List of Figures

sidebar

"The Concept of Ecosystem Services Regarding Landscape Research: A Review"

Anna Hermann and Sabine Schleifer and Thomas Wrbka

	Abstract
1	Introduction
2	Definitions of the different key terms
3	Classification systems and their different typologies
	3.1	Presentation of five selected classification systems
	3.2	Comparison of different typologies
	3.3	The problem of double counting
	3.4	Further developments of classification systems
4	Quantifying and mapping
5	Valuation
	5.1	The ecological, economic and socio-cultural value of ecosystems
	5.2	Different valuation methods
6	Discussion
	6.1	Definitions and classifications – a challenge
	6.2	Quantifying and mapping – their limitations
	6.3	Multifunctionality
	6.4	Different disciplines – advantages or hindrances?
	6.5	Valuation and the future generation
7	Acknowledgements
	References
	Figures
	Tables

	Figure 1: Valuation framework integrating the ecosystem service concept into sustainable landscape planning and management; Taking into account the total landscape value (including ecological, socio-cultural and economical values) in decision making processes effects indirectly the provision of services (adopted from de Groot, 2006).
	Figure 2: Final Services vs. Intermediate Components regarding the benefits “recreational angling and drinking water”; Whereas Intermediate Components are indirect processes and functions, Final Services are directly consumed or enjoyed to produce human well-being (after Boyd and Banzhaf, 2007).
	Figure 3: Conceptual relationship between Intermediate and Final Services; Structure and Processes become Intermediate Services if there are humans that benefit from them. Interactions among several Intermediate Services produce Final Services such as “clean water provision” and “storm protection” (after Fisher et al., 2009).
	Figure 4: Conceptual relationship between Ecosystems & Biodiversity and Human Well-being (adopted from Haines-Young and Potschin, 2010).