Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- About the authors
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Measuring ecosystem services
- 2 The role of biodiversity in the provision of ecosystem services
- 3 A traits-based approach to quantifying ecosystem services
- 4 Mapping ecosystem services
- Part III Valuing ecosystem services
- Part IV Paying for ecosystem services
- Part V Governing ecosystem services
- Index
- Plate section
- References
4 - Mapping ecosystem services
from Part II - Measuring ecosystem services
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2015
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- About the authors
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Measuring ecosystem services
- 2 The role of biodiversity in the provision of ecosystem services
- 3 A traits-based approach to quantifying ecosystem services
- 4 Mapping ecosystem services
- Part III Valuing ecosystem services
- Part IV Paying for ecosystem services
- Part V Governing ecosystem services
- Index
- Plate section
- References
Summary
Introduction
In Chapter 3, the variation in ecosystem processes and functions was described using the plant functional trait approach. Due to variability in plant functional traits and other environmental conditions, as well as variation in human influence on ecosystems, the supply of ecosystem services is not homogeneously distributed across space. Besides spatial variation in the supply of ecosystem services, spatial variation in socioeconomic conditions makes the demand of ecosystem services dependent upon location as well. To understand the role of this spatial variation many ecosystem service assessments use observations, measurements, and models to create ecosystem service maps. Especially in the last couple of years an exponential increase has been observed in research, papers, and reports focused on mapping of ecosystem services. Ecosystem services can be mapped using various methods, of which applicability depends upon data availability, scope of the study, and time constraints. Regulating services are most commonly mapped, followed by provisioning services. The most frequently studied individual ecosystem services are climate regulation and food production (Martínez-Harms and Balvanera, 2012), and when multiple ecosystem services are mapped food production is almost always included (Crossman et al., 2013). Moreover, these studies vary in their scale from the global to the local level, vary in the type and number of ecosystem services incorporated, and map supply, demand, or a combination of both.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Ecosystem ServicesFrom Concept to Practice, pp. 65 - 86Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2015
References
, , , et al. (2005). Changes in nature’s balance sheet: model-based estimates of future worldwide ecosystem services. Ecology and Society, 10(2): 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2009). Spatial covariance between biodiversity and other ecosystem service priorities. Journal of Applied Ecology, 46(4): 888–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2012). Organic farming improves pollination success in strawberries. PLoS ONE, 7(2): e31599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , et al. (2008). Coastal ecosystem-based management with nonlinear ecological functions and values. Science, 319(5861): 321–323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2009). Landscape context and habitat type as drivers of bee diversity in European annual crops. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 133: 40–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2008). Letter to the editor. Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biological Conservation, 141: 350–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2013). A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 4: 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2010). Mapping the Impacts of Natural Hazards and Technological Accidents in Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
, , , et al. (2010). Error propagation associated with benefits transfer-based mapping of ecosystem services. Biological Conservation, 143: 2487–2493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2013). Landscape characterization integrating expert and local spatial knowledge of land and forest resources. Environmental Management, 52: 660–682.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , et al. (2011). Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Ecology Letters, 14: 101–112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (2009). Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision-making. Ecological Economics, 68: 643–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2011). Increased bumblebee abundance along the margins of a mass flowering crop: evidence for pollinator spill-over. Oikos, 120: 1618–1624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2008). Agricultural landscapes with organic crops support higher pollinator diversity. Oikos, 117: 354–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2007). Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274: 303–313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , , and (2010). River flood risk and adaptation in Europe – assessment of the present status. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 15: 621–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2013). An analytical framework for ecosystem assessments under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. Geneva: European Union.
and (2012). Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review. International Journal of Biodiversity, Science, Ecosystem Services and Management, 8(1–2): 17–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and (2014). Trade-offs across value-domains in ecosystem service assessment. Ecological Indicators, 37: 220–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2005). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
and (2012). Impact of landscape alteration and invasions on pollinators: a meta analysis. Journal of Ecology, 100: 884–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2008). Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(28): 9495–9500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , et al. (2009). Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(1): 4–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2009). Assessing benefit transfer for the valuation of ecosystem services. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7: 38–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2013). Spatial interactions among ecosystem services in an urbanizing agricultural watershed. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(29): 12149–12154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1999). Estimating historical changes in global land cover: croplands from 1700 to 1992. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 13: 997–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2006). Trade-offs across space, time and ecosystem services. Ecology and Society, 11(1): 28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2014). Quantifying and mapping ecosystem services: demand and supply of pollination in the European Union. Ecological Indicators, 36: 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , and (in press). Assessing uncertainties in ecosystem service maps: a comparison for the European Union. PLoS ONE, .
, , , , and (2011). A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48: 630–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2013). Identifying trade-offs between ecosystem services, land use and biodiversity; a plea for combining scenario analysis and optimization on different spatial scales. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(5): 458–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2014). A quantitative framework for assessing spatial flows of ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators, 39: 24–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2014). Mapping ecosystem services: the supply and demand of flood regulation services in Europe. Ecological Indicators, 38: 198–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2013). Land system architecture: using land systems to adapt and mitigate global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 23: 395–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2011). Sensitising rural policy: assessing spatial variation in rural development options for Europe. Land Use Policy, 28(3): 447–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2013). Modelling the spatial distribution of linear landscape elements in Europe. Ecological Indicators, 27: 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2011). Forested landscapes promote richness and abundance of native bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila) in Wisconsin apple orchards. Environmental Entomology, 40: 621–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , and (2008). Spatial characterization of landscape functions. Landscape and Urban Planning, 88: 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , and (2007). Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture. Ecological Economics, 64(2): 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3
- Cited by