Roy P. Remme

Bio: Roy P. Remme is an academic researcher from Stanford University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Ecosystem services & Ecosystem. The author has an hindex of 11, co-authored 32 publications receiving 1247 citations. Previous affiliations of Roy P. Remme include Leiden University & Wageningen University and Research Centre.

Ecosystem Services as a Contested Concept: a Synthesis of Critique and Counter-Arguments

Abstract: 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.

Spatial prioritisation for conserving ecosystem services : comparing hotspots with heuristic optimisation

Abstract: Context The variation in spatial distribution between ecosystem services can be high Hence, there is a need to spatially identify important sites for conservation planning The term ‘ecosystem service hotspot’ has often been used for this purpose, but definitions of this term are ambiguous

Lessons learned for spatial modelling of ecosystem services in support of ecosystem accounting

Abstract: Assessment of ecosystem services through spatial modelling plays a key role in ecosystem accounting. Spatial models for ecosystem services try to capture spatial heterogeneity with high accuracy. This endeavour, however, faces several practical constraints. In this article we analyse the trade-offs between accurately representing spatial heterogeneity of ecosystem services and the practical constraints of modelling ecosystem services. By doing so we aim to explore the boundary conditions for best practice of spatial ecosystem accounting. We distinguished seven types of spatial ES modelling methods, including four types of look-up tables, causal relationships, spatial interpolation, and environmental regression. We classified 29 spatial ES models according to a judgement of accuracy and modelling feasibility. Best practice of spatial ES models varies depending on the reliability requirements of different policy applications and decision contexts. We propose that in best practice for ecosystem accounting an approach should be adopted that provides sufficient accuracy at acceptable costs given heterogeneity of the respective service. Furthermore, we suggest that different policy applications require different accuracy and different spatial modelling approaches. Societal investment in higher data availability of ecosystem services make models of a specific accuracy more feasible or would enable achievement of higher accuracy with comparable feasibility.

Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands-concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification

Abstract: 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.

Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services: A systematic review

Abstract: A systematic literature review was undertaken to analyse the linkages between different biodiversity attributes and 11 ecosystem services. The majority of relationships between attributes and ecosystem services cited in the 530 studies were positive. For example, the services of water quality regulation, water flow regulation, mass flow regulation and landscape aesthetics were improved by increases in community and habitat area. Functional traits, such as richness and diversity, also displayed a predominantly positive relationship across the services, most commonly discussed for atmospheric regulation, pest regulation and pollination. A number of studies also discussed a positive correlation with stand age, particularly for atmospheric regulation. Species level traits were found to benefit a number of ecosystem services, with species abundance being particularly important for pest regulation, pollination and recreation, and species richness for timber production and freshwater fishing. Instances of biodiversity negatively affecting the examined ecosystem services were few in number for all ecosystem services, except freshwater provision. The review showed that ecosystem services are generated from numerous interactions occurring in complex systems. However, improving understanding of at least some of the key relationships between biodiversity and service provision will help guide effective management and protection strategies.