One Ecosystem :
Short Communications
|
Corresponding author: Benjamin Burkhard (burkhard@phygeo.uni-hannover.de)
Academic editor: Christian Albert
Received: 17 Aug 2018 | Accepted: 01 Sep 2018 | Published: 05 Sep 2018
© 2018 Benjamin Burkhard, Joachim Maes, Marion Potschin-Young, Fernando Santos-Martín, Davide Geneletti, Pavel Stoev, Leena Kopperoinen, Cristian Adamescu, Blal Adem Esmail, Ildikó Arany, Andy Arnell, Mario Balzan, David N. Barton, Pieter van Beukering, Sabine Bicking, Paulo Borges, Bilyana Borisova, Leon Braat, Luke M Brander, Svetla Bratanova-Doncheva, Steven Broekx, Claire Brown, Constantin Cazacu, Neville Crossman, Bálint Czúcz, Jan Daněk, Rudolf de Groot, Daniel Depellegrin, Panayotis Dimopoulos, Nora Elvinger, Markus Erhard, Nora Fagerholm, Jana Frélichová, Adrienne Grêt-Regamey, Margarita Grudova, Roy Haines-Young, Ola Inghe, Tamas Kallay, Tamara Kirin, Hermann Klug, Ioannis Kokkoris, Iskra Konovska, Marion Kruse, Iliyana Kuzmova, Manfred Lange, Inge Liekens, Alon Lotan, Damian Lowicki, Sandra Luque, Cristina Marta-Pedroso, Andrzej Mizgajski, Laura Mononen, Sara Mulder, Felix Müller, Stoyan Nedkov, Mariana Nikolova, Hannah Östergård, Lyubomir Penev, Paulo Pereira, Kati Pitkänen, Tobias Plieninger, Sven-Erik Rabe, Steffen Reichel, Philip Roche, Graciela Rusch, Anda Ruskule, Anna Sapundzhieva, Kalev Sepp, Ina Sieber, Mateja Šmid Hribar, Simona Stašová, Bastian Steinhoff-Knopp, Małgorzata Stępniewska, Anne Teller, David Vackar, Martine van Weelden, Kristina Veidemane, Henrik Vejre, Petteri Vihervaara, Arto Viinikka, Miguel Villoslada, Bettina Weibel, Grazia Zulian
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Burkhard B, Maes J, Potschin-Young MB, Santos-Martín F, Geneletti D, Stoev P, Kopperoinen L, Adamescu CM, Adem Esmail B, Arany I, Arnell A, Balzan M, Barton DN, van Beukering P, Bicking S, Borges PAV, Borisova B, Braat L, M Brander LM, Bratanova-Doncheva S, Broekx S, Brown C, Cazacu C, Crossman N, Czúcz B, Daněk J, Groot R, Depellegrin D, Dimopoulos P, Elvinger N, Erhard M, Fagerholm N, Frélichová J, Grêt-Regamey A, Grudova M, Haines-Young R, Inghe O, Kallay TK, Kirin T, Klug H, Kokkoris IP, Konovska I, Kruse M, Kuzmova I, Lange M, Liekens I, Lotan A, Lowicki D, Luque S, Marta-Pedroso C, Mizgajski A, Mononen L, Mulder S, Müller F, Nedkov S, Nikolova M, Östergård H, Penev L, Pereira P, Pitkänen K, Plieninger T, Rabe S, Reichel S, Roche PK, Rusch G, Ruskule A, Sapundzhieva A, Sepp K, Sieber IM, Šmid Hribar M, Stašová S, Steinhoff-Knopp B, Stępniewska M, Teller A, Vackar D, van Weelden M, Veidemane K, Vejre H, Vihervaara P, Viinikka A, Villoslada M, Weibel B, Zulian G (2018) Mapping and assessing ecosystem services in the EU - Lessons learned from the ESMERALDA approach of integration. One Ecosystem 3: e29153. https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.3.e29153
|
The European Union (EU) Horizon 2020 Coordination and Support Action ESMERALDA aimed at developing guidance and a flexible methodology for Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) to support the EU member states in the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy’s Target 2 Action 5. ESMERALDA’s key tasks included network creation, stakeholder engagement, enhancing ecosystem services mapping and assessment methods across various spatial scales and value domains, work in case studies and support of EU member states in MAES implementation. Thus ESMERALDA aimed at integrating various project outcomes around four major strands: i) Networking, ii) Policy, iii) Research and iv) Application. The objective was to provide guidance for integrated ecosystem service mapping and assessment that can be used for sustainable decision-making in policy, business, society, practice and science at EU, national and regional levels. This article presents the overall ESMERALDA approach of integrating the above-mentioned project components and outcomes and provides an overview of how the enhanced methods were applied and how they can be used to support MAES implementation in the EU member states. Experiences with implementing such a large pan-European Coordination and Support Action in the context of EU policy are discussed and recommendations for future actions are given.
EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020, ecosystem services, mapping, assessment, project
The ESMERALDA*
The consortium represented a deep and shared commitment amongst all participants (researchers, decision-makers and various other stakeholders) from all 28 EU member states, Switzerland, Norway, Israel as well as the EU outermost regions, to contribute to the effective accomplishment of the challenges of the Biodiversity Strategy and to address the underpinning, cutting edge research issues in this important and timely topic area. Thus, appropriate methods, information and data are needed on where and how, for example, food, water, clean air, other materials and recreation are provided and how climate, nutrients, natural disasters, pests and diseases are regulated (
Action 5 sets the requirement for an EU-wide knowledge-base, designed to be a primary resource for developing Europe’s green infrastructure. This is to identify areas for ecosystem restoration and to set a baseline against which the goal of 'no net loss of biodiversity and ES' can be evaluated. A dedicated working group on Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES*
ESMERALDA has worked along four key project strands: (i) Networking, (ii) Policy, (iii) Research and (iv) Application in order to help ensure the delivery of all EU member states of Action 5. A ‘flexible MAES methodology’ was developed that can simultaneously provide innovative building blocks for pan-European, national and regional MAES studies as well as for local assessments required, for instance, for spatial planning, agriculture, land degradation, climate, water and nature policy. A key part of ESMERALDA was the mobilisation of relevant actors from science, policy, practice and society involved in ES science and application and to enable them to fulfil their commitments under Action 5. Fig.
ESMERALDA's main objective was to use the expertise of its pan-European consortium members and their networks to build on and mobilise relevant ES mapping and assessment actors of on-going European, international and national initiatives and to exploit existing projects, networks, methods and data. This has provided opportunities for improving ES mapping and assessment methodologies and knowledge sharing through the wider stakeholder interactions supported by the project. In order to achieve the aims of the ESMERALDA CSA, the key objectives of ESMERALDA were:
Strand Networking
Strand Policy
Strand Research
Strand Application
In the following, an overview of the ESMERALDA Coordination and Support Action's implementation and its achievements will be given.
The work of ESMERALDA was organised along the four strands of Networking, Policy, Research and Application, which are described in more detail below. ESMERALDA started with identifying gaps and solutions for MAES implementation in the EU member states by intensive networking and stakeholder involvement, transmitting experiences through active processes of dialogue and co-creation of knowledge. The aim was to empower the participants and relevant stakeholders to achieve the aims of Action 5 by 2020. Based on relevant and completed or ongoing activities in Europe and worldwide (such as the EU MAES*
The Strand Networking went on through the whole project duration as represented by the increasing number of participating EU member states over the project lifetime. At its start, the consortium consisted of 25 partners from 19 EU member states and Switzerland. At the end of the project, ESMERALDA included 37 partners from all 28 EU member states, Switzerland, Norway and Israel (see Fig.
The Networking Strand has been especially active in the first phase of ESMERALDA, in which relevant stakeholders from science, policy and practice were identified and the current state of MAES implementation was systematically assessed in each EU member state. This stocktaking resulted in a clustering of all 28 EU member states according to their prerequisites and needs to perform ES mapping and assessment in the year 2015. 'Front-runner countries' could be identfied as well as some member states which had not yet started to implement MAES. A 'MAES barometer' has been developed and presented at MAES Working Group meetings. The barometer indicates each EU member state's stage of MAES implementation. Furthermore, an overview of various issues for MAES implementation were identified. Key gaps included:
Based on ESMERALDA works, the following recommendations to overcome these gaps were identified:
A follow-up stocktaking in late 2017 revealed that many EU member states had made substantial progress in the implementation of MAES and that all EU member states were at least engaged in it. Capacity building in terms of knowledge sharing, ES mapping and assessment methods and data availability still seemed to be major gaps in many countries.
The points from the initial and the follow-up stocktaking were taken up in the ESMERALDA workshops, which were a key element of the project. ESMERALDA workshops have taken place two to three times per year and in different EU member states across Europe. The workshops have successfully been linking the project consortium members with relevant stakeholders and specific topics of ES mapping and assessment in Europe. The workshops organised by ESMERALDA have considered different European regions and biomes, thematic questions from policy, businesses and citizens and were related to various case studies, as well as policy themes so as to increase the potential impact of the project on mainstreaming of ES in policy- and decision-making (see Suppl. material
The interest from the policy-side in research and practice on ES mapping is high as ES are a very politically relevant topic. Ecosystem assessments usually start with a set of questions from policy, society, business or science (
A first set of MAES-relevant policy questions was published in
This classification was then used to link ES mapping and assessment to policy questions and to reveal which question can (or cannot) be answered by a combination or an integration of available methods (
Knowledge requests: are questions asking for a conceptual clarification, describing information needs, usually at the start of a policy cycle. The reports by the MAES working group (available for download from the MAES website*
Policy support questions: are questions framing the use of ES as a concept to support a particular policy objective. These can include policies that have a positive or a negative impact on ES or are regulating the use of natural resources including agricultural policy, climate policy, biodiversity policy, spatial planning, impact assessment, disaster risk reduction and economic policy.
Questions about resources and responsibilities relate to ES governance: these questions ask, what could organisationally be done or which kind of institutional setting is favourable to implement an ES-based approach. Questions about human capacities and financial resources needed to carry out ecosystem assessments (or to ensure that ecosystems and their services are integrated into decision-making) are important for consideration during the assessment.
Application of ES mapping questions: are ‘how to’ questions focusing on the implementation of approaches and how to use ES mapping and assessment outputs to support policy implementation.
Technical and methodological questions: are questions asking for specific technical details of ES mapping; commonly addressed issues are spatial scale, uncertainty, the appropriate use of certain methodologies, priority setting and preferences.
The Strand Research of ESMERALDA has been clearly orientated on ES mapping and assessment methods and aimed at identifying, reviewing, enhancing, integrating and interlinking existing methods. The identified methods include biophysical, socio-cultural and economic ES quantification, valuation and mapping techniques (
To gain a comprehensive and systematic overview of existing methods, a methods database was created. This database contains information on existing ES mapping and assessment methods used by consortium partners in case studies and populated by a comprehensive pan-European literature review (
ESMERALDA also provided important contributions to the update of the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES*
Another important component of the Strand Research was the development of an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment Framework. This framework is supporting the MAES process in EU member states by clearly setting out the role which spatial analysis (ES mapping) can play within ecosystem assessments in relation to non-spatial approaches (ES assessment); it also illustrates how and where, in a flexible way, integration can take place. An integrated assessment allows for transdisciplinary analyses of the interactions between different biophysical, socio-cultural and economic ecosystem, societal and policy elements.
The results of the methods' review and the other components of the Research Strand contributed to the ESMERALDA Strand Application and to the development of the flexible ES mapping and assessment methodology.
A set of altogether 13 case studies has been selected (
The case studies and related ESMERALDA workshops across Europe proved to be an excellent means to test and further develop ES mapping and assessment methods and spatially available data, to engage local stakeholders (respective representatives from EU member states were invited to the workshops) and to implement MAES in the EU member states. More details of the research carried out in relation to the case study and methods testing work can be found in
Experience gained during the work in the four ESMERALDA Strands was used to establish a functioning stakeholder network (including stakeholder support groups in each country consisting of representatives from science, policy and practice), to improve ES mapping and assessment, to identify and improve related methods and to apply and test methods related to distinct questions from policy- and decision-making.
One of the major outcomes of the project was the easy-to-access online open access interface ESMERALDA MAES Explorer*
The ESMERALDA MAES Explorer also includes the ESMERALDA MAES Methods Explorer, allowing users to browse the ESMERALDA methods database and to collect further information on methods. The interface will help users of ESMERALDA products to find what they need for MAES implementation in their country, region, area or case study. Included guidance documents deliver detailed descriptions of MAES implementation in seven-steps. The guidance starts with relevant questions to be answered and the identification of stakeholders. It continues with network creation and the activation of the relevant stakeholders. The next steps are related to the ES mapping and assessment processes per se, their related methods, their application in case studies and further background information for ES mapping and assessment. An appropriate and user-orientated dissemination and communication of (often complex) scientific findings is key for successful implementation in decision-making – the last two steps of the ESMERALDA seven-step MAES/Action 5 implementation plan. Flexibility in ES mapping and assessment methods was achieved in ESMERALDA by analysing existing methods in a systematic review, testing them in various real-world case studies and by interlinking biophysical, socio-cultural and economic methods in transdisciplinary integrated ecosystem assessments. The design of a tiered mapping and assessment approach from simple (Tier 1) to complex (Tier 3) methods (
The interest of the additional European countries to join the consortium, although only very little financial resources could be provided, has proved ESMERALDA’s recognition and acceptance in Europe and can be seen as a great success of the Action’s implementation. ESMERALDA is certainly a very rare case of an EU project including partners from all 28 EU member states, Switzerland, Norway and Israel. Moreover, contacts with the EU outermost regions and overseas countries and territories as well as to EU enlargement countries (non-EU countries in Europe which are intending to join the EU in the future) have been established. The second survey amongst EU member states (see 'Strand Networking' above) revealed that ESMERALDA has helped EU member states to:
ESMERALDA has been promoting these processes by providing support in data and methods' selection and application as well as offering knowledge exchange opportunities for stakeholders during the numerous ESMERALDA topic-workshops across Europe (see Suppl. material
During the ESMERALDA project, numerous EU countries made substantial progress in the implementation of Action 5, as was monitored by the MAES barometer. This has been particularly evident for Ireland, Bulgaria (e.g.
ESMERALDA supported the creation of new European collaborations and the establishment of new national e.g. Poland, Greece (
The large pan-European ESMERALDA consortium created an extensive and detailed cross-disciplinary knowledge based on ES mapping and assessment, its application in the context of MAES in EU countries and has completed a comprehensive European case study and methods review. The case studies proved to be a very constructive and successful way to engage stakeholders from the member states, to test methods and to deliver relevant outcomes. Contacts with relevant projects, initiatives, knowledge-bases and stakeholders across Europe have been mandatory to achieve the ESMERALDA objectives. The regular ESMERALDA workshops in different European regions were used to bring together scientists and stakeholders from EU member states in order to discuss and develop knowledge, methods and cooperation. The integration of stakeholders into project activities, especially in the case studies, the regular project workshops and the project mid-term and final conferences were one key to the success of ESMERALDA.
Workshops and face-to-face meetings proved to be an excellent means for creating and maintaining a strong and functioning network. Intensive knowledge exchange and capacity building were able to occur during the ESMERALDA workshops. However, the organisation of all thematic workshops, the mid-term and the final project conferences have been logistically challenging and resource-intensive. Therefore, various project partners were selected as hosts for the workshops. Nevertheless, the workload on the ESMERALDA Executive Board (EB) members and work package leaders has been comparatively high, considering alone the 27 EB meetings until the final project conference in June 2018 was reached. Based on the available funding for CSAs and the large size of the consortium with, in the end, 37 partners, the budget available for personal costs has, in most cases, not been in accordance with the workload. ESMERALDA could harness its pan-European network and build on existing ES case studies provided by the consortium partners. Against this background, ESMERALDA, as a CSA, profited substantially from contributions made by the project partners and their institutions/existing networks to the Action which have not directly been financed by the project. The same goes for the eleven new ESMERALDA project partners who entered the project in this phase and who were willing to contribute to ESMERALDA, based on provided travel budget only. This dedication to an Action is exceptional and proves the strong interest of EU member state representatives in ESMERALDA. This can, however, not be taken for granted for all activities related to the implementation of the Biodiversity Strategy and the Horizon 2020 funding programme should be adapted in order to provide sufficient resources for pending tasks.
Open access to all ESMERALDA products and the early publication of the open access textbook on 'Mapping Ecosystem Services' (
Based on feedbacks from EU member state stakeholders, European Commission representatives, MAES Working Group members and ESMERALDA consortium members, ESMERALDA has achieved its objectives. Specific feedback has been collected during the ESMERALDA mid-term conference (October 2017), at the final project conference (June 2018) and from EU member state stakeholders in the second ESMERALDA survey (see 'Strand Networking' above). The latter brought up the following recommendations for ESMERALDA and MAES:
We want to thank all ESMERALDA consortium and cooperation partners, stakeholders and other active people contributing so ambitiously to the success of ESMERALDA and the great progress that has already been made in the implementation of Action 5 in all 28 EU member states, Switzerland, Norway and Israel. May ESMERALDA live long and prosper!
The ESMERALDA project received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme.
ESMERALDA: "Enhancing ecoSysteM sERvices mApping for poLicy and Decision mAking", grant agreement No 642007.