Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Ecosystem service

Ecosystem services are the conditions and processes through which natural ecosystems, and the species that make them up, sustain and fulfill human life, maintaining basic planetary life support systems while supplying human material and non-material needs.^[1] These benefits arise from biophysical processes driven by ecosystem structures and functions, such as photosynthesis, nutrient cycling, and species interactions, which generate outputs directly usable by humans or foundational to other services.^[2] The standard framework classifies ecosystem services into four categories: provisioning services, which provide tangible products like food, fresh water, timber, and genetic resources; regulating services, which moderate environmental conditions through processes like pollination, water purification, climate stabilization, and erosion control; cultural services, encompassing non-material benefits such as recreation, aesthetic appreciation, and cultural identity; and supporting services, which underpin the production of other services via habitat provision, primary production, and biodiversity maintenance.^[3]^[4] This categorization, formalized in assessments like the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, highlights how ecosystems deliver value exceeding trillions of dollars annually in equivalent economic terms, though much remains unpriced due to market failures and measurement difficulties rooted in complex causal chains.^[5] The concept traces its modern origins to the 1970s, with the term "ecosystem services" coined by Paul and Anne Ehrlich in 1981 amid growing recognition of environmental limits to economic growth, building on earlier utilitarian views of nature's role in human welfare.^[6] Pioneering economic valuations, such as Robert Costanza's 1997 estimate of global ecosystem service flows at $33 trillion per year (in 1997 dollars), underscored their scale relative to global GDP, spurring policy applications like payments for ecosystem services schemes.^[7] Yet, controversies persist over the framework's anthropocentric focus, which some critiques argue risks undervaluing ecosystems' intrinsic roles in causal ecological dynamics or incentivizing offsets that overlook irreversible thresholds in biodiversity loss and service degradation.^[8] Empirical evidence from degraded systems, including declining pollination yields from habitat fragmentation, demonstrates tangible human costs, emphasizing the need for causal analysis beyond aggregate valuations.^[9]

Conceptual Foundations

Definition and Core Principles

Ecosystem services constitute the direct and indirect benefits that ecosystems provide to human well-being through biophysical processes, such as the conversion of solar energy into biomass via primary production and the recycling of essential nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus through microbial and faunal activity.^[10]^[11] These services arise from causal interactions within ecosystems, where organisms and abiotic components interact to maintain flows of materials and energy, enabling outcomes like food availability or climate moderation without reliance on subjective interpretations of value.^[12] The concept emphasizes observable ecological functions over anthropocentric projections, grounding benefits in measurable processes like photosynthetic fixation of carbon, which underpins biomass accumulation, and biogeochemical cycles that prevent nutrient depletion in soils.^[13]^[14] A key distinction exists between ecosystem services and natural capital: the former represents the dynamic flows of benefits generated over time, while the latter denotes the underlying stocks of living and non-living components—such as biomass, soil, and water—that enable those flows.^[15]^[16] This separation highlights biophysical realities, where degradation of stocks, like deforestation reducing tree cover, directly impairs service provision, such as carbon sequestration, through interrupted processes rather than mere accounting abstractions. Empirical assessments prioritize these verifiable mechanisms, avoiding conflation with economic constructs that may overlook causal dependencies on ecosystem integrity.^[17] The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment framework, published in 2005, establishes a baseline classification of ecosystem services into provisioning (e.g., materials from ecosystems), regulating (e.g., moderation of environmental fluctuations), supporting (e.g., foundational processes like nutrient cycling), and cultural (e.g., non-material benefits), derived from documented ecological outputs across global biomes.^[18]^[19] This typology rests on empirical data from field observations and modeling of ecosystem dynamics, providing a structured yet flexible lens for identifying services without presuming universality or ignoring biophysical limits.^[20]

Historical Development

The foundations of the ecosystem services concept emerged from mid-20th-century ecological research, particularly the work of Eugene Odum, whose 1953 textbook Fundamentals of Ecology conceptualized ecosystems as integrated systems performing essential functions such as nutrient cycling and energy flow, implicitly underscoring their role in supporting life processes.^[21] This built on Arthur Tansley's 1935 introduction of the "ecosystem" term, but Odum's emphasis on holistic system dynamics provided an empirical basis for later recognition of functional benefits to human welfare.^[22] By the late 1970s, explicit attention turned to quantifying these benefits, as seen in Walter Westman's 1977 Science paper "How Much Are Nature's Services Worth?", which attempted to measure the social value of ecosystem processes like pollination and water purification, estimating losses from environmental degradation in monetary terms to highlight their economic significance.^[23] The phrase "ecosystem services" itself was coined in 1981 by Paul and Anne Ehrlich, framing natural systems as providers of direct and indirect human benefits, drawing on prior ecological literature.^[24] Preceding these developments, neoclassical economists had discussed "natural capital" as stocks of resources yielding flows akin to services, with David Pearce in the 1980s–1990s explicitly linking it to environmental assets and their productive capacities, influencing integration with mainstream economic models.^[25] A landmark advancement occurred in 1997 when Robert Costanza and colleagues published "The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital" in Nature, aggregating 17 services across 16 biomes to estimate a global annual value of US$16–54 trillion (average $33 trillion in 1995 dollars), primarily outside market prices, which catalyzed interdisciplinary debate on valuation methodologies and the need for policy recognition despite criticisms of aggregation assumptions.^[26] The concept formalized further through the 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, an international effort involving over 1,300 experts that synthesized empirical data on ecosystem changes and their human impacts, establishing a structured approach to assessing service degradation amid biodiversity loss.^[27] Subsequent expansions came with the 2012 establishment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), which broadened the framework to incorporate indigenous knowledge and diverse valuation perspectives, building on the Assessment's findings to inform global policy.

Types of Ecosystem Services

Provisioning Services

Provisioning services encompass the tangible material outputs derived directly from ecosystems for human use, including food, fresh water, timber, fiber, fuel, and genetic resources. These services form the foundation of human sustenance and economic activity by providing essential raw inputs. For instance, global fisheries and aquaculture supplied approximately 223.2 million tonnes of aquatic products in 2022, with fish contributing at least 20% of the per capita animal protein supply for 3.2 billion people in 2021.^[28]^[29] Terrestrial ecosystems support agriculture through soil-based nutrient cycling and biodiversity-driven processes that enhance crop yields, such as microbial activity improving soil fertility and diverse plant-pollinator interactions bolstering resilience to environmental stresses.^[30] Forests deliver timber and non-timber products, with provisioning outputs like wood for construction and fuel underpinning industries that meet baseline human needs.^[31] Human reliance on these services stems from causal dependencies on ecosystem structures, where biodiversity underpins productivity; for example, diverse soil organisms facilitate nutrient availability and suppress pests naturally, reducing vulnerability in food production systems.^[32] Innovations such as crop domestication and selective breeding have amplified provisioning yields beyond natural baselines, enabling exponential human population expansion from about 1 billion in 1800 to over 8 billion today through intensified agricultural outputs tied to ecosystem-derived resources.^[33] Fresh water provisioning via watershed ecosystems supplies potable and irrigation needs, with intact vegetation regulating capture and filtration to sustain hydrological flows essential for agriculture and urban use.^[34] Genetic resources from wild species provide raw material for breeding resilient varieties and pharmaceuticals, preserving adaptive traits lost in monocultures.^[31] Overexploitation poses risks to sustainability, as seen in the Atlantic cod fishery collapse in the early 1990s, where stocks plummeted over 90% from historical levels due to excessive harvesting under open-access regimes, prompting a 1992 moratorium that has yielded partial but incomplete recovery.^[35] Such cases illustrate the tragedy of the commons in unmanaged resources, though evidence indicates that assigning property rights, such as individual transferable quotas, can incentivize stewardship and facilitate stock rebuilding by aligning incentives with long-term yields.^[36] Despite these challenges, provisioning services have demonstrably supported human demographic growth by scaling food and material availability, though continued productivity hinges on maintaining underlying ecosystem integrity against depletion pressures.^[37]

Regulating Services

Regulating services encompass the benefits humans derive from ecosystem processes that moderate natural phenomena, such as climate variability, hydrological flows, and biological interactions, thereby stabilizing environmental conditions conducive to human welfare. These services arise from biophysical mechanisms like vegetation transpiration influencing local temperatures, soil microbial activity degrading pollutants, and predator-prey dynamics controlling pest populations. Empirical assessments quantify their role in buffering extremes, though their efficacy varies with ecosystem integrity and can be partially replicated by anthropogenic technologies like reservoirs or synthetic pesticides.^[38] In climate regulation, terrestrial ecosystems, particularly forests and soils, act as carbon sinks, absorbing approximately 30% of annual anthropogenic CO2 emissions through photosynthesis and soil storage. This sequestration mitigates atmospheric CO2 accumulation, with global land sinks estimated to offset around 11 gigatons of carbon yearly, equivalent to a third of fossil fuel emissions. However, habitat loss from deforestation has reduced sink capacity by up to 20% in some regions since 2000, prompting human adaptations such as reforestation programs and carbon capture technologies that achieve comparable rates without relying on natural variability.^[39]^[40] Hydrological regulation includes flood mitigation and water purification, where coastal mangroves and inland wetlands attenuate storm surges and filter contaminants. Mangroves, for instance, reduce annual global flood damages to property by over $65 billion by dissipating wave energy and trapping sediments, with specific events like Hurricane Irma in 2017 showing averted losses of $1.5 billion in Florida counties. Wetlands achieve up to 50-90% removal of nitrogen and phosphorus pollutants through sedimentation and microbial denitrification, though performance declines with overload, leading to engineered alternatives like treatment plants that provide consistent purification independent of seasonal fluctuations.^[41]^[42]^[43] Pollination services, primarily from insects like bees, support reproduction in flowering plants, contributing to 35% of global crop production volume by facilitating fruit and seed set in crops such as almonds and coffee. Over 75% of leading food crops depend on animal pollinators for yield, with empirical studies estimating their economic value at $235-577 billion annually, though colony collapse disorders have caused localized failures, offset by managed hives and genetic modifications in wind-pollinated varieties. These services exhibit unreliability due to environmental stressors, underscoring human interventions like robotic pollinators as viable supplements.^[44]^[45]^[46] Overall, while regulating services yield cost savings—such as mangroves providing flood protection at restoration costs 3-5 times lower than seawalls—their degradation from land-use changes necessitates balanced management, recognizing that technological substitutes often exceed natural systems in predictability and scale.^[47]

Supporting Services

Supporting services encompass the fundamental ecological processes that sustain the biophysical conditions necessary for other ecosystem services to operate, including primary production, nutrient cycling, soil formation, and the provision of habitats that support biodiversity and ecosystem structure. These processes operate through biogeochemical cycles and biophysical interactions, such as photosynthesis converting solar energy into biomass and microbial activities facilitating element transformations. Unlike regulating services, which involve direct modulation of environmental factors, supporting services provide the underlying infrastructure, enabling long-term ecosystem functionality without immediate human-oriented outputs.^[2] Primary production, the synthesis of organic compounds from inorganic precursors via photosynthesis and chemosynthesis, forms the base of ecosystem energy flows, with global net primary productivity (NPP) estimated at approximately 61 Pg C per year from 1981 to 2018, roughly half from terrestrial vegetation and half from marine phytoplankton. Oceanic phytoplankton, microscopic algae in sunlit surface waters, contribute 50 to 70 percent of Earth's atmospheric oxygen through this process, maintaining oxidative capacity despite net oxygen production being balanced by respiratory sinks. These rates are quantifiable through satellite-derived chlorophyll measurements and carbon flux models, highlighting variability influenced by light, nutrients, and temperature rather than assuming uniform ecosystem primacy over anthropogenic inputs like fertilizers.^[48]^[49]^[50] Nutrient cycling involves microbial and faunal processes that recycle essential elements, exemplified by biological nitrogen fixation where diazotrophic bacteria convert atmospheric N₂ into bioavailable forms, adding 52 to 130 Tg N per year in terrestrial natural ecosystems. This fixation, occurring in symbiotic associations (e.g., with legumes) and free-living forms, underpins plant growth without relying solely on industrial alternatives, though human activities have doubled nitrogen inputs in some biomes relative to natural rates. Soil formation integrates physical weathering, organic matter decomposition, and bioturbation, yielding accumulation rates typically ranging from 0.02 to 0.3 mm per year in undisturbed ecosystems, dependent on parent material, climate, and biota; these slow processes build soil profiles over centuries to millennia, contrasting with rapid erosion under disturbance.^[51]^[52]^[53]^[54] Habitat provision maintains structural complexity, such as through tree cavities or wetland substrates that shelter species, fostering trophic interactions essential for process stability; empirical studies link habitat heterogeneity to biodiversity metrics, which in turn sustain cycling efficiency. Despite their foundational role, supporting services face criticism for their indirect linkage to human welfare, as benefits emerge only through intermediary provisioning or regulating functions, complicating isolated policy prioritization and often leading to undervaluation in frameworks emphasizing tangible outputs. Attribution remains tenuous without causal chains, as models like NPP estimates incorporate uncertainties from land-use changes and climate variability, underscoring the need for empirical validation over assumptive primacy.^[55]

Cultural Services

Cultural ecosystem services encompass the non-material benefits that ecosystems provide to human well-being, including opportunities for recreation, aesthetic appreciation, spiritual enrichment, sense of place, and educational experiences. These services derive from interactions with natural environments that enhance psychological and social dimensions of life, distinct from tangible provisioning or regulating functions. Empirical assessments often rely on visitation patterns, self-reported surveys, and physiological measures, though challenges arise in quantifying subjective values.^[56]^[57] Recreational benefits constitute a prominent category, evidenced by high visitation rates to protected areas. In the United States, national park visitors in 2023 spent $26.4 billion on travel, lodging, and related activities, generating $55.6 billion in total economic output and supporting 415,400 jobs nationwide. This spending reflects observable behaviors, such as over 330 million annual visits across the park system, driven by activities like hiking, wildlife viewing, and camping that foster physical activity and social bonding. Similar patterns occur globally, with ecosystems enabling tourism that bolsters local economies through direct user expenditures rather than indirect biophysical processes.^[58]^[59] Aesthetic and spiritual values are supported by the biophilia hypothesis, which posits an innate human affinity for natural forms, corroborated by meta-analyses showing medium to large effects of nature exposure on positive affect and reduced negative emotions. Physiological studies indicate small to moderate reductions in stress markers, such as cortisol levels, following brief interactions with natural settings compared to urban ones, as measured via heart rate variability and self-reported mood improvements. These outcomes align with causal mechanisms like attentional restoration, where diverse landscapes promote recovery from mental fatigue, grounded in controlled experiments rather than anecdotal sentiment. Spiritual or existential benefits, including feelings of awe and connectedness, manifest in behaviors like nature-based rituals or contemplation, though quantification remains tied to survey data on life satisfaction enhancements.^[60]^[61] Educational and cultural heritage services involve knowledge transmission and identity formation linked to ecosystems, such as indigenous practices preserving biodiversity insights or interpretive programs in reserves that increase environmental awareness. Observable metrics include participation in eco-education initiatives, which correlate with behavioral shifts toward conservation, though causal links require longitudinal data to distinguish from confounding factors. These services underpin cultural continuity, as seen in traditional landscapes that encode historical narratives, but their assessment prioritizes documented human uses over speculative intrinsic values.^[62] CES face undervaluation in policy due to their intangible nature, complicating monetary assessments that favor measurable outputs over experiential gains. Methods like contingent valuation elicit willingness-to-pay for non-use values, yet yield subjective estimates prone to hypothetical bias, leading to systematic underrepresentation compared to provisioning services. Critics argue this anthropocentric framing risks overlooking ecosystem integrity, but evidence suggests human-derived utility—via enhanced stewardship from personal enjoyment—drives sustained protection more effectively than abstract ethical appeals.^[63]^[64]

Ecosystem Disservices and Trade-offs

Nature and Examples of Disservices

Ecosystem disservices encompass the adverse effects or outputs of ecological processes that directly harm human welfare, such as facilitating disease transmission, property damage, or economic losses, often arising from unmanaged or unaltered natural systems.^[65] These disservices contrast with benefits by highlighting inherent trade-offs in ecosystems, where functions like habitat provision can simultaneously generate costs without human intervention to mitigate them.^[66] Unlike services, disservices are not merely absences of positives but active detrimental contributions, including vector proliferation and resource conflicts.^[67] Prominent examples include wetlands serving as breeding grounds for mosquitoes that transmit malaria, thereby imposing substantial health and economic burdens; coastal and constructed wetlands, for instance, support vector populations that exacerbate disease incidence in adjacent human settlements.^[68] In Africa, elephant crop-raiding exemplifies wildlife-related disservices, with losses ranging from 0.2% of planted fields in Niger to 61% in Gabon, translating to annual economic costs per affected area from $60 in Uganda to higher figures elsewhere, undermining food security and livelihoods.^[69] Similarly, unmanaged fire-prone forests contribute disservices through heightened wildfire risks, elevating suppression expenditures; in regions like the western U.S., intensified fire seasons since 1995 have amplified these costs alongside ecosystem damages.^[70] Invasive species facilitated by ecosystem dynamics further illustrate this, inflicting global annual damages estimated at $423 billion, encompassing agricultural losses and management expenses.^[71] Soil erosion in overvegetated or disturbed ecosystems represents another disservice, where excessive biomass accumulation or unchecked growth can destabilize slopes, accelerating sediment loss and degrading arable land productivity; this process diminishes soil fertility and associated functions, with global implications for agricultural viability.^[72] Recognizing these disservices underscores the limitations of frameworks that emphasize only positive outputs, as unmitigated habitat preservation can inadvertently intensify harms like vector-borne diseases or conflict-driven damages, necessitating integrated management to address causal trade-offs rather than assuming net benefits.^[73] Empirical assessments reveal that such negatives can rival or offset services in specific contexts, particularly where human proximity amplifies exposure without adaptive controls.^[74]

Balancing Services and Disservices

Ecosystems inherently produce bundles of services and disservices that interact through ecological processes, where efforts to maximize one often generate trade-offs with others due to resource competition and trophic dynamics. For instance, promoting biodiversity to enhance supporting services like pollination can inadvertently boost populations of predators or pests, amplifying disservices such as crop damage or livestock predation. Systematic reviews of empirical studies have documented 198 pairs of conflicting ecosystem services, with common trade-offs including provisioning outputs like timber or food versus regulating functions such as carbon storage or water purification, though disservices like habitat for disease vectors emerge concurrently and are often underquantified in perceptions mismatched to actual ecological costs.^[75]^[76] Tools such as the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model enable spatial mapping of these dynamics, allowing assessment of how land-use changes alter service-disservice bundles across landscapes by simulating biophysical processes and identifying hotspots for intervention.^[77] Human management plays a critical role in navigating these trade-offs, with clear property rights facilitating localized optimization over centralized regulations that externalize costs. In rangeland systems, for example, ranchers facing heightened disservices from carnivore predation—exacerbated by biodiversity-focused reintroductions—can employ fencing or selective culling under secure tenure, balancing livestock provisioning against wildlife regulating services more effectively than prohibitive protections that shift burdens to producers. Gray wolf reintroductions in the US, initiated under the Endangered Species Act in areas like Yellowstone in 1995 and expanded westward, have generated annual economic losses to ranchers exceeding $100 million nationwide through direct depredation and indirect effects like reduced cattle pregnancy rates, with one study estimating $69,000 to $162,000 per wolf in foregone productivity.^[78]^[79] Such regulatory approaches amplify disservices by constraining adaptive responses, contrasting with property-based systems where owners internalize incentives to mitigate harms, as evidenced by farmer adjustments in forest-adjacent zones to distance-dependent trade-offs between crop yields and wildlife incursions.^[80] Ecological complexity undermines zero-sum narratives positing uniform conservation benefits, as causal chains reveal non-linear feedbacks where static preservation overlooks synergies and antagonisms. Adaptive management frameworks address this by iteratively testing interventions against monitored outcomes, clarifying trade-offs in service production without assuming inherent conflicts, and prioritizing empirical adjustment over ideological priors. This approach counters oversimplifications in policy discourse, emphasizing that human stewardship, informed by ownership and experimentation, better aligns ecosystem outputs with societal needs than rigid exclusions of anthropogenic influence.^[81]^[82]

Economic Valuation

Methods of Valuation

Economic valuation of ecosystem services employs several established techniques to estimate monetary values, primarily drawing from market data, observed behaviors, and production linkages to ensure empirical grounding. These methods categorize into direct market approaches, revealed preference techniques, stated preference methods, and production or cost-based functions, each suited to different service types such as provisioning, regulating, or cultural benefits.^[83] Market price methods apply directly to provisioning services where ecosystems yield traded goods, such as using timber harvest prices to value forest biomass production or fish catch values for aquatic yields, adjusted for extraction costs to approximate net benefits.^[83] Revealed preference techniques infer value from actual human behaviors in related markets; the travel cost method, for instance, calculates recreational use value by analyzing visitor expenditures and travel distances to sites like national parks, treating access costs as proxies for willingness to pay.^[83] Hedonic pricing extends this by decomposing property prices to isolate environmental amenities, such as proximity to clean air or water bodies.^[83] Stated preference methods, including contingent valuation surveys, elicit hypothetical willingness to pay through questionnaires, useful for non-market values like biodiversity existence but prone to hypothetical bias where responses overestimate true values compared to observed actions.^[84] Revealed preference approaches mitigate this by relying on real expenditures, though they require observable proxy markets and may understate non-use values.^[85] Production function methods quantify regulating services by integrating biophysical data into economic models, such as linking pollinator abundance to crop yield changes; for example, studies estimate pollination's contribution by applying pollinator dependence ratios to agricultural output values, revealing dependencies in crops like almonds where losses could reduce global production by 3-8%.^[86] Replacement or avoided cost methods value services by the expense of human alternatives, such as flood damage mitigation by wetlands; empirical analyses indicate that losing one hectare of U.S. wetlands elevates annual flood damages by approximately $8,000, based on insurance claims and municipal costs from 1996-2016 data.^[87] These techniques enable cost-benefit assessments, as seen in global estimates updating the 1997 figure of $33 trillion annually to $125-145 trillion in 2011 equivalents, incorporating refined biome-specific values and land-use shifts while acknowledging spatial and temporal variability in service flows.^[88] Prioritizing methods with direct behavioral or causal evidence, such as production functions verified against yield experiments, enhances reliability over purely survey-based estimates.^[86]

Empirical Estimates and Applications

In 2014, Costanza et al. updated prior global valuations of ecosystem services, estimating an annual total of approximately $125–145 trillion in 2011 international dollars, reflecting adjustments for biophysical changes, population growth, and rising marginal values due to scarcity; this figure surpasses global GDP by a factor of roughly twice, illustrating the underrepresentation of natural capital in conventional economic accounting.^[89]^[90] Regulating services, such as climate regulation and pollination, account for the largest share in these aggregates, comprising over 50% of total values across biomes in revised models that incorporate enhanced data on non-market benefits.^[89] Provisioning services like food and timber follow, while cultural services represent a smaller fraction, often under 10%.^[91] Local applications demonstrate practical integration of these estimates in decision-making. For the Brazilian Amazon, meta-analyses yield an average ecosystem service value of $410 per hectare annually, with regulating functions (e.g., water purification and carbon sequestration) driving over 60% of this; such figures have informed land-use policies, prioritizing conservation where service flows exceed timber or agriculture revenues by factors of 2–5 in intact forests.^[92] However, technological substitutions, including synthetic fertilizers that replicate soil nutrient cycling, have reduced reliance on certain provisioning and supporting services in agricultural regions, enabling viable land conversions without total loss of productivity.^[93] Empirical impacts extend to national economies, where TEEB assessments quantify provisioning services' contributions; for instance, fisheries—a key provisioning output—generate 1–2.5% of GDP in many coastal developing nations, such as those in West Africa and Southeast Asia, underscoring ecosystem dependence in livelihoods but also vulnerability to overexploitation.^[94] These valuations guide applications like wetland restoration projects, where high per-unit values (e.g., wetlands contributing over 40% of global totals despite covering 6% of land) justify investments yielding returns 3–10 times costs through flood mitigation and fisheries enhancement.^[95] Overall, such data support scenario modeling for land-use trade-offs, revealing that maintaining biomes like forests preserves $4–20 trillion annually in avoided losses from degradation.^[96]

Controversies and Limitations

One prominent limitation in economic valuations of ecosystem services is the risk of double-counting, which arises from conflating intermediate ecosystem functions with final services or aggregating overlapping services without adjustment. For instance, valuing nutrient cycling (a supporting function) separately from crop pollination (a provisioning service) can inflate totals by attributing the same underlying biophysical process multiple times.^[97] ^[98] This error persists despite classification frameworks like the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, as empirical studies show valuations often fail to distinguish co-produced or nested contributions, leading to overstated aggregates that misguide policy.^[99] Valuations frequently overlook thresholds of irreversibility and potential substitutability through technological innovation, assuming many services are non-substitutable despite counterexamples. Water regulation services, for example, are often deemed essential for welfare up to scarcity thresholds, yet regions like Israel have substituted natural freshwater provisioning via desalination, which supplied 70% of domestic water by 2020 while reducing aquifer depletion and enabling adaptation to arid conditions without systemic welfare collapse.^[100] ^[101] Empirical evidence indicates that human capital can partially replace natural capital in such cases, challenging claims of absolute essentiality, though valuations rarely incorporate dynamic innovation paths or cost trajectories of alternatives like reverse osmosis, which have declined 80% since 2010.^[102] Geographic biases further undermine valuation robustness, with estimates disproportionately reflecting preferences and data from developed nations, skewing global aggregates. Meta-analyses reveal that service values in databases like the Ecosystem Services Valuation Database are concentrated in Europe and North America, underrepresenting tropical or low-income contexts where local uses differ, such as subsistence provisioning over recreation.^[103] ^[104] This bias favors Western anthropocentric metrics, potentially inflating totals for biodiversity hotspots while ignoring substitutability in industrialized economies. Over-reliance on these valuations can foster inefficient policies by imposing artificial scarcity values that distort private markets, where revealed preferences via trade and innovation better signal trade-offs. For example, bundling multiple services in landscape-level assessments increases coordination costs and policy rigidity, as seen in grassland valuations where simultaneous optimization leads to higher implementation inefficiencies compared to market-driven land uses.^[105] Critics argue this supplants price signals with expert-imposed totals, echoing rebound effects where conservation incentives inadvertently boost consumption elsewhere, reducing net biodiversity gains.^[106] Private property rights and voluntary exchanges, by contrast, empirically handle substitutability without such distortions, as evidenced in agricultural adaptations bypassing rigid service quotas.^[107]

Policy, Management, and Applications

Payments for Ecosystem Services

Payments for ecosystem services (PES) involve voluntary transactions where service providers, such as landowners, receive compensation for maintaining or enhancing specific environmental benefits, like watershed protection or carbon sequestration, that would otherwise be underprovided due to externalities.^[108] This mechanism aligns incentives by internalizing benefits, drawing on Coasean principles of negotiating property rights to achieve efficient outcomes without relying on coercive regulation.^[109] One prominent example is Costa Rica's national PES program, established in 1997 under Forestry Law 7575, which compensates landowners for forest conservation, reforestation, and sustainable management to preserve biodiversity, water regulation, and carbon storage.^[110] By 2017, the program had enrolled nearly one million hectares, primarily for forest protection (90% of contracts), contributing to a reversal in deforestation trends as forest cover rose from about 21% in 1987 to over 50% by the 2010s.^[111] Empirical analyses, however, indicate mixed additionality, with national-level deforestation reductions attributable more to broader policy shifts than payments alone, though localized studies in northern regions show payments averted clearing that might have occurred absent incentives.^[112] At a global scale, the REDD+ framework, formalized under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change following the 2008 Bali Action Plan and advanced at the 2009 Copenhagen conference, incentivizes developing countries to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation through performance-based payments, often funded by international buyers.^[113] Evaluations of voluntary REDD+ projects demonstrate effectiveness in slowing tropical deforestation rates by 23-50% compared to baselines in participating sites, though scalability remains limited by verification challenges and uneven national implementation.^[113] China's Grain for Green Program, launched in 1999, exemplifies large-scale PES by converting 32 million hectares of cropland and barren land to forests and grasslands on erosion-prone slopes, compensating farmers with grain, cash, and subsidies.^[114] This initiative reduced soil erosion significantly in the upper Yangtze and middle Yellow River basins, with sediment yields dropping by up to 60% in treated areas, alongside increases in soil organic carbon stocks by 10-20% on the Loess Plateau.^[114]^[115] Despite successes, PES faces criticisms rooted in empirical shortcomings, including failures of additionality where services are preserved regardless of payments due to preexisting motivations or regulations, as evidenced in Costa Rican cases where up to 70% of enrolled forests showed no threat of conversion.^[116] High transaction costs—often 20-50% of total program expenses for monitoring, contracting, and enforcement—erode efficiency, particularly in government-led schemes with bureaucratic overhead.^[117] Voluntary private PES arrangements, emphasizing direct buyer-seller negotiations over state subsidies, better respect property rights and minimize distortions, fostering genuine markets rather than dependency on fiscal transfers that can crowd out intrinsic conservation motives.^[109]^[118]

Ecosystem-Based Management Strategies

Ecosystem-based management (EBM) strategies integrate ecosystem services into resource decision-making processes, employing adaptive frameworks that balance ecological resilience with human welfare objectives, such as sustained provisioning and regulating functions. In fisheries, EBM extends maximum sustainable yield (MSY) models to incorporate multispecies trophic interactions, bycatch mitigation, and environmental variability, ensuring harvest levels support broader services like habitat maintenance and biodiversity.^[119]^[120] Management strategy evaluations simulate these dynamics to set quotas that prevent overexploitation while accounting for ecosystem-wide productivity.^[121] Urban green infrastructure applies EBM by leveraging regulating services for stormwater control, where permeable surfaces, wetlands, and vegetated roofs attenuate runoff peaks, enhance infiltration, and filter pollutants, thereby reducing urban flood damages and erosion.^[122]^[123] These systems also yield ancillary benefits, including localized cooling and improved air quality, with empirical assessments showing significant volume reductions in peak flows during storms.^[124] For climate resilience, ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) tactics, formalized in UNFCCC guidelines post-2010 Cancun Agreements, restore natural buffers like wetlands and forests to buffer hazards such as coastal erosion and heatwaves, integrating services into national adaptation plans.^[125]^[126] The EU Water Framework Directive, effective since 2000, demonstrates EBM efficacy through river basin management that targets good ecological status, yielding over 98% achievement in organic pollution indicators (e.g., dissolved oxygen, BOD) by 2022 and 11-50% declines in sewage-related contaminants via wastewater upgrades.^[127]^[128] Yet, overreliance on preservation-oriented EBM has faltered by disregarding agricultural trade-offs; in tropical frontiers, stringent habitat protections have curtailed yields, intensifying poverty without proportional biodiversity gains due to unaddressed socioeconomic drivers.^[129]^[130] EBM alternatives juxtapose command-and-control mandates, which impose uniform standards on service extraction (e.g., fixed quotas), against market-driven mechanisms like tradable permits for capacities such as nutrient uptake or habitat credits, enabling efficient reallocation via price signals.^[131]^[132] These permits foster innovation in service enhancement, often surpassing rigid controls in cost-effectiveness for maintaining regulating functions amid varying demands.^[133]

Policy Debates and Alternatives

Debates on ecosystem services policies frequently contrast regulatory restrictions justified by service preservation with evidence of policy-induced maladaptations. The European Union's Habitats Directive, implemented since 1992, mandates safeguards for over 1,000 species and 230 habitat types to sustain services like pollination and water purification, often curtailing land development and agriculture.^[134] Critics highlight regulatory overreach, citing cases where compliance delays infrastructure, inflating costs—such as a UK project ballooning to £9 million amid six consultation rounds—while conservation outcomes remain inconsistent due to enforcement gaps.^[135]^[136] Policies targeting services through mandates have sometimes exacerbated environmental harms. Biofuel promotion, framed as enhancing carbon sequestration via biomass, has driven land conversion; under the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard, soybean biodiesel production yields net emission increases of up to 35.5 kg CO₂e per gallon from deforestation and foregone sequestration, per model analyses incorporating indirect effects.^[137] Similarly, ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) initiatives, which leverage services like mangroves for flood defense, face scrutiny for overstated benefits; while some yield benefit-cost ratios exceeding 3:1, others reveal trade-offs across stakeholders and scales, with ratios below 1.5 signaling inefficiencies where adaptation gains fail to offset opportunity costs.^[138]^[139] Alternatives prioritize property rights to internalize service externalities and promote stewardship, countering the tragedy of the commons where undefined access spurs overexploitation, as seen in depleted fisheries. England's 18th-19th century enclosures privatized commons, boosting output through invested practices like drainage and rotation, yielding sustainable intensification over communal degradation.^[140]^[141] Such rights enable owners to capture service values, outperforming vague regulations in incentivizing maintenance without universal prohibitions.^[142] Over preservation mandates, targeted subsidies for innovation offer flexibility, spurring technologies that augment services—like advanced monitoring for efficient habitat management—while avoiding distortions from coercive preservation. Payments for ecosystem services exemplify this, fostering verifiable provision and cost innovations superior to blanket rules in adaptive contexts.^[143]^[133]

Criticisms and Debates

Anthropocentric Bias and Intrinsic Value

The ecosystem services framework is inherently anthropocentric, defining value in terms of benefits to human welfare rather than attributing independent worth to natural entities. Critics argue this perspective marginalizes the intrinsic value of ecosystems, potentially rationalizing exploitation when short-term human gains outweigh perceived long-term costs. For instance, Douglas J. McCauley contended in 2006 that emphasizing services commodifies nature, undermines ethical protections for biodiversity unrelated to human utility, and relies on unproven market mechanisms for conservation, advocating instead for safeguarding nature on its own merits. Such biocentric critiques highlight risks of anthropocentrism reinforcing human dominance, as seen in ethical analyses warning that service-based valuations may overlook non-utilitarian dimensions like species existence rights.^[144] Proponents counter that the framework's anthropocentrism aligns with causal realities, as ecosystems' relevance stems from their provisioning, regulating, and supporting roles in human survival and prosperity, per the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment's linkages to well-being constituents such as basic needs and health.^[145] Empirical evidence supports this primacy: studies demonstrate correlations between ecosystem service flows—like freshwater regulation and soil fertility—and human development metrics, including adjusted GDP contributions from non-marketed ecological inputs, underscoring testable dependencies absent in intrinsic value claims.^[146] Assertions of nature's intrinsic value, while philosophically appealing, lack falsifiability, offering no empirical mechanism to prioritize or measure outcomes beyond subjective ethics, which can impede policy by diverting resources from verifiable human harms like service degradation linked to welfare declines.^[147] A synthesis of debates reveals that while biocentric arguments enrich moral discourse, anthropocentric focus enables rigorous assessment and intervention, as intrinsic paradigms struggle to resolve trade-offs without reverting to human-centered proxies for decision-making. This approach avoids policy paralysis by grounding conservation in observable causal chains, such as pollination services' direct ties to agricultural yields supporting 75% of global food crops, rather than unquantifiable absolutes.^[148]

Oversimplification and Measurement Challenges

The ecosystem services framework often conflates ecological functions—such as nutrient cycling—with the benefits derived by humans, leading to oversimplification of causal pathways and omission of negative feedbacks known as disservices, which were largely absent in early conceptual models like the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment of 2005.^[55] For instance, early assessments frequently ignored how biodiversity loss can amplify disservices, such as increased pest outbreaks or disease transmission, by failing to account for regulatory trade-offs where enhanced provisioning services (e.g., crop yields) diminish supporting functions like soil formation.^[55] This reductionism stems from categorizing services into rigid provisioning, regulating, cultural, and supporting bins, which obscures non-linear ecological dynamics where small changes in drivers like land use can trigger disproportionate shifts in service delivery, as evidenced in stream ecosystems where nonlinear responses to nutrient inputs complicate predictive modeling.^[149] Measurement challenges exacerbate these issues, particularly for cultural services, where intangible benefits like spiritual or aesthetic values are assessed via subjective surveys prone to respondent bias and cultural variability, yielding inconsistent quantifications that undervalue non-material contributions relative to market-based provisioning metrics.^[150] Reviews indicate that such methods often fail to capture relational aspects, such as place attachment, leading to underestimation by factors of up to 50% in participatory valuations compared to biophysical proxies.^[151] Similarly, links between biodiversity and services are poorly quantified, with 2013 analyses revealing that empirical studies capture only linear correlations while overlooking threshold effects, where species diversity buffers against service declines until a tipping point, as in pollinator-dependent crops where 20-30% diversity loss can halve yields nonlinearly.^[55] Common quantification flaws include mistaking static stocks (e.g., biomass) for dynamic fluxes (e.g., annual carbon sequestration), distorting policy targets by 10-100 fold in some cases.^[152] These inadequacies risk misguided conservation priorities, such as prioritizing single services over resilient assemblages, potentially leading to interventions that overlook feedbacks and result in unintended declines, as seen in afforestation projects enhancing carbon storage but reducing water provisioning by 15-20% in semi-arid regions.^[153] Integrated modeling approaches, incorporating stochastic feedbacks and disservices, offer partial mitigation by simulating complexity more accurately, though persistent data gaps in remote or dynamic systems limit reliability.^[154] Human adaptability, through technological substitutions like synthetic pollinators, can buffer some service failures, underscoring that while the framework highlights dependencies, over-reliance on simplified metrics may underestimate societal resilience to ecological variability.^[55]

Risks of Commodification and Policy Misuse

Commodification of ecosystem services, by converting ecological functions into marketable commodities such as carbon credits or tradable permits, risks undermining long-term stewardship by prioritizing short-term financial incentives over intrinsic environmental values. In carbon offset markets, which emerged prominently after the 2010 expansion of voluntary schemes under frameworks like the Clean Development Mechanism, numerous scandals have exposed how tradable units fail to deliver verifiable benefits, fostering moral hazard where buyers claim emission reductions without actual sequestration. For instance, a 2023 investigation found that 90% of rainforest carbon offsets purchased by major corporations like Delta and Gucci from Verra-certified projects were "likely junk," with little to no deforestation prevention achieved due to inflated baselines and poor monitoring.^[155] Similarly, South Pole, a leading offset provider, faced allegations in 2023 of exaggerating climate impacts in Peruvian forest protection projects, leading to over-crediting and erosion of trust in market mechanisms.^[156] These cases illustrate how commodification can incentivize gaming the system rather than genuine conservation, as participants treat nature as a financial asset prone to speculation and leakage, where protected areas displace degradation elsewhere.^[157] Policy misuse exacerbates these risks, particularly in payments for ecosystem services (PES) programs, where external incentives may crowd out intrinsic motivations for conservation, leading to dependency and reduced voluntary compliance once payments cease. A meta-analysis of 54 PES projects worldwide revealed that 42% exhibited crowding-out effects, weakening participants' pro-environmental intrinsic drives through overjustification, where monetary rewards supplant moral or cultural imperatives.^[158] This dynamic has been observed in schemes like Costa Rica's national PES program initiated in 1997, where initial participation surges yielded to long-term behavioral shifts toward payment reliance, with post-payment deforestation rates rising in some areas due to diminished stewardship norms.^[159] Valuation controversies further contribute to inefficient resource allocation, as economic models often overvalue marginal or easily monetizable services (e.g., carbon sequestration) at the expense of bundled, non-substitutable functions like biodiversity maintenance, resulting in policies that misdirect funds toward low-impact interventions.^[99] Geographic inequities compound these issues, as dominant valuation frameworks reflect Western anthropocentric biases, marginalizing non-market values prevalent in Indigenous and developing contexts and favoring policies that benefit high-income actors. Ecosystem service assessments show a pronounced geographical skew, with over 70% of valuation studies concentrated in Europe and North America, imposing utilitarian metrics that undervalue cultural or relational services central to non-Western worldviews, thereby enabling inequitable benefit capture by global North entities in schemes like REDD+.^[57]^[160] In contrast, secure property rights regimes have demonstrated superior outcomes in resource management compared to open-access or loosely commodified systems, avoiding the pitfalls of tradable abstractions. For example, the introduction of individual transferable quotas (ITQs) in the U.S. Pacific groundfish fishery in 2011 transformed a collapsing open-access regime—characterized by overcapitalization and stock depletion—into a sustainable system, with biomass increasing by over 60% and economic yields rising due to enforceable rights that align incentives with long-term viability, outperforming unregulated or offset-dependent alternatives.^[161]^[162] This evidence underscores that while commodification promises efficiency, its policy applications often falter without robust, localized rights structures, prioritizing verifiable stewardship over speculative markets.

Recent Advances and Future Directions

Innovations in Assessment (Post-2020)

Post-2020 advancements in ecosystem services assessment have increasingly incorporated remote sensing and geographic information systems (GIS) to enhance spatial mapping and quantification of services such as carbon sequestration and habitat provision. Earth observation technologies, including satellite imagery, enable high-resolution monitoring of land cover changes and service flows, improving accuracy over traditional ground-based methods.^[163] For instance, the InVEST (Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs) model, which integrates GIS with biophysical simulations, has been applied in post-2020 studies to evaluate tradeoffs in urban and rural landscapes, though specific version updates emphasize refined algorithms for scenario modeling.^[164] These tools facilitate verifiable predictions, such as water yield and soil retention, by processing multi-temporal data from sources like Landsat and Sentinel satellites.^[165] Artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) have emerged as complementary methods for predicting dynamic service flows, particularly in pollination and biodiversity contexts. ML algorithms trained on remote sensing data predict pollinator habitat quality and interaction networks, as seen in frameworks like MetaComNet, which forecast plant-pollinator occurrences with spatial explicitness using random forests.^[166] UAV-based imagery combined with ML detects flower abundance as a proxy for bee populations, enabling indirect assessment of pollination services at fine scales.^[167] Such approaches outperform conventional statistical models in handling complex, non-linear ecological data, with applications in grassland conservation demonstrating improved precision in service valuation.^[168] Procedural updates in certification frameworks have expanded assessment categories to include underrepresented services. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) revised its Ecosystem Services Procedure to version 2-0 in January 2025, incorporating cultural practices and air quality alongside provisioning, regulating, and supporting services to better capture comprehensive impacts in certified forests.^[169] Similarly, the OECD's September 2025 report on scaling biodiversity-positive incentives highlights refined PES mechanisms that rely on enhanced assessment tools for verifying service delivery, emphasizing data-driven baselines for subsidies and payments.^[170] Despite these improvements, integration of ecosystem disservices—such as disease transmission or invasive species facilitation—remains limited, with recent frameworks like the Composite Ecosystem Disservice model attempting to address this by quantifying negative flows, though empirical adoption lags due to data scarcity and methodological inconsistencies.^[65]

Emerging Research Trends

Recent research in ecosystem services emphasizes integrating dynamic stressors such as climate change and land-use alterations into long-term projections, with studies post-2020 developing frameworks to simulate service flows under multiple scenarios. For instance, a 2024 analysis proposes modular approaches combining climate models, land-use simulations, and service quantification to forecast mid- to long-term changes, revealing potential declines in provisioning services like timber yield by up to 20% in vulnerable regions by 2050 under high-emission pathways.^[171] Similarly, spatiotemporal modeling of service flows highlights risks of transboundary mismatches, where upstream land conversions could reduce downstream water regulation by 15-30% in shared basins, urging adaptive management across borders.^[172] Advances in assessment technologies, including remote sensing and machine learning, are addressing measurement gaps, enabling finer-scale mapping of services like carbon sequestration and habitat provision. A 2023 review identifies these tools as pivotal for overcoming data limitations, with applications in real-time monitoring showing accuracy improvements of 25-40% over traditional surveys in biodiversity hotspots.^[163] In urban contexts, alignment of nature-based solutions with service frameworks is gaining traction, as evidenced by 2022-2024 studies linking green infrastructure to enhanced regulating services, such as flood mitigation valued at $1-5 billion annually in megacities.^[173] ^[174] Theoretical shifts are rethinking services through supply-demand dynamics and human-ecosystem interdependence, moving beyond static valuations to account for realization processes. A 2025 framework integrates these elements, demonstrating that demand mismatches can halve effective service delivery in 40% of assessed cases, particularly for cultural services like recreation.^[175] ^[67] Social assessments are also evolving, with 2025 dissertations advancing participatory methods to incorporate equity in valuations, revealing that low-income communities prioritize non-market services like spiritual benefits, often undervalued in economic models by factors of 2-5.^[176] Cultural ecosystem services research is progressing in generational phases, with second-generation studies post-2020 focusing on policy impacts and non-material benefits, such as how habitat restoration boosts community well-being metrics by 10-25% in empirical trials.^[177] Emerging finance-oriented inquiries explore biodiversity loss's economic ripple effects, projecting global GDP reductions of 1-5% by 2050 without intervention, while advocating for integrated risk models in investment strategies.^[178] These trends collectively signal a pivot toward holistic, predictive paradigms that prioritize empirical validation over simplistic commodification.

References

[1]
[PDF] introduction: what are ecosystem services?
Ecosystem services are the conditions and processes through which natural ecosystems, and the species that make them up, sustain and fulfill human life. They ...
[2]
Ecosystem services classification: A systems ecology perspective of ...
Definitions and examples of ecosystem services terminology according to selected peer-reviewed literature. Author & proposed application, Biophysical ...
[3]
Ecosystem Services | USDA Climate Hubs
Ecosystem services are the direct and indirect benefits that ecosystems provide humans. Agroecosystems, rangelands, and forests provide suites of ecosystem ...
[4]
Ecosystems, Ecosystem Services, and Biodiversity
These benefits, termed ecosystem services, encompass four primary functions: provisioning materials, such as food and fiber; regulating critical parts of the ...
[5]
Ecosystem Services - EnviroAtlas | US EPA
Aug 8, 2025 · Ecosystem goods and services, often shortened to ecosystem services (ES), are the benefits that humans receive from nature. These benefits ...
[6]
[PDF] The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice
The origins of the modern history of ecosystem services are to be found in the late 1970s. It starts with the utilitarian framing of beneficial ecosystem ...
[7]
The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice
Apr 1, 2010 · The origins of the modern history of ecosystem services are to be found in the late 1970s.
[8]
Review Paper Conceptual diversity and application of ecosystem ...
Ecosystem Services (ES) are an evolving concept in environmental research and policy making. Over the years, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA, 2005), a ...
[9]
Ecosystem Services | National Wildlife Federation
Four Types of Ecosystem Services · 1. Provisioning Services · 2. Regulating Services · 3. Cultural Services · 4. Supporting Services
[10]
[PDF] Chapter 3 Scientific Understanding of Ecosystem Services
Jan 25, 2016 · The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) classified ecosystem services as: provisioning services (e.g., food – including food traded in ...
[11]
Box 2.1: Ecosystem Services - GreenFacts
Primary Production. The assimilation or accumulation of energy and nutrients by organisms. Nutrient cycling. Approximately 20 nutrients essential for life, ...
[12]
Ecological Processes | US EPA
Feb 5, 2025 · Collectively, ecological processes produce organic matter, transfer carbon and nutrients, drive soil formation, and enable organisms to ...
[13]
Net primary production is the basis of all ecosystem services
The energy and carbon of primary production supplies consumers, including humans, with the necessary fuel to support their metabolism while providing essential ...Missing: ecological | Show results with:ecological<|control11|><|separator|>
[14]
Soil-based ecosystem services: a synthesis of nutrient cycling and ...
Aug 12, 2014 · Soil-based ecosystem function is fundamental to continued production of food, fodder and energy to accommodate the needs of the human population ...
[15]
[PDF] Ecosystem Services - Robert Costanza
The ecosystems that provide the services are 'natural capital' (NC) using the general definition of capital as a stock that yields a flow of services over time.
[16]
[PDF] GUIDANCE FOR ASSESSING CHANGES IN ENVIRONMENTAL ...
Feb 28, 2024 · Natural capital is distinguished from ecosystem services in that natural capital is a stock (measure of quantity in a place at a point or period ...<|separator|>
[17]
Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions - PNAS
Ecosystem services are the conditions and processes of ecosystems that generate—or help generate—benefits for people. These benefits result from the ...Missing: distinction | Show results with:distinction
[18]
[PDF] Classification of ecosystem services (EEA) (UNCEEA/5/7)
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA 2005) first synthesis: ES defined as 'the benefits people obtain from ecosystems'. – Provisioning Services: which cover ...
[19]
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Is It the Same Below Ground?
Ecosystem Services ... The term 'ecosystem services' was defined in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA 2005) as 'the benefits people obtain from ecosystems' ...
[20]
[PDF] 3 DEFINING AND MEASURING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Dec 22, 2015 · The aim of this chapter is to take the reader on a journey through the terminology surrounding the idea of ecosystem services, not to convince.
[21]
Eugene Odum - New Georgia Encyclopedia
Eugene Pleasants Odum, called “the father of modern ecology,” brought the word ecosystem into common parlance by making it the organizing concept in his 1953 ...
[22]
Odum's 1960s Everglades Studies Shape The Science of Ecology ...
Jun 23, 2020 · The ecosystem concept was actually coined thirty years prior to Odum's research in 1935 by Sir Arthur Tansley at Oxford University. Tansley ...
[23]
How Much Are Nature's Services Worth? - Science
How Much Are Nature's Services Worth?: Measuring the social benefits of ... WESTMAN, W.E., QUANTIFYING BENEFITS: 284 (1977). Google Scholar. WHARTON ...
[24]
https://oxfordre.com/environmentalscience/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.001.0001/acrefore-9780199389414-e-4
[25]
[PDF] Natural Capital as an Economic Concept, History and Contemporary ...
Feb 20, 2019 · Pearce was the first economist to use the expression “natural capital” to refer to natural re- sources and services, or, to use his own words,.
[26]
The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital
May 15, 1997 · For the entire biosphere, the value (most of which is outside the market) is estimated to be in the range of US$16-54 trillion (1012) per year, ...
[27]
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment assessed the consequences of ecosystem change for human well-being. From 2001 to 2005, the MA involved the work of more than ...
[28]
FAO Report: Global fisheries and aquaculture production reaches a ...
Jun 7, 2024 · In 2021, they contributed at least 20 percent of the per capita protein supply from all animal sources to 3.2 billion people. Most capture ...
[29]
FAO Report: Global fisheries and aquaculture production reaches a ...
Jun 10, 2024 · In 2021, they contributed at least 20 percent of the per capita protein supply from all animal sources to 3.2 billion people. Most capture ...
[30]
Role of Biodiversity in Increasing Soil Fertility - EMNZ
Increasing biodiversity will improve the resilience of the soil to environmental changes while also influencing the chemical, physical, and biological ...
[31]
Provisioning Service - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
Provisioning services from marine environments include seafood, fuel wood from mangrove forests, sand for construction, and genetic resources for medicines.
[32]
(PDF) The Role of Biodiversity in Agricultural Resilience
Oct 15, 2024 · Biodiversity-rich systems enhance pollination, pest control, water regulation, and soil fertility, reducing dependence on chemicals. However ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[33]
Innovation and the growth of human population - Journals
Oct 23, 2017 · Our model connects human population size with the demand and provision of ecosystem services and technological innovation. These connections ...
[34]
Mapping water provisioning services to support the ecosystem ...
In this study we aimed to map and assess water provisioning services and associated benefits to support the ecosystem–water–food–energy nexus.Missing: timber | Show results with:timber
[35]
A Tragedy with No End | Science History Institute
Sep 5, 2024 · The cod collapse was due to industrialization, large factory ships, and a 93% biomass drop. A fishing moratorium failed to help, and the stock ...
[36]
Unnatural Disaster: How Politics Destroyed Canada's Atlantic ...
Jan 18, 2000 · ... property rights in fish systems of self-managed ownership. ... Lament for an Ocean: The Collapse of the Atlantic Cod Fishery: A True Crime Story.
[37]
How ecological feedbacks between human population and land ...
Aug 17, 2018 · We model human population over the next century, emphasizing feedbacks between natural and agricultural resource availability and human demography.
[38]
A global view of regulatory ecosystem services: existed knowledge ...
Jul 23, 2020 · A study by Bicking et al. (2018) on a mapping of nutrient regulating ecosystem service by using the nutrient nitrogen is an example in Germany.
[39]
Land - the planet's carbon sink | United Nations
In the last decade alone, land-based ecosystems absorbed around 30 per cent of the carbon emissions generated by human activities, such as the burning of fossil ...Missing: anthropogenic | Show results with:anthropogenic
[40]
[PDF] Reconciling Anthropogenic Land Use Emissions
Oct 31, 2024 · Simultaneously, terrestrial sinks absorb nearly a third of the total anthropogenic CO2 emissions, mostly in forests. Figure 1. The global carbon ...<|separator|>
[41]
The Global Flood Protection Benefits of Mangroves | Scientific Reports
Mar 10, 2020 · Mangroves and global flood reduction benefits. Mangroves annually reduce property damage by more than $US 65 billion and protect more than 15 ...
[42]
[PDF] Valuing the Flood Risk Reduction Benefits of Florida's Mangroves
The value of mangrove forests during Hurricane Irma was also very high. Mangroves averted $1.5 billion in storm damages, amounting to a 25% savings in counties ...
[43]
Water Purifying Capacity of Natural Riverine Wetlands in Relation to ...
Apr 21, 2020 · Generally, this study confirmed the potential of natural wetlands to mitigate nutrients and organic pollutants and sustain biodiversity. However ...
[44]
Global Action on Pollination Services for Sustainable Agriculture
Over 80 percent of all flowering plant species are pollinated by animals, mostly insects, and they affect 35 percent of the world's crop production. Pollination ...FAO Publications · About · Photo Contest WBD25 · News
[45]
Recognizing the importance of insects | FAO
Some 75 percent of our most-cultivated crops depend on insect pollination. 87% of all flowering plants need pollinators, we would lose them and their ...
[46]
Insect pollinators can unlock an annual monetary value of more than ...
Nov 16, 2023 · Direct insect pollinator-dependent crops accounted for 20% (2014) to 18% (2020) of this value, with the share attributed to insect pollinators ...
[47]
Mangroves and coral reefs: Two natural and cost-effective solutions ...
Jun 24, 2022 · Mangroves and coral reefs can be used cost-effectively to reduce coastal flooding, a new study finds. Mangrove restoration opportunities proved ...
[48]
Estimation of Global Net Primary Productivity from 1981 to 2018 with ...
The average global NPP is 61.0 PgC/yr in 1981-2018, which is in great agreement with the other similar products. The global NPP has shown a significant increase ...<|separator|>
[49]
How much oxygen comes from the ocean?
Jun 16, 2024 · Scientists estimate that roughly half of the oxygen production on Earth comes from the ocean. The majority of this production is from oceanic plankton.
[50]
Phenomenal Phytoplankton: Scientists Uncover Cellular Process ...
May 31, 2023 · These tiny oceanic algae form the base of the aquatic food web and are estimated to produce around 50% of the oxygen on Earth. The new study, ...
[51]
The Global Distribution of Biological Nitrogen Fixation in Terrestrial ...
Feb 9, 2020 · Global terrestrial biological nitrogen fixation is likely in the range of 52-130 Tg N per year. 1 Introduction. The terrestrial carbon cycle ...
[52]
Modeling biological nitrogen fixation in global natural terrestrial ... - BG
Jul 13, 2020 · The estimated nitrogen fixation in global terrestrial ecosystems is 61.5 Tg N yr−1 with a range of 19.8–107.9 Tg N yr−1 in the 1990s. Our ...
[53]
Spatially robust estimates of biological nitrogen (N) fixation imply ...
May 19, 2014 · Our results imply that humans have roughly doubled N inputs to the tropical forest biome relative to N inputs through BNF.
[54]
How fast does soil grow? - ScienceDirect.com
We compiled TCN-derived soil production rates of world soils. Soil production rates are reduced with an increasing layer of soil.
[55]
Ecosystem Services: Origins, Contributions, Pitfalls, and Alternatives
We then outline three sets of weaknesses in the ES framework: confusion over ecosystem functions and biodiversity, omission of dis-services, trade-offs and ...
[56]
Cultural ecosystem services: A review of methods and tools for ...
Cultural ecosystem services (CES) are non-material benefits from ecosystems, influencing quality of life. 15 evaluation methods were classified, with 68 ...
[57]
Challenges to understanding and managing cultural ecosystem ...
Cultural ecosystem services (CES) have been proposed as the “intangible and non-material benefits that people enjoy from ecosystems”, and the literature has ...
[58]
Visitor Spending Effects - Social Science (U.S. National Park Service)
Sep 10, 2024 · Economic contributions of National Park Service visitor spending are displayed at the national, state, and local levels. Select an economy to ...
[59]
Economic Impact of National Parks
Sep 12, 2024 · Overall, visitation grew by 6 million visits (2%) across the National Park System from 2023 to 2024, generating 340,100 jobs and resulting in ...
[60]
A Meta-Analysis of Emotional Evidence for the Biophilia Hypothesis ...
May 26, 2022 · The biophilia hypothesis posits that connection with nature is beneficial to all humans, through a dominant genetic/evolutionary basis (Wilson, ...
[61]
A meta-analysis of physiological stress responses to natural ...
Natural environments have a small to moderate effect on reducing physiological stress compared to urban environments, supporting Biophilia and Stress Recovery ...
[62]
A Review of Empirical Studies of Cultural Ecosystem Services in ...
Oct 12, 2023 · Cultural ecosystem services (CES) refer to those non-material benefits people obtain from ecosystems [4]. The concept has garnered growing ...
[63]
Valuing Cultural Ecosystem Services | Annual Reviews
Cultural ecosystem services (CES), usually defined as the intangible and nonmaterial benefits ecosystems provide, have been relatively neglected by researchers ...
[64]
The challenge of valuing ecosystem services that have no material ...
One of the key challenges thus resides in developing a valuation approach that explicitly considers ecological, socio-cultural and economic values of a service, ...
[65]
Boxes of rain: A systematic review on the classes and frameworks of ...
Mar 13, 2025 · These impacts (or trade-offs) can be referred to as ecosystem disservices (ED) (Döhren and Haase 2015). ED are defined as 'ecosystem-generated ...
[66]
[PDF] Landscape and Urban Planning
Dec 8, 2010 · Other types of ecosystem functions and structures might have negative consequences on human life are referred to as ecosystem disservices ( ...
[67]
A theoretical rethinking of ecosystem services from the perspective ...
By definition, EDS can be understood as the ecosystem functions that are disliked by people and the detrimental contributions from ecosystems to people, which ...
[68]
[PDF] Ecosystem Services and Disservices of Mangrove Forests and Salt ...
Shackleton et al. (2016) have undertaken one of the more rigorous ecosystem disservice typologies, defining disservices as the 'functions, processes, and ...
[69]
[PDF] Human-wildlife conflict: Elephant
Average losses ranged from 0.2% (Niger) to 61% (Gabon) of planted fields. Estimates of annual costs of elephant raids ranged from $60 (Uganda) to $510 Page 18 ...
[70]
[PDF] Forest Policy and Economics
Feb 11, 2025 · Compounding these challenges, longer and more intense wildfire seasons have had significant impacts on ecosystem services and costs. From 1995 ...
[71]
Damage costs from invasive species exceed management ...
Invasive species have been estimated to cost US$423 billion annually at the global scale (Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, ...
[72]
The impact of soil erosion on soil-related ecosystem services
May 14, 2021 · Soil erosion leads to soil degradation: Soil material, and by this organic carbon and nutrients, gets lost, resulting in reduced soil natural ...Missing: overgrowth | Show results with:overgrowth
[73]
A framework for sustainable management of ecosystem services ...
Nov 23, 2021 · Ecosystem disservices: Undesirable outcomes of ecosystem functions that negatively affect humans or the environ- ment, such as air pollution, ...
[74]
Fire-Regulating Services and Disservices With an Application to the ...
We review the literature on fire risk reduction related to ecosystem management to define and characterize fire-regulating services and disservices.
[75]
How much do we know about trade-offs in ecosystem services? A ...
Feb 1, 2022 · This study identifies a total of 198 pairs of conflicting ES, of which the trade-off between crop production and carbon/climate services has the highest ...
[76]
Conceptual ambiguity hinders measurement and management of ...
May 14, 2020 · Disservices are supplied concurrently with ecosystem services and human perceptions do not always accurately represent ecological costs in ...
[77]
InVEST - Natural Capital Project - Stanford University
InVEST enables decision makers to assess quantified tradeoffs associated with alternative management choices and to identify areas where investment in natural ...InVEST models · InVEST Downloads, User... · Urban InVEST · GIS for InVEST
[78]
Expanding Wolf Population is Costing Cattle Ranchers - UC Davis
Apr 21, 2025 · UC Davis researchers found that one gray wolf can cause between $69000 and $162000 in losses due to lower pregnancy rates in cows and ...
[79]
Wolves and the West: The Cost of Coexistence | Market Intel
Jul 7, 2025 · These combined costs, reflecting $128 million in annual costs to U.S. ranchers, are displayed in Figure 6. The University of Arizona study also ...
[80]
Balancing Ecosystem Services and Disservices - jstor
To investigate how farmers balance trade-offs between ecosystem services and disservices at different distances from forests, we studied three examples of ...
[81]
Adaptive management for ecosystem services - ScienceDirect.com
Dec 1, 2016 · Adaptive management provides a way to clarify otherwise concealed relationships among management actions, ecological processes, and the ...
[82]
Adaptive management for ecosystem services - ScienceDirect.com
Adaptive management provides a process to assess the underlying within and cross-scale tradeoffs associated with production of ecosystem services while ...
[83]
Dollar-Based Methods - Ecosystem Valuation
1) Market Price Method · 2) Productivity Method · 3) Hedonic Pricing Method · 4) Travel Cost Method · 5) Damage Cost Avoided, Replacement Cost, and Substitute Cost ...
[84]
Using economic experiments to assess the validity of stated ...
Nevertheless, SP methods are widely applied to elicit economic values and preferences when revealed preference or market data and prices are not available.
[85]
Stated versus revealed preferences: An approach to reduce bias
Mar 9, 2021 · Stated preference (SP) survey responses may not predict actual behavior, leading to hypothetical bias. We developed an approach that harnesses ...INTRODUCTION · PULSE: SOURCE OF... · RESULTS · DISCUSSIONMissing: ecosystem | Show results with:ecosystem
[86]
Identifying ecological production functions for use in ecosystem ...
Oct 15, 2021 · Ecological production functions (EPFs) may help to quantify these connections in a transparent manner and to predict ES provision based on ...
[87]
Losing a Hectare of Wetlands Could Cost $8000 Per Year in Flood ...
Jan 28, 2022 · Wetland loss between 2001 and 2016 cost the United States an estimated $600 million or more per year in damages from flooding, said the ...Missing: avoided $10K/ha/year
[88]
[PDF] Changes in the global value of ecosystem services - Robert Costanza
Costanza et al. (1997) estimated the value of 17 ecosystem services for 16 biomes and an aggregate global value expressed in monetary units. This estimate was ...
[89]
Changes in the global value of ecosystem services - ScienceDirect
Costanza et al. (1997) estimated the value of 17 ecosystem services for 16 biomes and an aggregate global value expressed in monetary units. This estimate was ...
[90]
[PDF] The future value of ecosystem services: Global scenarios and ...
Jun 2, 2017 · In 2011, the total value of global ecosystem ser- vices were estimated to be USD 125trillion/yr (Costanza et al.,. 2014). This value was ...
[91]
The value of forest ecosystem services: A meta-analysis at the ...
We find that the total value of forest is approximately 2842 US$ ha −1 year −1 , with regulation and maintenance ES being the most valuable services.3. Methodology · 4. Results · I. Manuscript References
[92]
The economic value of the Brazilian Amazon rainforest ecosystem ...
May 19, 2022 · The estimated mean value of the Amazon's ecosystem services is about 410 USD/ha/year, with an overall average of 411 USD/ha/year. Recreation ...4. Results · 4.2. Economic Value... · 4.3. Meta-Regression Model...Missing: annual | Show results with:annual
[93]
The economic value of the Brazilian Amazon rainforest ecosystem ...
May 19, 2022 · The mean value estimate is 270 USD/ha/year (with a standard error of 160 based on 6 observations) in case the whole Brazilian Amazon is valued ...Missing: annual | Show results with:annual
[94]
TEEB report released on the Economics of Ecosystems and ... - UFZ
Nov 13, 2009 · The TEEB report point to four urgent strategic priorities. One is to save and restore global fisheries and related jobs, currently an underperforming asset in ...
[95]
(PDF) Changes in the global value of ecosystem services
Globally, wetlands occupy about 12.1 million km² but contribute to more than 40% of the total global ecosystem service value (Costanza et al., 2014) .
[96]
Changes in the global value of ecosystem services - ADS
Global loss of ecosystem services due to land use change is $US 4.3–20.2trillion/yr. Ecoservices contribute more than twice as much to human well-being as ...Missing: et | Show results with:et
[97]
Double counting in ecosystem services valuation: causes and ...
Oct 13, 2010 · Confusion of ecosystem functions and services leads to errors in ecosystem services valuation. It is obvious that simply aggregating ecosystem ...
[98]
Double counting in ecosystem services valuation: Causes and ...
Aug 6, 2025 · Instead, double counting means counting the value of an ES more than once and occurs when values of overlapping ESs are assessed separately and ...
[99]
Valuation of ecosystem services: paradox or Pandora's box for ...
Oct 9, 2017 · Valuation of supporting services is particularly difficult, concerning real integrated values (e.g. to avoid the double-counting). Monetary ...1. Introduction · 4. Results · 5. Discussion
[100]
Can seawater desalination be a win-win fix to our water cycle? - PMC
If coupled with water reuse for irrigation, desalination reduces groundwater abstraction and augments the water cycle. As such, it may support both adaptation ...
[101]
As Water Scarcity Increases, Desalination Plants Are on the Rise
Jun 11, 2019 · After decades of slow progress, desalination is increasingly being used to provide drinking water around the globe.
[102]
Substitutability of natural and human capitals: lessons from a simple ...
Nov 28, 2023 · Most ecosystem services (ES) are co-produced, to varying degrees, by interactions between people and ecosystems. Although ES research has ...
[103]
The values of ecosystem services inside and outside of protected ...
Jun 12, 2025 · Estimates of ecosystem service values in the ESVD were clearly biased geographically (Figure 1). Eight of the 26 countries (30%) in Eastern and ...Missing: nations | Show results with:nations
[104]
Economic values for ecosystem services: A global synthesis and ...
This paper presents a global synthesis of economic values for ecosystem services provided by 15 terrestrial and marine biomes.
[105]
Economic value of three grassland ecosystem services when ...
Mar 9, 2022 · ... ecosystem services on a landscape level inefficient. For example ... ecosystem services simultaneously increase potential cost inefficiencies from ...
[106]
Ineffective biodiversity policy due to five rebound effects
Ineffective biodiversity policy due to five rebound effects. Author links ... on the socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services provided by home gardens.Missing: reliance | Show results with:reliance
[107]
Misconceptions about the valuation of ecosystem services
This paper attempts to address some of those misconceptions, including showing that: (1) ecosystem services is not an anthropocentric concept; (2) economics is ...
[108]
Payments for Ecosystem Services | Water Knowledge Hub
PES are generally defined as voluntary transactions in which payments are received for the provision of well-defined ecosystem services. An important ...
[109]
Collective payments for ecosystem services - Ecology & Society
Various studies also emphasize the advantageous low transaction costs of C-PES, which is the result of the often significantly lower number of necessary ...Introduction · Methods · Results · Discussion
[110]
[PDF] Impact of Costa Rica's Program of Payments for Environmental ...
Costa Rica's PSA has been implemented throughout the country since 1997. Thus, there is sufficient experience to test the underlying hypothesis that PES ...
[111]
[PDF] Learning from 20 years of Payments for ecosystem services in costa ...
Since 1997 the programme has helped to conserve nearly one million hectares of forest by payments for protection (90 per cent), reforestation (6 per cent), ...
[112]
Understanding the impacts of Costa Rica's PES - ScienceDirect.com
Sep 15, 2010 · National studies conclude that PES has not lowered deforestation rates. Yet in northern Costa Rica, there is evidence of additionality for PES- ...
[113]
A global evaluation of the effectiveness of voluntary REDD+ projects ...
Our results indicate that incentivizing forest conservation through voluntary site‐based projects can slow tropical deforestation.
[114]
Chinese Grain for Green Program led to highly increased soil ...
Mar 27, 2014 · ... reducing soil erosion, enhancing biodiversity and conserving natural resources. This program has been implemented in 25 provinces ...
[115]
The Grain for Green project eliminated the effect of soil erosion on ...
Dec 1, 2021 · These results suggest that the Grain for Green project eliminated the negative effect of soil erosion on SOC on China's Loess Plateau.
[116]
[PDF] Additionality: The Next Steps for Ecosystem Service Markets
Jul 15, 2010 · 13. This paper reviews common policy approaches to analyzing additionality in an attempt to overcome this criticism and present additionality as ...
[117]
Redesigning payments for ecosystem services to increase cost ...
Oct 26, 2024 · The consensus is that the essential preconditions are that participants face low opportunity and transaction costs to conserve, which makes it ...
[118]
[PDF] Payments for Ecosystem Services: Rife with Problems and Potential ...
The problems include (1) new externalities, (2) misplacement of rights and responsibilities, (3) crowding out existing motivations, (4) efficiency-equity ...
[119]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165783615301041
[120]
Incorporating environmental forcing in developing ecosystem-based ...
The main objectives of this study were to (i) explore the ecosystem effects of different environmental forcing scenarios; (ii) identify the impacts of different ...
[121]
Two Tools Can Help Make Ecosystem-Based Fisheries ...
Sep 14, 2023 · Harvest strategies and management strategy evaluation offer a pathway to incorporating ecosystem considerations into fishery governance.
[122]
[PDF] Stormwater management and ecosystem services: a review
It is increasingly clear that green stormwater infrastructure not only controls stormwater volume and timing, but also promotes ecosystem services, which are ...
[123]
Urban Soils, Ecosystem Services, and the Application of Green ...
Jan 27, 2025 · These functions include stormwater management, mitigation of urban heat island impacts, recreational spaces, and even habitat for the ...
[124]
The ecosystem services supplied by urban green infrastructure ...
Sep 22, 2023 · The study showed that water supply, water regulation, soil formation, carbon sequestration and air temperature regulation were significantly and positively ...
[125]
[PDF] Guidelines for Integrating Ecosystem-based Adaptation into National ...
These guidelines for integrating ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) into National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) benefitted from the vast knowledge and valuable.
[126]
Ecosystem-based Adaptation - wocatpedia.net
Sep 7, 2016 · In response to the 2010 UNFCCC Cancun Agreements, a €10 million EbA flagship program in mountain ecosystems is being funded by the BMU (see ...Missing: adoption post-
[127]
Two decades of the EU Water Framework Directive
Apr 15, 2023 · By 2022, 'good' or 'high' water quality status for organic matter pollution indicators (dissolved oxygen, BOD, ammonium) was achieved for >98 % ...
[128]
Two decades of the EU Water Framework Directive - PubMed
Apr 15, 2023 · Our analysis reveals improvements in wastewater treatment initiated significant declines (11-50 %) in the concentration of key sewage pollution ...
[129]
Fading opportunities for mitigating agriculture-environment trade ...
Strong trade-offs between agriculture and the environment occur in deforestation frontiers, particularly in the world's rapidly disappearing tropical and ...
[130]
Trade-offs between agricultural production and ecosystem services ...
Jul 1, 2025 · This study evaluated the trade-offs between provisioning ecosystem services (crop yields) and other key ecosystem services including regulating services.
[131]
[PDF] Market-Based Environmental Policies
In contrast, conventional approaches to regulating the environment, so- called command-and-control regulations, typically force everyone to imple- ment the same ...
[132]
Types of market-oriented environmental tools (article) | Khan Academy
A marketable permit program is a program in which a city or state government issues permits allowing only a certain quantity of pollution. ... command-and-control ...Missing: management | Show results with:management
[133]
Economic Incentives | US EPA
Jul 22, 2025 · Economic incentive or market-based policies that rely on market forces to correct for producer and consumer behavior.
[134]
The Habitats Directive - Environment - European Commission
The Habitats Directive aims to protect over a thousand species, including mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish invertebrates, and plants, and 230 characteristic ...
[135]
How the EU's habitats directive is still harming Britain - The Times
one project went through six rounds of consultation as the cost ballooned to £9 ...Missing: overreach criticism
[136]
Habitats directive: Gross policy failure leaves Ireland's most prized ...
Jun 29, 2023 · Analysis: European Court's finding on our failure to implement habitats directive an indication of gross policy failure.
[137]
EPA's New Renewable Fuel Standard Will Increase Carbon Emissions
not lower them.
[138]
Ecosystems-based adaptation: Are we being conned? Evidence ...
The most common definition of EBA is “the use of biodiversity and ecosystem services to help people adapt to the adverse effects of climate change” (SCBD, 2009 ...Missing: inefficiencies | Show results with:inefficiencies
[139]
Assessing the costs and benefits of climate change adaptation
Mar 3, 2023 · Adaptation actions are cost-efficient when the benefit-cost ratio exceeds 1.5. Measures resulting in a lower ratio require careful consideration ...Missing: inefficiencies | Show results with:inefficiencies
[140]
Enclosing the land - UK Parliament
There is little doubt that enclosure greatly improved the agricultural productivity of farms from the late 18th century by bringing more land into effective ...
[141]
The Enclosure Movement and the Agricultural and Industrial ...
Sep 12, 2022 · That the enclosures affected northern and western England in particular is significant. These are areas less receptive to raising grains and ...
[142]
Property rights play a pivotal role in the distribution of ecosystem ...
Feb 20, 2022 · Property rights are fundamental institutions that set the rules for who is allowed to use, manage, and control natural resources.
[143]
Designing payments for ecosystem services: Lessons from previous ...
PES policies may be funded by taxes, by nongovernmental organization (NGO) funding acquired from voluntary contributions, by direct fees on service consumers, ...
[144]
Ethical Considerations in On-Ground Applications of the Ecosystem ...
Dec 1, 2012 · Abstract. The ecosystem services (ES) concept is one of the main avenues for conveying society's dependence on natural ecosystems.Abstract · Anthropocentric Framing · Addressing Ethical...<|separator|>
[146]
[PDF] What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized ...
12 Put differently, green GDP “trues up” conventional GDP to account for non-marketed ecological contributions to welfare. An ESI includes those new elements.
[147]
(PDF) Ecosystem Services as a Contested Concept: A Synthesis of ...
Jan 21, 2014 · We describe and reflect on seven recurring critiques of the concept of ecosystem services and respective counter-arguments.
[148]
Ecosystem Services and Human Wellbeing-Based Approaches Can ...
Apr 14, 2022 · This paper highlights how the Ecosystem Services approach can shift the focus to human wellbeing while remaining within biophysical planetary boundaries.
[149]
The prevalence of nonlinearity and detection of ecological ... - Nature
Mar 7, 2019 · Stream ecosystems are frequently managed from a log-linear framework, thus nonlinearity complicates monitoring, management, and rehabilitation ...
[150]
The Challenges of Incorporating Cultural Ecosystem Services into ...
A clearer characterization of services/benefits and values can be realized if cultural services are seen as producing a large number of intangible and nonmarket ...
[151]
Making Intangibles Tangible: Identifying Manifestations of Cultural ...
Dec 24, 2021 · The assessment of cultural ecosystem services (CES) has proved challenging due to their intangible, non-material and invisible characteristics.
[152]
Are ecosystem services adequately quantified? - Boerema
May 13, 2016 · Quantification of ecosystem services (ES) is an important step in operationalizing the concept for management and decision-making.
[153]
Non‐linearity in ecosystem services: temporal and spatial variability ...
Feb 1, 2009 · Improvements in the understanding and quantification of non-linearities in ecosystem functions are likely to provide more realistic ecosystem ...Abstract · In a nutshell · Valuation of non-linear... · Management of coastal...
[154]
Ecosystem services—current challenges and opportunities for ...
In this article we identify major challenges and opportunities for ecologists involved in empirical or modeling ecosystem service research.Abstract · Introduction · Challenges and Opportunities · Concluding Remarks
[155]
Corporations invested in carbon offsets that were 'likely junk ...
May 30, 2024 · Analysis of the carbon offset projects used by top corporations including Delta, Gucci and ExxonMobil raises concerns around their emission cuts claims.
[156]
Faulty Credits Tarnish Billion-Dollar Carbon Offset Seller
Mar 24, 2023 · South Pole, the world's leading purveyor of offsets, is facing allegations that it exaggerated climate claims around its forest-protection projects.
[157]
Addressing scandals and greenwashing in carbon offset markets
Carbon scandals and greenwashing in VCMs stem from inflated baselines, poor MRV, and weak governance structures. •. This review identifies systemic risks, ...
[158]
The impact of payment for ecosystem service schemes on ...
Our study found that: 1) 54% of PES projects had a crowding-in effect, reinforcing intrinsic motivations, while 42% had a crowding-out effect, weakening ...
[159]
Motivational crowding effects in payments for ecosystem services ...
Nov 29, 2021 · Motivational crowding-in refers to situations in which intrinsic pro-environmental motivations and values are reinforced (rather than ...Abstract · INTRODUCTION · METHODS · DISCUSSION
[160]
Decolonizing ecosystem valuation to sustain Indigenous worldviews
This paper examines if and how ecosystem valuation frameworks have recognized and mobilized Indigenous worldviews and engagements.
[161]
Property Regime or Development Policy? Explaining Growth in the ...
Aug 6, 2025 · Open access fisheries, in which the right to catch fish is available to all, is frequently identified as a fundamentally problematic situation.
[162]
Property Rights in Fisheries: How Much Can Individual Transferable ...
Individual transferable quotas (ITQs) are one of the property rights instruments that have been employed to improve economic efficiency in fisheries.
[163]
Emerging technologies for assessing ecosystem services
Emerging technologies include Earth observation, mobile technologies, data science, modeling/simulation, immersive technologies, visualization, and web-based ...
[164]
[PDF] Evaluating Ecosystem Services with Remote Sensing
Aug 30, 2022 · Remote sensing can be used to assess a variety of questions related to the valuation of ecosystems services.
[165]
Remote Sensing Technologies for Mapping Ecosystem Services
The existing reviews on mapping GIs or ESs often focus on single-discipline methods and typically address environmental issues at a single spatial scale. This ...
[166]
MetaComNet: A random forest‐based framework for making spatial ...
Nov 12, 2021 · Here we propose a framework for producing spatially explicit predictions of the occurrence and number of pairwise plant–pollinator interactions ...
[167]
UAV-based flower detection as an indirect proxy for bee abundance
Using machine learning methods on RGB UAV imagery enabled us to estimate flower cover in UAV-monitored areas and make numerical inferences of wild bee ...
[168]
Integrating Remote Sensing and Machine Learning with Ecosystem ...
CBI is using the latest remote sensing, machine learning, and modeling approaches to assess the quality of grasslands and pollinator habitat.Missing: AI prediction 2021-2025
[169]
The revised Ecosystem Services Procedure V2-0 is published | fsc.org
Jan 2, 2025 · The revised FSC-PRO-30-006 Ecosystem Services Procedure V2-0 is the conclusion of a more than two-year revision process and offers managers of FSC-certified ...
[170]
Scaling Up Biodiversity-Positive Incentives - OECD
Sep 10, 2025 · It examines an array of economic incentives for biodiversity, including subsidies, payments for ecosystem services, environmental taxes, fees ...
[171]
Revisiting mid-long term ecosystem services projections: Integrating ...
Mar 23, 2024 · Two of the most critical issues of sustainability are how future ecosystem services (ES) will change under natural and artificial stressors.
[172]
Spatial flows of ecosystem services under future climate and land ...
Feb 9, 2024 · Our study highlights the importance of embracing the spatiotemporal features of ES flows in sustainable transboundary management and adaptation strategies.
[173]
Aligning nature-based solutions with ecosystem services in the ...
This paper presents a framework to clarify and explicitly relate the two concepts, enhancing their applicability in the management of urban challenges.
[174]
Ecosystem-based adaptation to address urbanization and climate ...
Tools and innovative practices to boost consideration of ecosystem services in urban development and management have proliferated in recent years. For ...
[175]
A theoretical rethinking of ecosystem services from the perspective ...
May 16, 2025 · The framework integrates these advances by grounding ES in human-ecosystem interdependence, linking supply-demand dynamics to ES realization.Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
[176]
[PDF] Methodological and Theoretical Advances in the Social Assessment ...
May 1, 2025 · This dissertation advances the methodological and theoretical foundations of the social assessment of ecosystem services, a growing research ...
[177]
The generations of cultural ecosystem services research - PMC
Jun 14, 2025 · Understanding the cultural dimensions of human–nature relationships and integrating them into decision‐making is a central goal of ...
[178]
[PDF] Nature and Biodiversity Loss: A Research Agenda for Financial ...
We outline a research agenda to better understand the economic and financial consequences of nature and biodiversity loss. Our starting point is a simple ...