{"title":"An online method database for mapping and assessing ecosystem services","authors":"Steffen Reichel, H. Klug","doi":"10.3897/ONEECO.3.E25542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.\n 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.","PeriodicalId":36908,"journal":{"name":"One Ecosystem","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"One Ecosystem","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/ONEECO.3.E25542","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: 4
Abstract
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.
自上世纪九十年代生态系统服务概念建立以来(Costanza等人1998,Costanza et al.1997,de Groot 1992),已经开发出许多绘制和评估生态系统服务的方法,并将其应用于世界各地的政策和商业问题。虽然在不同的空间尺度和生态系统类型下存在许多灵活的方法,但Jax等人(2018)表达了在选择正确的方法并将其应用于感兴趣的正确主题方面的困难。为了能够选择合适的方法,Harrison等人(2018)开发了一种决策树方法。然而,Dunford等人(2018)认为,在现实世界中进行适当的决策通常不需要单一的方法,而是需要多种方法的组合。因此,在实践中应用生态系统服务的概念是具有挑战性的,尤其是在机构层面(Saarikoski等人,2018)。这妨碍了生态系统服务评估和相关制图应用在不同尺度和欧洲区域之间的可比性、适用性和可转让性。它还阻碍了对适合在不同生物群落和生态系统类型中以不同规模使用的现有方法的全面概述。这些挑战需要一个一致的知识资本化基础设施,在这个基础设施中,信息被综合在一个可公开访问的门户网站中,以实现对不同生态系统条件及其提供的服务的一致描述。超越上述挑战需要一种灵活的方法来评估和绘制生态系统服务。地平线2020项目ESMERALDA(Enhanced ecoSysteM sERvices mApping for poLicy and Decision mAking)开发了这种方法,并将其实施到“MAES explorer”*5和“MAES Methods explorer*1(MME)”中。MME补充了欧盟项目OpenNESS*2和OPERAs*3之前的发展。与具有案例研究区域和附带研究区域小册子和描述的OPPLA*4案例研究发现器相比,MME侧重于绘制和评估生态系统服务的方法,并将这些方法与选定的文献和案例研究联系起来。此外,MME提供了一个全面的、可公开搜索的同行评审期刊参考文献和关于欧洲生态系统服务测绘和评估的灰色文献集。该汇编与ESMERALDA项目编制的案例研究小册子,特别是专门用于评估和绘制案例研究区域内特定生态系统服务的方法相互关联。因此,搜索和过滤特定的案例研究领域、(相关)文献参考和/或方法是可能的。Santos Martin等人(2018)提供了关于此处描述的MME工具背后的科学程序的详细描述。