8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

Ecosystem service
Ecosystem services are the many and varied benefits to
humans provided by the natural environment and from healthy
ecosystems. Such ecosystems include, for example,
agroecosystems, forest ecosystems, grassland ecosystems and
aquatic ecosystems. These ecosystems, functioning in healthy
relationship, offer such things like natural pollination of crops,
clean air, extreme weather mitigation, and human mental and
physical well-being. Collectively, these benefits are becoming
known as 'ecosystem services', and are often integral to the
provisioning of clean drinking water, the decomposition of
wastes, and resilience and productivity of food ecosystems.
Honey bee on Avocado crop.
While scientists and environmentalists have discussed ecosystem Pollination is just one type of
services implicitly for decades, the Millennium Ecosystem ecosystem service.
Assessment (MA) in the early 2000s popularized this concept.[1]
There, ecosystem services are grouped into four broad categories:
provisioning, such as the production of food and water;
regulating, such as the control of climate and disease;
supporting, such as nutrient cycles and oxygen production; and
cultural, such as spiritual and recreational benefits. To help
inform decision-makers, many ecosystem services are being
valuated in order to draw equivalent comparisons to human
engineered infrastructure and services.

Estuarine and coastal ecosystems are both marine ecosystems.

Together, these ecosystems perform the four categories of Upland bog in Wales, forming the
ecosystem services in a variety of ways: "Regulating services" official source of the River Severn.
include climate regulation as well as waste treatment and disease Healthy bogs sequester carbon,
regulation and buffer zones. The "provisioning services" include hold back water thereby reducing
forest products, marine products, fresh water, raw materials, flood risk, and supply cleaned water
biochemical and genetic resources. "Cultural services" of coastal better than degraded habitats do.
ecosystems include inspirational aspects, recreation and tourism,
science and education. "Supporting services" of coastal
ecosystems include nutrient cycling, biologically mediated habitats and primary production.

Contents
Definition
Categories
Regulating services
Provisioning services
Cultural services
Supporting services
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 1/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

Ecology
Redundancy hypothesis
Portfolio effect
Estuarine and coastal ecosystem services
Regulating services
Provisioning services
Cultural services
Supporting services Social forestry in Andhra Pradesh,
India, providing fuel, soil protection,
Economics shade and even well-being to
Management and policy travellers.
Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA)
Land use change decisions
History
Examples
See also
Sources
References
Further reading
External links

Definition
Ecosystem services are defined as the gains acquired by humankind from surroundings ecosystems.
Per the 2006 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), ecosystem services are "the benefits people
obtain from ecosystems". The MA also delineated the four categories of ecosystem services—
supporting, provisioning, regulating and cultural—discussed below.

By 2010, there had evolved various working definitions and descriptions of ecosystem services in the
literature.[2] To prevent double counting in ecosystem services audits, for instance, The Economics of
Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) replaced "Supporting Services" in the MA with "Habitat
Services" and "ecosystem functions", defined as "a subset of the interactions between ecosystem
structure and processes that underpin the capacity of an ecosystem to provide goods and services".[3]

Categories
Four different types of ecosystem services have been distinguished by the scientific body: regulating
services, provisioning services, cultural services and supporting services. An ecosystem does not
necessarily offer all four types of services simultaneously; but given the intricate nature of any
ecosystem, it is usually assumed that humans benefit from a combination of these services. The
services offered by diverse types of ecosystems (forests, seas, coral reefs, mangroves, etc.) differ in
nature and in consequence. In fact, some services directly affect the livelihood of neighboring human
populations (such as fresh water, food or aesthetic value, etc.) while other services affect general
environmental conditions by which humans are indirectly impacted (such as climate change, erosion
regulation or natural hazard regulation, etc.).[4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 2/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment report 2005 defined

ecosystem services as benefits people obtain from ecosystems and
distinguishes four categories of ecosystem services, where the so-
called supporting services are regarded as the basis for the
services of the other three categories.[1]

Regulating services
Purification of water and air
Carbon sequestration and climate regulation Detritivores like this dung beetle
help to turn animal wastes into
Waste decomposition and detoxification
organic material that can be reused
Predation regulates prey populations by primary producers.
Biological control pest and disease control
Pollination
Disturbance regulation, i.e. Flood protection[5]

Provisioning services

The following services are also known as ecosystem goods:

food (including seafood and game), crops, wild foods, and spices
raw materials (including lumber, skins, fuel wood, organic matter, fodder, and fertilizer)
genetic resources (including crop improvement genes, and health care)
biogenic minerals
medicinal resources (including pharmaceuticals, chemical models, and test and assay organisms)
energy (hydropower, biomass fuels)
ornamental resources (including fashion, handicraft, jewelry, pets, worship, decoration and
souvenirs like furs, feathers, ivory, orchids, butterflies, aquarium fish, shells, etc.)

Cultural services
cultural (including use of nature as motif in books, film, painting, folklore, national symbols,
advertising, etc.)
spiritual and historical (including use of nature for religious or heritage value or natural)
recreational experiences (including ecotourism, outdoor sports, and recreation)
science and education (including use of natural systems for school excursions, and scientific
discovery)
Therapeutic (including Ecotherapy, social forestry and animal assisted therapy)

As of 2012, there was a discussion as to how the concept of cultural ecosystem services could be
operationalized, how landscape aesthetics, cultural heritage, outdoor recreation, and spiritual
significance to define can fit into the ecosystem services approach.[6] who vote for models that
explicitly link ecological structures and functions with cultural values and benefits. Likewise, there
has been a fundamental critique of the concept of cultural ecosystem services that builds on three
arguments:[7]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 3/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

1. Pivotal cultural values attaching to the natural/cultivated environment rely on an area's unique
character that cannot be addressed by methods that use universal scientific parameters to
determine ecological structures and functions.
2. If a natural/cultivated environment has symbolic meanings and cultural values the object of these
values are not ecosystems but shaped phenomena like mountains, lakes, forests, and, mainly,
symbolic landscapes.[8]
3. Cultural values do result not from properties produced by ecosystems but are the product of a
specific way of seeing within the given cultural framework of symbolic experience.[9]

The Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) is a classification scheme

developed to accounting systems (like National counts etc.), in order to avoid double-counting of
Suporting Services with others Provisioning and Regulating Services.[10]

Supporting services

These may be redundant with regulating services in some categorisations, but include services such as
nutrient cycling, primary production, soil formation, habitat provision. These services make it
possible for the ecosystems to continue providing services such as food supply, flood regulation, and
water purification. Slade et al [11] outline the situation where a greater number of species would
maximize more ecosystem services

Ecology
Understanding of ecosystem services requires a strong foundation in ecology, which describes the
underlying principles and interactions of organisms and the environment. Since the scales at which
these entities interact can vary from microbes to landscapes, milliseconds to millions of years, one of
the greatest remaining challenges is the descriptive characterization of energy and material flow
between them. For example, the area of a forest floor, the detritus upon it, the microorganisms in the
soil, and characteristics of the soil itself will all contribute to the abilities of that forest for providing
ecosystem services like carbon sequestration, water purification, and erosion prevention to other
areas within the watershed. Note that it is often possible for multiple services to be bundled together
and when benefits of targeted objectives are secured, there may also be ancillary benefits—the same
forest may provide habitat for other organisms as well as human recreation, which are also ecosystem
services.

The complexity of Earth's ecosystems poses a challenge for scientists as they try to understand how
relationships are interwoven among organisms, processes and their surroundings. As it relates to
human ecology, a suggested research agenda[12] for the study of ecosystem services includes the
following steps:

1. identification of ecosystem service providers (ESPs)—species or populations that provide specific

ecosystem services—and characterization of their functional roles and relationships;
2. determination of community structure aspects that influence how ESPs function in their natural
landscape, such as compensatory responses that stabilize function and non-random extinction
sequences which can erode it;
3. assessment of key environmental (abiotic) factors influencing the provision of services;
4. measurement of the spatial and temporal scales ESPs and their services operate on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 4/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

Recently, a technique has been developed to improve and standardize the evaluation of ESP
functionality by quantifying the relative importance of different species in terms of their efficiency
and abundance.[13] Such parameters provide indications of how species respond to changes in the
environment (i.e. predators, resource availability, climate) and are useful for identifying species that
are disproportionately important at providing ecosystem services. However, a critical drawback is that
the technique does not account for the effects of interactions, which are often both complex and
fundamental in maintaining an ecosystem and can involve species that are not readily detected as a
priority. Even so, estimating the functional structure of an ecosystem and combining it with
information about individual species traits can help us understand the resilience of an ecosystem
amidst environmental change.

Many ecologists also believe that the provision of ecosystem services can be stabilized with
biodiversity. Increasing biodiversity also benefits the variety of ecosystem services available to society.
Understanding the relationship between biodiversity and an ecosystem's stability is essential to the
management of natural resources and their services.

Redundancy hypothesis

The concept of ecological redundancy is sometimes referred to as functional compensation and

assumes that more than one species performs a given role within an ecosystem.[14] More specifically,
it is characterized by a particular species increasing its efficiency at providing a service when
conditions are stressed in order to maintain aggregate stability in the ecosystem.[15] However, such
increased dependence on a compensating species places additional stress on the ecosystem and often
enhances its susceptibility to subsequent disturbance.[16] The redundancy hypothesis can be
summarized as "species redundancy enhances ecosystem resilience".[17]

Another idea uses the analogy of rivets in an airplane wing to compare the exponential effect the loss
of each species will have on the function of an ecosystem; this is sometimes referred to as rivet
popping.[18] If only one species disappears, the loss of the ecosystem's efficiency as a whole is
relatively small; however, if several species are lost, the system essentially collapses—similar to an
airplane that lost too many rivets. The hypothesis assumes that species are relatively specialized in
their roles and that their ability to compensate for one another is less than in the redundancy
hypothesis. As a result, the loss of any species is critical to the performance of the ecosystem. The key
difference is the rate at which the loss of species affects total ecosystem functioning.

Portfolio effect

A third explanation, known as the portfolio effect, compares biodiversity to stock holdings, where
diversification minimizes the volatility of the investment, or in this case, the risk of instability of
ecosystem services.[19] This is related to the idea of response diversity where a suite of species will
exhibit differential responses to a given environmental perturbation. When considered together, they
create a stabilizing function that preserves the integrity of a service.[20]

Several experiments have tested these hypotheses in both the field and the lab. In ECOTRON, a
laboratory in the UK where many of the biotic and abiotic factors of nature can be simulated, studies
have focused on the effects of earthworms and symbiotic bacteria on plant roots.[18] These laboratory
experiments seem to favor the rivet hypothesis. However, a study on grasslands at Cedar Creek
Reserve in Minnesota supports the redundancy hypothesis, as have many other field studies.[21]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 5/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

Estuarine and coastal ecosystem services

Estuarine and coastal ecosystems are both marine ecosystems. Together, these ecosystems perform
the four categories of ecosystem services in a variety of ways: "Regulating services" include climate
regulation as well as waste treatment and disease regulation and buffer zones. The "provisioning
services" include forest products, marine products, fresh water, raw materials, biochemical and
genetic resources. "Cultural services" of coastal ecosystems include inspirational aspects, recreation
and tourism, science and education. "Supporting services" of coastal ecosystems include nutrient
cycling, biologically mediated habitats and primary production.

Coasts and their adjacent areas on and offshore are an important part of a local ecosystem. The
mixture of fresh water and salt water (brackish water) in estuaries provides many nutrients for
marine life. Salt marshes, mangroves and beaches also support a diversity of plants, animals and
insects crucial to the food chain. The high level of biodiversity creates a high level of biological
activity, which has attracted human activity for thousands of years. Coasts also create essential
material for organisms to live by, including estuaries, wetland, seagrass, coral reefs, and mangroves.
Coasts provide habitats for migratory birds, sea turtles, marine mammals, and coral reefs.[22]

Regulating services

Regulating services are the "benefits obtained from the regulation of ecosystem processes".[23] In the
case of coastal and estuarine ecosystems, these services include climate regulation, waste treatment
and disease control and natural hazard regulation.

Climate regulation

Both the biotic and abiotic ensembles of marine ecosystems play a role in climate regulation. They act
as sponges when it comes to gases in the atmosphere, retaining large levels of CO2 and other
greenhouse gases (methane and nitrous oxide). Marine plants also use CO2 for photosynthesis
purposes and help in reducing the atmospheric CO2. The oceans and seas absorb the heat from the
atmosphere and redistribute it through the means of water currents, and atmospheric processes, such
as evaporation and the reflection of light allow for the cooling and warming of the overlying
atmosphere. The ocean temperatures are thus imperative to the regulation of the atmospheric
temperatures in any part of the world: "without the ocean, the Earth would be unbearably hot during
the daylight hours and frigidly cold, if not frozen, at night".[24]

Waste treatment and disease regulation

Another service offered by marine ecosystem is the treatment of wastes, thus helping in the regulation
of diseases. Wastes can be diluted and detoxified through transport across marine ecosystems;
pollutants are removed from the environment and stored, buried or recycled in marine ecosystems:
"Marine ecosystems break down organic waste through microbial communities that filter water,
reduce/limit the effects of eutrophication, and break down toxic hydrocarbons into their basic
components such as carbon dioxide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and water".[24] The fact that waste is
diluted with large volumes of water and moves with water currents leads to the regulation of diseases
and the reduction of toxics in seafood.

Buffer zones
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 6/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

Coastal and estuarine ecosystems act as buffer zones against natural hazards and environmental
disturbances, such as floods, cyclones, tidal surges and storms. The role they play is to "[absorb] a
portion of the impact and thus [lessen] its effect on the land".[24] Wetlands (which include saltwater
swamps, salt marshes, ...) and the vegetation it supports – trees, root mats, etc. – retain large
amounts of water (surface water, snowmelt, rain, groundwater) and then slowly releases them back,
decreasing the likeliness of floods.[25] Mangrove forests protect coastal shorelines from tidal erosion
or erosion by currents; a process that was studied after the 1999 cyclone that hit India. Villages that
were surrounded with mangrove forests encountered less damages than other villages that weren't
protected by mangroves.[26]

Provisioning services

Provisioning services consist of all "the products obtained from ecosystems".

Forest products

Forests produce a large type and variety of timber products, including roundwood, sawnwood, panels,
and engineered wood, e.g., cross-laminated timber, as well as pulp and paper.[27] Besides the
production of timber, forestry activities may also result in products that undergo little processing,
such as fire wood, charcoal, wood chips and roundwood used in an unprocessed form.[28] Global
production and trade of all major wood-based products recorded their highest ever values in 2018.[29]
Production, imports and exports of roundwood, sawnwood, wood-based panels, wood pulp, wood
charcoal and pellets reached[30] their maximum quantities since 1947 when FAO started reporting
global forest product statistics.[29] In 2018, growth in production of the main wood-based product
groups ranged from 1 percent (woodbased panels) to 5 percent (industrial roundwood).[29] The fastest
growth occurred in the Asia-Pacific, Northern American and European regions, likely due to positive
economic growth in these areas.[29]

Forests also provide non-wood forest products, including fodder, aromatic and medicinal plants, and
wild foods.  Worldwide, around 1 billion people depend to some extent on wild foods such as wild
meat, edible insects, edible plant products, mushrooms and fish, which often contain high levels of
key micronutrients.[30] The value of forest foods as a nutritional resource is not limited to low- and
middle-income countries; more than 100 million people in the European Union (EU) regularly
consume wild food.[30] Some 2.4 billion people – in both urban and rural settings – use wood-based
energy for cooking.[30]

Marine products

Marine ecosystems provide people with: wild & cultured seafood, fresh water, fiber & fuel and
biochemical & genetic resources.

Humans consume a large number of products originating from the seas, whether as a nutritious
product or for use in other sectors: "More than one billion people worldwide, or one-sixth of the
global population, rely on fish as their main source of animal protein. In 2000, marine and coastal
fisheries accounted for 12 per cent of world food production".[31] Fish and other edible marine
products – primarily fish, shellfish, roe and seaweeds – constitute for populations living along the
coast the main elements of the local cultural diets, norms and traditions. A very pertinent example
would be sushi, the national food of Japan, which consists mostly of different types of fish and
seaweed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 7/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

Fresh water

Water bodies that are not highly concentrated in salts are referred to as 'fresh water' bodies. Fresh
water may run through lakes, rivers and streams, to name a few; but it is most prominently found in
the frozen state or as soil moisture or buried deep underground. Fresh water is not only important for
the survival of humans, but also for the survival of all the existing species of animals, plants.[32]

Raw materials

Marine creatures provide us with the raw materials needed for the manufacturing of clothing,
building materials (lime extracted from coral reefs), ornamental items and personal-use items (luffas,
art and jewelry): "The skin of marine mammals for clothing, gas deposits for energy production, lime
(extracted from coral reefs) for building construction, and the timber of mangroves and coastal forests
for shelter are some of the more familiar uses of marine organisms. Raw marine materials are utilized
for non-essential goods as well, such as shells and corals in ornamental items".[31] Humans have also
referred to processes within marine environments for the production of renewable energy: using the
power of waves – or tidal power – as a source of energy for the powering of a turbine, for example.
Oceans and seas are used as sites for offshore oil and gas installations, offshore wind farms.[33]

Biochemical and genetic resources

Biochemical resources are compounds extracted from marine organisms for use in medicines,
pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and other biochemical products. Genetic resources are the genetic
information found in marine organisms that would later on be used for animal and plant breeding
and for technological advances in the biological field. These resources are either directly taken out
from an organism – such as fish oil as a source of omega3 –, or used as a model for innovative man-
made products: "such as the construction of fiber optics technology based on the properties of
sponges. ... Compared to terrestrial products, marine-sourced products tend to be more highly
bioactive, likely due to the fact that marine organisms have to retain their potency despite being
diluted in the surrounding sea-water".[31]

Cultural services

Cultural services relate to the non-material world, as they benefit the benefit recreational, aesthetic,
cognitive and spiritual activities, which are not easily quantifiable in monetary terms.[34]

Inspirational

Marine environments have been used by many as an inspiration for their works of art, music,
architecture, traditions... Water environments are spiritually important as a lot of people view them as
a means for rejuvenation and change of perspective. Many also consider the water as being a part of
their personality, especially if they have lived near it since they were kids: they associate it to fond
memories and past experiences. Living near water bodies for a long time results in a certain set of
water activities that become a ritual in the lives of people and of the culture in the region.

Recreation and tourism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 8/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

Sea sports are very popular among coastal populations: surfing, snorkeling, whale watching,
kayaking, recreational fishing...a lot of tourists also travel to resorts close to the sea or rivers or lakes
to be able to experience these activities, and relax near the water. The United Nations Sustainable
Development Goal 14 also has targets aimed at enhancing the use of ecosystem services for
sustainable tourism especially in Small Island Developing States.[35]

Science and education

A lot can be learned from marine processes, environments and

organisms – that could be implemented into our daily actions and
into the scientific domain. Although much is still yet to still be
known about the ocean world: "by the extraordinary intricacy and
complexity of the marine environment and how it is influenced by
large spatial scales, time lags, and cumulative effects".[24]
Beach accommodated into a
Supporting services recreational area.

Supporting services are the services that allow for the other
ecosystem services to be present. They have indirect impacts on humans that last over a long period of
time. Several services can be considered as being both supporting services and
regulating/cultural/provisioning services.[36]

Nutrient cycling

Nutrient cycling is the movement of nutrients through an ecosystem by biotic and abiotic
processes.[37] The ocean is a vast storage pool for these nutrients, such as carbon, nitrogen and
phosphorus. The nutrients are absorbed by the basic organisms of the marine food web and are thus
transferred from one organism to the other and from one ecosystem to the other. Nutrients are
recycled through the life cycle of organisms as they die and decompose, releasing the nutrients into
the neighboring environment. "The service of nutrient cycling eventually impacts all other ecosystem
services as all living things require a constant supply of nutrients to survive".[24]

Biologically mediated habitats

Biologically mediated habitats are defined as being the habitats that living marine structures offer to
other organisms.[38] These need not to have evolved for the sole purpose of serving as a habitat, but
happen to become living quarters whilst growing naturally. For example, coral reefs and mangrove
forests are home to numerous species of fish, seaweed and shellfish... The importance of these
habitats is that they allow for interactions between different species, aiding the provisioning of marine
goods and services. They are also very important for the growth at the early life stages of marine
species (breeding and bursary spaces), as they serve as a food source and as a shelter from predators.

Primary production

Primary production refers to the production of organic matter, i.e., chemically bound energy, through
processes such as photosynthesis and chemosynthesis. The organic matter produced by primary
producers forms the basis of all food webs. Further, it generates oxygen (O2), a molecule necessary to

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 9/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

sustain animals and humans.[39][40][41][42] On average, a human

consumes about 550 liter of oxygen per day, whereas plants
produce 1,5 liter of oxygen per 10 grams of growth.[43]

Economics
There are questions regarding the environmental and economic
values of ecosystem services.[44] Some people may be unaware of
the environment in general and humanity's interrelatedness with
Coral and other living organisms
the natural environment, which may cause misconceptions.
serve as habitats for many marine
Although environmental awareness is rapidly improving in our
species.
contemporary world, ecosystem capital and its flow are still
poorly understood, threats continue to impose, and we suffer
from the so-called 'tragedy of the commons'.[45] Many efforts to
inform decision-makers of current versus future costs and
benefits now involve organizing and translating scientific
knowledge to economics, which articulate the consequences of
our choices in comparable units of impact on human well-
being.[46] An especially challenging aspect of this process is that
interpreting ecological information collected from one spatial-
temporal scale does not necessarily mean it can be applied at
another; understanding the dynamics of ecological processes Sustainable urban drainage pond
relative to ecosystem services is essential in aiding economic near housing in Scotland. The
decisions.[47] Weighting factors such as a service's irreplaceability filtering and cleaning of surface and
or bundled services can also allocate economic value such that waste water by natural vegetation is
goal attainment becomes more efficient. a form of ecosystem service.

The economic valuation of ecosystem services also involves social

communication and information, areas that remain particularly challenging and are the focus of many
researchers.[48] In general, the idea is that although individuals make decisions for any variety of
reasons, trends reveal the aggregated preferences of a society, from which the economic value of
services can be inferred and assigned. The six major methods for valuing ecosystem services in
monetary terms are:[49]

Avoided cost: Services allow society to avoid costs that would have been incurred in the absence
of those services (e.g. waste treatment by wetland habitats avoids health costs)
Replacement cost: Services could be replaced with man-made systems (e.g. restoration of the
Catskill Watershed cost less than the construction of a water purification plant)
Factor income: Services provide for the enhancement of incomes (e.g. improved water quality
increases the commercial take of a fishery and improves the income of fishers)
Travel cost: Service demand may require travel, whose costs can reflect the implied value of the
service (e.g. value of ecotourism experience is at least what a visitor is willing to pay to get there)
Hedonic pricing: Service demand may be reflected in the prices people will pay for associated
goods (e.g. coastal housing prices exceed that of inland homes)
Contingent valuation: Service demand may be elicited by posing hypothetical scenarios that
involve some valuation of alternatives (e.g. visitors willing to pay for increased access to national
parks)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 10/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

A peer-reviewed study published in 1997 estimated the value of the world's ecosystem services and
natural capital to be between US$16–54 trillion per year, with an average of US$33 trillion per
year.[50] However, Salles (2011) indicated 'The total value of biodiversity is infinite, so having debate
about what is the total value of nature is actually pointless because we can't live without it'.[51]

As of 2012, many companies were not fully aware of the extent of their dependence and impact on
ecosystems and the possible ramifications. Likewise, environmental management systems and
environmental due diligence tools are more suited to handle "traditional" issues of pollution and
natural resource consumption. Most focus on environmental impacts, not dependence. Several tools
and methodologies can help the private sector value and assess ecosystem services, including Our
Ecosystem,[52] the 2008 Corporate Ecosystem Services Review,[53] Artificial Intelligence for
Environment & Sustainability (ARIES) from 2007,[54] the Natural Value Initiative (2012)[55] and
InVEST (Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services & Tradeoffs, 2012)[56]

Management and policy

Although monetary pricing continues with respect to the valuation of ecosystem services, the
challenges in policy implementation and management are significant and multitudinous. The
administration of common pool resources has been a subject of extensive academic
pursuit.[57][58][59][60][61] From defining the problems to finding solutions that can be applied in
practical and sustainable ways, there is much to overcome. Considering options must balance present
and future human needs, and decision-makers must frequently work from valid but incomplete
information. Existing legal policies are often considered insufficient since they typically pertain to
human health-based standards that are mismatched with necessary means to protect ecosystem
health and services. In 2000, to improve the information available, the implementation of an
Ecosystem Services Framework has been suggested (ESF[62]), which integrates the biophysical and
socio-economic dimensions of protecting the environment and is designed to guide institutions
through multidisciplinary information and jargon, helping to direct strategic choices.

As of 2005 Local to regional collective management efforts were considered appropriate for services
like crop pollination or resources like water.[12][57] Another approach that has become increasingly
popular during the 1990s is the marketing of ecosystem services protection. Payment and trading of
services is an emerging worldwide small-scale solution where one can acquire credits for activities
such as sponsoring the protection of carbon sequestration sources or the restoration of ecosystem
service providers. In some cases, banks for handling such credits have been established and
conservation companies have even gone public on stock exchanges, defining an evermore parallel link
with economic endeavors and opportunities for tying into social perceptions.[46] However, crucial for
implementation are clearly defined land rights, which are often lacking in many developing
countries.[63] In particular, many forest-rich developing countries suffering deforestation experience
conflict between different forest stakeholders.[63] In addition, concerns for such global transactions
include inconsistent compensation for services or resources sacrificed elsewhere and misconceived
warrants for irresponsible use. As of 2001, another approach focused on protecting ecosystem service
biodiversity hotspots. Recognition that the conservation of many ecosystem services aligns with more
traditional conservation goals (i.e. biodiversity) has led to the suggested merging of objectives for
maximizing their mutual success. This may be particularly strategic when employing networks that
permit the flow of services across landscapes, and might also facilitate securing the financial means to
protect services through a diversification of investors.[64][65]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 11/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

For example, as of 2013, there had been interest in the valuation of ecosystem services provided by
shellfish production and restoration.[66] A keystone species, low in the food chain, bivalve shellfish
such as oysters support a complex community of species by performing a number of functions
essential to the diverse array of species that surround them. There is also increasing recognition that
some shellfish species may impact or control many ecological processes; so much so that they are
included on the list of "ecosystem engineers"—organisms that physically, biologically or chemically
modify the environment around them in ways that influence the health of other organisms.[67] Many
of the ecological functions and processes performed or affected by shellfish contribute to human well-
being by providing a stream of valuable ecosystem services over time by filtering out particulate
materials and potentially mitigating water quality issues by controlling excess nutrients in the water.
As of 2018, the concept of ecosystem services had not been properly implemented into international
and regional legislation yet.[68]

Notwithstanding, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 15 has a target to ensure the
conservation, restoration, and sustainable use of ecosystem services.[69]

Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA)

Ecosystem-based adaptation or EbA is a strategy for community development and environmental

management that seeks to use an ecosystem services framework to help communities adapt to the
effects of climate change. The Convention on Biological Diversity defines it as "the use of biodiversity
and ecosystem services to help people adapt to the adverse effects of climate change", which includes
the use of "sustainable management, conservation and restoration of ecosystems, as part of an overall
adaptation strategy that takes into account the multiple social, economic and cultural co-benefits for
local communities".[70]

In 2001, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment announced that humanity's impact on the natural
world was increasing to levels never before seen, and that the degradation of the planet's ecosystems
would become a major barrier to achieving the Millennium Development Goals. In recognition of this
fact, Ecosystem-Based Adaptation sought to use the restoration of ecosystems as a stepping-stone to
improve the quality of life in communities experiencing the impacts of climate change. Specifically, it
involved the restoration of such ecosystems that provide food and water and protection from storm
surges and flooding. EbA interventions combine elements of both climate change mitigation and
adaptation to global warming to help address the community's current and future needs.[71]

Collaborative planning between scientists, policy makers, and community members is an essential
element of Ecosystem-Based Adaptation. By drawing on the expertise of outside experts and local
residents alike, EbA seeks to develop unique solutions to unique problems, rather than simply
replicating past projects.[70]

Land use change decisions

Ecosystem services decisions require making complex choices at the intersection of ecology,
technology, society, and the economy. The process of making ecosystem services decisions must
consider the interaction of many types of information, honor all stakeholder viewpoints, including
regulatory agencies, proposal proponents, decision makers, residents, NGOs, and measure the
impacts on all four parts of the intersection. These decisions are usually spatial, always multi-
objective, and based on uncertain data, models, and estimates. Often it is the combination of the best
science combined with the stakeholder values, estimates and opinions that drive the process.[72]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 12/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

One analytical study modeled the stakeholders as agents to support water resource management
decisions in the Middle Rio Grande basin of New Mexico. This study focused on modeling the
stakeholder inputs across a spatial decision, but ignored uncertainty.[73] Another study used Monte
Carlo methods to exercise econometric models of landowner decisions in a study of the effects of land-
use change. Here the stakeholder inputs were modeled as random effects to reflect the uncertainty.[74]
A third study used a Bayesian decision support system to both model the uncertainty in the scientific
information Bayes Nets and to assist collecting and fusing the input from stakeholders. This study was
about siting wave energy devices off the Oregon Coast, but presents a general method for managing
uncertain spatial science and stakeholder information in a decision making environment.[75] Remote
sensing data and analyses can be used to assess the health and extent of land cover classes that
provide ecosystem services, which aids in planning, management, monitoring of stakeholders'
actions, and communication between stakeholders.[76]

In Baltic countries scientists, nature conservationists and local authorities are implementing
integrated planning approach for grassland ecosystems.[77] They are developing an integrated
planning tool based on GIS (geographic information system) technology and put online that will help
for planners to choose the best grassland management solution for concrete grassland. It will look
holistically at the processes in the countryside and help to find best grassland management solutions
by taking into account both natural and socioeconomic factors of the particular site.[78]

History
While the notion of human dependence on Earth's ecosystems reaches to the start of Homo sapiens'
existence, the term 'natural capital' was first coined by E.F. Schumacher in 1973 in his book Small is
Beautiful.[79] Recognition of how ecosystems could provide complex services to humankind date back
to at least Plato (c. 400 BC) who understood that deforestation could lead to soil erosion and the
drying of springs.[80] Modern ideas of ecosystem services probably began when Marsh challenged in
1864 the idea that Earth's natural resources are unbounded by pointing out changes in soil fertility in
the Mediterranean.[81] It was not until the late 1940s that three key authors—Henry Fairfield Osborn,
Jr,[82] William Vogt,[83] and Aldo Leopold[84]—promoted recognition of human dependence on the
environment.

In 1956, Paul Sears drew attention to the critical role of the ecosystem in processing wastes and
recycling nutrients.[85] In 1970, Paul Ehrlich and Rosa Weigert called attention to "ecological
systems" in their environmental science textbook[86] and "the most subtle and dangerous threat to
man's existence... the potential destruction, by man's own activities, of those ecological systems upon
which the very existence of the human species depends".

The term "environmental services" was introduced in a 1970 report of the Study of Critical
Environmental Problems,[87] which listed services including insect pollination, fisheries, climate
regulation and flood control. In following years, variations of the term were used, but eventually
'ecosystem services' became the standard in scientific literature.[88]

The ecosystem services concept has continued to expand and includes socio-economic and
conservation objectives, which are discussed below. A history of the concepts and terminology of
ecosystem services as of 1997, can be found in Daily's book "Nature's Services: Societal Dependence
on Natural Ecosystems".[80]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 13/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

While Gretchen Daily's original definition distinguished between ecosystem goods and ecosystem
services, Robert Costanza and colleagues' later work and that of the Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment lumped all of these together as ecosystem services.[89][90]

Examples
The following examples illustrate the relationships between humans and natural ecosystems through
the services derived from them:

The US military has funded research through the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory,[91] which
claims that Department of Defense lands and military installations provide substantial ecosystem
services to local communities, including benefits to carbon storage, resiliency to climate, and
endangered species habitat.[92] As of 2020, research from Duke University claims for example
Eglin Air Force Base provides about $110 million in ecosystem services per year, $40 million more
than if no base was present.[92]
In New York City, where the quality of drinking water had fallen below standards required by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), authorities opted to restore the polluted Catskill
Watershed that had previously provided the city with the ecosystem service of water purification.
Once the input of sewage and pesticides to the watershed area was reduced, natural abiotic
processes such as soil absorption and filtration of chemicals, together with biotic recycling via root
systems and soil microorganisms, water quality improved to levels that met government
standards. The cost of this investment in natural capital was estimated between $1–1.5 billion,
which contrasted dramatically with the estimated $6–8 billion cost of constructing a water filtration
plant plus the $300 million annual running costs.[93]
Pollination of crops by bees is required for 15–30% of U.S. food production; most large-scale
farmers import non-native honey bees to provide this service. A 2005 study[12] reported that in
California's agricultural region, it was found that wild bees alone could provide partial or complete
pollination services or enhance the services provided by honey bees through behavioral
interactions. However, intensified agricultural practices can quickly erode pollination services
through the loss of species. The remaining species are unable to compensate this. The results of
this study also indicate that the proportion of chaparral and oak-woodland habitat available for
wild bees within 1–2 km of a farm can stabilize and enhance the provision of pollination services.
The presence of such ecosystem elements functions almost like an insurance policy for farmers.
In watersheds of the Yangtze River China, spatial models for water flow through different forest
habitats were created to determine potential contributions for hydroelectric power in the region. By
quantifying the relative value of ecological parameters (vegetation-soil-slope complexes),
researchers were able to estimate the annual economic benefit of maintaining forests in the
watershed for power services to be 2.2 times that if it were harvested once for timber.[94]
In the 1980s, mineral water company Vittel now a brand of Nestlé Waters) faced the problem that
nitrate and pesticides were entering the company's springs in northeastern France. Local farmers
had intensified agricultural practices and cleared native vegetation that previously had filtered
water before it seeped into the aquifer used by Vittel. This contamination threatened the
company's right to use the "natural mineral water" label under French law.[95] In response to this
business risk, Vittel developed an incentive package for farmers to improve their agricultural
practices and consequently reduce water pollution that had affected Vittel's product. For example,
Vittel provided subsidies and free technical assistance to farmers in exchange for farmers'
agreement to enhance pasture management, reforest catchments, and reduce the use of
agrochemicals, an example of a payment for ecosystem services program.[96]
In 2016, it was counted that to plant 15 000 ha new woodland in the UK, considering only the
value of timber, it would cost £79 000 000, which is more than the benefit of £65 000 000. If,
however, all other benefits the trees in lowland could provide (like soil stabilization, wind
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 14/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

deflection, recreation, food production, air purification, carbon storage, wildlife habitat, fuel
production, cooling, flood prevention) were included, the costs will increase due to displacing the
profitable farmland (would be around £231 000 000) but would be overweight by benefits of £546
000 000.[97]
In Europe, various projects are implemented in order to define the values of concrete ecosystems
and to implement this concept into decision making process. For example, "LIFE Viva grass"
project aims to do this with grasslands in Baltics.[98]

See also
Blue carbon
Biodiversity banking
Flood control by beavers
Controlled Ecological Life Support System
Diversity-function debate
Earth Economics
Ecological goods and services
Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
Environmental finance
Existence value
Forest farming
Environmental and economic benefits of having indigenous peoples tend land
Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
Keystone species: i.e. wildfire risk reduction by grazers, ...
Loess Plateau Watershed Rehabilitation Project
Mitigation banking
Natural Capital
Non-timber forest product
Oxygen cycle
Panama Canal Watershed
Rangeland Management
Soil functions
Spaceship Earth
Nature Based Solutions

Sources
 This article incorporates text from a free content work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO License
statement/permission on Wikimedia Commons (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Stat
e_of_the_World%E2%80%99s_Forests_2020._In_brief.pdf). Text taken from The State of the
World’s Forests 2020. Forests, biodiversity and people – In brief (https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8985e
n), FAO & UNEP, FAO & UNEP.

 This article incorporates text from a free content work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO License
statement/permission on Wikimedia Commons (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Global_F
orest_Resources_Assessment_2020_%E2%80%93_Key_findings.pdf). Text taken from Global

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 15/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

Forest Resources Assessment 2020 – Key findings (https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8753en), FAO, FAO.

References
1. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis
"Archived copy" (http://www.unep.org/maweb/documents/document.356.aspx.pdf) (PDF).
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20131203005715/http://www.unep.org/maweb/documents/d
ocument.356.aspx.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 3 December 2013. Retrieved 29 January 2013..
Island Press, Washington. 155pp.
2. Ojea, E. Classifying Ecosystem Services for Economic Valuation: the case of forest water
services. BIOECON Conference, Venice 27–28 September 2010
3. The Ecological and Economic Foundation (http://www.teebtest.org/wp-content/uploads/Study%20
and%20Reports/Reports/Ecological%20and%20Economic%20Foundations/TEEB%20Ecologica
l%20and%20Economic%20Foundations%20report/TEEB%20Foundations.pdf), chapter 1, p.19,
TEEB, 2010
4. Barbier, E.B.; Hacker, S.D.; Kennedy, C.; Koch, E.W.; Stier, A.C. & Silliman, B.R. [1] (https://wayb
ack.archive-it.org/all/20170109135811/http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/10-1510.1/epdf)
Ecological Monographs, 2011
5. Basic Biology (2016). "Wetlands" (https://basicbiology.net/environment/land/wetlands).
6. Daniel, T. C. et al. 2012: Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109: 8812–8819 [2] (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/05/18/111
4773109.full.pdf+html).
7. Kirchhoff, T. 2012: Pivotal cultural values of nature cannot be integrated into the ecosystem
services framework. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109 (46): E3146.
8. Cf. Cosgrove, D.E. 1984: Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape, London; Schama, S. 1995:
Landscape and memory. New York; Kirchhoff, T./Trepl, L./Vicenzotti, V. 2012:What is landscape
ecology? An analysis and evaluation of six different conceptions. Landscape Research iFirst.
9. Cf. Cosgrove, D.E. 1984: Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape, London; Schama, S. 1995:
Landscape and memory. New York; Backhaus, G./Murungi, J. (eds.): Symbolic Landscapes.
Dordrecht 2009.
10. https://cices.eu/
11. "Eleanor M. Slade, Robert Bagchi, Nadine Keller & Christopher D. Philipson. When Do More
Species Maximize More Ecosystem Services? Trends in Plant Science" (https://www.sciencedirec
t.com/science/article/pii/S136013851930161X).
12. Kremen, C. 2005. Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology?
Ecology Letters 8: 468–479.
13. Balvanera, P. C. Kremen, and M. Martinez. 2005. Applying community structure analysis to
ecosystem function: examples from pollination and carbon storage. Ecological Applications 15:
360–375.
14. Walker, B.H. 1992. "Biodiversity and ecological redundancy." Conservation Biology 6: 18–23.
15. Frost, T.M., S.R. Carpenter, A.R. Ives, and T.K. Kratz. 1995. "Species compensation and
complementarity in ecosystem function." In: C. Jones and J. Lawton, editors. Linking species and
ecosystems. Chapman & Hall, London. 387pp.
16. Hooper, D. U.; Chapin, F. S.; Ewel, J. J.; Hector, A.; Inchausti, P.; Lavorel, S.; Lawton, J. H.;
Lodge, D. M.; Loreau, M.; Naeem, S.; Schmid, B.; Setälä, H.; Symstad, A. J.; Vandermeer, J.;
Wardle, D. A. (2005). "Effects of Biodiversity on Ecosystem Functioning: A Consensus of Current
Knowledge" (https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/2060/1/Hooper_2005.pdf) (PDF). Ecological
Monographs. 75 (1): 3–35. doi:10.1890/04-0922 (https://doi.org/10.1890%2F04-0922).
17. Naeem S. 1998. "Species redundancy and ecosystem reliability" Conservation Biology 12: 39–45.
18. Lawton, J.H. 1994. What do species do in ecosystems? Oikos 71: 367–374.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 16/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

19. Tilman, D., C.L. Lehman, and C.E. Bristow. 1998. Diversity-stability relationships: statistical
inevitability or ecological consequence?" The American Naturalist 151: 277–282.
20. Elmqvist, T., C. Folke, M. Nyström, G. Peterson, J. Bengtsson, B. Walker and J. Norberg. 2003.
Response diversity, ecosystem change, and resilience. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
1: 488–494.
21. Grime, J.P. 1997. "Biodiversity and ecosystem function: The debate deepened." Science 277
22. US EPA, ORD (2 November 2017). "Coastal Waters" (https://www.epa.gov/report-environment/co
astal-waters). US EPA. Retrieved 4 May 2020.
23. "Millennium Ecosystem Assessment" (http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/index.html).
www.millenniumassessment.org. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20180224041032/http://mi
llenniumassessment.org/en/index.html) from the original on 24 February 2018. Retrieved 28 April
2018.
24. Molnar, Michelle; Clarke-Murray, Cathryn; Whitworth, John; Tam, Jordan (2009). "Marine and
Coastal Ecosystem Services" (https://web.archive.org/web/20160303230158/http://www.davidsuz
uki.org/publications/downloads/2009/marine_ecosystems_report_web.pdf) (PDF). Archived from
the original (http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/downloads/2009/marine_ecosystems_report_
web.pdf) (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 1 December 2014.
25. Campos, A.C.; Hernandez, M.E.; Moreno-Casasola, P.; Espinosa, E.C.; Robledo, A.R. & Mata,
D.I. [3] (http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02626667.2011.629786) Hydrological
Sciences Journal, December 2011.
26. Badol, Ruchi & Hussain, S.A. [4] (http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayFulltext?type=1&fid=
314311&jid=ENC&volumeId=32&issueId=01&aid=314310), Environmental Conservation,
February 2005
27. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020 – Main report (https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825en).
Rome: FAO. 2020. doi:10.4060/ca9825en (https://doi.org/10.4060%2Fca9825en). ISBN 978-92-5-
132974-0.
28. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020 – Key findings (https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8753en).
2020: FAO. 2020. doi:10.4060/ca8753en (https://doi.org/10.4060%2Fca8753en). ISBN 978-92-5-
132581-0.
29. Global forest products facts and figures 2018 (http://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/ca7415en).
FAO. 2019.
30. The State of the World's Forests 2020. Forests, biodiversity and people – In brief (https://doi.org/1
0.4060/ca8985en). Rome: FAO & UNEP. 2020. doi:10.4060/ca8985en (https://doi.org/10.4060%2
Fca8985en). ISBN 978-92-5-132707-4.
31. Molnar, Michelle; Clarke-Murray, Cathryn; Whitworth, Jogn & Tam, Jordan. "Archived copy" (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20160303230158/http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/downloads/200
9/marine_ecosystems_report_web.pdf) (PDF). Archived from the original (http://www.davidsuzuki.
org/publications/downloads/2009/marine_ecosystems_report_web.pdf) (PDF) on 3 March 2016.
Retrieved 1 December 2014., 2009
32. "What is Freshwater and Where is it Found?" (https://www.worldwildlife.org/industries/freshwater-s
ystems). World Wildlife Fund. Retrieved 13 July 2021.
33. "Top 10 Things You Didn't Know About Offshore Wind Energy" (https://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/
articles/top-10-things-you-didnt-know-about-offshore-wind-energy). Energy.gov. Retrieved 19 July
2021.
34. "Cultural services" (http://www.fao.org/ecosystem-services-biodiversity/background/cultural-servic
es/en/). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved 19 July 2021.
35. "Goal 14 targets" (https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals/go
al-14-life-below-water/targets.html). UNDP. Retrieved 24 September 2020.
36. "Ecosystem Services" (https://www.nwf.org/Educational-Resources/Wildlife-Guide/Understanding-
Conservation/Ecosystem-Services). National Wildlife Federation. Retrieved 19 July 2021.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 17/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

37. "Nutrient Cycles: Recycling in Ecosystems, The Carbon and Nitrogen Cycles – ScienceAid" (http
s://scienceaid.net/biology/ecology/nutrient.html). ScienceAid. Retrieved 16 May 2018.
38. UK National Ecosystem Assessment Technical Report, "Archived copy" (http://uknea.unep-wcmc.
org/Resources/tabid/82/Default.aspx). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20140707060244/htt
p://uknea.unep-wcmc.org/Resources/tabid/82/Default.aspx) from the original on 7 July 2014.
Retrieved 1 December 2014., Chapters 13–16, June 2011
39. "ISBN1118506243 – Google zoeken" (https://books.google.com/books?isbn=1118506243).
books.google.be. Retrieved 28 April 2018.
40. "Ecosystem Services" (http://www.canr.msu.edu/nativeplants/ecosystem_services). msu.edu.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20171228161544/http://www.canr.msu.edu/nativeplants/ec
osystem_services/) from the original on 28 December 2017. Retrieved 28 April 2018.
41. "Oxygen and Human Requirements" (http://www.geography.hunter.cuny.edu/tbw/wc.notes/1.atmo
sphere/oxygen_and_human_requirements.htm). www.geography.hunter.cuny.edu. Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20171022082604/http://www.geography.hunter.cuny.edu/tbw/wc.notes/1.
atmosphere/oxygen_and_human_requirements.htm) from the original on 22 October 2017.
Retrieved 28 April 2018.
42. "BBC – GCSE Bitesize: Inhaled and exhaled air" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/pe/a
ppliedanatomy/1_anatomy_respiratorysys_rev3.shtml). bbc.co.uk. Archived (https://web.archive.o
rg/web/20171026150605/http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/pe/appliedanatomy/1_anato
my_respiratorysys_rev3.shtml) from the original on 26 October 2017. Retrieved 28 April 2018.
43. New Scientist, June 2019
44. Raudsepp-Hearne, C. et al. 2010. Untangling the Environmentalist's Paradox: Why is Human
Well-being Increasing as Ecosystem Services Degrade? Bioscience 60(8) 576–589.
45. Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons" Science 162: 1243–1248.
46. Daily, G.C., T. Söderqvist, S. Aniyar, K. Arrow, P. Dasgupta, P.R. Ehrlich, C. Folke, A. Jansson, B.
Jansson, N. Kautsky, S. Levin, J. Lubchenco, K. Mäler, D. Simpson, D. Starrett, D. Tilman, and B.
Walker. 2000. The value of nature and the nature of value" Science 289: 395–396.
47. DeFries, R.S., J.A. Foley, and G.P. Asner. 2004. Land-use choices: balancing human needs and
ecosystem function. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2: 249–257.
48. Gorriz-Misfud, Elena; Varela, Elsa; Piqué, Miriam; Prokofieva, Irina (2016). "Demand and supply
of ecosystem services in a Mediterranean forest: Computing payment boundaries" (http://arxiudigi
tal.ctfc.cat/docs/upload/27_522_Gorriz%20et%20al%202016_Demand%20and%20supply%20o
f%20ES%20in%20a%20Med%20forest_Computing%20payment%20boundaries.pdf) (PDF).
Ecosystem Services. 17: 53–63. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.006 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.e
coser.2015.11.006). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20160806071955/http://arxiudigital.ctf
c.cat/docs/upload/27_522_Gorriz%20et%20al%202016_Demand%20and%20supply%20of%20E
S%20in%20a%20Med%20forest_Computing%20payment%20boundaries.pdf) (PDF) from the
original on 6 August 2016.
49. Farber, S.C., R. Costanza and M.A. Wilson. 2002. Economic and ecological concepts for valuing
ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 41: 375–392.
50. Costanza, Robert; d'Arge, Ralph; de Groot, Rudolf; Farberk, Stephen; Grasso, Monica; Hannon,
Bruce; Limburg, Karin; Naeem, Shahid; O'Neill, Robert V.; Paruelo, Jose; Raskin, Robert G.;
Sutton, Paul; van den Belt, Marjan (15 May 1997). "The value of the world's ecosystem services
and natural capital" (https://web.archive.org/web/20120730185431/http://www.esd.ornl.gov/benefit
s_conference/nature_paper.pdf) (PDF). Nature. 387 (6630): 253–260.
Bibcode:1997Natur.387..253C (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997Natur.387..253C).
doi:10.1038/387253a0 (https://doi.org/10.1038%2F387253a0). S2CID 672256 (https://api.semanti
cscholar.org/CorpusID:672256). Archived from the original (http://www.esd.ornl.gov/benefits_conf
erence/nature_paper.pdf) (PDF) on 30 July 2012. Retrieved 8 August 2012.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 18/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

51. Salles, J. M. (2011). Valuing biodiversity and ecosystem services: Why put economic values on
Nature?. Comptes rendus biologies, 334(5-6), 469-482 at page 478 quoting Robert Scholes,
ecologist.
52. "Our Ecosystem – Mapping & Data Sharing Software" (http://ecometrica.com/products/our-ecosys
tem/). Ecometrica. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20130617100654/http://ecometrica.com/
products/our-ecosystem/) from the original on 17 June 2013. Retrieved 9 July 2012.
53. Hanson, C, J Ranganathan, C Iceland, and J Finisdore. (2008) The Corporate Ecosystem
Services Review (Version 1.0). World Resources Institute. "Archived copy" (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20090401203436/http://www.wri.org/project/ecosystem-services-review). Archived from the
original (http://www.wri.org/project/ecosystem-services-review) on 1 April 2009. Retrieved
17 March 2009.
54. "ARIES :: ARtificial Intelligence for Environment & Sustainability" (https://aries.integratedmodellin
g.org/). aries.integratedmodelling.org/. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20120607044742/htt
ps://aries.integratedmodelling.org/) from the original on 7 June 2012. Retrieved 9 July 2012.
55. "Welcome" (http://www.naturalvalueinitiative.org/). Natural Value Initiative. Archived (http://arquivo.
pt/wayback/20160516073119/http://www.naturalvalueinitiative.org/) from the original on 16 May
2016. Retrieved 9 July 2012.
56. "Home" (http://www.naturalcapitalproject.org). Natural Capital Project. Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20120628223946/http://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/) from the original on 28 June
2012. Retrieved 9 July 2012.
57. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 279pp.
58. Dietz, T. E. Ostrom and P.C. Stern. 2003. The struggle to govern the commons" Science 302:
1907–1912.
59. Pretty, J. 2003. Social capital and the collective management of resources" Science 302: 1912–
1914.
60. Heikkila, T. 2004. Institutional boundaries and common-pool resource management: a
comparative analysis of water management programs in California. Journal of Policy Analysis and
Management from Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management 23: 97–117.
61. Gibson, C.C., J.T. Williams and E. Ostrom. 2005. Local management and better forests. World
Development 33: 273–284.
62. Daily, G.C. 2000. Management objectives for the protection of ecosystem services. Environmental
Science & Policy 3: 333–339.
63. Jessica Brown and Neil Bird 2010. Costa Rica sustainable resource management: Successfully
tackling tropical deforestation (http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/details.asp?id=5049&title=costa-ric
a-sustainable-resource-management-successfully-tackling-tropical-deforestation) Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20110514083601/http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/details.asp?id=5049&tit
le=costa-rica-sustainable-resource-management-successfully-tackling-tropical-deforestation) 14
May 2011 at the Wayback Machine. London: Overseas Development Institute
64. Balvanera, P., G.C. Daily, P.R. Ehrlich, T.H. Ricketts, S.Bailey, S. Kark, C. Kremen and H. Pereira.
2001. Conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services. Science 291: 2047.
65. Chan, K.M.A., M.R. Shaw, D.R. Cameron, E.C. Underwood and G.C. Daily. 2006. Conservation
planning for ecosystem services. PLoS Biology 4: 2138–2152.
66. Northern Economics Inc. "Valuation of Ecosystem Services from Shellfish Restoration,
Enhancement and Management: A Review of the Literature" (http://www.pacshell.org/pdf/Shellfish
EcoServices.pdf) (PDF). Prepared for Pacific Shellfish Institute. Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20131203085756/http://www.pacshell.org/pdf/ShellfishEcoServices.pdf) (PDF) from the
original on 3 December 2013.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 19/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

67. Jones; Lawton, and Shachak (1994). "Organisms as Ecosystem Engineers". Oikos. 69 (3): 373–
386. doi:10.2307/3545850 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3545850). JSTOR 3545850 (https://www.js
tor.org/stable/3545850).
68. Kistenkas, Frederik H., Irene Bouwma, Barriers for the ecosystem services concept in European
water and nature conservation law, Ecosystem Services 29 (2018) 223–227
69. "Goal 15 targets" (https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals/go
al-15-life-on-land/targets.html). UNDP. Retrieved 24 September 2020.
70. ebaflagship.org (http://ebaflagship.org/images/ContentsForPublications/eba%20policy%20brochur
e%20web.pdf)
71. "Archived copy" (http://www.unep.org/climatechange/adaptation/EcosystemBasedAdaptation/tabi
d/29583/Default.aspx). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20150604195815/http://www.unep.o
rg/climatechange/adaptation/EcosystemBasedAdaptation/tabid/29583/Default.aspx) from the
original on 4 June 2015. Retrieved 11 May 2015.
72. Gorriz-Misfud, Elena; Secco, L; Pisani, E (2016). "Exploring the interlinkages between
governance and social capital: A dynamic model for forestry". Forest Policy and Economics. 65:
25–36. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2016.01.006 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.forpol.2016.01.006).
73. Tidwell, V.; Richards, E.; Siirola, J.; Warrender, C.; Benz, Z.; Morrow, D.; Glicken Turnley, J.;
Stansbury, M. (2012). "Decision Insight into Stakeholder Conflict for ERN" (http://prod.sandia.gov/t
echlib/access-control.cgi/2012/120710.pdf) (PDF). SANDIA Report SAND2012-0710. Archived (ht
tps://web.archive.org/web/20131202232101/http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib/access-control.cgi/201
2/120710.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2 December 2013.
74. Lewis D. J.; R. J. Alig (2009). "Empirical Methods for Modeling Landscape Change, Ecosystem
Services, and Biodiversity" (http://www.fs.fed.us/openspace/pubs/Lewis%20Alig%20WEF-Vol.8-N
o.1-Spring2009.pdf) (PDF). Western Economics Forum. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20
111020172653/http://www.fs.fed.us/openspace/pubs/Lewis%20Alig%20WEF-Vol.8-No.1-Spring20
09.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 20 October 2011.
75. Ullman D. G.; K. Halsey; C. Goldfinger (2013). "Managing Eco-System Services Decisions" (http
s://davidullman.com/uploads/Managing_Eco.pdf) (PDF). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20
130606201318/https://davidullman.com/uploads/Managing_Eco.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 6
June 2013.
76. VO, Q.T., KUENZER, C., OPPELT, N.: How remote sensing supports mangrove ecosystem
service valuation: A case study in Ca Mau Province, Vietnam. Ecosystem Services, 2015, 14, 67–
75
77. [5] (http://vivagrass.eu/about-the-project/)
78. "Sustainable grassland management efforts in the Baltics: interview with Žymantas Morkvėnas –
GO-GRASS" (https://www.go-grass.eu/sustainable-grassland-management-efforts-in-the-baltics-i
nterview-with-zymantas-morkvenas/). www.go-grass.eu. Retrieved 1 August 2021.
79. Schumacher, E.F (1973). Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As If People Mattered.
80. Daily, G.C. 1997. Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press,
Washington. 392pp.
81. Marsh, G.P. 1864 (1965). Man and Nature. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. 472pp.
82. Osborn, F. 1948. Our Plundered Planet. Little, Brown and Company: Boston. 217pp.
83. Vogt, W. 1948. Road to Survival. William Sloan: New York. 335pp.
84. Leopold, A. 1949. A Sand County Almanac and Sketches from Here and There. Oxford University
Press, New York. 226pp.
85. Sears, P.B. 1956. "The processes of environmental change by man." In: W.L. Thomas, editor.
Man's Role in Changing the Face of the Earth (Volume 2). University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
1193pp.
86. Ehrlich, P.R. and A. Ehrlich. 1970. Population, Resources, Environment: Issues in Human
Ecology. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco. 383pp. – see p.157
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 20/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

87. Study of Critical Environmental Problems (SCEP). 1970. Man's Impact on the Global
Environment. MIT Press, Cambridge. 319pp.
88. Ehrlich, P.R. and A. Ehrlich. 1981. Extinction: The Causes and Consequences of the
Disappearance of Species. Random House, New York. 305pp.
89. Brown, Thomas C.; John C. Bergstrom; John B. Loomis (2007). "Defining, valuing and providing
ecosystem goods and services" (https://web.archive.org/web/20130525213257/http://lawlibrary.un
m.edu/nrj/47/2/04_brown_goods.pdf) (PDF). Natural Resources Journal. 47 (2): 329–376.
Archived from the original (http://lawlibrary.unm.edu/nrj/47/2/04_brown_goods.pdf) (PDF) on 25
May 2013.
90. Daily, Gretchen C.; Söderqvist, Tore; Aniyar, Sara; Arrow, Kenneth; Dasgupta, Partha; Ehrlich,
Paul R.; Folke, Carl; Jansson, AnnMari; Jansson, Bengt-Owe (21 July 2000). "The Value of
Nature and the Nature of Value". Science. 289 (5478): 395–396.
doi:10.1126/science.289.5478.395 (https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.289.5478.395).
ISSN 0036-8075 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0036-8075). PMID 10939949 (https://pubmed.ncb
i.nlm.nih.gov/10939949). S2CID 27639803 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:27639803).
91. "RC18-1605 Project Overview. Value and Resiliency of Ecosystem Services on Department of
Defense (DoD) Lands" (https://www.serdp-estcp.org/Program-Areas/Resource-Conservation-and-
Resiliency/Infrastructure-Resiliency/Vulnerability-and-Impact-Assessment/RC18-1605).
www.serdp-estcp.org Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 19 May 2020. Retrieved 19 May
2020.
92. James Kagan, Mark Borsuk (18 September 2019). "Assessing Ecosystem Service Benefits from
Military Installations" (https://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/publications/assessing-ecosystem-service
-benefits-military-installations). Nicholas Institute, Duke University. Retrieved 19 May 2020.
93. Chichilnisky, G. and G. Heal. 1998. Economic returns from the biosphere. Nature 391: 629–630.
94. Guo, Z.W., X.M. Xio and D.M. Li. 2000. An assessment of ecosystem services: water flow
regulation and hydroelectric power production. Ecological Applications 10: 925–936.
95. Hanson, C, J Ranganathan, C Iceland, and J Finisdore. (2008) The Corporate Ecosystem
Services Review (Version 1.0). World Resources Institute.
96. Perrot-Maître, D. (2006) The Vittel payments for ecosystem services: a "perfect" PES case?
International Institute for Environment and Development, London, UK.
97. EU Environment (22 April 2016), Ecosystem services and Biodiversity – Science for Environment
Policy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6luBEJfi3s), archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20
170806014145/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6luBEJfi3s) from the original on 6 August
2017, retrieved 6 September 2016
98. "LIFE Viva Grass | Integrated planning tool for grassland ecosystem services" (http://vivagrass.e
u/). vivagrass.eu. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20160807201444/http://vivagrass.eu/)
from the original on 7 August 2016. Retrieved 6 September 2016.

Further reading
Farber, S., Costanza, R., Childers, D.L., Erickson, J., Gross, K., Grove, M., Hopkinson, C.S.,
Kahn, J., Pincetl, S., Troy, A., Warren, P. and M. Wilson, "Linking Ecology and Economics for
Ecosystem Management," Bioscience 56(2): 121–133, 2006.
Kistenkas, Frederik H., Irene Bouwma, Barriers for the ecosystem services concept in European
water and nature conservation law, Ecosystem Services 29 (2018) 223–227
Salles, J-M, "Valuing biodiversity and ecosystem services: Why put economic values on Nature?"
Comptes Rendus Biologies 334(5–6): 469–82, 2011.
Vo Quoc, T., Kuenzer, C., Vo Quang, M., Moder, F., Oppelt, N., "Review of Valuation Methods for
Mangrove Ecosystem Services," Journal of Ecological Indicators 23: 431–446, 2012.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 21/22
8/13/2021 Ecosystem service - Wikipedia

External links
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (http://www.millenniumassessment.org)
Earth Economics (http://www.eartheconomics.org/)
Gund Institute for Ecological Economics (http://www.uvm.edu/giee/)
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (http://www.teebweb.org/)
COHAB Initiative on Health and Biodiversity – Ecosystems and Human Well-being (https://web.ar
chive.org/web/20090204054347/http://www.cohabnet.org/)
The ARIES Project (https://aries.integratedmodelling.org/)
Ecosystem Marketplace (http://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/)
Plan Vivo: an operational model for Payments for Ecosystem Services (http://www.planvivo.org/)
Ecosystem services (http://www.greenfacts.org/glossary/def/ecosystem-services.htm) at Green
Facts
Water Evaluation And Planning (WEAP) system (http://www.weap21.org/) for modeling impacts on
aquatic ecosystem services
Project Life+ Making Good Natura (http://www.lifemgn-serviziecosistemici.eu/EN/home/Pages/def
ault.aspx)
GecoServ (http://www.gecoserv.org/) – Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Services Valuation Database
(includes studies from all over the world, but only coastal ecosystems relevant to the Gulf of
Mexico)
Ecosystem services in environmental accounting (http://www.umweltgesamtrechnung.at/ms/ugr/u
gr_en/ugr_scopeapplication/ugr_ecosystemservices/)

Regional

Ecosystem Services (http://www.fs.fed.us/ecosystemservices/) at the US Forest Service

GecoServ (http://www.gecoserv.org/) – Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Services Valuation Database
LIFE VIVA Grass (http://vivagrass.eu) – grassland ecosystems services in Baltic countries
(assessment and integrated planning)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ecosystem_service&oldid=1038030236"

This page was last edited on 10 August 2021, at 03:30 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;

additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosystem_service 22/22