Advertisement

Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 19, Issue 10, pp 2773–2790 | Cite as

Ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation: concepts and a glossary

  • Richard Harrington
  • Christian Anton
  • Terence P. Dawson
  • Francesco de Bello
  • Christian K. Feld
  • John R. Haslett
  • Tatiana Kluvánkova-Oravská
  • Areti Kontogianni
  • Sandra Lavorel
  • Gary W. Luck
  • Mark D. A. Rounsevell
  • Michael J. Samways
  • Josef Settele
  • Michalis Skourtos
  • Joachim H. Spangenberg
  • Marie Vandewalle
  • Martin Zobel
  • Paula A. Harrison
Original Paper

Abstract

The RUBICODE project draws on expertise from a range of disciplines to develop and integrate frameworks for assessing the impacts of environmental change on ecosystem service provision, and for rationalising biodiversity conservation in that light. With such diverse expertise and concepts involved, interested parties will not be familiar with all the key terminology. This paper defines the terms as used within the project and, where useful, discusses some reasoning behind the definitions. Terms are grouped by concept rather than being listed alphabetically.

Keywords

Biodiversity Conservation DPSIR Ecosystem management Ecosystem services Ecosystem valuation Functional diversity Functional traits Service-providing unit Social–ecological systems 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the RUBICODE Coordination Action Project (Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems) funded under the Sixth Framework Programme of the European Commission (Contract No. 036890). RUBICODE is an endorsed project of the Global Land Project of the IGBP. The authors would like to thank all of the RUBICODE partners and associates for their contribution to the discussions necessary to produce this paper, and Professor Dave Raffaelli (University of York) for valuable comments on an earlier draft. The work also forms part of a BBSRC Institute Strategic Programme Grant to the Rothamsted Centre for Bioenergy and Climate Change.

References

  1. Barker T (2003) Representing global climate change, adaptation and mitigation. Glob Environ Change 13:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berkes F, Folke C (eds) (1998) Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonnin M, Bruzik A, Delbaere B et al (2007) The pan-European ecological network: taking stock. Nature and Environment No 146. Council of Europe Publishing, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  4. CBD (1998) Report of The Workshop on the Ecosystem Approach, Lilongwe, Malawi, 26–28 January 1998. UNEP/CBD/COP/4/INF.9 20th March 1998Google Scholar
  5. Costanza R (2000) Social goals and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecosystems 3:4–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Council of Europe (1989) Standing Committee of the Berne Convention Resolution No. 1, 1989 on the provisions relating to the conservation of habitats. Council of Europe, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  7. Dawson TP, Rounsevell MDA, Kluvánková-Oravská et al (2010) Dynamic properties of complex adaptive ecosystems: implications for the sustainability of service provision. Biodivers Conserv (this issue)Google Scholar
  8. Diaz S, Cabido M (2001) Vive la différence: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends Ecol Evol 16:646–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diaz S, Lavorel S, de Bello F et al (2007) Incorporating plant functional diversity effects in ecosystem service assessments. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:20684–20689CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. EEA (1995) Europe’s environment: the Dobris assessment. European Environment Agency, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  11. EEA (1999) Environmental indicators: typology and overview. Technical Report 25. European Environment Agency, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  12. EEA (2007) Halting the Loss of Biodiversity by 2010: proposal for a first set of indicators to monitor progress in Europe. Technical Report 11. European Environment Agency, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  13. Farina A (2000) Principles and methods in landscape ecology. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  14. Feld CK, Sousa P, da Silva PM et al (2010) A framework to assess indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services: implications for indicator development. Biodivers Conserv (this issue)Google Scholar
  15. Folke C, Carpenter SR, Walker BH et al (2004) Regime shift, resilience and biodiversity in ecosystem management. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 35:557–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Galaz V, Olsson P, Hahn T (2008) The problem of fit among biophysical systems, environmental and resource regimes: insights and emerging challenges. In: Young OR, King LA, Schröder H et al (eds) Institutions and environmental change: principle findings, applications and research frontiers. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallopin GC (1991) Human dimensions of global change: linking the global and the local processes. Int Soc Sci J 130:707–718Google Scholar
  18. Garnier E, Cortez J, Billès G et al (2004) Plant functional markers capture ecosystem properties during secondary succession. Ecology 85:2630–2637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gatzweiler F, Sipiläinen T, Bäckman S et al (2001) Analysing institutions, policies and farming systems for sustainable agriculture in Central and Eastern European Countries in transition. CEESA discussion paper No 2. Humboldt University of Berlin, Chair of Resource Economics, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  20. Gitay H, Noble IR (1997) What are functional types and how should we seek them? In: Smith TM, Shugart HH, Woodward FI (eds) Plant functional types: their relevance to ecosystem properties and global change. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Harrison PA, Vandewalle M, Sykes MT et al (2010) Identifying and prioritising services in European terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. Biodivers Conserv. doi: 10.1007/s10531-010-9789-x Google Scholar
  22. Haslett JR, Berry PM, Bela G et al (2010) Changing conservation strategies in Europe: a framework for integrating ecosystem services and dynamics. Biodivers Conserv. doi: 10.1007/s10531-009-9743-y
  23. Hodgson G (2002) Evolution of institutions: an agenda for future theoretical research. Consititut Polit Econ 13:111–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Holling CS (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hunter ML Jr, Gibbs J (2007) Fundamentals of conservation biology, 3rd edn. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Jongman R, Pungetti G (eds) (2004) Ecological networks and greenways: concept, design, implementation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Justus J, Colyvan M, Regan H et al (2009) Buying into conservation: intrinsic versus instrumental value. Trends Ecol Evol 24:187–191CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Kremen C (2005) Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology? Ecol Lett 8:468–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lavorel S, McIntyre S, Landsberg J et al (1997) Plant functional classification: from general groups to specific groups based on response to disturbance. Trends Ecol Evol 12:474–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lenski RE, Barrick JE, Ofria C (2006) Balancing robustness and evolvability. PLoS Biol 4(12):e48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lepš J, de Bello F, Lavorel S et al (2006) Quantifying and interpreting functional diversity of natural communities: practical considerations matter. Preslia 78:481–501Google Scholar
  32. Luck GW, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR (2003) Population diversity and ecosystem services. Trends Ecol Evol 18:331–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Luck GW, Harrington R, Harrison PA et al (2009) Quantifying the contribution of organisms to the provision of ecosystem services. Bioscience 59:223–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2003) Ecosystems and human well-being. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  35. Mason NWH, Mouillot D, Lee WG et al (2005) Functional richness, functional evenness and functional divergence: the primary components of functional diversity. Oikos 111:112–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maxim L, Spangenberg JH (2006) Bridging the gap between two analytical frameworks. Paper presented at the 9th biennial conference of the International Society for Ecological Economics (Ecological sustainability and human well-being), New Delhi, India, 15–18 December 2006Google Scholar
  37. Maxim L, Spangenberg JH, O’Connor M (2009) An analysis of risks for biodiversity under the DPSIR framework. Ecol Econ 69:12–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McGeoch M (1998) The selection, testing and application of terrestrial insects as bioindicators. Biol Rev 73:181–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Noss RF (1990) Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. Conserv Biol 4:355–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. OECD (2002) Handbook of biodiversity valuation: a guide for policy makers. ENV/EPOC/GEEI/BIO(2000)2/FINAL, ParisGoogle Scholar
  41. Olson JM, Misana S, Campbell DJ et al (2004a) The spatial pattern and root causes of land use change in East Africa. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Project Working Paper 47. International Livestock Research Institute, NairobiGoogle Scholar
  42. Olson JM, Misana S, Campbell DJ et al (2004b) A research framework to identify the root causes of land use change leading to land degradation and changing biodiversity. Land Use Change Impacts and Dynamics (LUCID) Project Working Paper 48. International Livestock Research Institute, NairobiGoogle Scholar
  43. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons. The evolution of the institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Pavoine S, Vallet J, Dufour A-B et al (2009) On the challenge of treating various types of variables: application for improving the measurement of functional diversity. Oikos 118:391–402Google Scholar
  45. Petchey OL, Hector A, Gaston KJ (2004) How do different measures of functional diversity perform? Ecology 85:847–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rapport D, Friend A (1979) Towards a comprehensive framework for environmental statistics: a stress-response approach. Statistics Canada Catalogue 11-510. Minister of Supply and Services Canada, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  47. Ricklefs RE, Miller GL (2000) Ecology, 4th edn. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Rounsevell MDA, Dawson TP, Harrison PA (2010) A conceptual framework to analyse the effects of environmental change on ecosystem services. Biodivers Conserv. doi: 10.1007/s10531-010-9838-5
  49. Samways MJ, Bazelet CS, Pryke JS (2010). Provision of ecosystem services by large-scale corridors and ecological networks. Biodivers Conserv (this issue)Google Scholar
  50. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2001) Handbook of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Earthscan Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. Skourtos M, Kontogianni A, Harrison PA (2009) Reviewing the dynamics of economic values and preferences for ecosystem goods and services. Biodiv Conserv. doi: 10.1007/s10531-009-9722-3
  52. Tirri R, Lehtonen J, Lemmetyinen R et al (1998) Elsevier’s dictionary of biology. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  53. Vandewalle M, de Bello F, Berg MP et al (2010) Functional traits as indicators of biodiversity response to land use changes across ecosystems and organisms. Biodivers Conserv (this issue)Google Scholar
  54. Violle C, Navas M-L, Vile D et al (2007) Let the concept of the trait be functional. Oikos 116:882–892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wallace KJ (2007) Classification of ecosystem services: problems and solutions. Biol Conserv 139:235–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wiens JA (1995) Landscape mosaics and ecological theory. In: Hansson L, Fahrig L, Merriam G (eds) Mosaic landscapes and ecological processes. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Harrington
    • 1
  • Christian Anton
    • 2
  • Terence P. Dawson
    • 3
  • Francesco de Bello
    • 8
  • Christian K. Feld
    • 4
  • John R. Haslett
    • 5
  • Tatiana Kluvánkova-Oravská
    • 6
  • Areti Kontogianni
    • 7
  • Sandra Lavorel
    • 8
  • Gary W. Luck
    • 9
  • Mark D. A. Rounsevell
    • 10
  • Michael J. Samways
    • 11
  • Josef Settele
    • 2
  • Michalis Skourtos
    • 12
  • Joachim H. Spangenberg
    • 13
  • Marie Vandewalle
    • 8
    • 14
  • Martin Zobel
    • 15
  • Paula A. Harrison
    • 16
  1. 1.Department of Plant and Invertebrate EcologyRothamsted Research, Centre for Bioenergy and Climate ChangeHarpendenUK
  2. 2.Department of Community EcologyUFZ – Helmholtz Centre for Environmental ResearchHalleGermany
  3. 3.School of GeographyUniversity of SouthamptonHighfieldUK
  4. 4.Department of Applied Zoology/HydrobiologyUniversity of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany
  5. 5.Division of Zoology and Functional Anatomy, Department of Organismal BiologyUniversity of SalzburgSalzburgAustria
  6. 6.CETIP – IF SAS, Slovak Academy of SciencesBratislavaSlovak Republic
  7. 7.Department of Marine ScienceUniversity of AegeanMytiliniGreece
  8. 8.Laboratoire d’Ecologie AlpineUniversité Joseph FourierGrenoble Cedex 9France
  9. 9.Institute for Land, Water and SocietyCharles Sturt UniversityAlburyAustralia
  10. 10.Centre for the Study of Environmental Change and Sustainability, School of GeosciencesUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK
  11. 11.Department of Conservation Ecology and EntomologyUniversity of StellenboschMatielandSouth Africa
  12. 12.Department of EnvironmentUniversity of AegeanMytiliniGreece
  13. 13.SERI – Sustainable Europe Research Institute SERI Deutschland e.VCologneGermany
  14. 14.Department of Earth and Ecosystem SciencesLund UniversityLundSweden
  15. 15.Institute of Ecology and Earth SciencesUniversity of TartuTartuEstonia
  16. 16.Environmental Change InstituteOxford University Centre for the EnvironmentOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations