Ecosystem services

The term ecosystem services ( engl. ecosystem service, abbreviated ESS) (Eng. also: ecosystem service, and ecosystem services) referred to in the common definition of the " benefit foundations " or " benefits " ( engl. benefits ), refer the people of the ecological systems. The term has become a key concept at the interface between natural and social scientific environmental research since the beginning of the millennium.

Examples of ecosystem services are pollinating fruit flowers by insects, the provision of useful irrigation and drinking water through natural filtration of precipitation, the reproduction of fish populations as a food as well as the provision of fresh air and a pleasant environment for leisure, recreation and aesthetic edification.

The concept of ecosystem services is to be distinguished from that of the ecosystem function. Although there are terminological overlap, be as ecosystem functions usually the behind the ecosystem services ecosystem processes, rarely referred to underlying ecosystem structures and states.

Definition

The internationally authoritative definition comes from the band methods the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. ( Box 1, Key Definitions, p 3) ecosystem services defined here as

Another influential definition comes from Gretchen Daily, published in their anthology Nature's Services. It defines ecosystem services as

Categories

According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment to Ecosystem services can be divided into four categories, with the so-called support services are considered as the basis of other services:

• Supportive Services ecosystem services that are based on soil formation, nutrient cycling and conservation of genetic diversity

• -Providing services Provision of food, water, building materials (wood ) fibers, raw materials for pharmaceuticals

• Regulating services Regulation of climate, floods, disease, water quality, waste disposal, pollination

• Cultural services promote ecosystem services, recreation, nature tourism, aesthetic pleasure and spiritual fulfillment

Value for the human

Without ecosystem services human life on Earth would not be possible. Such statements seem to imply that ecosystem services have a value that goes far beyond any meaningful quantifiable in monetary measure. For the entirety of all ecosystem services, this is true. This has, for example, the detailed critique of the article by Costanza et al. (1997) demonstrated the " value" of the biosphere. However, the totality of ecosystem services is rarely an object of human action decisions. Actionable valuation issues relating to ecosystem services arise only in relation to specific issues.

The concept of ecosystem services is by definition a anthroporelationale (there are people who rate) and an anthropocentric perspective ( only human interests include ) set. This does not imply that there can be no other relations or perspectives ( see, eg, biocentrism ). If ecosystem services are mentioned, but only benefit foundations for people to be addressed. This benefit foundations can be evaluated by various methods:

• The multi-criteria analysis (MCA; eg Analytic Hierarchy Process, cost-benefit analysis ) employs various methods to compare complex action alternatives in terms of their properties (including impacts on ecosystem services) without assigning it economic or financial aspects necessarily a special role.

• The cost -effectiveness analysis ( CEA ) examines which of several alternatives the best ratio between the expended (usually purely financial ) has a cost and the desired improvements in the supply of ecosystem services.

• The cost-benefit analysis (CBA ) studies the net present values ​​of various alternative courses of action that influence the supply of ecosystem services.

The calculation of net present values ​​in the CBA assumes here that the temporal power of the economic advantages and disadvantages ( net benefit ) can be adequately estimated the action alternatives. In " environmentally relevant " alternatives this sets the estimation of the changes of the affected ecosystem services and their monetization ahead for the conversion into monetary units, in turn, various methods are available, . Particular survey methods (eg contingent valuation ) are often easier for the assessment of ecosystem services apply as for the valuation of ecosystem functions. too, the monetary valuation of ecosystem services remains difficult, however, if in the narrow sense "essential " ecosystem services are affected on a large scale.

To ensure the provision of ecosystem services, special reward mechanisms ( Payments for Ecosystem Services, PES ) are used.

Hazards caused by environmental damage

The availability of ecosystem services may deteriorate rapidly as a result of pollution or other non- sustainable management. Worldwide, 60 % of the examined by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, ecosystem services are in a state of degradation or unsustainable use, which is characterized by decreasing quantity and quality of ecosystem services. Of the 24 recorded providing, regulating and cultural services, the use of pressure increases currently at 20

Discussion of application and application limits

General Limitations

In its more than 30 studies summarizing ending work Costanza et al lead. In 1997, a number of issues on which set of practical implementation of appraisals in ESS limits.

Cultural ecosystem services

In the discussion continues to be the operationalization of the concept of so-called cultural ecosystem services. A good overview to try the definition, collection and evaluation of these services in research areas such as landscape aesthetics / landscape assessment, landscape conservation and recreation planning have Daniel et al., 2012.

A fundamental criticism of the concept of cultural ecosystem services, points out the following: First, based essential cultural values ​​of our natural or culturally shaped environment on the unique character ( nature ) of areas which, with the general, scientific parameters by which ecosystems are described could not be capture; secondly, as the environment when it comes to such value estimates not perceived as an ecosystem, but in emotional and aesthetic subjective opinion way as landscape, wilderness, etc.; Third, set up this value estimates not in ecological characteristics and processes, but in culturally defined modes of apprehension and interpretation patterns.

In contrast to generally negative word messages other authors assess the applicability of the concept as an empirical question. For a number of examples, the research has demonstrated a substantial contribution of specific ecosystems to meet specific cultural needs and desires. This applies especially for the aesthetic perception and evaluation of the landscape. Also in terms of legal regulations for landscape conservation needs just the interaction of natural and cultural factors are emphasized - otherwise threaten a further progressive underestimation of the cultural benefits foundations of ecological systems.