Is the focus on "ecosystems" a liability in the research on nature's services?

10Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

For the last 20 years, the concept of ecosystem has constituted one of the key pillars on which the study of "ecosystem services," i.e., the benefits that human populations derive from nature, has been based. Yet, at this stage, one could argue that, in general and especially in fields related to agriculture, the ecosystem framework tends to limit unnecessarily the range of benefits to humans that are considered in practice, to hinder the necessary measurement of services, and to make it challenging to convince individuals to take nature's services into account in their decision making. In the present Perspective piece, we analyze these 3 arguments in detail, conclude that the current focus on ecosystems is more a liability than an asset in the field, and suggest a return to the less constraining notions of "nature's functions and services," without a necessary tie to ecosystems.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Baveye, P. C., Chalhoub, M., Choquet, P., & Montagne, D. (2018). Is the focus on “ecosystems” a liability in the research on nature’s services? Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 6(DEC). https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2018.00226

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free