Advertisement

AMBIO

, Volume 39, Issue 4, pp 314–324 | Cite as

Trends in Ecosystem Service Research: Early Steps and Current Drivers

  • Petteri Vihervaara
  • Mia Rönkä
  • Mari Walls
Report

Abstract

Over the past 50 years, human beings have influenced ecosystems more rapidly than at any similar time in human history, drastically altering ecosystem functioning. Along with ecosystem transformation and degradation, a number of studies have addressed the functioning, assessment and management of ecosystems. The concept of ecosystem services has been developed in the scientific literature since the end of the 1970s. However, ecosystem service research has focused on certain service categories, ecosystem types, and geographical areas, while substantial knowledge gaps remain concerning several aspects. We assess the development and current status of ecosystem service research on the basis of publications collected from the Web of Science. The material consists of (1) articles (n = 353) from all the years included in the Web of Science down to the completion of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and (2) more recent articles (n = 687) published between 2006 and 2008. We also assess the importance of international processes, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Kyoto Protocol and the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, as drivers of ecosystem service research. Finally, we identify future prospects and research needs concerning the assessment and management of ecosystem services.

Keywords

Ecosystem change Ecosystem goods Environmental management Environmental policy International conventions Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank M. Ollikainen and M. Kettunen for assistance in the early phases of the study. E. Valle and M. Vieno kindly checked the language. The study profited greatly from comments by the anonymous referees. The study was financed by the Maj and Tor Nessling Foundation and by the Finnish Cultural Foundation, and was conducted in cooperation with the CORECO (grant number 111152) and the REGSUS (grant number 131893) projects funded by the Academy of Finland.

References

  1. Allen-Wardell, G., P. Bernhardt, R. Bitner, A. Burquez, S. Buchmann, J. Cane, P.A. Cox, V. Dalton, et al. 1998. The potential consequences of pollinator declines on the conservation of biodiversity and stability of food crop yields. Conservation Biology 12 (1): 8–17.Google Scholar
  2. Allkin, R. 1998. Effective management and delivery of natural resource information. In Information technology, plant pathology and biodiversity, ed. P. Bridge, P. Jeffries, D.R. Morse, and P.R. Scott, 87–102. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
  3. Andrén, O., H. Kirchmann, T. Kätterer, J. Magid, A. Paul, and D.C. Coleman. 2008. Visions of a more precise soil biology. European Journal of Soil Science 59: 380–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balmford, A., and W. Bond. 2005. Trends in the state of nature and their implications for human well-being. Ecology Letters 8: 1218–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyd, J., and S. Banzhaf. 2007. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics 63: 616–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chan, K.M.A., M.R. Shaw, D.R. Cameron, E.C. Underwood, and G.C. Daily. 2006. Conservation planning for ecosystem services. PlosBiology 4: e379.Google Scholar
  7. Chivian, E., and A. Bernstein, eds. 2008. Sustaining life—how human health depends on biodiversity, 542 pp. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Coates, K.D., and P.J. Burton. 1997. A gap-based approach for development of silvicultural systems to address ecosystem management objectives. Forest Ecology and Management 99 (3): 337–354.Google Scholar
  9. Cochrane, M.A. 2003. Fire science for rainforests. Nature 421 (6926): 913–919.Google Scholar
  10. Costanza, R., R. d’Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, et al. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Daily, G., ed. 1997. Nature’s services. Societal dependence on natural ecosystems, 392 pp. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
  12. Daily, G., and K. Ellison. 2002. The new economy of nature. The quest to make conservation profitable, 260 pp. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
  13. Debinski, D.M., and R.D. Holt. 2000. A survey and overview of habitat fragmentation experiments. Conservation Biology 14 (2): 342–355.Google Scholar
  14. De Groot, R.S., M.A. Wilson, and R.M.J. Boumans. 2002. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics 41: 393–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ehrlich, P.R., and H.A. Mooney. 1983. Extinction, substitution and ecosystem services. BioScience 33: 248–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ehrlich, P.R., and E.O. Wilson. 1991. Biodiversity studies: Science and policy. Science 253 (5021): 758–762.Google Scholar
  17. Fearnside, P.M. 1999. Biodiversity as an environmental service in Brazil’s Amazonian forests: Risks, value and conservation. Environmental Conservation 26: 305–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Folke, C., S. Carpenter, T. Elmqvist, L. Gunderson, C.S. Holling, and B. Walker. 2002. Resilience and sustainable development: Building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. Ambio 31: 437–440.Google Scholar
  19. Gatto, M., and G.A. De Leo. 2000. Pricing biodiversity and ecosystem services: The never-ending story. BioScience 50: 347–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glowka, L., F. Burhenne-Guilmin, H. Synge, J. McNeely, and L. Gündling. 1994. A guide to the Convention on Biological Diversity, 161 pp. Cambridge: IUCN Gland.Google Scholar
  21. Godfray, H.C.J., O.T. Lewis, and J. Memmot. 1999. Studying insect diversity in the tropics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 254: 1811–1824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heal, G. 2000. Valuing ecosystem services. Ecosystems 3: 24–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Holling, C.S. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecology systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Holling, C.S., and G.K. Meffe. 1996. Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conservation Biology 10: 328–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hooper, D.U., F.S. Chapin III, J.J. Ewel, A. Hector, P. Inchausti, S. Lavorel, J.H. Lawton, D.M. Lodge, et al. 2005. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: A consensus of current knowledge. Ecological Monographs 75: 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jackson, R.B., S.R. Carpenter, C.N. Dahm, D.M. McKnight, R.J. Naiman, S.L. Postel, and S.W. Running. 2001. Water in a changing world. Ecological applications 11: 1027–1045.Google Scholar
  27. Juma, C. 1997. The role of information in the operation of the Convention on Biological Diversity. In Biodiversity information—needs and options, ed. D.L. Hawksworth, P.M. Kirk, and S. Dextre Clarke, 125–128. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
  28. Kearns, C.A., D.W. Inouye, and N.M. Waser. 1998. Endangered mutualisms: The conservation of plant-pollinator interactions. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 29: 83–112.Google Scholar
  29. Kremen, C. 2005. Managing ecosystem services: What do we need to know about their ecology? Ecology Letters 8 (5): 468–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kuhn, T. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions, 1st ed, 168 pp. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  31. Laihonen, P., M. Rönkä, H. Tolvanen, and R. Kalliola. 2003. Geospatially structured biodiversity information as a component of a regional biodiversity clearing house. Biodiversity and Conservation 12: 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lambin, E.F., H.J. Geist, and E. Lepers. 2003. Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 28: 205–241.Google Scholar
  33. Lamoreux, J.F., J.C. Morrison, T.H. Ricketts, D.M. Olson, E. Dinerstein, M.W. McKnight, and H.H. Shugart. 2005. Global tests of biodiversity concordance and the importance of endemism. Nature 440: 212–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Loreau, M., S. Naeem, P. Inchausti, J. Bengtsson, J.P. Grime, A. Hector, D.U. Hooper, M.A. Huston, et al. 2001. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294: 804–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Martin, J.L., L. Fahrig, D. Kirk, K. Lindsay, A.C. Smith, and M.A. Villard. 2009. Selection of cultural landscapes by birds: Do things look different across continents and, if so, why? In: 7th Conference of the European Ornithologists’ Union 21–26 August 2009, University of Zurich, Switzerland, Abstracts, ed. V. Keller and J. O’Halloran, 152 pp. Sempach: Swiss Ornithological Institute.Google Scholar
  36. Mezger, M.J., D. Schröter, R. Leemans, and W. Cramer. 2008. A spatially explicit and quantitative vulnerability assessment of ecosystem service change in Europe. Regional Environmental Change 8: 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis, 160 pp. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
  38. Naidoo, R., A. Balmford, R. Costanza, B. Fisher, R.E. Green, B. Lehner, T.R. Malcolm, and T.H. Ricketts. 2008. Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 105: 9495–9500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nguyen, D. 1979. Environmental services and the optimum rotation problem in forest management. Journal of Environmental Management 8: 127–136.Google Scholar
  40. Norton, B.G. 2000. Biodiversity and environmental values: In search of a universal earth ethic. Biodiversity and Conservation 9: 1029–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Odum, E.P. 1959. Fundamentals of ecology, 2nd ed, 546 pp. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company.Google Scholar
  42. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action, 280 pp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Rounsevell, M.D.A., F. Ewert, I. Reginster, R. Leemans, and T.R. Carter. 2005. Future scenarios of European agricultural land use II: Projecting changes in cropland and grassland. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 107: 117–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schalk, P.H. 1998. Archiving biodiversity: Information technology applied to biodiversity information management. In Information technology, plant pathology and biodiversity, ed. P. Bridge, P. Jeffries, D.R. Morse, and P.R. Scott, 213–220. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
  45. Scheffer, M., W. Brock, and F. Westley. 2000. Socioeconomic mechanisms preventing optimum use of ecosystem services: An interdisciplinary theoretical analysis. Ecosystems 3: 451–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stern, N. 2007. The economics of climate change. The Stern review, 692 pp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. TEEB. 2009. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity for national and international policy makers. Summary report: Responding to the value of nature 2009, 47 pp.Google Scholar
  48. UNEP. 1997. Introduction to the clearing-house mechanisms of the Convention on Biological Diversity to facilitate and promote technical and scientific co-operation. UNEP, UNEP/CBD/CHM/RW/3/2, 21 October 1997.Google Scholar
  49. United Nations. 1993. Multilateral Convention on Biological Diversity (with annexes), concluded at the Rio de Janeiro on 5 June 1992. United Nations Treaty Series vol. 1760, no. 30619.Google Scholar
  50. United Nations. 1998. Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Google Scholar
  51. United Nations. 2006a. The millennium development goals report. New York.Google Scholar
  52. United Nations. 2006b. World population prospects. The 2006 revision population database. Google Scholar
  53. Vatn, A., and D.W. Bromley. 1994. Choices without prices without apologies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 26: 129–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vihervaara, P., T. Kumpula, A. Tanskanen, and B. Burkhard. 2009. Ecosystem services—a tool for sustainable management of human–environment systems. Case study Finnish Forest Lapland. Ecological Complexity. doi: 10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.12.002.
  55. Wallace, K.J. 2007. Classification of ecosystem services: Problems and solutions. Biological Conservation 139: 235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Section of Biodiversity and Environmental Science, Department of BiologyUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland
  2. 2.Section of Ecology, Department of BiologyUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland
  3. 3.Finnish Environment Institute SYKEHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations