National mapping and assessment of ecosystem services – a countrywide program of nature conservation

  • Anikó Kovács-Hostyánszki Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany
  • Krisztina Bereczki Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany
  • Bálint Czúcz Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany
  • Veronika Fabók Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany
  • Lívia Fodor Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Nature Conservation
  • Ágnes Kalóczkai Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany
  • Márton Kiss Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany; Department of Climatology and Landscape Ecology, University of Szeged
  • Péter Koncz Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany; Duna-Ipoly National Park Directorate
  • Eszter Kovács Szent István University, Institute of Nature Conservation and Landscape Management
  • Rita Rezneki Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany; Duna-Ipoly National Park Directorate
  • Eszter Tanács Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany
  • Katalin Török Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany
  • Ágnes Vári Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany; Centre for Ecological Research, GINOP Sustainable Ecosystems Group
  • Anikó Zölei Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and Botany
  • Zita Zsembery Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Nature Conservation
Keywords: Biodiversity Strategy, capacity, cascade model, ecosystem condition, green infrastructure, MAES, sustainable management, wellbeing

Abstract

One of the main goals of the EU Biodiversity Strategy 2020 is to maintain and restore ecosystem services. It requires the member states to assess and map the condition of ecosystems, and the state and economic value of the most important ecosystem services (ESs). Led by the Ministry of Agriculture an EU-co-financed KEHOP-4.3.0-VEKOP-15-2016-00001 project started in Hungary in 2016 to fulfill these goals. The evaluation of the ecosystem services follows a so-called cascade model, which has 4 main levels: 1. condition of ecosystems, 2. capacity of ecosystems to provide selected ESs (potential supply), 3. actual use of ESs, 4. contribution of ESs to human wellbeing. The results of the project will hopefully assist the sustainable management of environmental resources, the development of the green infrastructure network, improved communication between different sectors, and proper decision making in nature conservation and other related sectors.

References

EC – European Commission (2013): Decision No 1386/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 on a General Union Environment Action Programme to 2020 ‘Living well, within the limits of our planet (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32013D1386 – elérés: 2015. jún. 15.)

Haines-Young, R. & Potschin, M. (2010): The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. – In: Raffaelli, D. G. & Frid, C. L. J. (eds.): Ecosystem ecology: a new synthesis. Cambridge University Press, pp. 110–139.

Haines-Young, R. & Potschin, M. (2013): Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES). – EEA Framework Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003. (http://www.cices.eu – elérés: 2019. jún. 15.)

Kelemen, E. (2013): Az ökoszisztéma szolgáltatások közösségi részvételen alapuló, ökológiai közgazdaságtani értékelése. – Doktori értekezés, Szent István Egyetem, Környezettudományi Doktori Iskola, Gödöllő.

Kovács, E. (2014): Az ökoszisztéma-szolgáltatások megjelenése a biodiverzitás politikában. – In: Kelemen, E. & Pataki, Gy. (szerk.) Ökoszisztéma-szolgáltatások: A természet- és társadalomtudományok metszéspontjában. Szent István Egyetem, Környezet- és Tájgazdálkodási Intézet, Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG), Gödöllő-Budapest, pp. 131–143.

Kovács, E., Harangozó, G., Marjainé Szerényi, Zs. & Csépányi, P. (2015): Natura 2000 erdők közgazdasági környezetének elemzése. – Duna-Ipoly Nemzeti Park Igazgatóság, Esztergom, 217 p.

Kovács, E., Kelemen, E. & Czúcz, B. (2014): A természettől a jóllétig: az ökoszisztéma-szolgáltatások természet- és társadalomtudományi meghatározottsága. – In: Kelemen, E. & Pataki, Gy. (szerk.) Ökoszisztéma-szolgáltatások: A természet- és társadalomtudományok metszéspontjában. Szent István Egyetem, Környezet- és Tájgazdálkodási Intézet, Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG), Gödöllő-Budapest, pp. 15–34.

Maes, J., Teller, A., Erhard, M., Liquete, C., Braat L., Berry, P., Egoh, B., Puydarrieux, P., Fiorina, C., Santos, F., Paracchini, M. L., Keune, H., Wittmer, H., Hauck, J., Fiala, I., Verburg, P.H., Condé, S., Schägner, J. P., San Miguel, J., Estreguil, C., Ostermann, O., Barredo, J.I., Pereira, H.M., Stott, A., Laporte, V., Meiner, A., Olah, B., Royo Gelabert, E., Spyropoulou, R., Petersen, J. E., Maguire, C., Zal, N., Achilleos, E., Rubin, A., Ledoux, L., Brown, C., Raes, C., Jacobs, S., Vandewalle, M., Connor, D., & Bidoglio. G. (2013): Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. An analytical framework for ecdosystem assessments under action 5 of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. – Publication office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 57 p.

Maes, J., Teller, A., Erhard, M., Murphy, P., Paracchini, M. L., Barredo, J. I., Grizzetti, B., Cardoso, A., Somma, F., Petersen, J. E., Meiner, A., Royo Gelabert, E., Zal, N., Kristensen, P., Bastrup-Birk, A., Biala, K., Romao, C., Piroddi, C., Egoh, B., Fiorina, C., Santos, F., Naruševičius, V., Verboven, J., Pereira, H., Bengtsson, J., Gocheva, K., Marta-Pedroso, C., Snäll, T., Estreguil, C., San Miguel, J., Braat, L., Grêt-Regamey, A., Perez-Soba, M., Degeorges, P., Beaufaron, G., Lillebø, A., Abdul Malak, D., Liquete, C.,Condé, S., Moen, J., Östergård, H., Czúcz, B., Drakou, E. G., Zulian, G. & Lavalle, C. (2014): Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. Indicators for ecosystem assessments under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. 2nd Report, – Publications office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 90 p.

Maes, J, Teller, A, Erhard, M., Grizzetti, B., Barredo, J. I., Paracchini, M. L, Condé, S., Somma, F., Orgiazzi, A., Jones, A., Zulian, A., Petersen, J. E., Marquardt, D., Kovacevic, V., Abdul Malak, D., Marin, A. I., Czúcz, B., Mauri, A., Loffler, P., Bastrup-Birk, A., Biala, K., Christiansen, T. & Werner, B. (2018): Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services: An analytical framework for ecosystem condition. – Publications office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 75 p.

MEA – Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003): Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment. – Island Press, Washington DC. 245 p.

MEA – Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005): Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. – World Resource Institute, Washington DC. 137 p.

Tanács, E., Belényesi, M., Lehoczki, R., Pataki, R., Petrik, O., Standovár, T., Pásztor, L., Laborczi A., Szatmári, G., Molnár, Zs., Bede-Fazekas, Á., Kisné Fodor, L., Varga, I., Zsembery, Z. & Maucha, G. (2019): Országos, nagyfelbontású ökoszisztéma- alaptérkép: módszertan, validáció és felhasználási lehetőségek. – Termvéd Közlem. 25: 34–58. https://dx.doi.org/10.20332/tvk-jnatconserv.2019.25.34

Published
2019-12-31
Section
Social Sciences in Conservation