiversity finance needs are on the order of seven times current investments. This paper reviews recent public and private sector efforts to address this biodiversity finance gap and suggests priorities to increase progress toward its closure. In this review of biodiversity finance, we first provide a brief historical overview of the biodiversity finance gap, next describe current methodologies designed to identify, quantify, and bridge the gap in the public and private sectors, two sections reviewing current public and private sector efforts to close the gap follow, and a discussion of future directions and trends concludes. From asset management to biodiversity credits to crowdfunding, and from debt for nature swaps to environmental fiscal transfer and green bonds, we highlight efforts in the global south to address their biodiversity finance needs and meet their commitments to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Research on subsidies harmful to nature, more effectively connecting biodiversity outcomes to financial investments, identifying finance mechanisms that generate climate and biodiversity co-benefits, and further innovation in private sector solutions like biodiversity credits and offsets are future priorities and perhaps a research agenda in this sphere. We hope this review generates discussion and a research agenda within the biodiversity finance community to help us fulfil the ambitious goals of the GBF by 2030.

This groundbreaking study sheds new light on the unequal distribution of cultural ecosystem services (CES) within Rome's urban green spaces (UGS). Employing a novel methodology, we assess UGS quality through georeferenced social media data from Twitter, evaluate the green cover of UGS, and assess accessibility to these spaces using network analysis in a GIS environment. This unique methodology allows us to unveil marked disparities in both UGS accessibility and the provision of CES. Unlike traditional approaches, our analysis provides a more nuanced understanding of UGS quality and accessibility. Our findings reveal areas with high UGS accessibility, yet limited CES provision. These insights are crucial for targeted urban planning interventions, advocating for a more equitable distribution of UGS benefits. This research challenges traditional green space planning with a focus on green space availability. Importantly, our study goes further by identifying specific disadvantaged areas, offering valuable insights for promoting equity in urban areas, emphasizing the importance of UGS quality and accessibility. Thereby, this research provides a foundation for a more nuanced, equal, and quality-driven approach to UGS planning.

There are currently no guidelines in the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA) for quantifying and disclosing uncertainty. However, without quantifying uncertainty, it is unclear whether or not accounting tables contain biased (erroneous) area estimates which do not reflect real land cover changes. We use Oslo municipality in Norway as a case study to illustrate best practices in quantifying unbiased area estimates using design-based statistical methods. As input for ecosystem extent accounts, we compared a custom Sentinel-2 land cover map with a globally available one called Dynamic World for 2015, 2018 and 2021. The design-based area estimation involved (i) generating a stratified probability sample of locations using the satellite-based maps to define strata, (ii) assigning ecosystem type labels to the samples using photointerpretation according to a response design protocol, and (iii) applying a stratified area estimator to produce 95% confidence intervals around opening, closing and change stocks in the extent accounting table. We found that pixel counting practices, currently adopted by the SEEA EA community, led to biased extent accounts, particularly for ecosystem conversions, with biases averaging 195% of the true change value derived from design-based methods. We found that the uncertainty inherent in state-of-the-art satellite-based maps exceeded the ability to detect real change in extent for some ecosystem types including water and bare/artificial surfaces. In general, uncertainty in extent accounts is higher for ecosystem type conversion classes compared to stable classes, and higher for 3-yr compared to 6-yr accounting periods. Custom, locally calibrated satellite-based maps of ecosystem extent changes were more accurate (81% overall accuracy) than globally available Dynamic World maps (75%). We suggest that rigorous accuracy assessment in SEEA EA will ensure that ecosystem extent (and consequently condition and service) accounts are credible. A standard for auditing uncertainty in ecosystem accounts is needed.

Ecosystem services are often analysed individually, but are intertwined with one another and the social-ecological systems they occur in. As a response, ecosystem service bundles, i.e. co-occurring sets of ecosystem services, can be used to simplify complex relationships between nature and society, and in turn aid understanding. Typically bundles are studied on the local to regional scale, given the importance of local context to bundling, but wider scale analysis may help highlight broader ecosystem service balances for sustainable management. However, it remains uncertain if the relationships between ecosystem services are strong enough to describe coherent bundles at the global scale, and the extent to which these bundles are robust across different social-ecological systems and within different biogeographical realms.

Here, we examine whether coherent bundles emerge from a set of 25 ecosystem property and service indicators across regional mountain, island and delta systems around the world. We analyse differences between bundle composition and correlation structure based on system, latitude and biome. We find consistent bundles broadly representing ‘food’, ‘productivity’ and biodiversity ‘intactness/soil’ ecosystem properties and services emerge across mountains, islands and deltas globally. These bundles show strong positive correlations internally, and consistent negative correlations between ‘food’ services and ‘intactness/soil’ ecosystem properties across bundles. The bundles weakened at higher latitudes and individual biomes where the division between ecosystem properties and services broke down. In sum, while islands, mountains and deltas are distinct social-ecological systems, we found ecosystem bundles robustly described synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services across these systems. This suggests that bundling has a role in simplifying wider scale interactions between humans and ecosystem services.

Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) is a commonly used policy tool to fund nature conservation efforts. However, the implementation of financial incentives may have unintended consequences on intrinsic motivations, such as attitudes and environmental values, resulting in reduced levels of pro-environmental behaviors after PES compared to those observed before PES. The effect of PES schemes on participants’ motivations is not well understood. To address this gap, we conducted a quantitative analysis of motivation effects in PES schemes using 155 data points from 126 primary studies. Our study found that: 1) 54% of PES projects had a crowding-in effect, reinforcing intrinsic motivations, while 42% had a crowding-out effect, weakening intrinsic motivations; 2) PES projects with community payments were more likely to induce crowding-out due to free-riding and reduced trust; 3) compliance monitoring was a weak predictor of crowding-in, possibly due to increased satisfaction; and 4) monetary payment, when compared to in-kind payment, was more likely to lead to crowding-out due to reduced autonomy. Our findings also suggest that crowding-in is associated with successful environmental outcomes, while crowding-out is associated with environmental failure. To enhance the effectiveness of PES programs, policymakers should promote motivation crowding-in and prevent crowding-out by using in-kind payments, addressing free-riding, and enhancing fairness and transparency through monitoring, where feasible.

Many cultural benefits of ecosystem services (ES) are difficult to capture in standard ES assessments. Scholars and practitioners often respond to this gap by seeking to develop new scientific methods to capture and integrate the plural values associated with diverse cultural benefits categories. This increasing emphasis on value pluralism represents an essential step toward recognitional justice within ES theory and practice. However, current approaches continue to rest on the assumption that ES-knowledge is only made available to decision-makers through scientific documentation. As a result, scholars and decision-makers fail to account for the role of knowledge pluralism as a core element of recognitional justice, and a key enabling factor for meaningful consideration of the plural values linked to cultural benefits of ES. In this paper, we contribute to a pluralist theory of cultural-benefits-knowledge, and ES-knowledge more broadly. Using a critical interpretive synthesis of environmental management literature, we conceptualize a wider range of knowledge forms that convey cultural benefits, based on the knowledge-as-practice concept in addition to the knowledge-as-product concept more familiar to Western actors. As part of the synthesis, we explore when and how diverse forms of cultural-benefits-knowledge intersect with decision-making processes, and the value aspects and categories of cultural benefits most frequently conveyed by each form of knowledge. Our synthesizing argument offers a critique of the concept of “ES-knowledge-use,” proposing a shift in focus toward “learning opportunities” that exist across phases of decision-making. We demonstrate that attention to a greater diversity of knowledge forms (knowledge pluralism), and a fuller spectrum of opportunities to integrate them (learning opportunities) can support more meaningful consideration of the plural values associated with cultural benefits of ES (value pluralism). In combination, attention to knowledge pluralism and value pluralism can help bring the ES approach into alignment with environmental justice through the recognition and legitimization of multiple identities, well-beings, and human-nature relationships, as reflected in meaningful consideration of the diverse cultural benefits of ES.

Although the importance of ecosystem services (ES) as a result of urbanization continues to be emphasized, their economic value to cities as a whole has not been widely explored. This study aimed to provide basic data to respond to the continuously increasing demand for ESs by analyzing the potential value of cultural ecosystem services (CESs). These services are among the most important ESs and represent the most intimate interactions between humans and nature. The ongoing Busan Eco Delta City development was selected as the study subject. Using the concept of compensating surplus as a theoretical framework, the benefit derived from CESs by local citizens was determined. A questionnaire-based survey was conducted on the willingness to pay and its influence on CESs. Results from the 1,477 survey responses showed that the willingness to pay for CESs was affected by the offer amount, age, place of residence, willingness to visit, and environmental organization membership. The average value ascribed to CESs was KRW 9,044, based on a dichotomous-choice response logit model. Among the CESs, the existence CES had the strongest influence on willingness to pay, indicating that the natural resources of the urban ecosystem were of the highest value to the residents. This study presents a clear approach to estimating the potential value of cultural services derived from the urban ecosystem and provides reference data for decision-making processes such as planning and policy establishment.

Improved consideration of the cultural benefits of ecosystem services (ES) requires attention to knowledge pluralism in addition to value pluralism. Theorists have increasingly argued that meaningful inclusion of cultural benefits of ES requires attention to plural values, beyond the individual, instrumental values associated with ecosystems. However, there has been little engagement around the role of knowledge pluralism as a foundational enabling factor for meaningful consideration of plural values. This paper contributes to a conceptual toolkit for implementation of knowledge pluralism in ES theory and application by (re)conceptualizing ES-knowledge as a knowledge system. This can support personal and collective reflexivity around the role of worldviews embedded in our institutions, and illuminate what is at stake when assumptions about human-nature relationship and well-being remain hidden. Further, by locating benefits-knowledge as a core element of the ES-knowledge-system, we can imagine a greater range of possible cultural-benefits-knowledge-forms and improve our ability to comprehend and convey the plural values of cultural benefits of ES, as they arise across cultural contexts.

Backed by the Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 and 2030, numerous ‘Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem Services’ (MAES) projects have been completed in recent years in the member states of the European Union, with substantial results and insights accumulated. The experience from the different approaches is a valuable source of information for developing assessment processes further, especially with regard to their uptake into policy and more recently, into ecosystem accounting. Systematic approaches towards best practices and lessons learned from national MAES projects are yet lacking. This study presents the results of a survey conducted with participants of national MAES projects overviewing 13 European MAES processes. Focus hereby is put on the types of methods used, the assessed ecosystem services, and the perceived challenges and advancements. All MAES projects assessed ecosystem services at several levels of the ecosystem service cascade (69% at least three levels), using a diverse set of data sources and methods (with 4.7 types of methods on average). More accessible data was used more frequently (e.g., statistical and literature data being the most popular). Challenges regarding policy uptake, synthesizing results, and data gaps or reliability were perceived as the most severe. Insufficient evaluation of uncertainty was seen as a major critical point, and emphasized as crucial for uptake and implementation. Moving towards accounting for ES in the frame of environmental-economic accounts, considering uncertainties of ES assessments should be even more important.