Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 101714 |
| Journal | Ecosystem Services |
| Volume | 73 |
| Early online date | 7 Mar 2025 |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 7 Mar 2025 |
Abstract
Ecosystem services (ES) assessments are rarely integrated into decision-making processes, with uncertainties often cited as a major barrier. While various uncertainties, such as modelling and data uncertainties, are inherent in ES assessments, their role in uptake of ES assessment results in decision-making remains unclear. We conducted a semi-systematic literature review of scientific papers assessing ES to reveal how uncertainties in ES assessments relate to ES uptake, i.e., the potential use of ES assessment results by decision makers. We performed logistic regressions to analyse the influence of three main sources of uncertainty on ES uptake, i.e., (i) modelling uncertainties, (ii) uncertainties related to qualitative and quantitative descriptions of scenarios, and (iii) uncertainties related to the transfer of ES assessment results into decision-making. Furthermore, we investigated if stakeholder involvement plays a role in ES uptake. First, and most importantly, the results indicate that clarifying the policy context can decrease decision uncertainty and thus improve ES uptake. Referring to a specific policy, following a decisive study purpose and documenting the intended policy entry point are factors that significantly enhance ES uptake. Second, the way how ES are modelled is related to ES uptake. Our results show that using multiple models to assess ES significantly promotes ES uptake. Third, involving stakeholders in ES assessments is significantly associated with increased documented uptake. We discuss that explicitly anchoring the assessment in a policy context increases the salience and timeliness of an ES study, assessing model uncertainties can lead to more credible results, and involving stakeholders can provide more legitimacy, which together increase the potential for ES assessments and their results to be used in decision-making. This study encourages future ES assessments to integrate uncertainties in order to support informed decision-making and promote the conservation and sustainable management of ecosystems and their services.
Keywords
- Decision-making, ES, Science-policy, Stakeholders, Uncertainty, Uptake
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Environmental Science(all)
- Global and Planetary Change
- Social Sciences(all)
- Geography, Planning and Development
- Environmental Science(all)
- Ecology
- Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
- Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
- Environmental Science(all)
- Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Environmental Science(all)
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Ecosystem Services, Vol. 73, 101714, 06.2025.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Uncertainties in ecosystem services assessments and their implications for decision support
T2 - A semi-systematic literature review
AU - Walther, Franziska
AU - Barton, David N.
AU - Schwaab, Jonas
AU - Kato-Huerta, Jarumi
AU - Immerzeel, Bart
AU - Adamescu, Mihai
AU - Andersen, Erling
AU - Arámbula Coyote, Martha Verónica
AU - Arany, Ildikó
AU - Balzan, Mario
AU - Bruggeman, Adriana
AU - Carvalho-Santos, Claudia
AU - Cazacu, Constantin
AU - Geneletti, Davide
AU - Giuca, Relu
AU - Inácio, Miguel
AU - Lagabrielle, Erwann
AU - Lange, Sabine
AU - Clec'h, Solen Le
AU - Vanessa Lim, Zhi Yi
AU - Mörtberg, Ulla
AU - Nedkov, Stoyan
AU - Portela, Ana Paula
AU - Porucznik, Anna
AU - Racoviceanu, Tudor
AU - Rendón, Paula
AU - Ribeiro, Daniela
AU - Seguin, Joana
AU - Hribar, Mateja Šmid
AU - Stoycheva, Vanya
AU - Vejre, Henrik
AU - Zoumides, Christos
AU - Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)
PY - 2025/3/7
Y1 - 2025/3/7
N2 - Ecosystem services (ES) assessments are rarely integrated into decision-making processes, with uncertainties often cited as a major barrier. While various uncertainties, such as modelling and data uncertainties, are inherent in ES assessments, their role in uptake of ES assessment results in decision-making remains unclear. We conducted a semi-systematic literature review of scientific papers assessing ES to reveal how uncertainties in ES assessments relate to ES uptake, i.e., the potential use of ES assessment results by decision makers. We performed logistic regressions to analyse the influence of three main sources of uncertainty on ES uptake, i.e., (i) modelling uncertainties, (ii) uncertainties related to qualitative and quantitative descriptions of scenarios, and (iii) uncertainties related to the transfer of ES assessment results into decision-making. Furthermore, we investigated if stakeholder involvement plays a role in ES uptake. First, and most importantly, the results indicate that clarifying the policy context can decrease decision uncertainty and thus improve ES uptake. Referring to a specific policy, following a decisive study purpose and documenting the intended policy entry point are factors that significantly enhance ES uptake. Second, the way how ES are modelled is related to ES uptake. Our results show that using multiple models to assess ES significantly promotes ES uptake. Third, involving stakeholders in ES assessments is significantly associated with increased documented uptake. We discuss that explicitly anchoring the assessment in a policy context increases the salience and timeliness of an ES study, assessing model uncertainties can lead to more credible results, and involving stakeholders can provide more legitimacy, which together increase the potential for ES assessments and their results to be used in decision-making. This study encourages future ES assessments to integrate uncertainties in order to support informed decision-making and promote the conservation and sustainable management of ecosystems and their services.
AB - Ecosystem services (ES) assessments are rarely integrated into decision-making processes, with uncertainties often cited as a major barrier. While various uncertainties, such as modelling and data uncertainties, are inherent in ES assessments, their role in uptake of ES assessment results in decision-making remains unclear. We conducted a semi-systematic literature review of scientific papers assessing ES to reveal how uncertainties in ES assessments relate to ES uptake, i.e., the potential use of ES assessment results by decision makers. We performed logistic regressions to analyse the influence of three main sources of uncertainty on ES uptake, i.e., (i) modelling uncertainties, (ii) uncertainties related to qualitative and quantitative descriptions of scenarios, and (iii) uncertainties related to the transfer of ES assessment results into decision-making. Furthermore, we investigated if stakeholder involvement plays a role in ES uptake. First, and most importantly, the results indicate that clarifying the policy context can decrease decision uncertainty and thus improve ES uptake. Referring to a specific policy, following a decisive study purpose and documenting the intended policy entry point are factors that significantly enhance ES uptake. Second, the way how ES are modelled is related to ES uptake. Our results show that using multiple models to assess ES significantly promotes ES uptake. Third, involving stakeholders in ES assessments is significantly associated with increased documented uptake. We discuss that explicitly anchoring the assessment in a policy context increases the salience and timeliness of an ES study, assessing model uncertainties can lead to more credible results, and involving stakeholders can provide more legitimacy, which together increase the potential for ES assessments and their results to be used in decision-making. This study encourages future ES assessments to integrate uncertainties in order to support informed decision-making and promote the conservation and sustainable management of ecosystems and their services.
KW - Decision-making
KW - ES
KW - Science-policy
KW - Stakeholders
KW - Uncertainty
KW - Uptake
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=86000142007&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101714
DO - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101714
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:86000142007
VL - 73
JO - Ecosystem Services
JF - Ecosystem Services
SN - 2212-0416
M1 - 101714
ER -