Boundary of ecosystem services: Differentiating between ecosystem services and geosystem services is needed

被引:1
|
作者
Chen, Haojie [1 ,2 ]
Sloggy, Matthew R. [2 ]
Escobedo, Francisco [2 ]
Koskimaki, Teemu [3 ]
Lu, Tianchu [4 ]
Meng, Ziqi [5 ]
Rasheed, A. Rifaee [6 ]
Sanchez, Jose J. [7 ]
Tan, Xin [7 ]
Yang, Weishan [8 ]
Yu, Fang
机构
[1] Oak Ridge Inst Sci & Educ, US Dept Energy, Riverside, CA 92507 USA
[2] Forest Serv USDA, Pacific Southwest Res Stn, Riverside, CA 92507 USA
[3] Univ Eastern Finland, Dept Social Sci, Kuopio 70210, Finland
[4] UCL, Inst Global Prosper, London WC1E 6BT, England
[5] Australian Natl Univ, Res Sch Biol, Plant Sci Div, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
[6] Deakin Univ, Fac Sci Engn & Built Environm, Ctr Integrat Ecol, Melbourne, VIC 3125, Australia
[7] Macquarie Univ, Sydney, NSW 2113, Australia
[8] Chinese Acad Environm Planning, Ctr Ecoenvironm Accounting, Beijing 100012, Peoples R China
关键词
Keywords; Biodiversity; Conservation; Geodiversity; Nature's services; Resources; Typology; GEODIVERSITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121285
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Geosystem services (GSs) and ecosystem services (ESs) are interconnected, both representing nature's contributions to people. Whether GSs are a subset of ESs depends on the definition of ESs. The answer would be "not necessarily" (i.e., some GSs are, while other GSs are not), if ESs are the benefits humans derive from ecological functions, processes, or characteristics. The boundary proposed by Chen et al. (2023) to differentiate ESs from other ecosystem-related benefits adopted this definition, and suggested that ESs are renewable and affected by biotic elements to occur. Gray et al. (2024) criticized this boundary for separating out bits of nature and ignoring the contributions of GSs and abiotic elements to ESs and human wellbeing. In fact, highlighting that ESs are affected by biotic elements to occur does not deny that ESs' occurrence is also affected by abiotic elements. However, ESs' dependence on abiotic elements cannot be a criterion to differentiate ESs from other benefits because abiotic elements are integral to geosystems, ecosystems, and many other natural and artificial systems, as well as to these systems' services. Conversely, while geosystems might persist without biotic elements, ecosystems cannot. Chen et al. (2023) only excluded those (not the whole) abiotic benefits, such as wind energy, that may occur independently of biotic elements, while allowing for integrating certain GSs into ESs. For example, geological structures can offer flood protection and water storage as GSs, which can also be classified as ESs when their qualities or quantities are affected by biotic elements. Differentiation between GSs and ESs should not be misinterpreted as splitting their interconnections or undervaluing or dividing nature. Instead, such differentiation and classification of nature's benefits serve to facilitate communication, management, education, research, and policy-making associated with nature's benefits, while also highlighting the richness and diversity of nature's benefits.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Geosystem services: A hidden link in ecosystem management
    van Ree, C. C. D. F.
    van Beukering, P. J. H.
    Boekestijn, J.
    ECOSYSTEM SERVICES, 2017, 26 : 58 - 69
  • [2] Geoheritage Concept in a Context of Abiotic Ecosystem Services (Geosystem Services) - How to Argue the Geoconservation Better?
    Urban, Jan
    Radwanek-Bak, Barbara
    Margielewski, Wlodzimierz
    GEOHERITAGE, 2022, 14 (02)
  • [3] Geoheritage Concept in a Context of Abiotic Ecosystem Services (Geosystem Services) — How to Argue the Geoconservation Better?
    Jan Urban
    Barbara Radwanek-Bąk
    Włodzimierz Margielewski
    Geoheritage, 2022, 14
  • [4] Ecosystem services: Multiple classification systems are needed
    Costanza, Robert
    BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2008, 141 (02) : 350 - 352
  • [5] Ecosystem services as a boundary object for sustainability
    Abson, D. J.
    von Wehrden, H.
    Baumgaertner, S.
    Fischer, J.
    Hanspach, J.
    Haerdtle, W.
    Heinrichs, H.
    Klein, A. M.
    Lang, D. J.
    Martens, P.
    Walmsley, D.
    ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2014, 103 : 29 - 37
  • [6] Ecosystem services
    Guterstam, B
    Werker, A
    Adamsson, M
    Barker, D
    Brüll, A
    Dakers, A
    Gossling, S
    Heeb, J
    Loiselle, S
    Mander, U
    Canu, DM
    Roggenbauer, R
    Roux, M
    Santopietro, GD
    Stuart, D
    Trudeau, M
    van Bohemen, HD
    UNDERSTANDING AND SOLVING ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: TOWARD A NEW, INTEGRATED HARD PROBLEM SCIENCE, 2002, : 127 - 138
  • [7] Ecosystem services
    Tallis, H
    Kareiva, P
    CURRENT BIOLOGY, 2005, 15 (18) : R746 - R748
  • [8] Ecosystem services
    Carnoye, Leslie
    Petitimbert, Remy
    DEVELOPPEMENT DURABLE & TERRITOIRES, 2022, 13 (03):
  • [9] More than Language Is Needed in Valuing Ecosystem Services
    Orenstein, Daniel
    BIOSCIENCE, 2013, 63 (12) : 913 - 913
  • [10] High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services
    Isbell, Forest
    Calcagno, Vincent
    Hector, Andy
    Connolly, John
    Harpole, W. Stanley
    Reich, Peter B.
    Scherer-Lorenzen, Michael
    Schmid, Bernhard
    Tilman, David
    van Ruijven, Jasper
    Weigelt, Alexandra
    Wilsey, Brian J.
    Zavaleta, Erika S.
    Loreau, Michel
    NATURE, 2011, 477 (7363) : 199 - U96