Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Distant regions underpin interregional flows of cultural ecosystem services provided by birds and mammals

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Ambio Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ecosystem service assessments rarely consider flows between distant regions. Hence, telecoupling effects such as conservation burdens in distant ecosystems are ignored. We identified service-providing species for two cultural ecosystem services (existence and bequest, and birdwatching) and two receiving, i.e. benefitting, regions (Germany, the Netherlands). We delineated and analysed sending, i.e. service-providing, regions on a global scale. The proportion of service-providing species with distant habitats was higher for birdwatching (Germany: 58.6%, Netherlands: 59.4%), than for existence and bequest (Germany: 49.3%, Netherlands: 57.1%). Hotspots of sending regions were predominantly situated in tropical and subtropical grasslands, savannas and shrublands and were significantly more threatened and poorer than the global mean. Hotspot protection levels for flows to Germany were higher than the global mean, and lower for the Dutch hotspots. Our findings increase understanding on how distant regions underpin ecosystem services and necessitate interregional assessment as well as conservation efforts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barua, M. 2011. Mobilizing metaphors: The popular use of keystone, flagship and umbrella species concepts. Biodiversity and Conservation 20: 1427–1440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boere, G.C., and T. Piersma. 2012. Flyway protection and the predicament of our migrant birds: A critical look at international conservation policies and the Dutch Wadden Sea. Ocean and Coastal Management 68: 157–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, J.E., K.J. Gaston, K.L. Evans, and P.R. Armsworth. 2011. The value of species rarity in biodiversity recreation: A birdwatching example. Biological Conservation 144: 2728–2732.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borucke, M., D. Moore, G. Cranston, K. Gracey, K. Iha, J. Larson, E. Lazarus, J.C. Morales, et al. 2013. Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: The national footprint accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecological Indicators 24: 518–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen-Jones, E., and A. Entwistle. 2002. Identifying appropriate flagship species: The importance of culture and local contexts. Oryx 36: 189–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Courchamp, F., I. Jaric, C. Albert, Y. Meinard, W.J. Ripple, and G. Chapron. 2018. The paradoxical extinction of the most charismatic animals. PLoS Biology 16: e2003997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, G.S., and K. Maciejewski. 2017. Reconciling community ecology and ecosystem services: Cultural services and benefits from birds in South African National Parks. Ecosystem Services 28: 219–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, M.D. 2013. On the relation between ecosystem services, intrinsic value, existence value and economic valuation. Ecological Economics 95: 171–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Díaz, S., U. Pascual, M. Stenseke, B. Martín-López, R.T. Watson, Z. Molnár, R. Hill, K.M.A. Chan, et al. 2018. Assessing nature’s contributions to people. Science 359: 270–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorninger, C., D.J. Abson, J. Fischer, and H. von Wehrden. 2017. Assessing sustainable biophysical human–nature connectedness at regional scales. Environmental Research Letters 12: 055001.

    Google Scholar 

  • EOL. 2018. Encyclopedia of life. Retrieved 25 May 2018, from http://www.eol.org/.

  • Fish, R., A. Church, and M. Winter. 2016. Conceptualising cultural ecosystem services: A novel framework for research and critical engagement. Ecosystem Services 21: 208–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansjürgens, B., C. Schröter-Schlaack, A. Berghöfer, and N. Lienhoop. 2017. Justifying social values of nature: Economic reasoning beyond self-interested preferences. Ecosystem Services 23: 9–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, P.A., P.M. Berry, G. Simpson, J.R. Haslett, M. Blicharska, M. Bucur, R. Dunford, B. Egoh, et al. 2014. Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services: A systematic review. Ecosystem Services 9: 191–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausmann, A., T. Toivonen, R. Slotow, H. Tenkanen, A. Moilanen, V. Heikinheimo, and E.D. Minin. 2018. Social media data can be used to understand tourists’ preferences for nature-based experiences in protected areas. Conservation Letters 11: e12343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurlbert, A.H., and W. Jetz. 2007. Species richness, hotspots, and the scale dependence of range maps in ecology and conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104: 13384–13389.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • IUCN. 2018. 1994 Categories & criteria (version 2.3). Retrieved 25 May 2018, from http://www.iucnredlist.org/static/categories_criteria_2_3.

  • Jones, K.R., O. Venter, R.A. Fuller, J.R. Allan, S.L. Maxwell, P.J. Negret, and J.E.M. Watson. 2018. One-third of global protected land is under intense human pressure. Science 360: 788–791.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karp, D.S., C.D. Mendenhall, E. Callaway, L.O. Frishkoff, P.M. Kareiva, P.R. Ehrlich, and G.C. Daily. 2015. Confronting and resolving competing values behind conservation objectives. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112: 11132–11137.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kastner, T., K.-H. Erb, and S. Nonhebel. 2011. International wood trade and forest change: A global analysis. Global Environmental Change 21: 947–956.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, J. 2010. Review of current knowledge of bird flyways, principal knowledge gaps and conservation priorities. Prepared on behalf of the CMS Scientific Council/Working Group on Flyways. UNEP Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals, Bonn, Germany.

  • Kirby, J.S., A.J. Stattersfield, S.H.M. Butchart, M.I. Evans, R.F.A. Grimmett, V.R. Jones, J. O’Sullivan, G.M. Tucker, et al. 2008. Key conservation issues for migratory land- and waterbird species on the world’s major flyways. Bird Conservation International 18: S49–S73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koellner, T., A. Bonn, S. Arnhold, K.J. Bagstad, D. Fridman, C.A. Guerra, T. Kastner, M. Kissinger, et al. 2019. Guidance for assessing interregional ecosystem service flows. Ecological Indicators 105: 92–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J., V. Hull, J. Luo, W. Yang, W. Liu, A. Viña, C. Vogt, Z. Xu, et al. 2015. Multiple telecouplings and their complex interrelationships. Ecology and Society 20 (3): 44.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Hoffman, L., C.C. Chester, D.J. Semmens, W.E. Thogmartin, M.S. Rodriguez McGoffin, R. Merideth, and J.E. Diffendorfer. 2017. Ecosystem services from transborder migratory species: Implications for conservation governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 42: 509–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Hoffman, L., R.G. Varady, K.W. Flessa, and P. Balvanera. 2010. Ecosystem services across borders: A framework for transboundary conservation policy. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 8: 84–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Hoffman, L., R. Wiederholt, C. Sansone, K.J. Bagstad, P. Cryan, J.E. Diffendorfer, J. Goldstein, K. LaSharr, et al. 2014. Market forces and technological substitutes cause fluctuations in the value of bat pest-control services for cotton. PLoS ONE 9: e87912.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luck, G.W., R. Harrington, P.A. Harrison, C. Kremen, P.M. Berry, R. Bugter, T.R. Dawson, F.D. Bello, et al. 2009. Quantifying the contribution of organisms to the provision of ecosystem services. BioScience 59: 223–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martín-López, B., A. Church, E. Başak Dessane, P. Berry, C. Chenu, M. Christie, M. Gerino, H. Keune, et al. 2018. Chapter 2: Nature’s contributions to people and quality of life. In The IPBES regional assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Europe and Central Asia, ed. M. Rounsevell, M. Fischer, A. Torre-Marin Rando, A. Mader, and IPBES, 57–185. Bonn, Germany: Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, A., B. Coolsaet, E. Corbera, N.M. Dawson, J.A. Fraser, I. Lehmann, and I. Rodriguez. 2016. Justice and conservation: The need to incorporate recognition. Biological Conservation 197: 254–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mattsson, B.J., J.A. Dubovsky, W.E. Thogmartin, K.J. Bagstad, J.H. Goldstein, J.B. Loomis, J.E. Diffendorfer, D.J. Semmens, et al. 2018. Recreation economics to inform migratory species conservation: Case study of the northern pintail. Journal of Environmental Management 206: 971–979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyfroidt, P., E.F. Lambin, K.-H. Erb, and T.W. Hertel. 2013. Globalization of land use: Distant drivers of land change and geographic displacement of land use. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5: 438–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milcu, A.I., J. Hanspach, D. Abson, and J. Fischer. 2013. Cultural ecosystem services: A literature review and prospects for future research. Ecology and Society 18 (3): 44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D.M., E. Dinerstein, E.D. Wikramanayake, N.D. Burgess, G.V.N. Powell, E.C. Underwood, J.A. D’Amico, I. Itoua, et al. 2001. Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: A new map of life on EarthA new global map of terrestrial ecoregions provides an innovative tool for conserving biodiversity. BioScience 51: 933–938.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pascual, U., I. Palomo, W. Adams, K.M.A. Chan, T. Daw, E. Garmendia, E. Gómez-Baggethun, R. de Groot, et al. 2017. Off-stage ecosystem service burdens: A blind spot for global sustainability. Environmental Research Letters 12: 075001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyers, B., S. Polasky, H. Tallis, H.A. Mooney, and A. Larigauderie. 2012. Finding common ground for biodiversity and ecosystem services. BioScience 62: 503–507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rondinini, C., M. Di Marco, F. Chiozza, G. Santulli, D. Baisero, P. Visconti, M. Hoffmann, J. Schipper, et al. 2011. Global habitat suitability models of terrestrial mammals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 366: 2633–2641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schirpke, U., C. Meisch, and U. Tappeiner. 2018. Symbolic species as a cultural ecosystem service in the European Alps: Insights and open issues. Landscape Ecology 33: 711–730.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schröter, M., C. Albert, A. Marques, W. Tobon, S. Lavorel, J. Maes, C. Brown, S. Klotz, et al. 2016. National ecosystem assessments in Europe: A review. BioScience 66: 813–828.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schröter, M., T. Koellner, R. Alkemade, S. Arnhold, K.J. Bagstad, K.-H. Erb, K. Frank, T. Kastner, et al. 2018. Interregional flows of ecosystem services: Concepts, typology and four cases. Ecosystem Services 31: 231–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semmens, D.J., J.E. Diffendorfer, K.J. Bagstad, R. Wiederholt, K. Oberhauser, L. Ries, B.X. Semmens, J. Goldstein, et al. 2018. Quantifying ecosystem service flows at multiple scales across the range of a long-distance migratory species. Ecosystem Services 31: 255–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serna-Chavez, H., C. Schulp, P. van Bodegom, W. Bouten, P. Verburg, and M. Davidson. 2014. A quantitative framework for assessing spatial flows of ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators 39: 24–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steven, R., J.C.R. Smart, C. Morrison, and J.G. Castley. 2017. Using a choice experiment and birder preferences to guide bird-conservation funding. Conservation Biology 31: 818–827.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP-WCMC and IUCN. 2018. The lag effect in the world database on protected areas. Retrieved 25 May 2018, from https://www.protectedplanet.net/c/the-lag-effect-in-the-world-database-on-protected-areas.

  • Venter, O., E.W. Sanderson, A. Magrach, J.R. Allan, J. Beher, K.R. Jones, H.P. Possingham, W.F. Laurance, et al. 2016. Sixteen years of change in the global terrestrial human footprint and implications for biodiversity conservation. Nature Communications 7: 12558.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vogelbescherming. 2016. Jaarverslag 2016, p. 116.

  • Watson, R.A., B.S. Green, S.R. Tracey, A. Farmery, and T.J. Pitcher. 2015. Provenance of global seafood. Fish and Fisheries 17: 585–595.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willemen, L., A.J. Cottam, E.G. Drakou, and N.D. Burgess. 2015. Using social media to measure the contribution of red list species to the nature-based tourism potential of African protected areas. PLoS ONE 10: e0129785.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P.H., N.D. Burgess, and C. Rahbek. 2000. Flagship species, ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in sub-Saharan Africa. Animal Conservation 3: 249–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, Y., K. Feng, and K. Hubacek. 2013. Tele-connecting local consumption to global land use. Global Environmental Change 23: 1178–1186.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments which have helped to improve an earlier version of the manuscript. We thank Morgan Kain for critical feedback and for checking the language. The work by RK is supported by the research project Environmental-Health Interactions in Cities (GreenEquityHEALTH) - Challenges for Human Well-Being under Global Changes (2017–2022), funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; no. 01LN1705A). RPR is supported by the Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation. The work by AvO was funded by the STW research programme ‘Nature-driven nourishment of coastal systems (NatureCoast)’ (Grant Number 12691), which is (partly) financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecosystem Services, UFZ – Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Permoserstr. 15, 04318, Leipzig, Germany

    Matthias Schröter & Roland Kraemer

  2. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Deutscher Platz 5e, 04103, Leipzig, Germany

    Matthias Schröter & Roland Kraemer

  3. Institute of Geography, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099, Berlin, Germany

    Roland Kraemer

  4. Natural Capital Project, Stanford University, 371 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA

    Roy P. Remme

  5. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, 3720 BA, Bilthoven, The Netherlands

    Roy P. Remme

  6. Institute of Environmental Sciences CML, Leiden University, Einsteinweg 2, 2333 CC, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Alexander P. E. van Oudenhoven

Authors
  1. Matthias Schröter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roland Kraemer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roy P. Remme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alexander P. E. van Oudenhoven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthias Schröter.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 63 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schröter, M., Kraemer, R., Remme, R.P. et al. Distant regions underpin interregional flows of cultural ecosystem services provided by birds and mammals. Ambio 49, 1100–1113 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01261-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-019-01261-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation