Ecosystem service supply by European landscapes under alternative land-use and environmental policies

M. Mouchet, C. Rega, Rémy Lasseur, D. Georges, M. Paracchini, J. Renaud, J. Stürck, C. Schulp, P. Verburg, P. J. Verkerk, S. Lavorel
{"title":"Ecosystem service supply by European landscapes under alternative land-use and environmental policies","authors":"M. Mouchet, C. Rega, Rémy Lasseur, D. Georges, M. Paracchini, J. Renaud, J. Stürck, C. Schulp, P. Verburg, P. J. Verkerk, S. Lavorel","doi":"10.1080/21513732.2017.1381167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The European Union (EU) 2020 Biodiversity strategy aims at guaranteeing and enhancing the future supply of ecosystem services (‘ES’) in the member states. In an ex-ante assessment of plausible environmental policies, we projected the supply of 10 ES under 3 policy alternatives of land-use change (‘Nature Protection’, ‘Payment for carbon sequestration’ and ‘Payment for recreational services’) in the 27 EU member states (EU27). We assessed changes in supply of individual services across administrative units (at the NUTS-2 and EU27 levels) as well as bundles (at the EU27 level) between 2010 and 2040. Results show that the policy options only marginally affected ES bundles but several services could change substantially at the EU27 level (e.g. energy content from agricultural production and pollination). Wood supply, carbon sequestration and moderation of wind disturbance responded very differently across policy alternatives. At the NUTS-2 level, biocontrol of pests, carbon sequestration, moderation of wind disturbance and wood supply showed the most contrasted deviation from their regional supply in 2010. Finally, while payments for carbon sequestration benefited carbon sequestration as expected, specific payments for recreation services failed to promote them. Our analyses suggest that protecting nature appeared to be the best way of fostering ES supply within Europe. EDITED BY Rob Alkemade","PeriodicalId":31680,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Biodiversity Science Ecosystem Services Management","volume":"13 1","pages":"342 - 354"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21513732.2017.1381167","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Biodiversity Science Ecosystem Services Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2017.1381167","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

ABSTRACT The European Union (EU) 2020 Biodiversity strategy aims at guaranteeing and enhancing the future supply of ecosystem services (‘ES’) in the member states. In an ex-ante assessment of plausible environmental policies, we projected the supply of 10 ES under 3 policy alternatives of land-use change (‘Nature Protection’, ‘Payment for carbon sequestration’ and ‘Payment for recreational services’) in the 27 EU member states (EU27). We assessed changes in supply of individual services across administrative units (at the NUTS-2 and EU27 levels) as well as bundles (at the EU27 level) between 2010 and 2040. Results show that the policy options only marginally affected ES bundles but several services could change substantially at the EU27 level (e.g. energy content from agricultural production and pollination). Wood supply, carbon sequestration and moderation of wind disturbance responded very differently across policy alternatives. At the NUTS-2 level, biocontrol of pests, carbon sequestration, moderation of wind disturbance and wood supply showed the most contrasted deviation from their regional supply in 2010. Finally, while payments for carbon sequestration benefited carbon sequestration as expected, specific payments for recreation services failed to promote them. Our analyses suggest that protecting nature appeared to be the best way of fostering ES supply within Europe. EDITED BY Rob Alkemade
欧洲景观在不同土地利用和环境政策下提供的生态系统服务
摘要欧盟2020年生物多样性战略旨在保障和加强成员国未来的生态系统服务供应。在对合理环境政策的事前评估中,我们预测了27个欧盟成员国(欧盟27国)土地利用变化的3种政策替代方案(“自然保护”、“碳固存付款”和“娱乐服务付款”)下的10个ES的供应量。我们评估了2010年至2040年间行政单位(NUTS-2和EU27级别)以及捆绑服务(EU27级别的)的个人服务供应变化。结果表明,政策选择仅对ES捆绑包产生轻微影响,但在欧盟27国层面上,一些服务可能会发生重大变化(例如农业生产和授粉的能源含量)。木材供应、碳固存和风扰动的缓和在不同的政策选择中反应非常不同。在NUTS-2水平上,害虫的生物控制、碳固存、风干扰的调节和木材供应与2010年的区域供应相比出现了最明显的偏差。最后,虽然碳固存付款如预期的那样有利于碳固存,但娱乐服务的具体付款未能促进碳固存。我们的分析表明,保护自然似乎是促进欧洲ES供应的最佳方式。Rob Alkemade编辑
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
46 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书