Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | e120449 |
| Journal | One Ecosystem |
| Volume | 9 |
| Publication status | Published - 14 Jun 2024 |
Abstract
Aiming at understanding the role of plural values in decision-making, the IPBES Values Assessment defined nature valuation broadly as including biophysical, economic and socio-cultural assessments, including ecosystem service assessment. IPBES reviews of scientific literature revealed a lack of documentation of uptake by stakeholders across method types. The EU project SELINA aims to contribute to increasing uptake of ES assessments at different governance levels. This paper reviews guidance in national and local applications by compiling study design recommendations for ES assessments from 111 guidance documents on ES assessments covering 12 European languages. Guidance documents are evaluated for seven diagnostic topics suggested to increase relevance and robustness of ES assessments: ecosystem condition variables; capacity-potential; supply-demand; spatial scaling and resolution capability; social and health benefit compatibility; economic valuation compatibility; and uncertainty assessment. The paper develops the guidance recommendations across these topics into a set of checklists for practitioners and contractors of ES assessments. We find synergies between these study design features and gaps in guidance in relation to the policy cycle. Checklists are aimed at projects self-assessing and improving their design and implementation to increase robustness of their ES assessment. From a knowledge supply perspective, this is expected to increase the likelihood of uptake of results by stakeholders. We end the paper with some cautions on limitations to uptake from different perspectives and the demand for and political uses of ES assessment knowledge.
Keywords
- economic valuation, ecosystem accounting, ecosystem capacity, ecosystem condition, ecosystem potential, health benefits, social benefits, spatial resolution, spatial scale, uncertainty
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
- Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- Environmental Science(all)
- Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
- Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
- Environmental Science(all)
- Ecology
- Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)
- Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous)
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: One Ecosystem, Vol. 9, e120449, 14.06.2024.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Increasing uptake of ecosystem service assessments
T2 - best practice check-lists for practitioners in Europe
AU - Barton, David N.
AU - Immerzeel, Bart
AU - Brander, Luke
AU - Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne
AU - Huerta, Jarumi Kato
AU - Kretsch, Conor
AU - Clech, Solen Le
AU - Rendón, Paula
AU - Seguin, Joana
AU - Coyote, Martha Arámbula
AU - Almenar, Javier Babí
AU - Balzan, Mario
AU - Burkhard, Benjamin
AU - Carvalho-Santos, Claudia
AU - Geneletti, Davide
AU - Goñi, Victoria Guisado
AU - Giannakis, Elias
AU - Liekens, Inge
AU - Lupa, Piotr
AU - Ryan, Gillian
AU - Stępniewska, Małgorzata
AU - Tanács, Eszter
AU - Hoff, Vince van ‘t
AU - Walther, Franziska
AU - Zoumides, Christos
AU - Zwierzchowska, Iwona
AU - Grammatikopoulou, Ioanna
AU - Villosalda, Miguel
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © Barton D et al.
PY - 2024/6/14
Y1 - 2024/6/14
N2 - Aiming at understanding the role of plural values in decision-making, the IPBES Values Assessment defined nature valuation broadly as including biophysical, economic and socio-cultural assessments, including ecosystem service assessment. IPBES reviews of scientific literature revealed a lack of documentation of uptake by stakeholders across method types. The EU project SELINA aims to contribute to increasing uptake of ES assessments at different governance levels. This paper reviews guidance in national and local applications by compiling study design recommendations for ES assessments from 111 guidance documents on ES assessments covering 12 European languages. Guidance documents are evaluated for seven diagnostic topics suggested to increase relevance and robustness of ES assessments: ecosystem condition variables; capacity-potential; supply-demand; spatial scaling and resolution capability; social and health benefit compatibility; economic valuation compatibility; and uncertainty assessment. The paper develops the guidance recommendations across these topics into a set of checklists for practitioners and contractors of ES assessments. We find synergies between these study design features and gaps in guidance in relation to the policy cycle. Checklists are aimed at projects self-assessing and improving their design and implementation to increase robustness of their ES assessment. From a knowledge supply perspective, this is expected to increase the likelihood of uptake of results by stakeholders. We end the paper with some cautions on limitations to uptake from different perspectives and the demand for and political uses of ES assessment knowledge.
AB - Aiming at understanding the role of plural values in decision-making, the IPBES Values Assessment defined nature valuation broadly as including biophysical, economic and socio-cultural assessments, including ecosystem service assessment. IPBES reviews of scientific literature revealed a lack of documentation of uptake by stakeholders across method types. The EU project SELINA aims to contribute to increasing uptake of ES assessments at different governance levels. This paper reviews guidance in national and local applications by compiling study design recommendations for ES assessments from 111 guidance documents on ES assessments covering 12 European languages. Guidance documents are evaluated for seven diagnostic topics suggested to increase relevance and robustness of ES assessments: ecosystem condition variables; capacity-potential; supply-demand; spatial scaling and resolution capability; social and health benefit compatibility; economic valuation compatibility; and uncertainty assessment. The paper develops the guidance recommendations across these topics into a set of checklists for practitioners and contractors of ES assessments. We find synergies between these study design features and gaps in guidance in relation to the policy cycle. Checklists are aimed at projects self-assessing and improving their design and implementation to increase robustness of their ES assessment. From a knowledge supply perspective, this is expected to increase the likelihood of uptake of results by stakeholders. We end the paper with some cautions on limitations to uptake from different perspectives and the demand for and political uses of ES assessment knowledge.
KW - economic valuation
KW - ecosystem accounting
KW - ecosystem capacity
KW - ecosystem condition
KW - ecosystem potential
KW - health benefits
KW - social benefits
KW - spatial resolution
KW - spatial scale
KW - uncertainty
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85196910087&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3897/oneeco.9.e120449
DO - 10.3897/oneeco.9.e120449
M3 - Article
VL - 9
JO - One Ecosystem
JF - One Ecosystem
M1 - e120449
ER -