GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: International Review of Hydrobiology, Wiley, Vol. 107, No. 1-2 ( 2022-03), p. 128-139
    Abstract: The concept of ecosystem services (ES) is a powerful tool for communicating with stakeholders because it highlights the benefits of ecosystems for people and demonstrates their economic importance through monetized values. However, this hypothesis has rarely been substantiated in the context of local landscape planning. To investigate which ecosystem services information formats (ESIF) stakeholders prefer in decision situations, we experimented with a highly conflictual planning situation about the Lower Mulde restoration in Germany. We invited local stakeholders to a so‐called ‘future vision workshop’. It included a paper‐based, noncompetitive planning game, which combined the freedom of choice with strict rules for justifying the proposed measures. We tested how often participants used different ESIFs to justify their decisions, focusing on quantification, monetization, and the default qualitative (ordinal‐scaled) format applied in landscape planning. A total of 17 representatives from stakeholder groups such as nature conservation, recreation, and local politics attended. We provided information on four ES and eight related measure proposals to the stakeholders, who used them to select, locate, and justify actions for the area's future development. The participants applied the ordinal‐qualitative format in more than two‐thirds of the decisions. Quantification and monetization were used with approximately equal frequency, mostly for measures that favoured flood risk regulation. Actions supporting habitat provision and biodiversity were justified exclusively in ordinal‐qualitative terms. Instead of our provided quantifications, some participants mentioned numbers they were already familiar with before. They also partly doubted our monetization approaches. In conclusion, we recommend combined and context‐specific uses of several ESIFs, while using the ordinal‐qualitative format as the basis. Furthermore, the participants appreciated the workshop and requested that the results be presented to the city council. The workshop also confirmed that the ES concept is challenging to understand, especially for laypeople unfamiliar with ES and landscape planning.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1434-2944 , 1522-2632
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2006634-X
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1420232-3
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: International Review of Hydrobiology, Wiley, Vol. 107, No. 1-2 ( 2022-03), p. 9-21
    Abstract: Over the last 40 years, a growing number of restoration projects have been implemented to improve the ecological conditions of highly degraded rivers and their floodplains. Despite considerable investment in these projects, information is still limited about the effectiveness and the success of such river restoration measures, mainly due to a lack of standardised and interdisciplinary assessment approaches. During the project ‘Wilde Mulde—Restoration of a dynamic riverine landscape in Central Germany’, we implemented hydromorphological restoration measures (installation of large wood, removal of rip‐rap, reconnection of a former river side‐arm) along a lowland river in Central Germany. We carried out intensive scientific monitoring of biodiversity, hydromorphology, ecosystem functions and services, as well as socio‐economic aspects. A Before/After‐Control/Impact (BACI) design was used to identify the spatial and temporal effects of the restoration measures and to distinguish them from changes caused by background variation. For this, we used a comprehensive set of indicators, including abiotic (flow velocity, diversity of riverbed topography, and flow resistance), biological (ecosystem respiration, macroinvertebrates, fish, carabids, vegetation, and birds) and socio‐economic (acceptance and public awareness) indicators as well as the ecosystem service indicator aesthetic quality of the landscape. To meet the inherent challenges of such a large‐scale field experiment, like unpredictable environmental conditions, we used an experimental approach that allowed us to demonstrate a measurable success of the implemented restoration measures. The majority of the abiotic and some of the biological and socio‐economic indicators at the restored sites approached values of a natural reference site while already deviating from values of a nonnatural reference site two years after restoration. In addition to the applied interdisciplinary approach, multiple scales of field investigations and data analyses are essential as key components for evaluating successful river and floodplain restoration projects.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1434-2944 , 1522-2632
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2006634-X
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1420232-3
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...