Intermediate ecosystem services: the origin and meanings behind an unsettled concept

References

• [MEA] Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: scenarios, Volume 2. Washington (DC): Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andersson E, Barthel S, Borgström S, Colding J, Elmqvsit T, Folke C, Gren Å. 2014. Reconnecting cities to the biosphere: stewardship of green infrastructure and urban ecosystem services. Ambio. 43:445–453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkins JP, Burdon D, Elliott M, Gregory AJ. 2011. Management of the marine environment: integrating ecosystem services and societal benefits with the DPSIR framework in a systems approach. Marine Poll Bull. 62:215–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barquín J, Benda LE, Villa F, Brown LE, Bonada N, Vieites DR, Battin TJ, Olden JD, Hughes SJ, Gray C, et al. 2015. Coupling virtual watersheds with ecosystem services assessment: a 21st century platform to support river research and management. WIREs Water. 2:609–621.
   Google Scholar
• Beier CM, Caputo J, Groffman PM. 2015. Measuring ecosystem capacity to provide regulating services: forest removal and recovery at Hubbard Brook (USA). Ecol Appl. 25:2011–2021.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benjamin N, Diao X. 2000. Liberalizing services trade in APEC: a general equilibrium analysis with imperfect competition. Pac Rev. 5:49–75.
   Google Scholar
• Biggs R, Schlüter M, Schoon ML. 2015. An introduction to the resilience approach and principles to sustain ecosystem services in social-ecological systems. In: Biggs R, Schlüter M, Schoon ML, editors. Principles for building resilience: sustaining ecosystem services in social-ecological systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1–31.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd J, Banzhaf S. 2007. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol Econ. 63:616–626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brauman KA, Daily GC, Duarte TK, Mooney HA. 2007. The nature and value of ecosystem services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annu Rev Environ Resour. 32:67–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campos P, Rodríguez Y, Caparrós A. 2001. Towards the dehesa total income accounting: theory and operative monfragüe study cases. Invest Agrar Sist Recur For (Spanish). 1–2001:43–67.
   Google Scholar
• Czúcz B, Condé S. 2017. Note on definitions related to ecosystem conditions and their services based on different glossaries. Technical paper N°4/2017. ETC/BD Report European Environment Agency P. 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Duncan C, Thompson JR, Pettorelli N. 2015. The quest for a mechanistic understanding of biodiversity–ecosystem services relationships. Proc Roy Soc B. 282:20151348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ec UN, Fao IMF, Oecd WB. 2014. System of environmental-economic accounting 2012 – experimental ecosystem accounting. New York (USA: United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Febria CM, Koch CJ, Palmer MA. 2015. Operationalizing and ecosystem services-based approach for managing river biodiversity. In: Martin-Ortega J, Ferrier RC, Gordon IJ, Khan S, editors. Water ecosystem services: a global perspective. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press; 26–34.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Turner K, Zylstra M, Brouwer R, de Groot R, Farber S, Ferraro P, Green R, Hadley D, Harlow J, et al. 2008. Ecosystem services and economic theory: integration for policy-relevant research. Ecol Appl. 18:2050–2067.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Turner RK. 2008. Ecosystem services: classification for valuation. Biol Conserv. 141:1167–1169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Turner RK, Morling P. 2009. Defining and classifying ecosystem service for decision making. Ecol Econ. 68:643–653.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu BJ, Su CH, Wei YP, Willett IR, Lü YH, Liu GH. 2011. Double counting in ecosystem services valuation: causes and countermeasures. Ecol Res. 26:1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haines-Young R, Potschin M. 2010. The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. In: Rafaelli D, Frid C, editors. Ecosystem ecology: a new synthesis. Cambridge: BES Ecological Reviews Series; 110–139.
   Google Scholar
• Haines-Young R, Potschin M 2013. Common international classification of ecosystem services (CICES): consultation on version 4, August-December 2012. Available online: http://biodiversity.europa.eu/maes/common-international-classification-of-ecosystem-services-cices-classification-version-4.3.
   Google Scholar
• Howe C, Suich H, Vira B, Mace GM. 2014. Creating win-wins from trade-offs? Ecosystem services for human well-being: a meta-analysis of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies in the real world. Glob Environ Change. 28:263–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang B, Wong CP, Cui L, Ouyang Z. 2016. Wetland economic valuation approaches and prospects in China. Chin Geogra Sci. 26:143–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston RJ, Russell M. 2011. An operational structure for clarity in ecosystem service values. Ecol Econ. 70:2243–2249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kremen C, Ostfeld RS. 2005. A call to ecologists: measuring, analyzing, and managing ecosystem services. Front Ecol Environ. 3:540–548.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luck GW, Harrington R, Harrison PA, Kremen C, Berry PM, Bugter R, Dawson TP, de Bello F, Díaz S, Feld CK, et al. 2009. Quantifying the contribution of organisms to the provision of ecosystem services. BioScience. 59:223–235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez-Harms MJ, Bryan BA, Balvanera P, Law EA, Rhodes JR, Possingham HP, Wilson KA. 2015. Making decisions for managing ecosystem services. Biol Conserv. 184:229–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mellina E, Hinch SG. 2009. Influences of riparian logging and in-stream large removal on pool habitgat and salmonid density and biomass: a meta-analysis. Can J For Res. 39:1280–1301.
   Google Scholar
• Milcu AI, Hanspach J, Abson D, Fischer J. 2013. Cultural ecosystem services: a literature review and prospects for future research. Ecol Soc. 18:44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell MGE, Suarez-Castro AF, Martinez-Harms M, Maron M, McAlpine C, Gaston KJ, Johansen K, Rhodes JR. 2015. Reframing landscape fragmentation’s effects of ecosystem services. Trends Ecol Evol. 30:190–198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nahlik AM, Kentula ME, Fennessy MS, Landers DH. 2012. Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice. Ecol Econ. 77:27–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naiman RJ, Bilby RE, Bissoon PA. 2000. Riparian ecology and management in the Pacific Coastal Rain Forest. Bioscience. 50:996–1011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parrot L, Meyer WS. 2012. Future landscapes: managing within complexity. Front Ecol Env. 10:382–389.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pert PL, Butler JRA, Brodie JE, Bruce C, Honzák M, Kroon FJ, Metcalfe D, Mitchell D, Wong G. 2010. A catchment-based approach to mapping hydrological ecosystem services using a riparian habitat: a case study from the Wet Tropics, Australia. Ecol Complex. 7:378–388.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polasky S, Segerson K. 2009. Integrating ecology and economics in the study of ecosystem services: some lessons learned. Annu Rev Resour Econ. 1:409–434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potschin M, Haines-Young R, Heink U, Jax K 2014. OpenNESS Glossary (V2.0). Grant Agreement No 308428. Available online: http://www.openness-project.eu/library/reference-book.
   Google Scholar
• Potschin-Young M, Czúcz B, Liquete C, Maes J, Rusch GM, Haines-Young R. 2017. Intermediate ecosystem services. Empty Concept? Ecosyst Serv. 27:124–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pullin AS, Steward GB. 2006. Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conserv Biol. 20:1647. –1656..
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saarikoski H, Jax K, Harrison PA, Primmer E, Barton DN, Mononen L, Vihervaara P, Furman E. 2015. Exploring operational ecosystem service definitions: the case of boreal forests. Ecosyst Serv. 14:144–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smithwick EAH, Harmon ME, Remillard SM, Acker SA, Franklin JF. 2002. Potential upper bounds of carbon stores in forests of the Pacific Northwest. Ecol Appl. 12:1303–1317.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutherland IJ, Bennett EM, Gergel SE. 2016a. Recovery trends in multiple ecosystem services reveal non-linear responses and long-term tradeoffs from temperate forest harvesting. For Ecol Manage. 374:61–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutherland IJ, Bennett EM, Gergel SE. 2016b. Seeing the forests for its multiple ecosystem services: indicators for cultural services in heterogeneous forests. Ecol Indicat. 71:123–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutherland IJ, Villamagna AM, Ouellet Dallaire C, Bennett EM, Chin ATM, Yeung ACY, Lamothe KA, Tomscha SA, Cormier R. In Press. Undervalued and under pressure: a plea for greater attention toward regulating ecosystem services. Ecol Indicat. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.06.047.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TEEB. 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity Ecological and Economic Foundations. Edited by Pushpam K. Earnscan, Washington DC. pp. 410.
   Google Scholar
• Tomscha SA, Sutherland IJ, Renard D, Gergel SE, Rhemtulla JM, Bennett EM, Daniels LD, Eddy IMS, Clark EE. 2016. A guide to historical data sets for reconstructing ecosystem service change over time. Bioscience. 66:74–762.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Truchy A, Angeler DG, Sponseller RA, Johnson RK, McKie BG. 2015. Chapter two – linking biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and services, and ecological resilience: towards an integrative framework for improved management. Adv Ecol Res. 53:55–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US EPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Valuing the protection of ecological systems and services: a report of the EPA science advisory board. Washington DC (USA).
   Google Scholar
• Wong CP, Jiang B, Kinzig AP, Lee KN, Ouyang Z. 2015. Linking ecosystem characteristics to final ecosystem services for public policy. Ecol Lett. 18:108–118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeung ACY, Lecerf A, Richardson JS. 2017. Assessing the long-term ecological effects of riparian management practices on headwater streams in a coastal temperate rainforest. For Ecol Manage. 384:100–109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar