Biodiversity and ecosystem services. Complementary approaches for ecosystem management

Abstract The concept of ecosystem services introduced a new view on the relationship between biodiversity and human well being. But are both concepts, biodiversity and ecosystem services, mutually beneficial? We will try to unravel part of this much debated question in three steps. Firstly, a general hypothesis describing the present link between biodiversity, ecosystem services and land use intensity is tested for the region of Flanders (13.682 km2). The spatial exercise illustrates that even in a densely populated area as Flanders (539 inhabitants/km2), scores for biodiversity and ecosystem services show a clear decline with an increase in land use intensity. Despite the overall congruence of the rough indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services used in this exercise, the need for new indicators integrating key structural and functional aspects of the ecosystem is highlighted. In a second step a target scheme is proposed describing the relation between biodiversity and land use intensity, for the long-term future. In this conceptual framework the need for the conservation and restoration of biodiversity hot spots is emphasized. At the same time the importance of the search for an environmental ‘bottom line’ is stressed. What is the minimum amount of biodiversity needed to reach sustainable use? And what is the critical point for human impact beyond which society will largely depend on the import of ecosystem services to sustain or increase its well-being? In a third step, ecosystem management is used as a concept to bridge the gap between the present and the target scheme. Ecosystem management is divided into three focal zones. (1) For the remaining zones with a high biodiversity and a low intensity of land use, a biodiversity conservation based approach is needed. (2) For most rural areas with multifunctional uses and a good state as a future perspective, a focus on ecosystem services is a good point of departure. (3) In the built-up areas and intensively used agricultural sites, beyond the minimum standards for land use intensity, a technological service based approach will be necessary. A division of ecosystem management into these three zones confirms the complementarity of biodiversity and ecosystem services for policy and management strategies. The concept of this triple division can help to facilitate the discussion of a joint achievement of the goals for biodiversity and ecosystem services in the field.

[1]  A. Hector,et al.  Biodiversity and ecosystem multifunctionality , 2007, Nature.

[2]  Amy J. Symstad,et al.  Species diversity, functional diversity, and ecosystem functioning , 2002 .

[3]  Jai Ranganathan,et al.  When Agendas Collide: Human Welfare and Biological Conservation , 2007, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[4]  T. Dawson,et al.  Quantifying the Contribution of Organisms to the Provision of Ecosystem Services , 2009 .

[5]  P. Brussard,et al.  Ecosystem management: what is it really? , 1998 .

[6]  A. Izac,et al.  Biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes: Are we asking the right questions? , 2004 .

[7]  M. Loreau,et al.  Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning : synthesis and perspectives , 2002 .

[8]  K. Gaston,et al.  Spatial covariance between biodiversity and other ecosystem service priorities , 2009 .

[9]  G. Blust,et al.  Towards an ecological assessment of watercourses , 1993 .

[10]  I. Hoste,et al.  Do the distribution patterns of vascular plant species correspond to biogeographical classifications based on environmental data? A case study from northern Belgium , 2011 .

[11]  Wouter Van Landuyt,et al.  Rode lijst van de vaatplanten van Vlaanderen en het Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest , 2006 .

[12]  R. Costanza,et al.  Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  R. D. de Groot,et al.  Ecosystem services and economic theory: integration for policy-relevant research. , 2008, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[14]  M. van Noordwijk,et al.  Biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes: Are we asking the right questions? , 2004 .

[15]  K. Redford,et al.  Payment for Ecosystem Services and the Challenge of Saving Nature , 2009, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[16]  J. Witte The descriptive capacity of ecological plant species groups , 2002, Plant Ecology.

[17]  Thomas M. Brooks,et al.  Conservation biology: Biodiversity barometers , 2004, Nature.

[18]  E. Odum Fundamentals of ecology , 1972 .

[19]  R. E. Grumbine What Is Ecosystem Management , 1994 .

[20]  R. Bayón,et al.  The business of biodiversity , 2010, Nature.

[21]  H. Mooney,et al.  Human Domination of Earth’s Ecosystems , 1997, Renewable Energy.

[22]  D. Srivastava,et al.  Biodiversity-Ecosystem Function Research: Is It Relevant to Conservation? , 2005 .

[23]  Pedro Martins da Silva,et al.  Indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services: a synthesis across ecosystems and spatial scales , 2009 .

[24]  P. J. Boon,et al.  Freshwater Quality: Defining the Indefinable? , 1996 .

[25]  W. Proctor,et al.  Implementing a Process for Integration Research: Ecosystem Services Project, Australia , 2005 .

[26]  H. Dyck,et al.  Habitat quality and biodiversity indicator performances of a threatened butterfly versus a multispecies group for wet heathlands in Belgium , 2005 .

[27]  B. Ridder Questioning the ecosystem services argument for biodiversity conservation , 2008, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[28]  Rob Alkemade,et al.  GLOBIO3: A Framework to Investigate Options for Reducing Global Terrestrial Biodiversity Loss , 2009, Ecosystems.

[29]  S. Díaz,et al.  Biodiversity Loss Threatens Human Well-Being , 2006, PLoS biology.

[30]  Richard C. Bishop,et al.  Endangered Species and Uncertainty: The Economics of a Safe Minimum Standard , 1978 .

[31]  P. Van Damme,et al.  The Relationship Between Plant Use and Plant Diversity in the Bolivian Andes, with Special Reference to Medicinal Plant Use , 2008 .

[32]  Gretchen C Daily,et al.  Conservation Planning for Ecosystem Services , 2006, PLoS biology.

[33]  Andrew Balmford,et al.  Measuring the changing state of nature , 2003 .

[34]  Wilhelm Windhorst,et al.  Landscapes' Capacities to Provide Ecosystem Services - a Concept for Land-Cover Based Assessments , 2009 .

[35]  R. Norris,et al.  What is river health , 1999 .

[36]  Shahid Naeem,et al.  Species Redundancy and Ecosystem Reliability , 1998 .

[37]  F. Chapin,et al.  EFFECTS OF BIODIVERSITY ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING: A CONSENSUS OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE , 2005 .

[38]  Magnus Nyström,et al.  Reserves, Resilience and Dynamic Landscapes , 2003, Ambio.

[39]  D. Tilman,et al.  Diversity‐Stability Relationships: Statistical Inevitability or Ecological Consequence? , 1998, The American Naturalist.

[40]  T. Crowards,et al.  Safe Minimum Standards: costs and opportunities , 1998 .

[41]  K. Wallace Classification of ecosystem services: Problems and solutions , 2007 .

[42]  Brendan Fisher,et al.  Ecosystem valuation , 2010, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[43]  T. Brooks,et al.  Conservation planning and the IUCN Red List , 2008 .

[44]  M. Haine,et al.  Van Damme A. , 1986 .

[45]  Wouter Van Reeth,et al.  Landgebruik in Vlaanderen , 2009 .

[46]  J. Ghazoul Recognising the Complexities of Ecosystem Management and the Ecosystem Service Concept , 2007 .

[47]  Garry D. Peterson,et al.  Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[48]  Changes in the distribution area of vascular plants in Flanders (northern Belgium): eutrophication as a major driving force , 2008, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[49]  Jaboury Ghazoul,et al.  Challenges to the Uptake of the Ecosystem Service Rationale for Conservation , 2007, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[50]  Alpina Begossi,et al.  Use of ecological methods in ethnobotany: Diversity indices , 1996, Economic Botany.

[51]  Robert K. Colwell,et al.  Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness , 2001 .

[52]  G. Minshall,et al.  The River Continuum Concept , 1980 .

[53]  R. O'Neill,et al.  The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital , 1997, Nature.

[54]  J. Karr Biological Integrity: A Long-Neglected Aspect of Water Resource Management. , 1991, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[55]  P. Clifford,et al.  Modifying the t test for assessing the correlation between two spatial processes , 1993 .

[56]  R. Costanza,et al.  Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making , 2009 .

[57]  R. D. Groot,et al.  A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services , 2002 .

[58]  Andrew Balmford,et al.  Trends in the state of nature and their implications for human well-being. , 2005, Ecology letters.

[59]  Michael Hoffmann,et al.  The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[60]  P. Schulze Engineering within ecological constraints , 1996 .

[61]  James H. Brown,et al.  The Report of the Ecological Society of America Committee on the Scientific Basis for Ecosystem Management , 1996 .

[62]  Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria , 2005 .

[63]  G. Mace,et al.  The 2010 Biodiversity Indicators: Challenges for Science and Policy , 2007, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[64]  Gretchen C. Daily,et al.  Management objectives for the protection of ecosystem services , 2000 .

[65]  B. Walker Biodiversity and Ecological Redundancy , 1992 .

[66]  S. V. Ciriacy-Wantrup,et al.  Resource Conservation: Economics and Policies , 1954 .

[67]  E. Davidson,et al.  Global assessment of nitrogen deposition effects on terrestrial plant diversity: a synthesis. , 2010, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[68]  C. W. Loomer Resource Conservation: Economics and Policies , 1953 .

[69]  J. Karr,et al.  Restoring life in running waters : better biological monitoring , 1998 .

[70]  J. Liira,et al.  Agrotolerant and high nature-value species—Plant biodiversity indicator groups in agroecosystems § , 2009 .

[71]  E J Milner-Gulland,et al.  Quantification of Extinction Risk: IUCN's System for Classifying Threatened Species , 2008, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[72]  P. Balvanera,et al.  Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services. , 2006, Ecology letters.

[73]  R. Cowling,et al.  An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[74]  R. Biggs,et al.  A biodiversity intactness index , 2005, Nature.