National mapping and assessment of ecosystem services projects in Europe Participants' experiences, state of the art and lessons learned

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F86652079%3A_____%2F24%3A00582788" target="_blank" >RIV/86652079:_____/24:00582788 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11690/24:10486605

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000852?via%3Dihub" target="_blank" >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000852?via%3Dihub</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101592" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101592</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

National mapping and assessment of ecosystem services projects in Europe Participants' experiences, state of the art and lessons learned

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

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 environmentaleconomic accounts, considering uncertainties of ES assessments should be even more important.

Název v anglickém jazyce

National mapping and assessment of ecosystem services projects in Europe Participants' experiences, state of the art and lessons learned

Popis výsledku anglicky

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 environmentaleconomic accounts, considering uncertainties of ES assessments should be even more important.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

10511 - Environmental sciences (social aspects to be 5.7)

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2024

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Ecosystem Services

ISSN

2212-0416

e-ISSN

2212-0416

Svazek periodika

65

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

FEB

Stát vydavatele periodika

NL - Nizozemsko

Počet stran výsledku

17

Strana od-do

101592

Kód UT WoS článku

001156404400001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85183429456