Pesce Stéphane, Bérard Annette, Coutellec Marie-Agnès, Hedde Mickaël, Langlais-Hesse Alexandra, Larras Floriane, Leenhardt Sophie, Mongruel Rémi, Munaron Dominique, Sabater Sergi, Gallai Nicola
INRAE, UR RiverLy, Villeurbanne, France.
INRAE, Avignon University, EMMAH, Avignon, France.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2025 Feb;32(6):2773-2785. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-29128-x. Epub 2023 Aug 7.
There is growing interest in using the ecosystem services framework for environmental risk assessments of chemicals, including plant protection products (PPPs). Although this topic is increasingly discussed in the recent scientific literature, there is still a substantial gap between most ecotoxicological studies and a solid evaluation of potential ecotoxicological consequences on ecosystem services. This was recently highlighted by a collective scientific assessment (CSA) performed by 46 scientific experts who analyzed the international science on the impacts of PPPs on biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and ecosystem services. Here, we first point out the main obstacles to better linking knowledge on the ecotoxicological effects of PPPs on biodiversity and ecological processes with ecosystem functions and services. Then, we go on to propose and discuss possible pathways for related improvements. We describe the main processes governing the relationships between biodiversity, ecological processes, and ecosystem functions in response to effects of PPP, and we define categories of ecosystem functions that could be directly linked with the ecological processes used as functional endpoints in investigations on the ecotoxicology of PPPs. We then explore perceptions on the possible links between these categories of ecosystem functions and ecosystem services among a sub-panel of the scientific experts from various fields of environmental science. We find that these direct and indirect linkages still need clarification. This paper, which reflects the difficulties faced by the multidisciplinary group of researchers involved in the CSA, suggests that the current gap between most ecotoxicological studies and a solid potential evaluation of ecotoxicological consequences on ecosystem services could be partially addressed if concepts and definitions related to ecological processes, ecosystem functions, and ecosystem services were more widely accepted and shared within the ecotoxicology community. Narrowing this gap would help harmonize and extend the science that informs decision-making and policy-making, and ultimately help to better address the trade-off between social benefits and environmental losses caused by the use of PPPs.
人们越来越有兴趣将生态系统服务框架用于化学品的环境风险评估，包括植物保护产品（PPP）。尽管最近的科学文献中对这一主题的讨论越来越多，但大多数生态毒理学研究与对生态系统服务潜在生态毒理学后果的可靠评估之间仍存在很大差距。最近，46位科学专家进行的一项集体科学评估（CSA）突出了这一点，他们分析了关于PPP对生物多样性、生态系统功能和生态系统服务影响的国际科学研究。在此，我们首先指出将PPP对生物多样性和生态过程的生态毒理学影响的知识与生态系统功能和服务更好地联系起来的主要障碍。然后，我们继续提出并讨论相关改进的可能途径。我们描述了在PPP影响下生物多样性、生态过程和生态系统功能之间关系的主要过程，并定义了可以与PPP生态毒理学调查中用作功能终点的生态过程直接相关的生态系统功能类别。然后，我们在来自环境科学各个领域的科学专家小组中探讨了对这些生态系统功能类别与生态系统服务之间可能联系的看法。我们发现这些直接和间接联系仍需澄清。本文反映了参与CSA的多学科研究团队所面临的困难，表明如果与生态过程、生态系统功能和生态系统服务相关的概念和定义在生态毒理学界得到更广泛的接受和共享，那么目前大多数生态毒理学研究与对生态系统服务潜在生态毒理学后果的可靠评估之间的差距可能会得到部分解决。缩小这一差距将有助于协调和扩展为决策和政策制定提供信息的科学，并最终有助于更好地应对使用PPP所带来的社会效益与环境损失之间的权衡。
