IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v48y2021ics2212041621000176.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecosystem service mapping needs to capture more effectively the biodiversity important for service supply

Author

Listed:
  • Ceaușu, Silvia
  • Apaza-Quevedo, Amira
  • Schmid, Marlen
  • Martín-López, Berta
  • Cortés-Avizanda, Ainara
  • Maes, Joachim
  • Brotons, Lluís
  • Queiroz, Cibele
  • Pereira, Henrique M.

Abstract

Large scale mapping of ecosystem services and functions (ES) is an important tool for researchers and policy makers to inform nature management and policies but it relies mainly on ES modelled with biophysical data such as land cover, henceforth biophysical ES. Other ES, henceforth species-based ES, are modelled at small scales based on species providers. As species-based ES are rarely included in multi-service, large-scale spatial assessments, we do not know if these assessments provide accurate information for managing the biodiversity important for species-based ES. We calculate and map weighted provider richness (WPR) for 9 species-based ES by weighting species data in Europe by their functional efficiency derived from functional trait databases. We compare WPR spatial patterns with those of 9 biophysical ES at continental and national scales in Europe. We find positive correlations at continental scale, and weaker positive correlations or neutral relationships at national scale between biophysical ES and WPR. Patterns of synergies and trade-offs for WPR are different from those of biophysical ES and change from continental to national scale. WPR for most species-based ES are synergistic with each other but WPR for existence value has the weakest synergies with other WPRs. Biodiversity data is still insufficient to truly map species-based ES at large scales but WPR can represent the next step forward for spatial ES assessments. A lack of spatial information on species-based ES in large-scale assessments leads to inaccurate information on ES distribution, and their synergies and trade-offs, which can lead to misguided management and conservation decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ceaușu, Silvia & Apaza-Quevedo, Amira & Schmid, Marlen & Martín-López, Berta & Cortés-Avizanda, Ainara & Maes, Joachim & Brotons, Lluís & Queiroz, Cibele & Pereira, Henrique M., 2021. "Ecosystem service mapping needs to capture more effectively the biodiversity important for service supply," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:48:y:2021:i:c:s2212041621000176
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101259
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041621000176
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101259?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grazia Zulian & Joachim Maes & Maria Luisa Paracchini, 2013. "Linking Land Cover Data and Crop Yields for Mapping and Assessment of Pollination Services in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Schulp, C.J.E. & Thuiller, W. & Verburg, P.H., 2014. "Wild food in Europe: A synthesis of knowledge and data of terrestrial wild food as an ecosystem service," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 292-305.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Orsi, Francesco & Ciolli, Marco & Primmer, Eeva & Varumo, Liisa & Geneletti, Davide, 2020. "Mapping hotspots and bundles of forest ecosystem services across the European Union," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Barbara Langlois & Vincent Martinet, 2023. "Defining cost-effective ways to improve ecosystem services provision in agroecosystems," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 123-165, June.
    3. Chian Jones Ritten & Christopher Bastian & Jason F. Shogren & Thadchaigeni Panchalingam & Mariah D. Ehmke & Gregory Parkhurst, 2017. "Understanding Pollinator Habitat Conservation under Current Policy Using Economic Experiments," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-13, August.
    4. Dominika Mesinger & Aneta Ocieczek & Witold Kozirok & Tomasz Owczarek, 2023. "Attitudes of Young Tri-City Residents toward Game Meat in the Context of Food Neophobia and a Tendency to Look for Diversity in Food," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-22, February.
    5. Jeferson Asprilla-Perea & José M. Díaz-Puente, 2019. "Importance of wild foods to household food security in tropical forest areas," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(1), pages 15-22, February.
    6. Rasmussen, Laura Vang & Mertz, Ole & Christensen, Andreas E. & Danielsen, Finn & Dawson, Neil & Xaydongvanh, Pheang, 2016. "A combination of methods needed to assess the actual use of provisioning ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 75-86.
    7. Marta Derek, 2021. "Nature on a Plate: Linking Food and Tourism within the Ecosystem Services Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    8. Giulia Capotorti & Simone Valeri & Arianna Giannini & Valerio Minorenti & Mariagrazia Piarulli & Paolo Audisio, 2023. "On the Role of Natural and Induced Landscape Heterogeneity for the Support of Pollinators: A Green Infrastructure Perspective Applied in a Peri-Urban System," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-29, January.
    9. Inês Ferreira & Teresa Dias & Juliana Melo & Abdul Mounem Mouazen & Cristina Cruz, 2023. "First Steps in Developing a Fast, Cheap, and Reliable Method to Distinguish Wild Mushroom and Truffle Species," Resources, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Bliss, Sam & Egler, Megan, 2020. "Ecological Economics Beyond Markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    11. Dardonville, Manon & Legrand, Baptiste & Clivot, Hugues & Bernardin, Claire & Bockstaller, Christian & Therond, Olivier, 2022. "Assessment of ecosystem services and natural capital dynamics in agroecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    12. Balázsi, Ágnes & Dänhardt, Juliana & Collins, Sue & Schweiger, Oliver & Settele, Josef & Hartel, Tibor, 2021. "Understanding cultural ecosystem services related to farmlands: Expert survey in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    13. Caroline Wentling & Felipe S. Campos & João David & Pedro Cabral, 2021. "Pollination Potential in Portugal: Leveraging an Ecosystem Service for Sustainable Agricultural Productivity," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    14. Zulian, Grazia & Stange, Erik & Woods, Helen & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, Jan & Andrews, Christopher & Baró, Francesc & Vizcaino, Pilar & Barton, David N. & Nowel, Megan & Rusch, Graciela M. & Autunes, 2018. "Practical application of spatial ecosystem service models to aid decision support," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 465-480.
    15. Gutiérrez-Arellano, Claudia & Mulligan, Mark, 2020. "Small-sized protected areas contribute more per unit area to tropical crop pollination than large protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    16. Huber, P. & Hujala, T. & Kurttila, M. & Wolfslehner, B. & Vacik, H., 2019. "Application of multi criteria analysis methods for a participatory assessment of non-wood forest products in two European case studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 103-111.
    17. Shackleton, Charlie M. & de Vos, Alta, 2022. "How many people globally actually use non-timber forest products?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    18. Perennes, Marie & Diekötter, Tim & Groß, Jens & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2021. "A hierarchical framework for mapping pollination ecosystem service potential at the local scale," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 444(C).
    19. Diaz-Balteiro, L. & Alfranca, O. & Voces, R. & Soliño, M., 2023. "Using google search patterns to explain the demand for wild edible mushrooms," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    20. Venter, Zander S. & Barton, David N. & Martinez-Izquierdo, Laura & Langemeyer, Johannes & Baró, Francesc & McPhearson, Timon, 2021. "Interactive spatial planning of urban green infrastructure – Retrofitting green roofs where ecosystem services are most needed in Oslo," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).

    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:48:y:2021:i:c:s2212041621000176. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.