Cited by 150Land Use and Ecosystem ServicesEconomic and Environmental ValuationConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

A tiered approach for mapping ecosystem services

Open access
Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne, Weibel, Bettina, Kienast, Felix, Rabe, Sven-Erik, Zulian, Grazia·2015·Ecosystem Services

Abstract

Ecosystem services (ES) mapping make the benefits of nature spatially explicit. The different methods used for ES mapping limit the comparability of outcomes and call for a more consistent but flexible approach. We present a four step tiered approach for ES mapping supporting scholars to select the adequate combination of variables: First, the user, researcher or policy maker defines the goal of the ES assessment. Second, a meta-analysis of relevant ES mapping studies is conducted to identify key variables for mapping the selected ES. Third, the identified variables are attributed to the different levels of the multitier framework according to the level at which they best answer the policy or research question. Finally, appropriate methods for mapping the ES are selected based on the reviewed studies. We illustrate the approach for recreational services at three different tiers. Main advantages of the tiered approach are that (i) it can be adapted to other ES, (ii) it supports the efforts toward a standardized ES assessment, (iii) it provides information about relevant variables to be considered in long term monitoring at different scales, (iv) it supports sustainable resource management as it ensures the inclusion of information relevant to decision makers at different levels.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.10.008

Cites

81 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Buchecker, 2013, Naherholung räumlich erfassen, Merbl. Prax., 51
  2. Capistrano, 2005, 2005, 388
  3. Eigenbrod, 2010, The impact of proxy-based methods on mapping the distribution of ecosystem services, J. Appl. Ecol., 47, 377, 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01777.x · DOI
  4. European Commission, 2011, Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020, COM, 2011, 244
  5. Tallis, 2009, Mapping and valuing ecosystem services as an approach for conservation and natural-resource management, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 1162, 265, 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04152.x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 150

Metadata

Authors
Grêt-Regamey, A., Weibel, B., Kienast, F., Rabe, S.-E., & Zulian, G.
Affiliations
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (CH)
  • European Commission (BE)
Venue
Ecosystem Services
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-06
Volume
13
Pages
16-27
ISSN
2212-0416 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1966291929
Cited by
150
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 6
FWCI
9.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ecosystem Services (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DORA WSL (Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Joint Research Centre (European Commission) (submittedVersion)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection
Funders
Joint Research Centre
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Keywords
ecosystem service mapping, tiered approach, recreational ecosystem services, long-term monitoring, sustainable resource management, multi-scale mapping

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review