National mapping and assessment of ecosystem services projects in Europe: Participants’ experiences, state of the art and lessons learned

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Documents

  • Fulltext

    Final published version, 2.32 MB, PDF document

  • Ágnes Vári
  • Cristian Mihai Adamescu
  • Mario Balzan
  • Kremena Gocheva
  • Martin Götzl
  • Karsten Grunewald
  • Miguel Inácio
  • Madli Linder
  • Grégory Obiang-Ndong
  • Paulo Pereira
  • Fernando Santos-Martin
  • Ina Sieber
  • Małgorzata Stępniewska
  • Eszter Tanács
  • Termansen, Mette
  • Eric Tromeur
  • Davina Vačkářová
  • Bálint Czúcz
Backed by the Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 and 2030, numerous ‘Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem Services’ (MAES) projects have been completed in recent years in the member states of the European Union, with substantial results and insights accumulated. The experience from the different approaches is a valuable source of information for developing assessment processes further, especially with regard to their uptake into policy and more recently, into ecosystem accounting. Systematic approaches towards best practices and lessons learned from national MAES projects are yet lacking. This study presents the results of a survey conducted with participants of national MAES projects overviewing 13 European MAES processes. Focus hereby is put on the types of methods used, the assessed ecosystem services, and the perceived challenges and advancements. All MAES projects assessed ecosystem services at several levels of the ecosystem service cascade (69% at least three levels), using a diverse set of data sources and methods (with 4.7 types of methods on average). More accessible data was used more frequently (e.g., statistical and literature data being the most popular). Challenges regarding policy uptake, synthesizing results, and data gaps or reliability were perceived as the most severe. Insufficient evaluation of uncertainty was seen as a major critical point, and emphasized as crucial for uptake and implementation. Moving towards accounting for ES in the frame of environmental-economic accounts, considering uncertainties of ES assessments should be even more important.
Original languageEnglish
Article number101592
JournalEcosystem Services
Volume65
Number of pages17
ISSN2212-0416
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2024

Number of downloads are based on statistics from Google Scholar and www.ku.dk


No data available

ID: 379668080