Assessing bundles of ecosystem services from regional to landscape scale: Insights from the French Alps

Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology © 2015 British Ecological SocietyAssessments of ecosystem services (ES) and biodiversity (hereafter ecological parameters) provide a comprehensive view of the links between landscapes, ecosystem functioning and human well-being. The investigation of consistent associations between ecological parameters, called bundles, and of their links to landscape composition and structure is essential to inform management and policy, yet it is still in its infancy. We mapped over the French Alps an unprecedented array of 18 ecological parameters (16 ES and two biodiversity parameters) and explored their co-occurrence patterns underpinning the supply of multiple ecosystem services in landscapes. We followed a three-step analytical framework to i) detect the ES and biodiversity associations relevant at regional scale, ii) identify the clusters supplying consistent bundles of ES at subregional scale and iii) explore the links between landscape heterogeneity and ecological parameter associations at landscape scale. We used successive correlation coefficients, overlap values and self-organizing maps to characterize ecological bundles specific to given land cover types and geographical areas of varying biophysical characteristics and human uses at nested scales from regional to local. The joint analysis of land cover richness and ES gamma diversity demonstrated that local landscape heterogeneity alone did not imply compatibility across multiple ecosystem services, as some homogeneous landscape could supply multiple ecosystem services. Synthesis and applications. Bundles of ecosystem services and biodiversity parameters are shaped by the joint effects of biophysical characteristics and of human history. Due to spatial congruence and to underlying functional interdependencies, ecological parameters should be managed as bundles even when management targets specific objectives. Moreover, depending on the abiotic context, the supply of multiple ecosystem services can arise either from deliberate management in homogeneous landscapes or from spatial heterogeneity.ERAnet BiodivERsA project CONNECTFrench Agence Nationale pour la RechercheEU project VOLANT

Ecosystem services for water policy: insights across Europe

In this research we explored how the concepts and approaches of ecosystem services are currently used in water management in Europe, in the application of River Basin Management Plans (RBMP) developed for the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). Five case studies have been considered, located in the River Basin Districts of the Po river (Italy), Scotland (United Kingdom), Scheldt river (Belgium), Danube river (Romania), Sado and Mira rivers and Ribeiras do Algarve (Portugal). These cases represent different regional contexts of application of this EU water policy, with specific socio-economic drivers and environmental issues. Each case study has developed an operational framework to analyse ecosystem services in practice together with a group of local stakeholders. In each regional case, we examined how EU water policy and RBMPs are implemented, considered legal and planning instruments from the national to the local scale, and we analysed the use of ecosystem service terms and concepts in the relevant planning instruments. In parallel, we explored the view of local stakeholders and water managers on the topic, collecting their opinion on three major aspects: the usefulness of the concepts and approaches of ecosystem services for WFD river basin management plans, the risks and benefits of their use, and the knowledge needs to put the concepts into practice. The major drawback of the ecosystem service approach seems to be the challenge for practitioners of understanding new concepts and methodologies, while the major advantages are that it highlights all the hidden benefits of a water body in good health and promotes multi-functionality and sustainability in water management. The results of this study provide a picture across Europe of the current use of the concepts of ecosystem services in the RBMP and relevant insight on the opinion of local stakeholders and water managers

Strengthening livelihood resilience in upper catchments of dry areas by integrated natural resources management

The Livelihood Resilience project evolved around the hypothesis that better integrated management can improve the livelihoods of poor farming communities and increase the environmental integrity and water productivity of upstream watersheds in dry areas. This hypothesis was tested by researchers from different Iranian research and executive organizations and farming communities in two benchmark research watersheds in upper Karkheh River Basin in Iran, under the guidance of the ICARDA scientists. Participatory technology development, water, soil, erosion, land degradation and vegetation assessments, livelihood, gender and policy analyses, and integrated workshops delivered a set of principles for watershed management in dry areas

How natural capital delivers ecosystem services: a typology derived from a systematic review

There is no unified evidence base to help decision-makers understand how the multiple components of natural capital interact to deliver ecosystem services. We systematically reviewed 780 papers, recording how natural capital attributes (29 biotic attributes and 11 abiotic factors) affect the delivery of 13 ecosystem services. We develop a simple typology based on the observation that five main attribute groups influence the capacity of natural capital to provide ecosystem services, related to: A) the physical amount of vegetation cover; B) presence of suitable habitat to support species or functional groups that provide a service; C) characteristics of particular species or functional groups; D) physical and biological diversity; and E) abiotic factors that interact with the biotic factors in groups A–D. ‘Bundles’ of services can be identified that are governed by different attribute groups. Management aimed at maximising only one service often has negative impacts on other services and on biological and physical diversity. Sustainable ecosystem management should aim to maintain healthy, diverse and resilient ecosystems that can deliver a wide range of ecosystem services in the long term. This can maximise the synergies and minimise the trade-offs between ecosystem services and is also compatible with the aim of conserving biodiversity

Erosion processes in steep terrain - Truths, myths, and uncertainties related to forest management in Southeast Asia

10.1016/j.foreco.2005.12.019Forest Ecology and Management2241-2199-225FECM