Publications (FIS)

Ecosystem services mapping and assessment for policy-and decision-making

Lessons learned from a comparative analysis of european case studies

authored by: Davide Geneletti, Blal Adem Esmail, Chiara Cortinovis, Ildikó Arany, Mario Balzan, Pieter van Beukering, Sabine Bicking, Paulo A.V. Borges, Bilyana Borisova, Steven Broekx, Benjamin Burkhard, Artur Gil, Ola Inghe, Leena Kopperoinen, Marion Kruse, Inge Liekens, Damian Lowicki, Andrzej Mizgajski, Sara Mulder, Stoyan Nedkov, Hannah Ostergard, Ana Picanço, Anda Ruskule, Fernando Santos-Martín, Ina M. Sieber, Johan Svensson, Dava Vačkářů, Kristina Veidemane
Abstract: This paper analyses and compares a set of case studies on ecosystem services (ES) mapping and assessment with the purpose of formulating lessons learned and recommendations. Fourteen case studies were selected during the EU Horizon 2020 “Coordination and Support Action” ESMERALDA to represent different policy-and decision-making processes throughout the European Union, across a wide range of themes, biomes and scales. The analysis is based on a framework that addresses the key steps of an ES mapping and assessment process, namely policy questions, stakeholder identification and involvement, application of mapping and assessment methods, dissemination and communication and implementation. The analysis revealed that most case studies were policy-orientated or gave explicit suggestions for policy implementation in different contexts, including urban, rural and natural areas. Amongst the findings, the importance of starting stakeholder engagement early in the process was confirmed in order to generate interest and confidence in the project and to increase their willingness to cooperate. Concerning mapping and assessment methods, it was found that the integration of methods and results is essential for providing a comprehensive overview from different perspectives (e.g. social, economic). Finally, lessons learned for effective implementation of ES mapping and assessment results are presented and discussed.
Organisation(s): Institute of Physical Geography and Landscape Ecology
Physical Geography Group
External Organisation(s): University of Trento
MTA Centre for Ecological Research
Malta College of Arts, Science and Technology
Vrije Universiteit
Kiel University
University of the Azores
University of Sofia
Flemish Institute for Technological Research
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF)
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE)
Technische Universität Darmstadt
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA)
Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań
FSD
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (BAS)
Baltic Environmental Forum-Latvia BEF-LV
University of Latvia
King Juan Carlos University
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Czech Academy of Sciences (CAS)
Type: Article
Journal: One Ecosystem
Volume: 5
Pages: 1-31
No. of pages: 31
Publication date: 02.06.2020
Publication status: Published
Peer reviewed: Yes
ASJC Scopus subject areas: Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous)
Electronic version(s): https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.5.e53111 (Access: Open)

BibTeX

@article{71869cb08d9d4bf7bd041c80bfd13c33,
title = "Ecosystem services mapping and assessment for policy-and decision-making: Lessons learned from a comparative analysis of european case studies",
abstract = "This paper analyses and compares a set of case studies on ecosystem services (ES) mapping and assessment with the purpose of formulating lessons learned and recommendations. Fourteen case studies were selected during the EU Horizon 2020 “Coordination and Support Action” ESMERALDA to represent different policy-and decision-making processes throughout the European Union, across a wide range of themes, biomes and scales. The analysis is based on a framework that addresses the key steps of an ES mapping and assessment process, namely policy questions, stakeholder identification and involvement, application of mapping and assessment methods, dissemination and communication and implementation. The analysis revealed that most case studies were policy-orientated or gave explicit suggestions for policy implementation in different contexts, including urban, rural and natural areas. Amongst the findings, the importance of starting stakeholder engagement early in the process was confirmed in order to generate interest and confidence in the project and to increase their willingness to cooperate. Concerning mapping and assessment methods, it was found that the integration of methods and results is essential for providing a comprehensive overview from different perspectives (e.g. social, economic). Finally, lessons learned for effective implementation of ES mapping and assessment results are presented and discussed.",
keywords = "Biodiversity, Case studies, Comparative analysis, Ecosystem services, EU Biodiversity Strategy, MAES",
author = "Davide Geneletti and Esmail, {Blal Adem} and Chiara Cortinovis and Ildik{\'o} Arany and Mario Balzan and {van Beukering}, Pieter and Sabine Bicking and Borges, {Paulo A.V.} and Bilyana Borisova and Steven Broekx and Benjamin Burkhard and Artur Gil and Ola Inghe and Leena Kopperoinen and Marion Kruse and Inge Liekens and Damian Lowicki and Andrzej Mizgajski and Sara Mulder and Stoyan Nedkov and Hannah Ostergard and Ana Pican{\c c}o and Anda Ruskule and Fernando Santos-Mart{\'i}n and Sieber, {Ina M.} and Johan Svensson and Dava Va{\v c}k{\'a}{\v r}ů and Kristina Veidemane",
note = "Funding Information: The ESMERALDA project received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement no. 642007. The authors are grateful to Joachim Maes and Uta Schirpke, the two reviewers, whose comments and reflections helped improve the manuscript.",
year = "2020",
month = jun,
day = "2",
doi = "10.3897/oneeco.5.e53111",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "1--31",
journal = "One Ecosystem",
issn = "2367-8194",
publisher = "Pensoft Publishers",
}