scholarly journals Bridging theory and practice in ecosystem services mapping: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel E. Bitoun ◽  
Ewan Trégarot ◽  
Rodolphe Devillers
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Spatial Scales ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Temporal Analysis ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Ecosystem Services Mapping

AbstractThe mapping and assessment of Ecosystem Services (ES) aims at better connecting environmental conservation, economic development, and human well-being. However, 60 years after the development of the ES concept, a persistent gap remains between the production of scientific knowledge on ES and its use in support of policy and management. Here, we report on a systematic review of the scientific literature that helps better understand key challenges and offers potential solutions to bridge this gap. The review considered four criteria: (1) how stakeholders participate to studies; (2) how usable ES maps are for decision-making; (3) what policy recommendations were made; and (4) what research recommendations were made. The analysis of 135 papers published between 2008 and 2020 revealed diverse technical and conceptual challenges that could prevent the effective use of ES concepts and methods outside the academic realm. The main challenges identified in the literature were the uncertainty levels of ES mapping outputs, issues of spatial scales, the understanding of ES interactions, and the need for temporal analysis. Many policies rely on mapped outcomes, creating a window of opportunity for the uptake of ES mapping into policy-making. However, it remains key to involve stakeholders early in the co-design of ES studies and to better understand their preferences and motivation to adopt ES mapping in their practices. The study shows that higher levels of learnability of ES mapping practices, further popularization to foster public awareness, and increased capacity building would facilitate the ES concept uptake into decision and policy-making.

scholarly journals Pornography Use and Holistic Sexual Functioning: A Systematic Review of Recent Research

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camille Hoagland ◽  
Joshua B. Grubbs
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sexual Satisfaction ◽  
Sexual Behaviors ◽  
Sexual Functioning ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Pornography Use ◽  
Nuanced Understanding ◽  
The Impact

Purpose of the Review: Pornography use is a common recreational activity in most developed nations with unrestricted internet access. As public awareness of pornography’s popularity has grown, so have concerns about potentially deleterious effects of pornography. One domain of particular concern has been the impact of pornography use and online sexual behaviors on sexual well-being. Over recent years, a number of studies have examined how pornography use relates to sexual well-being. The present work seeks to review such literature, with a particular focus on the effects of pornography on sexual functioning and sexual satisfaction. To this end, a systematic review of recent research (within the past 5 years) was conducted. Recent Findings: A total of 44 articles were included in the systematic review. In some situations, pornography use is associated with greater sexual functioning and greater sexual satisfaction, and in other cases it seems to be associated with lower sexual functioning and lower sexual satisfaction. Specifically, mere pornography use itself was most often not associated with sexual functioning in either direction, but self-reported problematic use of pornography was consistently associated with more sexual functioning problems. Summary: Collectively, results suggest a nuanced understanding of the effects of pornography on sexual well-being, with the context of and perceptions about pornography use being extremely important in predicting whether or not pornography has negative effects.

Abiotic ecosystem services: an effective tool for geoconservation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucie Kubalíková
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Ecosystem Assessment ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Use Of Resources ◽  
European Environmental Agency ◽  
Environmental Agency

<p>In the last decades, the concept of ecosystem services has become important to nature conservation. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA 2005) demonstrated the importance of ecosystems for human well-being and identified the services that ecosystems provide to society. Nevertheless, geodiversity (abiotic nature) as an indispensable component of ecosystems was underestimated (Gray 2011). Based on this, the concepts of "abiotic ecosystem services" or “geosystem services” were defined and discussed (Gordon, Barron 2012, Gray 2013, Van Ree, van Beukering 2016).</p><p>The role of geodiversity in ecosystem services has been already recognized, but in specific cases with problems and ambiguities (Brilha et al. 2018, Gray 2018). Practical applications combining geodiversity research and the concept of abiotic ecosystem services are still rather scarce, but it is evident that the wider use of this concept can provide a framework for (geo)conservation activities, sustainable use of resources or educational and tourist activities. The application of the abiotic ecosystem services concept can also enable better communication with policymakers and facilitate the “infiltration” of geodiversity’s importance into care plans for protected sites, regional strategic documents or legislation and policies (Brilha et al. 2018, Schrodt et al. 2019).</p><p>Abiotic ecosystem services are already included in the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (European Environmental Agency 2018). Nevertheless, there are still several methodological questions regarding the possible practical application.</p><p>The case study is focused on the assessment of abiotic ecosystem services at Stránská skála Rock in Brno (Czech Republic). It is a site protected by law (National Natural Monument since 1978) and currently, a new care plan is prepared. The ecosystem services concept is used to assess the abiotic components of the site (limestone outcrops, abandoned quarries, cave systems). Two approaches are applied (Gray 2013 and European Environmental Agency 2018) and their suitability or ambiguities are discussed. Based on the application of the concepts, the value of geodiversity can be fully recognized and the management of the site thus can be more effective.</p><p> </p><p>References:</p><p>Brilha J et al. (2018) Geodiversity: An integrative review as a contribution to the sustainable management of the whole of nature. Environmental Science and Policy 86:19–28</p><p>European Environmental Agency (2018) Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services V5.1. https://cices.eu/resources/</p><p>Gordon JE, Barron HF (2012) Valuing geodiversity and geoconservation: developing a more strategic ecosystem approach. Scottish Geographical Journal, 128:278–297</p><p>Gray M (2011) Other nature: geodiversity and geosystem services. Environmental Conservation 38(3):271–274</p><p>Gray M (2013) Geodiversity: Valuing and Conserving Abiotic Nature. Second Edition. Wiley Blackwell, 495 p</p><p>Gray M (2018) The confused position of the geosciences within the “natural capital” and “ecosystem services” approaches. Ecosystem Services 34A:106-112</p><p>MEA – Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington DC.</p><p>Schrodt F et al. (2019) To advance sustainable stewardship, we must document not only biodiversity but geodiversity. PNAS 116(33):16155–16158</p><p>Van Ree CCDF, van Beukering PJH (2016) Geosystem services: A concept in support of sustainable development of the subsurface. Ecosystem Services 20:30–36</p><p> </p>

Frontiers in coastal well-being and ecosystem services research: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 185 ◽  
pp. 105028 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Blythe ◽  
Derek Armitage ◽  
Georgina Alonso ◽  
Donovan Campbell ◽  
Ana Carolina Esteves Dias ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Services Research

scholarly journals An online method database for mapping and assessing ecosystem services

One Ecosystem ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steffen Reichel ◽  
Hermann Klug
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Spatial Scales ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
Single Method ◽  
Combination Of Methods ◽  
Ecosystem Services Mapping ◽  
The Right

Since the foundation of the ecosystem services concept in the ninetieth of the last century (Costanza et al. 1998, Costanza et al. 1997, de Groot 1992), many methods to map and assess ecosystem services have been developed and applied to policy and business questions worldwide. While many flexible methods exist at different spatial scales and ecosystem types, Jax et al. (2018) express the difficulty in choosing and applying the correct method to the right topic of interest. To enable a selection of appropriate methods, Harrison et al. (2018) developed a decision tree approach. However, Dunford et al. (2018) argue that often not a single method but a combination of methods are required for appropriate decision-making in real world situations. Thus, applying the concept of ecosystem services in practice is challenging, especially at institutional level (Saarikoski et al. 2018). This hampers comparability, applicability and transferability of ecosystem services assessments and related mapping applications across scales and European regions. It also impedes a solid overview of existing methods suitable for use at different scales in different biomes and types of ecosystems. These challenges require a consistent knowledge capitalisation infrastructure, where information is synthesised in a publicly accessible portal to enable a consistent description of different ecosystem conditions and the services they provide. Going beyond the previously mentioned challenges requires a flexible methodology for assessing and mapping ecosystem services. The Horizon 2020 project ESMERALDA (Enhancing ecoSysteM sERvices mApping for poLicy and Decision mAking) developed this methodology and implemented it into the "MAES explorer"*5 and the "MAES Methods Explorer*1 (MME)". The MME complements previous developments from the EU projects OpenNESS*2 and OPERAs*3. In contrast to the OPPLA*4 case-study-finder with case study areas and accompanied study area booklets and descriptions, MME focuses on methods for mapping and assessing ecosystem services and links those to selected literature and case studies. Additionally, MME provides a comprehensive and publicly searchable collection of peer-reviewed journal references and grey literature about mapping and assessing ecosystem services in Europe. This compilation is cross-related with the case study booklets produced by the ESMERALDA project and particularly methods, which are specifically used to assess and map particular ecosystem services within the case study area. Thus, searching for and filtering of particular case study areas, (related) literature references and/or methods is possible. Santos-Martin et al. (2018) provide the detailed description about the scientific procedure behind the MME tool described here.

scholarly journals Analysis of Representativeness of the Paramo Ecosystem in the Conservation Modalities of the Chimborazo Province

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Lozano Rodríguez ◽  
A. Armas Armas ◽  
E. Molina Bustamante ◽  
V. Flores Cantos
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Economic Importance ◽  
Local Populations ◽  
Gray Literature ◽  
Manual Search ◽  
Palabras Clave

The paramo ecosystem has ecological, social, cultural and economic importance due to the ecosystemic services of supply, regulation, support and culture that it provides to local populations for their well-being, therefore, it needs to be conserved and managed from an ecosystemic approach. The objective of this work is to analyze the conservation modalities that protect the paramo ecosystem in the Chimborazo province. To conduct the research, a systematic review of 30 cartographic sources was carried out, and documentary information on 7 variables of the paramo ecosystem was made, provided by institutions in charge of managing the province's natural resources, and found in articles consulted in scientific and academic databases. Additionally, gray literature has been included through manual search. The results indicate that the Chimborazo province has 17.93% of its extension under conservation modality, through 121 protected natural spaces, distributed in 3 modalities. The paramo ecosystem represents 36.40% of the province's size, and is made up of 9 vegetation formations. 15.10% of this ecosystem are under conservation modality, however, only 3 of the 121 spaces have planning documents for the management of these spaces. Keywords: paramo ecosystem, ecosystem services, conservation modalities. Resumen El ecosistema páramo tiene importancia ecológica, social, cultural y económica por los servicios ecosistémicos de abastecimiento, regulación, soporte y culturales que suministra a las poblaciones locales para su bienestar, por tanto, requiere ser conservado y manejado desde un enfoque ecosistémico. El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar las modalidades de conservación que protegen el ecosistema páramo en la provincia de Chimborazo. Para llevar a cabo la investigación se realizó una revisión sistémica de 30 fuentes de información cartográfica y documental sobre 7 variables del ecosistema páramo, facilitadas por instituciones encargadas del manejo de los recursos naturales de la provincia, y encontradas en artículos consultados en bases de datos científicas y académicas, adicionalmente se ha incluido literatura gris mediante la búsqueda manual. Los resultados indican que la provincia de Chimborazo tiene 17,93% de su extensión bajo modalidad de conservación, a través de 121 espacios naturales protegidos, distribuidos en 3 modalidades. El ecosistema páramo representa el 36,40% de la extensión de la provincia y está conformada por 9 formaciones vegetales. El 15,10% de éste ecosistema se encuentran bajo modalidad de conservación, sin embargo, únicamente 3 de los 121 espacios poseen documentos para el manejo de estos espacios. Palabras clave: ecosistema páramo, servicios ecosistémicos, modalidades de conservación.

scholarly journals Hotspots of biodiversity and ecosystem services: the Outermost Regions and Overseas Countries and Territories of the European Union

One Ecosystem ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. e24719 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ina Maren Sieber ◽  
Paulo Borges ◽  
Benjamin Burkhard
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Ecosystem Service ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Ecosystem Functions ◽  
Service Research ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Knowledge Gaps ◽  
Island Biodiversity ◽  
Research And Policy

The obligations of the EU Biodiversity Strategy 2020 create a need for mapping and assessment of the state of biodiversity, ecosystems and their services in all European member states. Europe’s nine Outermost Regions (ORs) and 25 Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs) are mainly islands, scattered around the globe. These territories contain unique flora and fauna and encompass diverse ecosystems, from coral reefs to rainforests. These highly diverse ecosystems provide multiple relevant ecosystem services from local to global scale. To date, the ecosystem services concept has so far received little attention in European ORs and OCTs. Therefore, our aims were (1) to analyse the current state of ecosystem services mapping and assessment in Europe’s overseas territories, (2) to identify knowledge gaps in the context of ecosystem service research and application and (3) to provide recommendations for future research and policy directions to fill these gaps. We conducted a systematic review of scientific literature for each of the ORs and OCTs, screening 1030 publications. The analysis resulted in 161 publications referring to ES mapping and assessment, of which most were conducted in the European Caribbean (31%) and Pacific (21%) territories. Results show that many ORs and OCTs are still blank spots in terms of ecosystem service mapping and assessment and that, despite many biodiversity studies referring to species’ abundance, little has been published on ecosystem services. Our systematic review highlights theknowledge lacking on dealing with invasive species, which pose major threats to native island biodiversity, ecosystem functions and ecosystem services. Further, it discusses knowledge gaps in (1) translation of information on island biodiversity and ecosystem functions into ES; (2) geographical coverage of mapping studies in most ORs and OCTs; (3) the lack of standardised approaches and integrated assessments to map, assess and value ecosystem services. Based on these results, future research and policy priorities could be adapted in order to focus on filling these gaps. To overcome current environmental policy challenges, it is crucial to address the ongoing decline in biodiversity, rising climatic and anthropogenic pressures on ecosystems and to maintain a sustainable ES flow to safeguard human well-being. Ultimately, ES mapping and assessment efforts will form the knowledge base for well-informed decision-making to protect Europe’s vulnerable overseas areas.

scholarly journals Mapping and assessing ecosystem services in the EU - Lessons learned from the ESMERALDA approach of integration

One Ecosystem ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Burkhard ◽  
Joachim Maes ◽  
Marion Potschin-Young ◽  
Fernando Santos-Martín ◽  
Davide Geneletti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Spatial Scales ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Service Mapping ◽  
Ecosystem Services Mapping ◽  
The Eu

The European Union (EU) Horizon 2020 Coordination and Support Action ESMERALDA aimed at developing guidance and a flexible methodology for Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) to support the EU member states in the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy’s Target 2 Action 5. ESMERALDA’s key tasks included network creation, stakeholder engagement, enhancing ecosystem services mapping and assessment methods across various spatial scales and value domains, work in case studies and support of EU member states in MAES implementation. Thus ESMERALDA aimed at integrating various project outcomes around four major strands: i) Networking, ii) Policy, iii) Research and iv) Application. The objective was to provide guidance for integrated ecosystem service mapping and assessment that can be used for sustainable decision-making in policy, business, society, practice and science at EU, national and regional levels. This article presents the overall ESMERALDA approach of integrating the above-mentioned project components and outcomes and provides an overview of how the enhanced methods were applied and how they can be used to support MAES implementation in the EU member states. Experiences with implementing such a large pan-European Coordination and Support Action in the context of EU policy are discussed and recommendations for future actions are given.

scholarly journals Public Attitudes, Preferences and Willingness to Pay for River Ecosystem Services

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (19) ◽  
pp. 3707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khan ◽  
Lei ◽  
Ali ◽  
Ali ◽  
Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Water Quality ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Ecological Restoration ◽  
Water Resource ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Wei River Basin

River basins are key sources of ecosystem services, with a wide range of social and economic benefits and many effects on human well-being. However, intensified land use and other dramatic variations in river ecosystems can alter ecosystem functions and services. In this study, we explored the public awareness, attitude and perception regarding environmental and water resource issues and assessed the willingness to pay (WTP) for improving selected attributes of the Wei River basin. Various rankings, Likert scales and random parameter logit (RPL) models were used to analyze data obtained from 900 surveyed respondents. Most respondents were more concerned about environmental and water resource management issues rather than socioeconomic attributes. From a policy perspective, 83.32% and 50.50% of the residents ranked “improvement in water quality” and “improving irrigation conditions,” respectively, as their main priorities regarding ecological restoration. Moreover, the results obtained using RPL models showed that the coefficients were significant for all ecological attributes and monetary attributes, as expected. The positive and significant coefficient for the alternative specific constant demonstrated that the respondents preferred restoration alternatives to the status quo. Furthermore, the highest WTP was found for water quality (91.99 RMB), followed by erosion intensity (23.59 RMB) and water quantity (11.79 RMB). Our results are relevant to policy development and they indicate that ecological restoration is the favored option.

scholarly journals Applying the ecosystem services concept to poverty alleviation: the need to disaggregate human well-being

2011 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 370-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
TIM DAW ◽  
KATRINA BROWN ◽  
SERGIO ROSENDO ◽  
ROBERT POMEROY
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Poverty Alleviation ◽  
Stakeholder Analysis ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Unequal Distribution ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
Selection Of

SUMMARYThe concept of ecosystem services (ES), the benefits humans derive from ecosystems, is increasingly applied to environmental conservation, human well-being and poverty alleviation, and to inform the development of interventions. Payments for ecosystem services (PES) implicitly recognize the unequal distribution of the costs and benefits of maintaining ES, through monetary compensation from ‘winners’ to ‘losers’. Some research into PES has examined how such schemes affect poverty, while other literature addresses trade-offs between different ES. However, much evolving ES literature adopts an aggregated perspective of humans and their well-being, which can disregard critical issues for poverty alleviation. This paper identifies four issues with examples from coastal ES in developing countries. First, different groups derive well-being benefits from different ES, creating winners and losers as ES, change. Second, dynamic mechanisms of access determine who can benefit. Third, individuals' contexts and needs determine how ES contribute to well-being. Fourth, aggregated analyses may neglect crucial poverty alleviation mechanisms such as cash-based livelihoods. To inform the development of ES interventions that contribute to poverty alleviation, disaggregated analysis is needed that focuses on who derives which benefits from ecosystems, and how such benefits contribute to the well-being of the poor. These issues present challenges in data availability and selection of how and at which scales to disaggregate. Disaggregation can be applied spatially, but should also include social groupings, such as gender, age and ethnicity, and is most important where inequality is greatest. Existing tools, such as stakeholder analysis and equity weights, can improve the relevance of ES research to poverty alleviation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document