IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v19y2016icp1-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Abiotic flows should be inherent part of ecosystem services classification

Author

Listed:
  • van der Meulen, E.S.
  • Braat, L.C.
  • Brils, J.M.

Abstract

Although ecosystems comprise both biotic and abiotic structures and processes, the role of abiotic output receives less attention and is addressed inconsistently in ecosystem services (ES) classification systems. The authors explore the nature and position of abiotic ecosystem output from: 1) a theoretical perspective on ecosystems, ecosystems services and natural capital; 2) a practical perspective on applying the ES concept in environmental policy, spatial planning and ecosystem management. From a theoretical point of view, excluding abiotic flows in ES frameworks such as CICES is inconsistent with the principles of the ES concept. Consequently, abiotic flows with (high) societal relevance may in practice be neglected or selectively addressed; many of them are related to sediment and the subsurface part of ecosystems. This impedes the integration strength of the ES concept. Given the large contributions to the economy and the societal costs of non-sustainable use of abiotic flows, it also impedes holistic, consistent and transparent information provision to decision makers. The authors urge to include abiotic flows as inherent part in ecosystem services classification systems such as CICES. This makes the application of the ES concept more holistic and consistent and will optimize it's integration power for practical planning and decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • van der Meulen, E.S. & Braat, L.C. & Brils, J.M., 2016. "Abiotic flows should be inherent part of ecosystem services classification," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 1-5.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:19:y:2016:i:c:p:1-5
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.03.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041616300699
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.03.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marie Balková & Lucie Kubalíková & Marcela Prokopová & Petr Sedlák & Aleš Bajer, 2021. "Ecosystem Services of Vegetation Features as the Multifunction Anti-Erosion Measures in the Czech Republic in 2019 and Its 30-Year Prediction," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Albrecht, Eerika & Isaac, Roman & Räsänen, Aleksi, 2024. "Legal and political arguments on aquatic ecosystem services and hydropower development – A case study on Kemi River basin, Finland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    3. Lucie Kubalíková, 2020. "Cultural Ecosystem Services of Geodiversity: A Case Study from Stránská skála (Brno, Czech Republic)," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Tammi, Ilpo & Mustajärvi, Kaisa & Rasinmäki, Jussi, 2017. "Integrating spatial valuation of ecosystem services into regional planning and development," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 329-344.
    5. Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Belton, Valerie & Hjerppe, Turo & Marttunen, Mika, 2020. "Utilizing ecosystem service classifications in multi-criteria decision analysis – Experiences of peat extraction case in Finland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    6. Jonathan P. Reeves & Conor H. D. John & Kevin A. Wood & Phoebe R. Maund, 2021. "A Qualitative Analysis of UK Wetland Visitor Centres as a Health Resource," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-25, August.
    7. Czúcz, Bálint & Arany, Ildikó & Potschin-Young, Marion & Bereczki, Krisztina & Kertész, Miklós & Kiss, Márton & Aszalós, Réka & Haines-Young, Roy, 2018. "Where concepts meet the real world: A systematic review of ecosystem service indicators and their classification using CICES," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 145-157.
    8. Annaêl Barnes & Alexandre Ickowicz & Jean-Daniel Cesaro & Paulo Salgado & Véronique Rayot & Sholpan Koldasbekova & Simon Taugourdeau, 2023. "Improving Biodiversity Offset Schemes through the Identification of Ecosystem Services at a Landscape Level," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-25, January.
    9. Benedetto Rugani & Philippe Osset & Olivier Blanc & Enrico Benetto, 2023. "Environmental Footprint Neutrality Using Methods and Tools for Natural Capital Accounting in Life Cycle Assessment," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-30, June.
    10. Broome, James David & Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur, 2024. "Heavenly lights: An exploratory review of auroral ecosystem services and disservices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    11. Watson, Stephen C.L. & Paterson, David M. & Queirós, Ana M. & Rees, Andrew P. & Stephens, Nicholas & Widdicombe, Stephen & Beaumont, Nicola J., 2016. "A conceptual framework for assessing the ecosystem service of waste remediation: In the marine environment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 69-81.
    12. Stępniewska, Małgorzata & Zwierzchowska, Iwona & Mizgajski, Andrzej, 2018. "Capability of the Polish legal system to introduce the ecosystem services approach into environmental management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 271-281.
    13. Schetke, Sophie & Lee, Heera & Graf, Wanda & Lautenbach, Sven, 2018. "Application of the ecosystem service concept for climate protection in Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 294-305.
    14. Volchko, Yevheniya & Norrman, Jenny & Ericsson, Lars O. & Nilsson, Kristina L. & Markstedt, Anders & Öberg, Maria & Mossmark, Fredrik & Bobylev, Nikolai & Tengborg, Per, 2020. "Subsurface planning: Towards a common understanding of the subsurface as a multifunctional resource," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    15. O’Garra, Tanya, 2017. "Economic value of ecosystem services, minerals and oil in a melting Arctic: A preliminary assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 180-186.
    16. E. S. Meulen & N. B. Sutton & F. H. M. Ven & P. R. Oel & H. H. M. Rijnaarts, 2020. "Trends in Demand of Urban Surface Water Extractions and in Situ Use Functions," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(15), pages 4943-4958, December.
    17. Van Ree, C.C.D.F. & van Beukering, P.J.H., 2016. "Geosystem services: A concept in support of sustainable development of the subsurface," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 30-36.
    18. Zheng Zang, 2021. "Conceptual Model of Ecosystem Service Flows from Carbon Dioxide to Blue Carbon in Coastal Wetlands: An Empirical Study Based on Yancheng, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-12, April.
    19. Frisk, Emrik Lundin & Volchko, Yevheniya & Sandström, Olof Taromi & Söderqvist, Tore & Ericsson, Lars O. & Mossmark, Fredrik & Lindhe, Andreas & Blom, Göran & Lång, Lars-Ove & Carlsson, Christel & Nor, 2022. "The geosystem services concept – What is it and can it support subsurface planning?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    20. van Ree, C.C.D.F. & van Beukering, P.J.H. & Boekestijn, J., 2017. "Geosystem services: A hidden link in ecosystem management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 58-69.
    21. Raphael Ocelli Pinheiro & Luiza F. A. de Paula & Marco Giardino, 2022. "Agricultural Heritage: Contrasting National and International Programs in Brazil and Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-24, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:19:y:2016:i:c:p:1-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.