Search

The estimation of the value of nature in terms of benefits derived by humans is becoming increasingly popular in environmental assessments and spatial planning worldwide. In line with this approach, the value of any ecosystem can be determined on the basis of its potential (capacity), or the actual amount of goods and services delivered (flow). The aim of this work was to develop indicators of the potential of ecosystems to deliver services related specifically to bees, i.e. to pollination and honey production. A new operational definition of ecosystem potential dedicated to the evaluation of bee-related services was introduced and applied. Two ratio scales were constructed, showing the potential abundance of nesting wild bees (indicating pollination) and the availability of honey substrates (indicating honey production). The expert assessment carried out was closely linked to real regional data. Specific values were assigned to 29 types of ecosystem relevant to bees and identified in the lowland rural landscape of Central Europe. The original scales for the indicators were then classified into the 0–10 ecosystem capacity scale. A specific study area in north-eastern Poland (815 km 2 ) was chosen to show a possible spatial pattern for ecosystem potential in relation to the two bee-related services. Dry grassland and early successional pine forests were assigned highest values in terms of pollination potential, as well as cropland, young swamp pine forests and dry grassland in the case of honey production. In turn, mature alder and riparian forests, together with wetlands, ranked lowest for both bee services. This study confirmed that ecosystem capacities to deliver bee services tend to contrast greatly with potentials as regards many other ecosystem services (e.g. carbon sequestration or erosion control). This obviously complicates management policies and requires that the concept of trade-offs be embraced. The proposed indicators, as combined with detailed mapping of ecosystem capacities differ from pan-European modelling in being of value to particular stakeholders, and in support of decision-making processes regarding beekeeping, farming and nature conservation.

The study aimed to determine how direct users of local ecosystems perceive the potentials of those ecosystems to provide services, and how their assessments are influenced by different factors (i.e. socio-demographic characteristics, the actual use of services and proximity to particular ecosystems). To elicit social values we carried out a door-to-door questionnaire survey among residents and visitors (N = 251) staying in Wigry National Park and its vicinity (the Suwalki Lakeland of NE Poland), a renowned area of high natural value. Respondents were asked to detail the frequency of use made of 45 different provisioning and cultural services, and then to evaluate 7 local ecosystem types as regards their capacity to supply 11 groups of services. Direct users of ecosystems were shown to possess a capacity to differentiate local ecosystems in terms of their potentials to provide services. Better education, multifaceted interaction with nature and frequent use of natural resources are all found to contribute to better understanding and more accurate assessments of potential. Between-group hierarchy variations also show clearly how personal experience influences the assessment of ecosystem potentials. The perception of cultural and regulating potential in particular appeared to be affected greatly by the frequency of use of cultural services.

Chapter 6 is the main analytical part of the book and forms the basis for the following synthetic chapters. It presents the entire path of indicator development for the evaluation of ES potentials in the postglacial landscape. Altogether, 29 ecosystem services were assessed by means of 35 indicators. Services are arranged firstly according to the type of assessment (expert/social), and then follow CICES V5.1 classification and coding. In expert assessment provisioning and regulating services were taken into account while cultural services were evaluated through social assessment. All subchapters devoted to particular services comprise: ES description (a table with ES location in CICES V5.1, indicator metadata, and briefly mentioned data sources), theoretical framework, assessment method and indicator values. Each subchapter ends with a map showing ES potential in the study area. Additionally, all services assessed for ecosystems in the narrow sense have their spatial pattern described by means of landscape metrics.

This chapter is a synthesis of the analytical results presented in Chapter 6 . However, the investigation was conducted only on 29 ecosystem services (ES) indicators for which the ecosystem (detailed or Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services [MAES]–derived) was the spatial reference unit. To start with, synthetic assessment matrices were generated, which served as a basis for the majority of further analyses. Rank values obtained through expert and social assessment were compared, where possible. In the next step, the aggregated potential for each ecosystem type was calculated and ES hotspots were identified and then both mapped, separately for each ES section and in total. Next, the interactions among services and similarities among ecosystem types were investigated. Finally, spatial patterns of ES potentials, described in short for each indicator separately in the analytical chapter, were compared with each other and further analyzed using landscape metrics.

This chapter describes the impact of various factors on the social assessment of ecosystem services (ES) potentials. The data on the frequency of ES use and sociodemographic characteristics of beneficiaries (e.g., age, gender, place of residence, level of education) were obtained through questionnaire survey. The results indicate that the intensity of ES use depends on the level of education. In general, better-educated people benefit more from nature. In turn, frequent use of the gifts of nature contributes to a better understanding of its value and appreciation of the services provided. It was also shown that the more often people interact with nature, the greater they perceive the ecosystem potentials to provide cultural and regulating services. However, this effect was not observed in the case of provisioning services. Moreover, people staying permanently and making their living in the area differ from tourists as regards their hierarchy of needs and expectations toward local nature.

This chapter presents the basic assumptions of the most recent version of the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES V5.1), selected as the framework of our research. It has been designed to help measure, account for, and assess ecosystem services. In contrast to many other classification systems, it includes only three main sections (provisioning, regulation and maintenance, and cultural) and relates only to final ecosystem services, which are defined as the contributions that ecosystems make to human well-being. In principle, CICES covers contributions that arise from living processes. However, the latest version (V5.1) includes also the nonliving parts of ecosystems, for example, water, mineral substances, wind, and solar energy. Nevertheless, when framing our research scope, we decided to focus only on biotic ecosystem outputs and we restricted further ecosystem services to those that are provided by animals, plants, and fungi that were formed in the Holocene.

Riparian forests with oaks, ashes and elms, now highly fragmented and rare in Europe, are considered hotspots for ecosystem services. However, their capacity to provide pollination seems to be quite low, although reports from in-situ research supporting this view are scarce. Our goal was therefore to thoroughly assess their pollination potential based on multifaceted field measurements. For this, we selected six test sites with well-developed riparian hardwood forests, located in the agricultural landscape along the middle Vistula River in Poland. We used seven indicators relating to habitat suitability (nesting sites and floral resources) and pollinator abundance (bumblebees and other Apoidea) and propose a threshold value (AdjMax) based on value distribution and Hampel’s test to indicate the level of pollination potential for this type of riparian forest. The obtained AdjMax for bumblebee density was 500 ind. ha−1, for Apoidea abundance—0.42 ind. day−1, while for nectar resources—200 kg ha−1. We demonstrate that the investigated small patches of the riparian hardwood forest have a higher pollination potential than reported earlier for riparian and other broadleaved temperate forests, but the indicators were inconsistent. As forest islands in the agricultural landscape, riparian hardwood forests play an important role in maintaining the diversity and abundance of wild pollinators, especially in early spring when there is still no food base available elsewhere.

Lowland riparian hardwood forests are valuable habitats protected by EU Habitat Directive (EU code: 91F0). Today, in most areas across Europe they are extremely rare due to deforestation, drainage and river engineering. The remaining small forest patches are important parts of riparian ecological corridors and biodiversity hotspots, and provide valuable ecosystem services (ES) to humans. However, unlike other forest types, due to their rarity and often low accessibility their ES potential has not been duly recognized and assessed to date. In this work we propose a set of biophysical indicators to assess the regulating potential of riparian hardwood forests. Indicator values were obtained through extensive field work and direct measurements carried out on selected test sites located along the middle Vistula River. The specific objectives of this work were: (i) to estimate the potential of riparian hardwood forests to provide 11 regulating services and to identify interactions among them; (ii) to examine the effects of forest and environmental attributes on individual ES; (iii) to determine ES drivers. Our results clearly show that riparian hardwood forests may be regarded as multiservice hotspots. Their regulating potential has proved to be substantial and in case of many services higher than the potential of other forest ecosystems. However, disruption of the natural water regime due to the absence of flooding and artificial drainage reduces their potential mainly for water-related regulating services (e.g. water treatment). On the other hand, more mesic habitats are beneficial for melliferous plant species and thus for wild pollinators. Most of the strong and significant interactions among the studied regulating services are synergistic. The high ES potential quantified by the biophysical ecosystem-condition-related indicators can be used effectively to promote the maintenance or restoration of this type of forests. The outcomes of our research suggest that protective actions should focus on ensuring adequate soil-moisture conditions which determine the specificity of these ecosystems.