A quantitative assessment of policy options for no net loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the European Union

Schulp, Catharina J.E.; Teeffelen, A.J.A. van; Tucker, Graham; Verburg, Peter H.

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.05.018

Cited by 31 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 56 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Trade-offs among BES provide a second explanation as to why none of our scenarios was beneficial overall. Trade-offs among BES are common (Harmáčková and Vačkář 2015;Mouchet et al 2017;Schulp et al 2016) and highly dependent on management choices (Bennett et al 2009;Rodríguez et al 2006). A common trade-off is the increase in provisioning services at the expense of regulating and supporting services (incl.…”

Section: Future Developments Of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Imentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this context, scenario-based modelling can play an important role by providing insights into drivers of change and exploring plausible pathways to desirable future environments (e.g. Harmáčková and Vačkář 2015;Kok et al 2018;Mouchet et al 2017;Posthumus et al 2010;Priess et al 2015;Schröter et al 2005;Schulp et al 2016). Scenarios describe potential futures whilst models translate these futures into projected societal and environmental consequences based on quantitative relationships between drivers (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Future projections of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe with two integrated assessment models

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Projections of future changes in biodiversity and ecosystem services (BES) are of increasing importance to inform policy and decision-making on options for conservation and sustainable use of BES. Scenario-based modelling is a powerful tool to assess these future changes. This study assesses the consequences for BES in Europe under four socio-environmental scenarios designed from a BES perspective. We evaluated these scenarios using two integrated assessment models (IMAGE-GLOBIO and CLIMSAVE IAP, respectively). Our results showed that (i) climate and land use change will continue to pose significant threats to biodiversity and some ecosystem services, even in the most optimistic scenario; (ii) none of the four scenarios achieved overall preservation of BES in Europe; and (iii) targeted policies (e.g. on climate change, biodiversity conservation and sustainable land management) and behavioural change (e.g. reducing meat consumption, water-saving behaviour) reduced the magnitude of BES loss. These findings stress the necessity of more ambitious policies and actions if BES in Europe are to be safeguarded. We further found that the multi-modelling approach was critical to account for complementary BES dimensions and highlighted different sources of uncertainties (e.g. related to land use allocation, driving forces behind BES changes, trade assumptions), which facilitated nuanced and contextualised insights with respect to possible BES futures.

show abstract

Section: Future Developments Of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Future projections of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe with two integrated assessment models

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reforestation of less productive land and the resulting landscape homogenisation under liberal economic settings is a common feature of scenarios for mountains (Schirpke et al, 2012;Vacquie et al, 2015;Brunner et al 2017) and other cultural landscapes (Hanspach et al 2014;Plieninger et al 2013), and at European scale (Stürck et al 2016). However the deliberately contiguous pattern proposed under Rewilding for developing ecological connectivity has rarely been considered in spite of this scenario's plausibility in the European policy context (Schulp et al 2016;Stürck et al 2016) and growing interest by the conservation community (Pettorelli et al 2018). Landscapes metrics strongly benefit land planning in addition to analyses of change volumes (De Vreese et al, 2016), especially when applied to scenarios (Lausch et al, 2015).…”

Section: Projecting Scenario Land Use Impactsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-constructing future land-use scenarios for the Grenoble region, France

Vannier

Bierry

Longaretti

et al. 2019

Landscape and Urban Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights  A Participatory Scenario Planning process for downscaling regional normative scenarios.  19 institutions from economic sectors involved throughout a two-year process.  Two trend and two break-away scenarios with storylines and projected land cover.  Three spatial models to project land use change by 2040 at 15 m resolution.  Multi-scale participatory normative scenarios for supporting land planning.

show abstract

“…; Schulp et al . ). Exploiting synergies can also provide additional benefits, even when development does not impact ES.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…; Schulp et al . ). Addressing these gaps will reveal current practices, identify what motivates companies to consider ES, and provide the insight needed for the public and private sectors to improve offsetting outcomes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Biodiversity offsets may miss opportunities to mitigate impacts on ecosystem services

Sonter

Gourevitch

Koh

et al. 2018

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity offsets are most commonly used to mitigate the adverse impacts of development on biodiversity, but some offsets are now also designed to support ecosystem services (ES) goals. Here, we assemble a global database of biodiversity offsets (n = 70) to show that 41% already take ES into consideration, with the objective of enhancing cultural, regulating, and provisioning services. We found that biodiversity offsets were more likely to consider ES when (1) development projects reported impacts on services, (2) offsets had voluntary biodiversity goals, and (3) conservation organizations were involved. However, offsets that considered ES were similar in design (eg offsetting approach, extent, and location) to offsets focused solely on biodiversity, suggesting that including ES goals may represent an attempt to strengthen community support for development projects, rather than to offset known ES impacts. We also found that 34% of all offsets displaced people and negatively affected livelihoods. Therefore, when biodiversity and ES are linked, current practices may not actually improve outcomes, instead incurring additional costs to communities and companies.

show abstract

A quantitative assessment of policy options for no net loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the European Union

Cited by 31 publications

References 56 publications

Future projections of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe with two integrated assessment models

Future projections of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe with two integrated assessment models

Co-constructing future land-use scenarios for the Grenoble region, France

Biodiversity offsets may miss opportunities to mitigate impacts on ecosystem services

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About