Published in One Ecosystem (an innovative Open Access scholarly journal which provides a forum for studies in the field of ecology and sustainability), the SELINA-supported article “Increasing uptake of ecosystem service assessments: best practice check-lists for practitioners in Europe” reviews 111 guidance documents on ecosystem service assessments across Europe, developing best practice checklists to improve the design and implementation of these assessments. This work aims to enhance the uptake of ES assessments at various governance levels.
Aiming at understanding the role of plural values in decision-making, the IPBES Values Assessment defined nature valuation broadly as including biophysical, economic and socio-cultural assessments, including ecosystem service assessment. IPBES reviews of scientific literature revealed a lack of documentation of uptake by stakeholders across method types. The EU project SELINA aims to contribute to increasing uptake of ES assessments at different governance levels. This paper reviews guidance in national and local applications by compiling study design recommendations for ES assessments from 111 guidance documents on ES assessments covering 12 European languages. Guidance documents are evaluated for seven diagnostic topics suggested to increase relevance and robustness of ES assessments: ecosystem condition variables; capacity-potential; supply-demand; spatial scaling and resolution capability; social and health benefit compatibility; economic valuation compatibility; and uncertainty assessment.
The paper develops the guidance recommendations across these topics into a set of checklists for practitioners and contractors of ES assessments. We find synergies between these study design features and gaps in guidance in relation to the policy cycle. Checklists are aimed at projects self-assessing and improving their design and implementation to increase robustness of their ES assessment. From a knowledge supply perspective, this is expected to increase the likelihood of uptake of results by stakeholders. We end the paper with some cautions on limitations to uptake from different perspectives and the demand for and political uses of ES assessment knowledge.
Read the full paper here.
