欧洲生态系统服务项目的国家绘图和评估 - 参与者的经验、最新技术和汲取的教训

IF 6.1 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Ágnes Vári , Cristian Mihai Adamescu , Mario Balzan , Kremena Gocheva , Martin Götzl , Karsten Grunewald , Miguel Inácio , Madli Linder , Grégory Obiang-Ndong , Paulo Pereira , Fernando Santos-Martin , Ina Sieber , Małgorzata Stępniewska , Eszter Tanács , Mette Termansen , Eric Tromeur , Davina Vačkářová , Bálint Czúcz
{"title":"欧洲生态系统服务项目的国家绘图和评估 - 参与者的经验、最新技术和汲取的教训","authors":"Ágnes Vári ,&nbsp;Cristian Mihai Adamescu ,&nbsp;Mario Balzan ,&nbsp;Kremena Gocheva ,&nbsp;Martin Götzl ,&nbsp;Karsten Grunewald ,&nbsp;Miguel Inácio ,&nbsp;Madli Linder ,&nbsp;Grégory Obiang-Ndong ,&nbsp;Paulo Pereira ,&nbsp;Fernando Santos-Martin ,&nbsp;Ina Sieber ,&nbsp;Małgorzata Stępniewska ,&nbsp;Eszter Tanács ,&nbsp;Mette Termansen ,&nbsp;Eric Tromeur ,&nbsp;Davina Vačkářová ,&nbsp;Bálint Czúcz","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101592","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Backed by the Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 and 2030, numerous ‘Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem Services’ (MAES) projects have been completed in recent years in the member states of the European Union, with substantial results and insights accumulated. The experience from the different approaches is a valuable source of information for developing assessment processes further, especially with regard to their uptake into policy and more recently, into ecosystem accounting. Systematic approaches towards best practices and lessons learned from national MAES projects are yet lacking. This study presents the results of a survey conducted with participants of national MAES projects overviewing 13 European MAES processes. Focus hereby is put on the types of methods used, the assessed ecosystem services, and the perceived challenges and advancements. All MAES projects assessed ecosystem services at several levels of the ecosystem service cascade (69% at least three levels), using a diverse set of data sources and methods (with 4.7 types of methods on average). More accessible data was used more frequently (e.g., statistical and literature data being the most popular). Challenges regarding policy uptake, synthesizing results, and data gaps or reliability were perceived as the most severe. Insufficient evaluation of uncertainty was seen as a major critical point, and emphasized as crucial for uptake and implementation. Moving towards accounting for ES in the frame of environmental-economic accounts, considering uncertainties of ES assessments should be even more important.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 101592"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000852/pdfft?md5=7087d36c40343ae9442f332190740410&pid=1-s2.0-S2212041623000852-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"National mapping and assessment of ecosystem services projects in Europe – Participants’ experiences, state of the art and lessons learned\",\"authors\":\"Ágnes Vári ,&nbsp;Cristian Mihai Adamescu ,&nbsp;Mario Balzan ,&nbsp;Kremena Gocheva ,&nbsp;Martin Götzl ,&nbsp;Karsten Grunewald ,&nbsp;Miguel Inácio ,&nbsp;Madli Linder ,&nbsp;Grégory Obiang-Ndong ,&nbsp;Paulo Pereira ,&nbsp;Fernando Santos-Martin ,&nbsp;Ina Sieber ,&nbsp;Małgorzata Stępniewska ,&nbsp;Eszter Tanács ,&nbsp;Mette Termansen ,&nbsp;Eric Tromeur ,&nbsp;Davina Vačkářová ,&nbsp;Bálint Czúcz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101592\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Backed by the Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 and 2030, numerous ‘Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem Services’ (MAES) projects have been completed in recent years in the member states of the European Union, with substantial results and insights accumulated. The experience from the different approaches is a valuable source of information for developing assessment processes further, especially with regard to their uptake into policy and more recently, into ecosystem accounting. Systematic approaches towards best practices and lessons learned from national MAES projects are yet lacking. This study presents the results of a survey conducted with participants of national MAES projects overviewing 13 European MAES processes. Focus hereby is put on the types of methods used, the assessed ecosystem services, and the perceived challenges and advancements. All MAES projects assessed ecosystem services at several levels of the ecosystem service cascade (69% at least three levels), using a diverse set of data sources and methods (with 4.7 types of methods on average). More accessible data was used more frequently (e.g., statistical and literature data being the most popular). Challenges regarding policy uptake, synthesizing results, and data gaps or reliability were perceived as the most severe. Insufficient evaluation of uncertainty was seen as a major critical point, and emphasized as crucial for uptake and implementation. Moving towards accounting for ES in the frame of environmental-economic accounts, considering uncertainties of ES assessments should be even more important.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51312,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecosystem Services\",\"volume\":\"65 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101592\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000852/pdfft?md5=7087d36c40343ae9442f332190740410&pid=1-s2.0-S2212041623000852-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecosystem Services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000852\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystem Services","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000852","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在 2020 年和 2030 年生物多样性战略的支持下,欧盟成员国近年来完成了许多 "生态系统服务绘图与评估"(MAES)项目,并积累了大量成果和见解。来自不同方法的经验是进一步开发评估流程的宝贵信息来源,尤其是在将其纳入政策以及最近的生态系统核算方面。目前还缺乏系统的方法来总结最佳实践以及从国家千年生态系统评估项目中吸取的经验教训。本研究介绍了对国家生态系统评估和评价项目参与者的调查结果,概述了 13 个欧洲生态系统评估和评价过程。调查的重点是所使用的方法类型、评估的生态系统服务以及所感受到的挑战和进步。所有生态系统服务评估项目都在生态系统服务级联的多个级别上对生态系统服务进行了评估(69% 的项目至少评估了三个级别),并使用了一系列不同的数据源和方法(平均 4.7 种方法)。更易于获取的数据使用频率更高(例如,统计和文献数据最受欢迎)。政策吸收、结果综合、数据缺口或可靠性方面的挑战被认为是最严峻的。对不确定性的评估不足被视为一个主要的关键点,并被强调为吸收和实施的关键。在环境--经济账户框架内对生态系统服务进行核算的过程中,考虑生态系统服务评估的不确定性应该更加重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
National mapping and assessment of ecosystem services projects in Europe – Participants’ experiences, state of the art and lessons learned

Backed by the Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 and 2030, numerous ‘Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem Services’ (MAES) projects have been completed in recent years in the member states of the European Union, with substantial results and insights accumulated. The experience from the different approaches is a valuable source of information for developing assessment processes further, especially with regard to their uptake into policy and more recently, into ecosystem accounting. Systematic approaches towards best practices and lessons learned from national MAES projects are yet lacking. This study presents the results of a survey conducted with participants of national MAES projects overviewing 13 European MAES processes. Focus hereby is put on the types of methods used, the assessed ecosystem services, and the perceived challenges and advancements. All MAES projects assessed ecosystem services at several levels of the ecosystem service cascade (69% at least three levels), using a diverse set of data sources and methods (with 4.7 types of methods on average). More accessible data was used more frequently (e.g., statistical and literature data being the most popular). Challenges regarding policy uptake, synthesizing results, and data gaps or reliability were perceived as the most severe. Insufficient evaluation of uncertainty was seen as a major critical point, and emphasized as crucial for uptake and implementation. Moving towards accounting for ES in the frame of environmental-economic accounts, considering uncertainties of ES assessments should be even more important.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecosystem Services
Ecosystem Services ECOLOGYENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES&-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
14.90
自引率
7.90%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: Ecosystem Services is an international, interdisciplinary journal that is associated with the Ecosystem Services Partnership (ESP). The journal is dedicated to exploring the science, policy, and practice related to ecosystem services, which are the various ways in which ecosystems contribute to human well-being, both directly and indirectly. Ecosystem Services contributes to the broader goal of ensuring that the benefits of ecosystems are recognized, valued, and sustainably managed for the well-being of current and future generations. The journal serves as a platform for scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders to share their findings and insights, fostering collaboration and innovation in the field of ecosystem services.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信