The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands-concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification
Open accessAbstract
The high variety of ecosystem service categorisation systems, assessment frameworks, indicators, quantification methods and spatial localisation approaches allows scientists and decision makers to harness experience, data, methods and tools. On the other hand, this variety of concepts and disagreements among scientists hamper an integration of ecosystem services into contemporary environmental management and decision making. In this article, the current state of the art of ecosystem service science regarding spatial localisation, indication and quantification of multiple ecosystem service supply and demand is reviewed and discussed. Concepts and tables for regulating, provisioning and cultural ecosystem service definitions, distinguishing between ecosystem service potential supply (stocks), flows (real supply) and demands as well as related indicators for quantification are provided. Furthermore, spatial concepts of service providing units, benefitting areas, spatial relations, rivalry, spatial and temporal scales are elaborated. Finally, matrices linking CORINE land cover types to ecosystem service potentials, flows, demands and budget estimates are provided. The matrices show that ecosystem service potentials of landscapes differ from flows, especially for provisioning ecosystem services.
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
Maslow, A. H. (1943) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0054346 · Cited by 21,563
Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis
Assessment, M. E. (2005) · Island Press · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18167309 · Cited by 10,665
The interaction of TIGIT with PVR and PVRL2 inhibits human NK cell cytotoxicity
Stanietsky, N., Simic, H., Arapovic, J., Toporik, A., Levy, O., Novik, A., Levine, Z., Beiman, M., Dassa, L., Achdout, H., et al. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0903474106 · Cited by 3,524
Cited by
Ecosystem services classification: A systems ecology perspective of the cascade framework
La Notte, A., D’Amato, D., Mäkinen, H., Paracchini, M. L., Liquete, C., Egoh, B., Geneletti, D., & Crossman, N. D. (2017) · Ecological Indicators · doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.11.030 · Cited by 473
Baró, F., Haase, D., Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2015) · Ecological Indicators · doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.03.013 · Cited by 358
Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Zhang, G., & Chen, Y. (2018) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.396 · Cited by 341
‘The Matrix Reloaded’: A review of expert knowledge use for mapping ecosystem services
Jacobs, S., Burkhard, B., Van Daele, T., Staes, J., & Schneiders, A. (2015) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.08.024 · Cited by 338
Self-citationVollmer, D., Pribadi, D. O., Remondi, F., Rustiadi, E., & Grêt-Regamey, A. (2016) · Sustainable Cities and Society · doi:10.1016/j.scs.2015.10.004 · Cited by 73
Metadata
- Authors
- Burkhard, B., Kandziora, M., Hou, Y., & Müller, F.
- Venue
- Landscape Online
- Publisher
- Landscape Online
- Published
- 2014-06-02
- Volume
- 34
- Pages
- 1-32
- ISSN
- 1865-1542 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2317304769
- Cited by
- 725
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 38.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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 service potentials, flows and demands-concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3097/lo.201434
- The paper
- Burkhard, B., Kandziora, M., Hou, Y., & Müller, F. (2014). Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands-concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification. Landscape Online. https://doi.org/10.3097/lo.201434
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.
