So you want your research to be relevant? Building the bridge between ecosystem services research and practice

Abstract

a b s t r a c tThere is growing demand for information regarding the impacts of decisions on ecosystem services and human benefits. Despite the large and growing quantity of published ecosystem services research, there remains a substantial gap between this research and the information required to support decisions.Research often provides models and tools that do not fully link social and ecological systems; are too complex, specialized, and costly to use; and are targeted to outcomes that differ from those needed by decision makers. Decision makers require cost-effective, straightforward, transferable, scalable, meaningful, and defensible methods that can be readily understood. We provide illustrative examples of these gaps between research and practice and describe how researchers can make their work relevant to decision makers by using Benefit Relevant Indicators (BRIs) and choosing models appropriate for particular decision contexts. We use examples primarily from the United States, including cases that illustrate varying degrees of success in closing these gaps. We include a discussion of the challenges and opportunities researchers face in adapting their work to meet the needs of practitioners.

How to design a transdisciplinary regional ecosystem service assessment: a case study from Romania, Eastern Europe

“…By juxtaposing these maps (by spatial overlay of individual ES maps), the parts of the landscape become comparable and locations and regions that are particularly important for the provision of specific services can become visible (e.g. Eigenbrod et al 2010, Nikolaidou et al 2017, Rabe et al 2016. To facilitate this kind of comparison, we also prepared two overview maps that show, for every single point (pixel) of the study area, the number of services being provided at above average (the upper 50%) or outstanding (the top 10%) performance, thus highlighting regional 'hotspots' for ES provision.…”

“…All of these make it really challenging to start out from 'locals-defined' ES in an ES assessment (and that is why many studies simply start out from a predefined ES list -e.g. Rabe et al 2016, Norton et al 2012, Boerema et al 2014).…”

“…• (Topic 5): the integration of the diverse outcomes (ES models, maps, monetary values) into a common framework and the potential issues related to the interpretation of the outcomes (e.g. , Olander et al 2017.…”

Mainstreaming ecosystem services in state-level conservation planning: progress and future needs

“…The research community must also do more to make these methodologies and associated datasets accessible to practitioners, policy makers, and the public (Sitas et al 2014). Olander et al (2017) suggest that researchers who are focused on publishing novel and increasingly precise methodologies often produce tools that are too complicated to run or are not suited for the decision contexts practitioners must contend with.…”

“…Analyzing and publishing consistent quantitative data on all proposed acquisitions would help programs communicate the value of their work in terms of direct benefits to people and better justify the selection of parcels that best represent the public interest. Another key element for successful implementation of an ES approach, identified by Olander et al (2017) and called for in the IPBES framework, is the codevelopment of ES knowledge and conservation priorities and interventions in partnership with stakeholders, landowners, restoration professionals, and implementing agencies (Cash et al 2003, Tengö et al 2014, Díaz et al 2015.…”