Main content area

From explanation to application: introducing a practice-oriented ecosystem services evaluation (PRESET) model adapted to the context of landscape planning and management

von Haaren, Christina, Albert, Christian, Barkmann, Jan, de Groot, Rudolf S., Spangenberg, Joachim H., Schröter-Schlaack, Christoph, Hansjürgens, Bernd
Landscape ecology 2014 v.29 no.8 pp. 1335-1346
decision making, ecosystem services, equipment, humans, issues and policy, land use, landscapes, models, planning, risk
The development and use of the conceptual framework of ecosystem services (ES) has been very successful in supporting the broad diffusion and application of ES within science and policy communities. However, most of the currently proposed interpretations of the framework neither correlate to environmental planning nor to decision-making contexts at the local and regional scale, which is a potential reason for the slow adoption and practice of the ES conceptual framework. This paper proposes a practice-oriented ES evaluation (PRESET) model specifically adapted to the requirements of local and regional planning and decision-making contexts, and discusses its potential benefits and implications for practice. Through the usage of PRESET we suggest making a distinction between ‘offered ES’, ‘utilized ES’, ‘human input’, and ‘ES benefits’ as relevant information for decision-making. Furthermore, we consider it important to link these decision-support categories to different value dimensions relevant in planning and management practice. PRESET provides guidance to inject the ES concept into planning, but needs to be implemented together with concrete assessment methods, indicators and data. The planning strategic benefits of using PRESET include its reference to existing legislative objectives, avoiding the risk that monetized ES values might dominate decision-making, clarification of human contributions, and easier identification of land use conflicts and synergies. Examples are given for offered and utilized ES, as well as for respective evaluation approaches and instruments of implementation.