Journal
ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS
Volume 38, Issue -, Pages 20-30Publisher
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.10.023
Keywords
Impact assessment; LTER (Long Term Ecological Research); Ecosystem services; Indicators
Categories
Funding
- Agri-Food and Bio-sciences Institute (Northern Ireland)
- Biotechnology & Biological Sciences Research Council
- Countryside Council for Wales
- National Assembly for Wales
- Defence Science and Technology Laboratory
- Department for Environment
- Food and Rural Affairs
- Environment Agency
- Forestry Commission
- Natural England
- Natural Environment Research Council
- Northern Ireland Environment Agency
- Scottish Environment Protection Agency
- Scottish Government
- Scottish Natural Heritage
- Natural Environment Research Council [NE/I015086/1]
- NERC [NE/I015086/1] Funding Source: UKRI
- Natural Environment Research Council [NE/I015086/1, ceh010010] Funding Source: researchfish
Ask authors/readers for more resources
In recent years a consistent number of studies carried out at different spatial scales have proposed options for mapping and integrated assessment of ecosystem services. Examples of cross-scale assessments are limited and open questions remain on the extent to which general assessments are able to capture local phenomena. This study aims at investigating what the relation is between ecosystem services analysis carried out at different spatial scales, and to what extent approaches based on input data at different resolution can be reconciled. In particular, the challenges and limitations involved in attempting holistic assessments of ecosystem services at the level of a management unit in the UK were investigated using two sets of ecosystem service indicators: (i) identified by local land managers and (ii) derived from EU-based spatially explicit data coupled with process-based models. The difference in the ecosystem services estimated for 11 sites of the Environmental Change Network (ECN) by the two methodologies was compared using (i) total ecosystem service index (TESI), (ii) regression analysis of comparable ecosystem service indicators, and (iii) multivariate techniques to determine site comparability. The comparative analysis revealed robust grouping of sites by both methods coupled with weak correlation between the different ecosystem service indicators assessed. This study indicated that both methods characterised the general landscapes in a similar way, but total ecosystem service index was critically dependent on indicators selected. (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available