| Summary: | For ecosystem measurement frameworks to be accepted, operationalised and implemented by diverse international communities, clear and agreeable concepts and classifications are essential. This paper analyses and develops two foundational typology challenges within ecosystem measurement: the classification of ecosystems and the classification of their services. Our aim is to determine if there is sufficient consensus to ascertain “Which ecosystems provide which services?” for standardised ecosystem accounting.
This paper first compares classifications used in nine selected ecosystem assessments as input studies that make value statements about multiple ecosystems providing multiple ecosystem services. Given that these nine studies do not use identical concepts, classifications and terminologies, we develop “supersets” that can accommodate the diversity of classifications used in these input studies. Each input study is then corresponded to these new supersets.
On the basis of this analysis, substantial consensus was found that some ecosystems are more likely to provide certain services than others are. However, for several ecosystem types, there was little or no consensus on which services they provide. Linkages for which there is consensus can serve as a checklist for future ecosystem services assessments. Both the framework of the supersets and the correspondence and visual methods developed will be useful for integrating information at different scales (for example, linkages from local, ecosystem-specific and ecosystem services-specific studies). This paper also provides guidance to future ecosystem services assessments to use, test and extend the current classifications of ecosystems and ecosystem services.
|
|---|
