Assumptions in ecosystem service assessments: Increasing transparency for conservation
Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Standard
Assumptions in ecosystem service assessments : Increasing transparency for conservation. / Schröter, Matthias; Crouzat, Emilie; Hölting, Lisanne et al.
In: Ambio, Vol. 50, No. 2, 02.2021, p. 289-300.Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Assumptions in ecosystem service assessments
T2 - Increasing transparency for conservation
AU - Schröter, Matthias
AU - Crouzat, Emilie
AU - Hölting, Lisanne
AU - Massenberg, Julian
AU - Rode, Julian
AU - Hanisch, Mario
AU - Kabisch, Nadja
AU - Palliwoda, Julia
AU - Priess, Jörg A.
AU - Seppelt, Ralf
AU - Beckmann, Michael
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - Conservation efforts are increasingly supported by ecosystem service assessments. These assessments depend on complex multi-disciplinary methods, and rely on a number of assumptions which reduce complexity. If assumptions are ambiguous or inadequate, misconceptions and misinterpretations may arise when interpreting results of assessments. An interdisciplinary understanding of assumptions in ecosystem service science is needed to provide consistent conservation recommendations. Here, we synthesise and elaborate on 12 prevalent types of assumptions in ecosystem service assessments. These comprise conceptual and ethical foundations of the ecosystem service concept, assumptions on data collection, indication, mapping, and modelling, on socio-economic valuation and value aggregation, as well as about using assessment results for decision-making. We recommend future assessments to increase transparency about assumptions, and to test and validate them and their potential consequences on assessment reliability. This will support the taking up of assessment results in conservation science, policy and practice.
AB - Conservation efforts are increasingly supported by ecosystem service assessments. These assessments depend on complex multi-disciplinary methods, and rely on a number of assumptions which reduce complexity. If assumptions are ambiguous or inadequate, misconceptions and misinterpretations may arise when interpreting results of assessments. An interdisciplinary understanding of assumptions in ecosystem service science is needed to provide consistent conservation recommendations. Here, we synthesise and elaborate on 12 prevalent types of assumptions in ecosystem service assessments. These comprise conceptual and ethical foundations of the ecosystem service concept, assumptions on data collection, indication, mapping, and modelling, on socio-economic valuation and value aggregation, as well as about using assessment results for decision-making. We recommend future assessments to increase transparency about assumptions, and to test and validate them and their potential consequences on assessment reliability. This will support the taking up of assessment results in conservation science, policy and practice.
KW - Assessment
KW - Decision-making
KW - Ecosystem services
KW - Environmental ethics
KW - Mapping
KW - Valuation
KW - Ecosystems Research
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090979779&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s13280-020-01379-9
DO - 10.1007/s13280-020-01379-9
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 32915448
AN - SCOPUS:85090979779
VL - 50
SP - 289
EP - 300
JO - Ambio : a Journal of the human environment
JF - Ambio : a Journal of the human environment
SN - 0044-7447
IS - 2
ER -