Suchergebnisse

Spatial assessments of ecosystem services (ES) are needed to fulfil EU policy requirements and to support practical applications of the ES concept in policy implementation. So far, ES assessments have largely focused on terrestrial systems. A joint approach for land and sea is especially lacking. To overcome this gap, we present a novel spatial habitat typology and ES classification for an assessment across the land–sea interface. We build upon existing approaches and common spatial definitions, like CORINE land cover (CLC) types, water bodies of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), and habitat types according to the Habitats Directive (HD). We show applications of the resulting ES matrix for an expert-based assessment of ES potentials in three Baltic study sites (Schlei, Greifswald Bay and Curonian Lagoon). A complementary indicator-based approach to assess ES flows is introduced and applied. It enables a quantification of ES potentials and flows and ensures comparability among case study sites. Comparisons between the results for ES potentials and flows show that development capacities exist in particular for provisioning ES for marine habitats. Our approaches are spatially expandable and transferrable and could be applied to support environmental policy implementation. Further, we discuss their practical relevance, current limitations, and future research perspectives.

Spatial assessments of ecosystem services (ES) are needed to fulfil EU policy requirements and to support practical applications of the ES concept in policy implementation. So far, ES assessments have largely focused on terrestrial systems. A joint approach for land and sea is especially lacking. To overcome this gap, we present a novel spatial habitat typology and ES classification for an assessment across the land–sea interface. We build upon existing approaches and common spatial definitions, like CORINE land cover (CLC) types, water bodies of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), and habitat types according to the Habitats Directive (HD). We show applications of the resulting ES matrix for an expert-based assessment of ES potentials in three Baltic study sites (Schlei, Greifswald Bay and Curonian Lagoon). A complementary indicator-based approach to assess ES flows is introduced and applied. It enables a quantification of ES potentials and flows and ensures comparability among case study sites. Comparisons between the results for ES potentials and flows show that development capacities exist in particular for provisioning ES for marine habitats. Our approaches are spatially expandable and transferrable and could be applied to support environmental policy implementation. Further, we discuss their practical relevance, current limitations, and future research perspectives.

Spatial assessments of ecosystem services (ES) are needed to fulfil EU policy requirements and to support practical applications of the ES concept in policy implementation. So far, ES assessments have largely focused on terrestrial systems. A joint approach for land and sea is especially lacking. To overcome this gap, we present a novel spatial habitat typology and ES classification for an assessment across the land–sea interface. We build upon existing approaches and common spatial definitions, like CORINE land cover (CLC) types, water bodies of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), and habitat types according to the Habitats Directive (HD). We show applications of the resulting ES matrix for an expert-based assessment of ES potentials in three Baltic study sites (Schlei, Greifswald Bay and Curonian Lagoon). A complementary indicator-based approach to assess ES flows is introduced and applied. It enables a quantification of ES potentials and flows and ensures comparability among case study sites. Comparisons between the results for ES potentials and flows show that development capacities exist in particular for provisioning ES for marine habitats. Our approaches are spatially expandable and transferrable and could be applied to support environmental policy implementation. Further, we discuss their practical relevance, current limitations, and future research perspectives.

Spatial assessments of ecosystem services (ES) are needed to fulfil EU policy requirements and to support practical applications of the ES concept in policy implementation. So far, ES assessments have largely focused on terrestrial systems. A joint approach for land and sea is especially lacking. To overcome this gap, we present a novel spatial habitat typology and ES classification for an assessment across the land–sea interface. We build upon existing approaches and common spatial definitions, like CORINE land cover (CLC) types, water bodies of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), and habitat types according to the Habitats Directive (HD). We show applications of the resulting ES matrix for an expert-based assessment of ES potentials in three Baltic study sites (Schlei, Greifswald Bay and Curonian Lagoon). A complementary indicator-based approach to assess ES flows is introduced and applied. It enables a quantification of ES potentials and flows and ensures comparability among case study sites. Comparisons between the results for ES potentials and flows show that development capacities exist in particular for provisioning ES for marine habitats. Our approaches are spatially expandable and transferrable and could be applied to support environmental policy implementation. Further, we discuss their practical relevance, current limitations, and future research perspectives

Front Cover -- Ecosystem Services: From Biodiversity to Society, Part 2 -- Copyright -- Contents -- Contributors -- Preface: Ecosystem Services: From Biodiversity to Society, Part 2 -- Acknowledgements -- Chapter One: Learning Ecological Networks from Next-Generation Sequencing Data -- 1. Introduction -- 1.1. Ecological Interactions Are Drivers of Ecosystem Functioning -- 1.2. Ecological Interactions Are Altered by Anthropogenic Activity -- 1.3. Next-Generation Sequencing Can Be Used for Monitoring Ecological Interactions -- 2. Why Learning Ecological Networks from NGS Data? -- 2.1. Limitations of Classical Methods for Resolving Ecological Interactions -- 2.2. Advantages of NGS for Identifying Species and Their Interactions -- 3. Examples of NGS-Based Ecological Networks and Their Applications -- 3.1. Deciphering Pathobiomes Using NGS-Based Microbial Networks for Improving Biological Control -- 3.2. Studying the Hologenome Theory of Evolution Using NGS-Based Microbial Networks -- 3.3. Testing the Niche Partitioning Theory with NGS-Based Trophic Networks -- 3.4. Challenges to Be Addressed to Get Predictive Insights from NGS-Based Networks -- 4. Theoretical Methods for Deciphering Ecological Networks from NGS Data -- 4.1. The Input Data -- 4.2. Inferring Ecological Interactions Using Statistical Models -- 4.2.1. Bayesian Networks and Dynamic Bayesian Networks -- 4.2.2. Gaussian Graphical Models with Sparse Regularization -- 4.3. Learning Ecological Interactions Using Logic-Based Machine-Learning Algorithms -- 4.3.1. Inductive Logic Programming -- 4.3.2. Meta-Interpretive Learning -- 5. Conclusion -- Acknowledgements -- Glossary -- References -- Chapter Two: The Visualisation of Ecological Networks, and Their Use as a Tool for Engagement, Advocacy and Management -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Benefits of a Network Approach in Ecology.

Many companies rely on natural resources, and securing the flow of ecosystem services may be directly related to their business's bottom line. Other businesses have a considerable environmental impact or produce significant harmful emissions; they may find that paying to increase the flow of ES (e.g., carbon offsets or biodiversity offsets) is an economical way to neutralize their footprint. Insurance companies and coastal area developers may find that increasing the provision of ES is the cheapest way to reduce the risk of natural hazard. However, caring for the environment and paying for ES is not the sole responsibility of the private sector. Governments, communities, and NGOs share the burden of protecting the environment. Governments must work out the rules of the game, prime the pump, and in many cases be the direct procurers of some ecosystem services (public goods). Community and conservation NGOs must ensure that ES and PES are pursued with equity -balancing the interests of people and nature- to increase job and income opportunities for the rural poor and deliver real, on-the-ground conservation. Finding creative and equitable business arrangements is not a new concept, and companies that have already embraced corporate social and environmental responsibility are well positioned to take advantage of the business opportunities inherent in the five PES Business Models described within. In recent years, there has been an upsurge of initiatives to increase society's awareness of ecosystem services and a rush to devise mechanisms to pay for sustaining them. The business sector is bound to be a key player here, as a buyer and a seller of ecosystem services as well as a market developer and innovator. With this in mind, in November 2006, WWF invited a dozen representatives of some of the world's largest food, beverage, energy, and mining companies to join staff from government agencies, financial institutions, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in Vienna to exchange ideas and identify collaborative opportunities. ; PES-1 (Payments for Environmental Services Associate Award)

Intro -- Contents -- Preface -- Acknowledgment -- Chapter 1 -- Role of Legumes in Cropping Systems for Soil Ecosystem Improvement -- Abstract -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Legumes, a Brief Description -- 3. Legumes and Biological Nitrogen Fixation (BNF) -- 4. Inclusion of Legumes in Cropping System -- 4.1. Sequential Cropping -- 4.2. Intercropping -- 4.3. Crop Rotation -- 4.4. Green and Brown Manuring -- 4.5. Cover Crop -- 4.6. Bio-Mulching -- 5. Synergy between Legumes and Soil Health Improvement -- 5.1. Improvement of Soil Physical Properties -- 5.2. Improvement of Soil Chemical Properties -- 5.3. Improvement of Soil Biological Properties -- Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 2 -- Novel Silver Nanoparticles as a Modern Defense Tool in Agro-Ecosystems -- Abstract -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Silver Nanoparticle and Green Synthesis -- 2.1. Synthesis via Micro-Organisms -- 2.2. Synthesis via Plant Extracts -- 3. Silver Nanoparticles as Plant Protectant -- 3.1. Silver Nanoparticles Encapsulated Pesticides -- 4. Silver Nanoparticle Led Environmental Remediation -- 4.1. Nanoremediation: Understanding the Mechanism -- 4.2. Nano-Biosensors Led Environmental Remediation -- 5. Research and Development -- Constraint and Policy -- Future Prospects -- Conclusion -- Conflict of Interest -- Acknowledgment -- Funding Agency -- References -- Chapter 3 -- Nano Techniques for Efficient Fertilizer Management -- Abstract -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Applications of Nanoparticles in Agriculture -- 2.1. Nanotechnology in Fertilizer and Pesticides -- 2.2. Nanotechnology in Disease Control -- 3. Types of Nanoparticles -- 3.1. Carbon-Based Nanoparticles -- 3.2. Metal Nanoparticles -- 3.3. Ceramics Nanoparticles -- 3.4. Semiconductor Nanoparticles -- 3.5. Polymeric Nanoparticles -- 3.6. Lipid-Based Nanoparticles -- 4. Characterization of Nanoparticles -- 4.1. Particle Size.

Policies and research increasingly focus on the protection of ecosystem services (ESs) through priority-area conservation. Priority areas for ESs should be identified based on ES capacity and ES demand and account for the connections between areas of ES capacity and demand (flow) resulting in areas of unique demand-supply connections (flow zones). We tested ways to account for ES demand and flow zones to identify priority areas in the European Union. We mapped the capacity and demand of a global (carbon sequestration), a regional (flood regulation), and 3 local ESs (air quality, pollination, and urban leisure). We used Zonation software to identify priority areas for ESs based on 6 tests: with and without accounting for ES demand and 4 tests that accounted for the effect of ES flow zone. There was only 37.1% overlap between the 25% of priority areas that encompassed the most ESs with and without accounting for ES demand. The level of ESs maintained in the priority areas increased from 23.2% to 57.9% after accounting for ES demand, especially for ESs with a small flow zone. Accounting for flow zone had a small effect on the location of priority areas and level of ESs maintained but resulted in fewer flow zones without ES maintained relative to ignoring flow zones. Accounting for demand and flow zones enhanced representation and distribution of ESs with local to regional flow zones without large trade-offs relative to the global ES. We found that ignoring ES demand led to the identification of priority areas in remote regions where benefits from ES capacity to society were small. Incorporating ESs in conservation planning should therefore always account for ES demand to identify an effective priority network for ESs.