Search

Ample evidence suggests positive effects of species diversity on ecosystem functioning and services in natural and agricultural landscapes. Less obvious and even contested are the effects of such diversity on human well-being. This state of art partly stems from methodological difficulties to evaluate and quantify these effects and imprecise conceptual frameworks.Here we propose a conceptual framework that links different aspects of diversity, particularly species and genetic richness, to ecosystem functioning, ecosystem services and disservices, and different aspects of well-being. We review current approaches for the study of diversity–well-being relationships and identify shortcomings and principle obstacles, mainly stemming from theoretical premises that are too imprecise.We discuss five basic methodological approaches to link diversity to well-being: matrix models, indirect inference, Price partitioning, structural equation modelling, and environmental inference.We call for a stricter terminology with respect to the different aspects of functioning, multifunctionality and well-being and highlight the need to evaluate each step in the different pathways from diversity to well-being. A full understanding of ecological constraints on human well-being requires consideration of trade-offs in diversity effects, of contrasting perceptions of well-being, and of ecosystem disservices. We also call for appropriate long-term socio-ecological research platforms to gather relevant data about ecosystem functioning and well-being across space and time.

[EN] Land-use intensification is often associated with a decline in functional diversity, potentially undermining the provision of ecosystem services. However, how changes in traits affect ecosystem processes remains poorly understood. Variation in trait values among species in a community may drive ecosystem processes. Alternatively, the mass ratio hypothesis proposes that trait values of the dominant species in a local community are related to ecosystem processes. Using data from 159 farms in six European countries, we quantified the impact of local and landscape-level land-use intensity on ground beetles as pest control agents. We then assessed the extent to which functional diversity and community-weighted mean trait values relate to pest control and cereal yield. In addition, we assessed how the responses to land use and the effects of different species on pest control and yield varied with their traits to compare the relative impact of the traits studied. Functional diversity of ground beetles improved aphid removal, but did not translate into higher crop yields. Pest control of aphids was enhanced by a higher proportion of smaller, mobile ground beetles with a preference for the vegetation layer. Smaller, predatory ground beetles in communities improved crop yield. The magnitude of responses to land-use intensification and the effects on pest control and yield were more strongly influenced by body size than other traits. Our study provides evidence that reduced management intensity can improve pest control by supporting small-sized, macropterous ground beetles. In contrast to the claims of ecological intensification, our joint analysis of the direct effects of land use on yield and indirect effects via functional diversity of ground beetles and pest control suggests that ecosystem services by ground beetles cannot compensate for the yield gap due to a reduction in land-use intensity

[EN] 1. Ample evidence suggests positive effects of species diversity on ecosystem functioning and services in natural and agricultural landscapes. Less obvious and even contested are the effects of such diversity on human well-being. This state of art partly stems from methodological difficulties to evaluate and quantify these effects and imprecise conceptual frameworks. 2. Here we propose a conceptual framework that links different aspects of diversity, particularly species and genetic richness, to ecosystem functioning, ecosystem services and disservices, and different aspects of well-being. We review current approaches for the study of diversity–well-being relationships and identify short comings and principle obstacles, mainly stemming from theoretical premises that are too imprecise. 3. We discuss five basic methodological approaches to link diversity to well-being: matrix models, indirect inference, Price partitioning, structural equation modelling, and environmental inference. 4. We call for a stricter terminology with respect to the different aspects of functioning, multifunctionality and well-being and highlight the need to evaluate each step in the different pathways from diversity to well-being. A full understanding of ecological constraints on human well-being requires consideration of trade-offs in diversity effects, of contrasting perceptions of well-being, and of ecosystem disservices. We also call for appropriate long-term socio-ecological research platforms to gather relevant data about ecosystem functioning and well-being across space and time