对生态系统核算和服务框架的批判性审查

IF 1.8 Q3 ECOLOGY
Michael Bordt, M. Saner
{"title":"对生态系统核算和服务框架的批判性审查","authors":"Michael Bordt, M. Saner","doi":"10.3897/ONEECO.3.E29306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ecological economists currently face an important opportunity to influence national policies and global awareness regarding ecosystems. Ecosystem services (ES) frameworks, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the System of Environmental Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA) will influence how national measurement systems integrate the value of ecosystems and their services into national planning and monitoring progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Decision-makers are, however, faced with an embarrassment of riches. There is a multitude of ES frameworks, but no formal and integrative evaluation of the entire set exists. We review the IPBES, the SEEA EEA and 14 other ES frameworks using criteria designed to address operational and convergence considerations for national ecosystem accounting. While the frameworks reviewed incorporate many strengths, none fulfils all the criteria of a comprehensive national ecosystem accounting framework. We conclude with suggestions for conceptual, measurement and process developments to broaden the appeal, utility and acceptance of future frameworks. Considering these suggestions could substantially contribute to the development of ecosystem accounting frameworks that foster a constructive dialogue amongst the many disciplines, national contexts and viewpoints involved in understanding, measuring and making decisions about ecosystems.","PeriodicalId":36908,"journal":{"name":"One Ecosystem","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A critical review of ecosystem accounting and services frameworks\",\"authors\":\"Michael Bordt, M. Saner\",\"doi\":\"10.3897/ONEECO.3.E29306\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ecological economists currently face an important opportunity to influence national policies and global awareness regarding ecosystems. Ecosystem services (ES) frameworks, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the System of Environmental Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA) will influence how national measurement systems integrate the value of ecosystems and their services into national planning and monitoring progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Decision-makers are, however, faced with an embarrassment of riches. There is a multitude of ES frameworks, but no formal and integrative evaluation of the entire set exists. We review the IPBES, the SEEA EEA and 14 other ES frameworks using criteria designed to address operational and convergence considerations for national ecosystem accounting. While the frameworks reviewed incorporate many strengths, none fulfils all the criteria of a comprehensive national ecosystem accounting framework. We conclude with suggestions for conceptual, measurement and process developments to broaden the appeal, utility and acceptance of future frameworks. Considering these suggestions could substantially contribute to the development of ecosystem accounting frameworks that foster a constructive dialogue amongst the many disciplines, national contexts and viewpoints involved in understanding, measuring and making decisions about ecosystems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"One Ecosystem\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"One Ecosystem\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3897/ONEECO.3.E29306\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"One Ecosystem","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/ONEECO.3.E29306","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: 10

摘要

生态经济学家目前面临着影响国家政策和全球生态系统意识的重要机会。生态系统服务(ES)框架,包括政府间生物多样性和生态系统服务专门委员会(IPBES)和环境经济核算系统实验性生态系统核算(SEEA EEA)将影响国家计量系统如何将生态系统及其服务的价值纳入国家规划和监测实现可持续发展目标的进展。然而,决策者面临着财富的尴尬。有许多ES框架,但不存在对整套框架的正式和综合评估。我们使用旨在解决国家生态系统核算的操作和趋同考虑的标准,审查了IPBES、SEEA EEA和其他14个ES框架。虽然审查的框架包含了许多优点,但没有一个符合全面的国家生态系统核算框架的所有标准。最后,我们提出了概念、衡量和流程发展的建议,以扩大未来框架的吸引力、实用性和可接受性。考虑到这些建议可以大大有助于制定生态系统会计框架,促进在理解、衡量和决策生态系统的许多学科、国家背景和观点之间进行建设性对话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A critical review of ecosystem accounting and services frameworks
Ecological economists currently face an important opportunity to influence national policies and global awareness regarding ecosystems. Ecosystem services (ES) frameworks, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the System of Environmental Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA) will influence how national measurement systems integrate the value of ecosystems and their services into national planning and monitoring progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Decision-makers are, however, faced with an embarrassment of riches. There is a multitude of ES frameworks, but no formal and integrative evaluation of the entire set exists. We review the IPBES, the SEEA EEA and 14 other ES frameworks using criteria designed to address operational and convergence considerations for national ecosystem accounting. While the frameworks reviewed incorporate many strengths, none fulfils all the criteria of a comprehensive national ecosystem accounting framework. We conclude with suggestions for conceptual, measurement and process developments to broaden the appeal, utility and acceptance of future frameworks. Considering these suggestions could substantially contribute to the development of ecosystem accounting frameworks that foster a constructive dialogue amongst the many disciplines, national contexts and viewpoints involved in understanding, measuring and making decisions about ecosystems.
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
One Ecosystem
One Ecosystem Environmental Science-Nature and Landscape Conservation
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
12 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:481959085
Book学术官方微信