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
  • [31] Payment for Ecosystem Services
    不详
    FORESTRY CHRONICLE, 2014, 90 (01): : 26 - 26
  • [32] Valuation of ecosystem services
    vanWilgen, BW
    Cowling, RM
    Burgers, CJ
    BIOSCIENCE, 1996, 46 (03) : 184 - 189
  • [33] Banking on ecosystem services
    Mundaca, Luis
    Heintze, Jan-Niklas
    ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2024, 224
  • [34] Valuing Ecosystem Services
    Geoffrey Heal
    Ecosystems, 2000, 3 : 24 - 30
  • [35] Birds and ecosystem services
    Gaston, Kevin J.
    CURRENT BIOLOGY, 2022, 32 (20) : R1163 - R1166
  • [36] Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture
    Zhang, Wei
    Ricketts, Taylor H.
    Kremen, Claire
    Carney, Karen
    Swinton, Scott M.
    ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2007, 64 (02) : 253 - 260
  • [37] Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda
    Daniel, Terry C.
    Muhar, Andreas
    Arnberger, Arne
    Aznar, Olivier
    Boyd, James W.
    Chan, Kai M. A.
    Costanza, Robert
    Elmqvist, Thomas
    Flint, Courtney G.
    Gobster, Paul H.
    Gret-Regamey, Adrienne
    Lave, Rebecca
    Muhar, Susanne
    Penker, Marianne
    Ribe, Robert G.
    Schauppenlehner, Thomas
    Sikor, Thomas
    Soloviy, Ihor
    Spierenburg, Marja
    Taczanowska, Karolina
    Tam, Jordan
    von der Dunk, Andreas
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2012, 109 (23) : 8812 - 8819
  • [38] Biofuels, ecosystem services and human wellbeing: Putting biofuels in the ecosystem services narrative
    Gasparatos, Alexandros
    Stromberg, Per
    Takeuchi, Kazuhiko
    AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT, 2011, 142 (3-4) : 111 - 128
  • [39] Introduction - Special section: Forum on valuation of ecosystem services - The value of ecosystem services
    Costanza, R
    ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 1998, 25 (01) : 1 - 2
  • [40] Emerging ecosystem services governance issues in the Belgium ecosystem services community of practice
    Keune, Hans
    Dendoncker, Nicolas
    Popa, Florin
    Sander, Jacobs
    Kampelmann, Stephan
    Boeraeve, Fanny
    Dufrene, Marc
    Bauler, Tom
    Casaer, Jim
    Cerulus, Tanya
    De Blust, Geert
    Denayer, Bart
    Janssens, Lieve
    Liekens, Inge
    Panis, Jeroen
    Scheppers, Thomas
    Simoens, Ilse
    Staes, Jan
    Turkelboom, Francis
    Ulenaers, Paula
    Van der Biest, Katrien
    Verboven, Jan
    ECOSYSTEM SERVICES, 2015, 16 : 212 - 219