School of Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK; West Yorkshire School of Christian Studies, Outwood House, Leeds LS18 4JN, UK.
Department of Anthropology, Durham University, Durham DH1 3LA, UK.
Trends Ecol Evol. 2017 Apr;32(4):249-257. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2017.01.002. Epub 2017 Feb 16.
The ecosystem services framework (ESF) is advantageous and widely used for itemising and quantifying ways in which humans benefit from natural places. However, it suffers from two important problems: (i) incoherence of definitions and (ii) a narrow approach to valuation, inadequate to represent the full range of human motives for conservation and the diverse interests of different stakeholders. These shortcomings can lead to a range of problems including double-counting, blind spots and unintended consequences. In this opinion article, we propose an ecosystem valuing framework as a broader and more rigorous way to deliver the benefits currently sought from the ESF, without the conceptual problems.
生态系统服务框架(ESF)有利于将人类从自然场所中受益的方式进行分类和量化,因此被广泛应用。然而,它存在两个重要问题:(i)定义不一致,(ii)估值方法狭隘,不足以代表人类保护的全部动机和不同利益相关者的不同利益。这些缺点可能导致一系列问题,包括重复计算、盲点和意想不到的后果。在这篇观点文章中,我们提出了一个生态系统估值框架,作为一种更广泛和更严格的方法来提供目前从 ESF 中寻求的益处,而不会产生概念问题。