The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ecosystem Services as a Contested Concept: a Synthesis of Critique and Counter‐Arguments
Open accessAbstract
We describe and reflect on seven recurring critiques of the concept of ecosystem services and respective counter‐arguments. First, the concept is criticized for being anthropocentric, whereas others argue that it goes beyond instrumental values. Second, some argue that the concept promotes an exploitative human–nature relationship, whereas others state that it reconnects society to ecosystems, emphasizing humanity's dependence on nature. Third, concerns exist that the concept may conflict with biodiversity conservation objectives, whereas others emphasize complementarity. Fourth, the concept is questioned because of its supposed focus on economic valuation, whereas others argue that ecosystem services science includes many values. Fifth, the concept is criticized for promoting commodification of nature, whereas others point out that most ecosystem services are not connected to market‐based instruments. Sixth, vagueness of definitions and classifications are stated to be a weakness, whereas others argue that vagueness enhances transdisciplinary collaboration. Seventh, some criticize the normative nature of the concept, implying that all outcomes of ecosystem processes are desirable. The normative nature is indeed typical for the concept, but should not be problematic when acknowledged. By disentangling and contrasting different arguments we hope to contribute to a more structured debate between opponents and proponents of the ecosystem services concept.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity
Cardinale, B. J., Duffy, J. E., Gonzalez, A., Hooper, D. U., Perrings, C., Venail, P., Narwani, A., Mace, G. M., Tilman, D., Wardle, D. A., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11148 · Cited by 7,457 · cited 1×
“Cardinale et al. (2012) suggest that for certain provisioning and regulating services there is suffi-cient evidence that biodiversity directly influences these or strongly correlates with them.”
Science for the post-normal age
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993) · Futures · doi:10.1016/0016-3287(93)90022-l · Cited by 4,255
An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science
Robbins, L. (1984) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-349-17510-9 · Cited by 3,217
Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services
Balvanera, P., Pfisterer, A. B., Buchmann, N., He, J., Nakashizuka, T., Raffaelli, D., & Schmid, B. (2006) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00963.x · Cited by 2,650
Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units
de Groot, R., Brander, L., van der Ploeg, S., Costanza, R., Bernard, F., Braat, L., Christie, M., Crossman, N., Ghermandi, A., Hein, L., et al. (2012) · Ecosystem Services · doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.005 · Cited by 2,578
Self-citationUnderstanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services
Bennett, E. M., Peterson, G. D., & Gordon, L. J. (2009) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01387.x · Cited by 2,481
This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept
Leigh Star, S. (2010) · Science, Technology, & Human Values · doi:10.1177/0162243910377624 · Cited by 2,375
Ecosystem services and agriculture: tradeoffs and synergies
Power, A. G. (2010) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0143 · Cited by 2,334
Science for managing ecosystem services: Beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Carpenter, S. R., Mooney, H. A., Agard, J., Capistrano, D., DeFries, R. S., Díaz, S., Dietz, T., Duraiappah, A. K., Oteng-Yeboah, A., Pereira, H. M., et al. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0808772106 · Cited by 2,257
Green Grabbing: a new appropriation of nature?
Fairhead, J., Leach, M., & Scoones, I. (2012) · The Journal of Peasant Studies · doi:10.1080/03066150.2012.671770 · Cited by 1,928
Cited by
Circular economy as an essentially contested concept
Korhonen, J., Nuur, C., Feldmann, A., & Birkie, S. E. (2018) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111 · Cited by 1,568
Reconnecting with nature for sustainability
Ives, C. D., Abson, D. J., von Wehrden, H., Dorninger, C., Klaniecki, K., & Fischer, J. (2018) · Sustainability Science · doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0542-9 · Cited by 593
Heino, J., Alahuhta, J., Bini, L. M., Cai, Y., Heiskanen, A., Hellsten, S., Kortelainen, P., Kotamäki, N., Tolonen, K. T., Vihervaara, P., et al. (2021) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12647 · Cited by 356
Are ecosystem services adequately quantified?
Boerema, A., Rebelo, A. J., Bodi, M. B., Esler, K. J., & Meire, P. (2017) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12696 · Cited by 283
Have Ecosystem Services Been Oversold?
Silvertown, J. (2015) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2015.08.007 · Cited by 255
Metadata
- Authors
- Schröter, M., van der Zanden, E. H., van Oudenhoven, A. P. E., Remme, R. P., Serna‐Chavez, H. M., de Groot, R. S., & Opdam, P.
- Venue
- Conservation Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-02-17
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 514-523
- ISSN
- 1755-263X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1571962500
- Cited by
- 685
- References
- 65
- FWCI
- 52.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ecosystem Services as a Contested Concept: a Synthesis of Critique and Counter‐Arguments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/conl.12091
- The paper
- Schröter, M., van der Zanden, E. H., van Oudenhoven, A. P. E., Remme, R. P., Serna‐Chavez, H. M., de Groot, R. S., & Opdam, P. (2014). Ecosystem Services as a Contested Concept: a Synthesis of Critique and Counter‐Arguments. Conservation Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12091
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
