|
|
|
|
|
| Fricke, Roman; Faculty of Biology, Department of Animal Ecology, Philipps University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany; fricker@staff.uni-marburg.de; Kleyer, Michael; Landscape Ecology Group, Institute of Biology and Environmental Sciences, University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany; michael.kleyer@uni-oldenburg.de; Kobbe, Susanne; Department of Animal Ecology and Conservation, University of Hamburg, Biocentre Grindel, Hamburg, Germany; Susanne.Kobbe@uni-hamburg.de; Seppelt, Ralf; UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department Computational Landscape Ecology, Leipzig, Germany; Institute of Geoscience & Geography, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany; ralf.seppelt@ufz.de; Settele, Josef; UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Community Ecology, Animal Ecology and Social-Ecological Research, Halle, Germany; iDiv - German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; josef.settele@ufz.de; Spangenberg, Joachim H.; UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Community Ecology, Animal Ecology and Social-Ecological Research, Halle, Germany; Sustainable Europe Research Institute SERI Germany, Cologne, Germany; Joachim.Spangenberg@ufz.de; Tekken, Vera; Institute for Geography and Geology, Department of Sustainability Science and Applied Geography, Ernst Moritz Arndt University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany; vera.tekken@posteo.de; Wittmer, Heidi; UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department Environmental Politics, Leipzig, Germany; heidi.wittmer@ufz.de. |
| Assessments of ecosystem services (ES), that aim at informing decisions on land management, are increasing in number around the globe. Despite selected success stories, evidence for ES information being used in decision making is weak, partly because ES assessments are found to fall short in targeting information needs by decision makers. To improve their applicability in practice, we compared existing concepts of ES assessments with focus on informing land use decisions and identified opportunities for enhancing the relevance of ES assessments for decision making. In a process of codesign, building on experience of four projects in Brazil, China, Madagascar, and Vietnam, we developed a step-wise approach for better targeting ES assessments toward... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed article |
Palavras-chave: Decision support; Ecosystem services assessment; Land use; Problem-oriented. |
| Ano: 2015 |
|
| |
|
|
| Marre, Jean-baptiste; Pascoe, Sean; Thebaud, Olivier; Jennings, Sarah; Boncoeur, Jean; Coglan, Louisa. |
| Ecosystem based management requires the integration of various types of assessment indicators. Understanding stakeholders' information preferences is important, in selecting those indicators that best support management and policy. Both the preferences of decision-makers and the general public may matter, in democratic participatory management institutions. This paper presents a multi-criteria analysis aimed at quantifying the relative importance to these groups of economic, ecological and socio-economic indicators usually considered when managing ecosystem services in a coastal development context. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is applied within two nationwide surveys in Australia, and preferences of both the general public and decision-makers for... |
| Tipo: Text |
Palavras-chave: Analytic hierarchy process; Australia; Coastal development; Ecosystem services assessment; Information preferences; Multi-criteria analysis. |
| Ano: 2016 |
URL: http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00313/42428/41791.pdf |
| |
|
|
|
