Ecosystem Services最新文献

{"title":"Economic valuation of ecosystem services and natural infrastructure: A quantitative review of the literature","authors":"Garrett O. Stanford ,&nbsp;Susana Ferreira ,&nbsp;Craig E. Landry ,&nbsp;Ben Blachly","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101754","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101754","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Natural infrastructure is increasingly being recognized as a viable alternative or complement to traditional ‘grey’ infrastructure in addressing global infrastructural needs. From a policy design perspective, selecting the optimal strategy among alternatives requires complete knowledge of the costs and benefits associated with each option. Unlike traditional infrastructure, natural infrastructure delivers a host of ecosystem services that may be difficult to quantify and monetize. Markets do not exist for many of the ecosystem services associated with natural infrastructure, so monetizing the suite of benefits requires specialized techniques from the field of nonmarket valuation. In this paper we use bibliometric techniques to systematically review the literature on economic valuation of ecosystem services, natural infrastructure and, at their intersection, ecosystem services provided by natural infrastructure. With a combination of machine learning and keyword matching, we extract 6,796 relevant articles published between 1990 and 2023 from the Web of Science database. They reveal a dramatic increase in economic valuation studies —especially in the last fifteen years, with a prominent focus on recreation and tourism ecosystem services, marine infrastructure and stated preference valuation methods. We also identify knowledge gaps in terms of geographical coverage, ecosystem services, natural infrastructure, and valuation methods considered, and we provide suggestions for filling these gaps.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 101754"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144704152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The economic value of annual forest loss in the Colombian Amazon","authors":"Mauro A Reyes-Bonilla,&nbsp;Carlos Moreno Díaz,&nbsp;Nicolás Castaño,&nbsp;Dairon Cárdenas López ,&nbsp;Marcela Núñez-Avellaneda,&nbsp;Edwin Agudelo Córdoba,&nbsp;Clara P. Peña-Venegas,&nbsp;Mariela Osorno-Muñoz,&nbsp;Natalia Atuesta-Dimian,&nbsp;Andrés Alberto Barona-Colmenares,&nbsp;Luis Fernando Jaramillo Hurtado","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101757","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101757","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Tropical deforestation in the Colombian Amazon has led to the loss of over 3 million hectares of forest since 1985, severely affecting ecosystem services (ES) vital to local communities and global climate regulation. This study applies a Total Economic Value framework to estimate the annual economic loss associated with deforestation, focusing on six key ES: carbon storage; provision of wildlife and fishery resources; firewood supply; non-timber forest products; and indigenous knowledge of medicinal plants. Methodologically, we integrate biophysical assessments on the diversity, abundance, and use of biological resources with market-based and cost-based valuation techniques. Carbon storage loss is quantified using forest inventory plot data and carbon pricing from international markets. Provisioning services (fauna, fish, firewood, and non-timber products) are valued using local consumption data and regional market prices. The cultural value of indigenous medicinal knowledge is estimated based on ethnobotanical databases and official census statistics on treatment patterns for common illnesses and population distribution. Spatial extrapolation at the hectare level enables the aggregation of ES values across deforested areas. Our results indicate that annual ES losses range from at least US$254 million to US$400 million, equivalent to 0.06–0.11% of Colombia's GDP. By explicitly linking ecological data with economic metrics, this study provides a robust basis for decision-making aimed at halting deforestation and safeguarding the Amazon’s multifunctional benefits.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 101757"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144672375","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"One-question interviews elucidate nuances in diverse values of coral reefs in West Hawaiʻi","authors":"Alison Adams ,&nbsp;Shane Akoni Palacat-Nelsen ,&nbsp;Rachelle K. Gould","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101756","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101756","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Considering diversity of non-material values of nature in environmental management can improve equity outcomes of management actions. But research on non-material values faces many challenges, including (1) how to balance the richness of qualitative analyses with the summative power from quantitative analyses; (2) how to phrase questions that elicit meaningful information without leading study participants; and (3) how to understand the diversity of people’s experiences of nature-related values.</div><div>We explored the potential of one-question interviews, a modified version of the freelisting method, to confront these challenges. We asked 330 individuals on reef-adjacent beaches in West Hawaiʻi one of two questions to (1) test the efficacy of the method to elucidate both quantitative and qualitative differences between different user groups’ non-material values; (2) test how question choice might impact results; and (3) identify differences in the values mentioned by residents vs. non-residents and Native Hawaiians vs. non-Native Hawaiians. We found that one-question interviews gather meaningful and complementary information on non-material values, and that question choice matters: the two questions yielded different proportions of mentions of non-material values. Finally, controlling for question type, we found significant differences in which values were mentioned by participants of different backgrounds, as well as qualitative differences in how participants of different backgrounds discussed the same values.</div><div>Our findings suggest that one-question interviews generate a mix of qualitative and quantitative data which can reveal nuances that might be missed if only surveys or long-form interviews are used. Data obtained with this approach can contribute to recognition justice and help address equity concerns associated with managing a resource based on a particular value set, particularly when they are conflicts between users. These findings can inform management and studies of non-material values in diverse contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 101756"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144653659","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Framing the relationship between justice and ecosystem services: A systematic review","authors":"Bruno Locatelli ,&nbsp;Felipe Benra ,&nbsp;Davide Geneletti ,&nbsp;Lasse Loft ,&nbsp;Jacqueline Loos ,&nbsp;Barbara Schröter ,&nbsp;Klara Winkler ,&nbsp;Brenda Maria Zoderer","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101755","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101755","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Ecosystem services (ES) are integral to environmental justice, in particular because they unevenly contribute to the well-being of different communities. Effective ES management and governance can promote equitable access and ensure that marginalized groups are not excluded from ES benefits, while recognizing the interests of multiple stakeholders and fostering fair decision making. Although environmental justice is a multifaceted concept that encompasses distributive, procedural, and recognition dimensions, most of the research on justice in ES has focused primarily on distributional aspects. Recent reviews indicate a growing interest in integrating environmental justice concerns with ES, but also highlight gaps in understanding how the relationship between justice and ES is framed and studied in different contexts. We conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature to identify the predominant framings of the relationship between ES and justice. Through a qualitative and quantitative analysis of 217 articles, examined from an environmental justice perspective, we identified five distinct framings, i.e. particular conceptualizations of the relationship between ES and justice that ultimately influence what (in)justices can be rendered visible or invisible. Each of the framings ‘Space’, ‘Access’, ‘Values’, ‘PES’ (Payment for ES), and ‘Management’ is associated with specific research questions and methods on ES, as well as specific perspectives and findings on justice. The plurality of framings identified in this review underscores the conceptual complexity of environmental justice and highlights the importance of engaging with diverse perspectives when addressing justice in relation to ES.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101755"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144653673","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A systematic literature review on the implementation of the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting-Ecosystem accounting in forests, cities and marine areas","authors":"M. Inácio ,&nbsp;E. Baltranaitė ,&nbsp;L.Valença Pinto ,&nbsp;M. Meisutovic-Akhtarieva ,&nbsp;D. Barceló ,&nbsp;P. Pereira","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101752","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101752","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA-EA) was set as an international standard framework for integrating and relating economic and environmental statistical data. Since its adoption in 2021, several scientific efforts have been established to operationalise it. Systematic literature reviews are essential for providing a comprehensive worldview on specific topics, exploring gaps, and defining future directions. In this study, we systematically review ecosystem accounting studies in the context of SEEA-EA and collate information on several aspects of its multiple accounts: ecosystem extent, condition, ecosystem services and assets. To narrow the scope, we focus our research on three ecosystem types: urban, forest and coastal and marine ecosystems. The results showed an increasing interest in the topic among scientists. Most of the works were published between 2014 and 2024 (75 studies – 98.68%) and conducted in Europe and Oceania (61 studies – 80.26%). Ecosystem extent and services (monetary) were the most studied aspects; however, most studies do not compile information on opening/closing tables. The revised studies covered other ecosystem types besides the target ones (e.g., croplands). Extent accounts were compiled mainly using European and National land cover datasets. Condition accounts were mostly compiled based on compositional state characteristics, especially using biophysical indicators. Most studies failed to define reference conditions. Regarding ecosystem services (ES), most studies focused on physical and monetary accounts, using mixed methodological approaches. Most works assessed one section, primarily regulating &amp; maintenance ES. Statistical data and market prices for biophysical and economic methodologies were preferred methods. Validation and mapping were not considered in the majority of the works. Future priorities, which are also challenges, on applying the SEEA-EA include developing guidance for (1) systematically defining appropriate reference conditions, (2) validating ES modelling outputs or at least reporting uncertainty levels, and (3) making the connection, often missing, between condition and ES accounts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101752"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144595813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A scoping review of the Cryosphere’s ecosystem services, disservices, and related indicators","authors":"Laura Malinauskaite ,&nbsp;David Cook ,&nbsp;Hashim Zaman ,&nbsp;Erik Gomez-Baggethun","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101753","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101753","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The cryosphere, which refers to the parts of the Earth’s surface where water is in solid form, is a major contributor to human wellbeing through the provision of vital ecosystem services. These include, e.g., groundwater recharge, water storage and purification, climate regulation, and diverse cultural and spiritual benefits. A systematized classification of ecosystem services can be used to define, measure, and value the ways in which the cryosphere contributes to society and to communicate these benefits in a clear, transparent and scientifically sound way, yet, it has been missing to date. This study builds on previous literature exploring the cryosphere’s positive and negative impacts on human wellbeing in the context of rapid climate change. It further organises this knowledge on a global scale with a view to enhancing scientific exploration and policy guidance, along with facilitating comparability between different studies. Our research applies the Search-Appraisal-Synthesis-Analysis (SALSA) literature review method and the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) to source and systemise the existing information on ecosystem services and disservices provided by the cryosphere, and possible indicators for monitoring their changes are identified. A total of 30 ecosystem services and 10 disservices were identified, together with indicators that could be used to monitor their trends in biophysical, economic, and sociocultural terms. Our research finds that the cryosphere continues to provide vital ecosystem services despite accelerated retreat of glaciers and other cryospheric components, but also an increasing amount of ecosystem disservices because of global climate change. Monitoring trends in the cryosphere’s contributions to human wellbeing has the potential to inform adaptive governance in fast-changing cryospheric environments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101753"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144572019","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Payment for ecosystem services and crowding of conservation behavior: A meta-analysis of lab-in-the-field experiments","authors":"Tobias Vorlaufer ,&nbsp;Ivo Steimanis ,&nbsp;Jan Plassenberg","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101750","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101750","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Concerns have been raised that payments for ecosystem services (PES) may crowd out land users’ non-monetary motivations to engage in conservation behavior. Especially once incentives are terminated, PES risk to be ineffective or even counterproductive. So far, research has produced mixed evidence. We present the first meta-analysis of studies that investigated crowding effects of PES through lab-in-the-field experiments with 2,894 real-world resource users taking 44,540 conservation decisions. On average, PES are successful in increasing conservation behavior and do not crowd out conservation behavior once incentives have been terminated. Although PES demonstrate greater effectiveness in settings where local resource users directly benefit compared to settings where third parties benefit, there is no evidence suggesting systematic differences in crowding effects between these two situations once PES have been terminated. Based on the available experimental evidence, the frequently voiced risk that PES crowd-out conservation, especially once payments are terminated, cannot be substantiated. However, methodological concerns regarding the internal and external validity of current experiments raise questions about the broader applicability of these findings. This paper outlines potential avenues for future research to address these challenges.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101750"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144480660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Ecosystem services governance: A cross-realm lever for sustainability transformation","authors":"Sherman Farhad ,&nbsp;Julia Baird ,&nbsp;Gordon Hickey ,&nbsp;Jennifer M. Holzer ,&nbsp;Klara Johanna Winkler ,&nbsp;Esteban Ruiz-Ballesteros","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101748","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101748","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The leverage points perspective is used increasingly in sustainability transformation research. Scholars have proposed three realms of leverage for the sustainability research agenda: human-environment interactions; institutional dynamics, and sustainability-related knowledge creation and use. However, studies aiming to better understand the role of cross-realm levers, which create parallel change in human-nature interactions, institutions, and knowledge production and use, remain scarce. To address this research gap, we provide an <em>Ecosystem Services Governance (hereafter, ESGov</em><span><span>¹</span></span><em>)</em> lens <em>to</em> conceptually and empirically investigate the potential cross-realm lever role of ESGov for sustainability transformations. Through theoretical and empirical analyses we: 1) identify the key features within the three sustainability transformation realms and analyze how ESGov can shape and influence them; 2) test the potential for ESGov to be a cross-realm lever for sustainability transformation using a case study from Agua Blanca (Ecuador); 3) navigate intra-realm dynamics, identifying features from diverse realms that may simultaneously be fostered by ESGov; and, 4) ultimately, contribute to the transformation, ecosystem services, and governance literatures by highlighting the enabling mechanisms within ESGov that can facilitate cross-realm sustainability transformation interventions. This study reveals that ESGov, when configured to embrace relational thinking, collaborative governance, and inclusive knowledge integration, can effectively serve as a cross-realm lever. Ultimately, we advocate for a shift from Ecosystem Services to ESGov framework as a means to catalyze cross-realm interventions, advancing sustainability through a nuanced understanding and designing of the dynamic interplay between society and the environment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101748"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144472459","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Who should control the provider of ecosystem services in buyer-driven governance? A choice experiment on orchards in Germany","authors":"Henrique Manhique,&nbsp;Frank Wätzold","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101749","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101749","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Buyer-driven governance arrangements have emerged as a promising innovative approach to mitigate the degradation of ecosystem services (ES) in agricultural landscapes. In such arrangements, ES buyers, such as consumers, support ES provision by remunerating farmers to adopt sustainable agricultural practices through market-based mechanisms, such as price premiums for (certified) sustainably produced products. In this context, effective compliance enforcement is essential, as it assures ES buyers that the services are delivered in accordance with agreed guidelines. Consequently, the level of trust ES buyers place in the organisation responsible for enforcing compliance is critical. We applied a discrete choice experiment to investigate ES buyers’ preferences for the organisation responsible for compliance enforcement for sustainably produced agricultural products. The survey used conventionally managed apple orchards in Germany as a case study and focused on the implementation of ES measures (<em>flower strips, hedgerows, flower strips plus hedgerows</em>, and <em>mechanical weed control</em> instead of chemical control) to support regulating (biological pest control and pollination), cultural (enhancement of landscape aesthetics), and provisioning ES (production of marketable fruits). To elicit preferences regarding compliance enforcement, the survey included four organisations: a <em>state agency</em>, a <em>farmers’ association</em>, a <em>conservation NGO</em>, and a <em>representative body</em> – composed of relevant societal actors collectively responsible for implementing compliance enforcement. The survey included a representative sample of 901 ES buyers (apple consumers) drawn from the German population. We find that most ES buyers trust <em>conservation NGO</em>, <em>representative body,</em> and <em>farmers’ association</em>, while less than half trust <em>state agency</em>; furthermore, ES buyers are willing to pay a substantially higher premium when a trusted organisation is enforcing compliance. Regarding ES measures, we find that ES buyers are willing to pay price premiums for all measures supporting ES provision, with higher premiums for <em>mechanical weed control</em> and the combination <em>flower strips plus hedgerows</em>.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101749"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144472458","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Navigating trade-offs in carbon storage, biodiversity, and wildfire risk in European landscape management","authors":"A.N. Neidermeier,&nbsp;T.A.P. West,&nbsp;P.H. Verburg","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101751","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101751","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Land use and climate change are driving new dynamics for wildfires and ecosystems globally. In Europe, these drivers contribute to changes in fuel structures which affect the behavior, impact, and recurrence interval of wildfires. In response, there is interest in restoring historic fuel-relevant land management strategies and fire regimes which impact the condition and arrangement of fuels. Simultaneously, ecosystem function (e.g., carbon storage and biodiversity) is a cornerstone for European sustainability and climate adaptation policies such as the Green Deal. Thus, a nuanced approach to landscape management is needed which addresses wildfires concerns while also conserving ecosystem function. Research evaluating the interaction between wildfire and ecological function in Europe has largely been limited to local or regional assessments which can be difficult to translate to European-wide policy initiatives. Our study takes a continental perspective to map areas in which ecosystem function and wildfire may be interacting using data on recent fire activity, aboveground carbon, and biodiversity. We synthesize policy-level considerations for mindfully navigating fire and conservation goals and propose areas which may be suitable for herbivory, mechanical removal, and prescribed burn to manage fuels. Our results highlight several countries, especially in eastern Europe and the Mediterranean, with both high ecosystem function and high fire activity which must be carefully managed to avoid intense and destructive fires in areas of high ecosystem function. Conversely, we identify areas with high fire activity and low carbon storage or biodiversity which may be good candidates for more intensive fuel management with fewer negative ecological consequences. As Europe continues to look to its landscapes to provide a wide range of services, policymakers will need to carefully consider services provided by landscapes to safeguard environmental objectives while managing the deleterious consequences of wildfires.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101751"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144472457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}