Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Review of Multicriteria Methodologies and Tools for the Evaluation of the Provision of Ecosystem Services

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Multicriteria Analysis in Agriculture

Part of the book series: Multiple Criteria Decision Making ((MCDM))

Abstract

An ecosystem is defined as an area, place or environment where organisms interact with the physical and chemical environment. Ecosystems provide a variety of benefits to people that are divided into market and non-market ecosystem goods or ecosystem services (ES) and classified in multiple ways. A wide range of methodologies is available to value changes in ES. The type of valuation technique chosen depends on the type of ES to be valued, as well as the quantity and quality of data available. Since ES provide multiple benefits, they are valued for a range of reasons and researchers must employ valuation methods that better match this diversity. How to compare objects with multiple characteristics has been the focus of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). In this paper, a literature review has been performed that covers an overview of various methodologies that seek to improve the knowledge base of existing tools and methodologies in ES evaluation. The focus will be on studies that used MCDA for an ES assessment; attempting to cover a representative sample of case studies of ES assessments through MCDA. We also discuss advantages and disadvantages of different methodological choices in ecosystem service evaluation. We conclude that the ES concept is currently used in a range of studies with widely differing aims creating difficulties for policy makers as well as researchers since it makes it difficult to assess the credibility of assessment results. MCDA techniques can indeed help structuring the problem and supporting a more transparent decision-making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abildtrup, J., Audsley, E., Fekete-Farkas, M., Giupponi, C., Gylling, M., Rosato, P., & Rounsevell, M. (2006). Socio-economic scenario development for the assessment of climate change impacts on agricultural land use: A pairwise comparison approach. Environmental Science and Policy, 9, 101–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abu-Taleb, M. F., & Mareschal, B. (1995). Water resources planning in the Middle East: Application of the PROMETHEE V multicriteria method. European Journal of Operational Research, 81, 500–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armsworth, P. R., Chan, K. M. A., Daily, G. C., Ehrlich, P. R., Kremen, C., Ricketts, T. H., & Sanjayan, M. A. (2007). Ecosystem-service science and the way forward for conservation. Conservation Biology, 21, 1383–1384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodini, A., & Giavelli, G. (1992). Multicriteria analysis as a tool to investigate compatibility between conservation and development on Salina Island, Aeolian Archipelago, Italy. Environmental Management, 16, 633–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, J., & Banzhaf, S. (2007). What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics, 63, 616–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M., & Vivas, M. B. (2005). Landscape Development Intensity Index. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 101, 289–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkhard, F., Kroll, F., Müller, F., & Windhorst, W. (2009). Landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services – A concept for land-cover based assessments. Landscape Online, 15, 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Nedkov, S., & Müller, F. (2012). Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecological Indicators, 21, 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkhard, B., Petrosillo, I., & Costanza, R. (2010). Ecosystem services – Bridging ecology, economy and social sciences. Ecological Complexity, 7, 257–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnus, J. M., Parrotta, J., Brockerhoff, E., Arbez, M., Jactel, H., Kremer, A., Lamb, D., OHara, K., & Walters, B. (2006). Planted forests and biodiversity. Journal of Forestry, 104, 65–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S. R., Mooney, H. A., Agard, J., Capistrano, D., Defries, R. S., Diaz, S., Dietz, T., Duraiappah, A. K., Oteng-Yeboah, A., Pereira, H. M., et al. (2009). Science for managing ecosystem services: Beyond the millennium ecosystem assessment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 1305–1312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carreño, L., Frank, F. C., & Viglizzo, E. F. (2012). Tradeoffs between economic and ecosystem services in Argentina during 50 years of land-use change. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 154, 68–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castella, J.-C., Trung, T. N., & Boissau, S. (2005). Participatory simulation of land-use changes in the Northern Mountains of Vietnam: The combined use of an agent-based model, a role-playing game, and a geographic information system. Ecology and Society, 10, 27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, K. M. A., Satterfield, T., & Goldstein, J. (2012). Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics, 74, 8–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatzinikolaou, P., Viaggi, D., & Raggi, M. (2015). The evaluation of ecosystem services production: An application in the Province of Ferrara. Bio-based and Applied Economics, 4(3), 235–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, W. W. L., Lam, V. W. Y., Sarmiento, J. L., Kearney, K., Watson, R., & Pauly, D. (2009). Projecting global marine biodiversity impacts under climate change scenarios. Fish and Fisheries, 10, 235–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CICES. (2013). The common international classification of ecosystem services. Report to the European Environment Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comino, E., Bottero, M., Pomarico, S., & Rosso, M. (2014). Exploring the environmental value of ecosystem services for a river basin through a spatial multicriteria analysis. Land Use Policy, 36, 381–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., & de Groot, R. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387, 253–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R., de Groot, R., Sutton, P., van der Ploeg, S., Anderson, S. J., Kubiszewski, I., Farber, S., & Turner, R. K. (2014). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 26, 152–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowling, R. M., Egoh, B., Knight, A. T., O’Farrell, P. J., Reyers, B., Rouget, M., Roux, D. J., Welz, A., & Wilhelm-Rechman, A. (2008). An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 9483–9488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, G. (1997). Nature’s services: Societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily, G. C., Polasky, S., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P. M., Mooney, H. A., Pejchar, L., Ricketts, T. H., Salzman, J., & Shallenberger, R. (2009). Ecosystem services in decision making: Time to deliver. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7, 21–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Groot, R. (1987). Environmental functions as a unifying concept for ecology and economics. Environmentalist, 7, 105–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Groot, R. (1992). Functions of nature: Evaluation of nature in environmental planning, management and decision making. Groningen: Wolters Noordhoff. 315 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Groot, R. (2006). Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable, multi-functional landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 75, 175–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Groot, R. S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., & Willemen, L. (2010). Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity, 7, 260–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Groot, R. S., Wilson, M. A., & Boumans, R. M. J. (2002). A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics, 41, 393–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diehl, K., Burkhard, B., & Jacob, K. (2016). Should the ecosystem services concept be used in European Commission impact assessment? Ecological Indicators, 61(Part 1), 6–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donner, S. D., Skirving, W. J., Little, C. M., Oppenheimer, M., & Hoegh-Guldberg, O. (2005). Global assessment of coral bleaching and required rates of adaptation under climate change. Global Change Biology, 11, 2251–2265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duinker, P. N., & Greig, L. A. (2007). Scenario analysis in environmental impact assessment: Improving explorations of the future. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27, 206–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EC. (2009). Consultation on the future “EU 2020” strategy. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. (2010). European Commission: Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. COM(2010) 2020, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. (2011). European Commission: Our life insurance, our natural capital: An EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. COM(2011) 244, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egoh, B., Drakou, E.G., Dunbar, M., Maes, J., & Willemen, L. (2012). Indicators for mapping ecosystem services: A review. Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egoh, B., Reyers, B., Rouget, M., Richardson, D. M., Le Maitre, D. C., & van Jaarsveld, A. S. (2008). Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 127, 135–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feld, C., Sousa, J., da Silva, P., & Dawson, T. (2010). Indicators for biodiversity and ecosystem services: Towards an improved framework for ecosystems assessment. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19, 2895–2919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, B., & Kerry Turner, R. (2008). Ecosystem services: Classification for valuation. Biological Conservation, 141, 1167–1169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, B., Turner, R. K., & Morling, P. (2009). Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics, 68, 643–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fontana, V., Radtke, A., Bossi Fedrigotti, V., Tappeiner, U., Tasser, E., Zerbe, S., & Buchholz, T. (2013). Comparing land-use alternatives: Using the ecosystem services concept to define a multi-criteria decision analysis. Ecological Economics, 93, 128–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galimberti, G., Raggi, M., & Viaggi, D. (2014). Landscape perception and ecosystem service uses: Some results from surveys and latent variable models. Deliverable 4.20 “Summary Report on Case Study Activity”.

    Google Scholar 

  • Girardin, P., Bockstaller, C., & Van der Werf, H. (2000). Assessment of potential impacts of agricultural practices on the environment: The AGRO*ECO method. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20, 227–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, M., & Diele, K. (2004). Asymmetric outcomes: Assessing central aspects of the biological, economic and social sustainability of a mangrove crab fishery, Ucides cordatus (Ocypodidae), in North Brazil. Ecological Economics, 49, 361–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Baggethun, E., de Groot, R., Lomas, P. L., & Montes, C. (2010). The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics, 69, 1209–1218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Limon, J. A., & Sanchez-Fernandez, G. (2010). Empirical evaluation of agricultural sustainability using composite indicators. Ecological Economics, 69, 1062–1075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorshkov, V. G., Gorshkov, V. V., & Makarieva, A. M. (2000). Biotic regulation of the environment. London: Springer, Published in association with Praxis Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo, M., Richter, G. M., Holland, R. A., Eigenbrod, F., Taylor, G., & Shah, N. (2016). Implementing land-use and ecosystem service effects into an integrated bioenergy value chain optimisation framework. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 91, 392–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haas, G., Wetterich, F., & Geier, U. (2000). Life cycle assessment framework in agriculture on the farm level. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 5, 345–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haas, G., Wetterich, F., & Köpke, U. (2001). Comparing intensive, extensified and organic grassland farming in southern Germany by process life cycle assessment. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 83, 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halberg, N., Verschuur, G., & Goodlass, G. (2005). Farm level environmental indicators; are they useful? An overview of green accounting systems for European farms. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 105, 195–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hein, L., van Koppen, K., de Groot, R. S., & van Ierland, E. C. (2006). Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics, 57(2), 209–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helliwell, D. R. (1969). Valuation of wildlife resources. Regional Studies, 3, 41–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hokkanen, J., & Salminen, P. (1997). Choosing a solid waste management system using multicriteria decision analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 98, 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooper, D. U., Chapin, F. S., Ewel, J. J., Hector, A., Inchausti, P., Lavorel, S., Lawton, J. H., Lodge, D. M., Loreau, M., Naeem, S., et al. (2005). Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: A consensus of current knowledge. Ecological Monographs, 75, 3–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J. B., Daily, G. C., & Ehrlich, P. R. (1997). Population diversity: Its extent and extinction. Science, 278, 689–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jetz, W., Wilcove, D. S., & Dobson, A. P. (2007). Projected impacts of climate and land-use change on the global diversity of birds. PLoS Biology, 5, e157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jopke, C., Kreyling, J., Maes, J., & Koellner, T. (2015). Interactions among ecosystem services across Europe: Bagplots and cumulative correlation coefficients reveal synergies, trade-offs, and regional patterns. Ecological Indicators, 49, 46–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kienast, F., Bolliger, J., Potschin, M., de Groot, R., Verburg, P., Heller, I., Wascher, D., & Haines-Young, R. (2009). Assessing landscape functions with broad-scale environmental data: Insights gained from a prototype development for Europe. Environmental Management, 44, 1099–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiker, G. A., Bridges, T. S., Varghese, A., Seager, T. P., & Linkov, I. (2005). Application of multicriteria decision analysis in environmental decision making. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 1, 95–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirchner, M., Schmidt, J., Kindermann, G., Kulmer, V., Mitter, H., Prettenthaler, F., Rüdisser, J., Schauppenlehner, T., Schönhart, M., Strauss, F., et al. (2015). Ecosystem services and economic development in Austrian agricultural landscapes — The impact of policy and climate change scenarios on trade-offs and synergies. Ecological Economics, 109, 161–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirchner, M., Schönhart, M., & Schmid, E. (2016). Spatial impacts of the CAP post-2013 and climate change scenarios on agricultural intensification and environment in Austria. Ecological Economics, 123, 35–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koschke, L., Fürst, C., Frank, S., & Makeschin, F. (2012). A multi-criteria approach for an integrated land-cover-based assessment of ecosystem services provision to support landscape planning. Ecological Indicators, 21, 54–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lautenbach, S., Kugel, C., Lausch, A., & Seppelt, R. (2011). Analysis of historic changes in regional ecosystem service provisioning using land use data. Ecological Indicators, 11, 676–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layke, C., Mapendembe, A., Brown, C., Walpole, M., & Winn, J. (2012). Indicators from the global and sub-global millennium ecosystem assessments: An analysis and next steps. Ecological Indicators, 17, 77–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luck, G. W., Daily, G. C., & Ehrlich, P. R. (2003). Population diversity and ecosystem services. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 18, 331–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundin, M., & Morrison, G. M. (2002). A life cycle assessment based procedure for development of environmental sustainability indicators for urban water systems. Urban Water, 4, 145–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lupp, G., Steinhäußer, R., Bastian, O., & Syrbe, R.-U. (2015). Impacts of increasing bioenergy use on ecosystem services on nature and society exemplified in the German district of Görlitz. Biomass and Bioenergy, 83, 131–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mace, G. M., Norris, K., & Fitter, A. H. (2012). Biodiversity and ecosystem services: A multilayered relationship. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 27, 19–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maes, J., Egoh, B., Willemen, L., Liquete, C., Vihervaara, P., Schägner, J. P., Grizzetti, B., Drakou, E. G., Notte, A. L., Zulian, G., et al. (2015). Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosystem Services, 1, 31–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Sastre, R., Ravera, F., González, J. A., López Santiago, C., Bidegain, I., & Munda, G. (2017). Mediterranean landscapes under change: Combining social multicriteria evaluation and the ecosystem services framework for land use planning. Land Use Policy, 67, 472–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza, G. A., & Prabhu, R. (2003). Qualitative multi-criteria approaches to assessing indicators of sustainable forest resource management. Forest Ecology and Management, 174, 329–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). (2003). Ecosystems and human well-being. In A framework for assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Wetlands and water synthesis report. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moberg, F., & Folke, C. (1999). Ecological goods and services of coral reef ecosystems. Ecological Economics, 29, 215–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moffett, A., Garson, J., & Sarkar, S. (2005). MultCSync: A software package for incorporating multiple criteria in conservation planning. Environmental Modelling and Software, 20, 1315–1322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. P., & Kennedy, P. E. (2009). The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and natural resource economics: An assessment. Environmental and Resource Economics, 42, 345–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newton, A. C., Hodder, K., Cantarello, E., Perrella, L., Birch, J. C., Robins, J., Douglas, S., Moody, C., & Cordingley, J. (2012). Cost–benefit analysis of ecological networks assessed through spatial analysis of ecosystem services. Journal of Applied Ecology, 49, 571–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norberg, J. (1999). Linking Nature’s services to ecosystems: Some general ecological concepts. Ecological Economics, 29, 183–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odum, E. P., & Odum, H. T. (1972). Natural areas as necessary components of man’s total environment (Vol. 37, pp. 178–189). In Transactions of the 37th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oikonomou, V., Dimitrakopoulos, P., & Troumbis, A. (2011). Incorporating ecosystem function concept in environmental planning and decision making by means of multi-criteria evaluation: The case-study of Kalloni, Lesbos, Greece. Environmental Management, 47, 77–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onate, J., Andersen, E., Peco, B., & Primdahl, J. (2000). Agri-environmental schemes and the European agricultural landscapes: The role of indicators as valuing tools for evaluation. Landscape Ecology, 15, 271–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pannell, D. J., & Glenn, N. A. (2000). A framework for the economic evaluation and selection of sustainability indicators in agriculture. Ecological Economics, 33, 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paracchini, M. L., & Capitani, C. (2011). Implementation of a EU wide indicator for the rural-agrarian landscape. In support of COM(2006)508 “Development of agri-environmental indicators for monitoring the integration of environmental concerns into the Common Agricultural Policy”.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paracchini, M. L., Pacini, C., Jones, M. L. M., & Pérez-Soba, M. (2011). An aggregation framework to link indicators associated with multifunctional land use to the stakeholder evaluation of policy options. Ecological Indicators, 11, 71–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patil, G. P., Brooks, R. P., Myers, W. L., Rapport, D. J., & Taillie, C. (2001). Ecosystem health and its measurement at landscape scale: Toward the next generation of quantitative assessments. Ecosystem Health, 7, 307–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D. W. (1993). Economic values and the natural world. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrings, C., Folke, C., & Maler, K.-G. (1992). The ecology and economics of biodiversity loss: The research agenda. Ambio, 21, 201–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrings, C., Naeem, S., Ahrestani, F. S., Bunker, D. E., Burkill, P., Canziani, G., Elmqvist, T., Fuhrman, J. A., Jaksic, F. M., Kawabata, Z., et al. (2011). Ecosystem services, targets, and indicators for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 9, 512–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polasky, S. (2008). What’s nature done for you lately: Measuring the value of ecosystem services. Choices, 23, 42–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posthumus, H., Rouquette, J. R., Morris, J., Gowing, D. J. G., & Hess, T. M. (2010). A framework for the assessment of ecosystem goods and services; a case study on lowland floodplains in England. Ecological Economics, 69, 1510–1523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasul, G., & Thapa, G. B. (2004). Sustainability of ecological and conventional agricultural systems in Bangladesh: An assessment based on environmental, economic and social perspectives. Agricultural Systems, 79, 327–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regan, H. M., Davis, F. W., Andelman, S. J., Widyanata, A., & Freese, M. (2006). Comprehensive criteria for biodiversity evaluation in conservation planning. Biodiversity and Conservation, 16, 2715–2728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, J. P., Beard, J., Douglas, T., Bennett, E. M., Cumming, G. S., Cork, S. J., Agard, J., Dobson, A. P., & Peterson, G. D. (2006). Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecology and Society, 11, 28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandhu, H. S., Wratten, S. D., Cullen, R., & Case, B. (2008). The future of farming: The value of ecosystem services in conventional and organic arable land. An experimental approach. Ecological Economics, 64, 835–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneiders, A., Van Daele, T., Van Landuyt, W., & Van Reeth, W. (2012). Biodiversity and ecosystem services: Complementary approaches for ecosystem management? Ecological Indicators, 21, 123–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Segura, M., Maroto, C., Belton, V., & Ginestar, C. (2015). A new collaborative methodology for assessment and management of ecosystem services. Forests, 6, 1696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seppelt, R., Dormann, C. F., Eppink, F. V., Lautenbach, S., & Schmidt, S. (2011). A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: Approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48, 630–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seppelt, R., Fath, B., Burkhard, B., Fisher, J. L., Grêt-Regamey, A., Lautenbach, S., Pert, P., Hotes, S., Spangenberg, J., Verburg, P. H., et al. (2012). Form follows function? Proposing a blueprint for ecosystem service assessments based on reviews and case studies. Ecological Indicators, 21, 145–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silvert, W. (2000). Fuzzy indices of environmental conditions. Ecological Modelling, 130, 111–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sitch, S., Huntingford, C., Gedney, N., Levy, P. E., Lomas, M., Piao, S. L., Betts, R., Ciais, P., Cox, P., Friedlingstein, P., et al. (2008). Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle, future plant geography and climate-carbon cycle feedbacks using five Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs). Global Change Biology, 14, 2015–2039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, T. J., & Scott, L. (1995). A scenario-based framework for multicriteria decision analysis in water resources planning. Water Resources Research, 31, 2835–2843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swetnam, R. D., Fisher, B., Mbilinyi, B. P., Munishi, P. K. T., Willcock, S., Ricketts, T., Mwakalila, S., Balmford, A., Burgess, N. D., Marshall, A. R., et al. (2011). Mapping socio-economic scenarios of land cover change: A GIS method to enable ecosystem service modelling. Journal of Environmental Management, 92, 563–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TEEB. (2010a). The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • TEEB. (2010b). A quick guide to the economics of ecosystems and biodiversity for local and regional policy makers. www.teebweb.org.

  • Thomas, C. D., Cameron, A., Green, R. E., Bakkenes, M., Beaumont, L. J., Collingham, Y. C., Erasmus, B. F. N., de Siqueira, M. F., Grainger, A., Hannah, L., et al. (2004). Extinction risk from climate change. Nature, 427, 145–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, R. K., & Daily, G. C. (2008). The ecosystem services framework and natural capital conservation. Environmental and Resource Economics, 39, 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Cauwenbergh, N., Biala, K., Bielders, C., Brouckaert, V., Franchois, L., Garcia Cidad, V., Hermy, M., Mathijs, E., Muys, B., Reijnders, J., et al. (2007). SAFE—A hierarchical framework for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 120, 229–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Zanten, B., Verburg, P., Espinosa, M., Gomez-y-Paloma, S., Galimberti, G., Kantelhardt, J., Kapfer, M., Lefebvre, M., Manrique, R., Piorr, A., et al. (2014). European agricultural landscapes, common agricultural policy and ecosystem services: A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 34, 309–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Zanten, B. T., Zasada, I., Koetse, M. J., Ungaro, F., Häfner, K., & Verburg, P. H. (2016). A comparative approach to assess the contribution of landscape features to aesthetic and recreational values in agricultural landscapes. Ecosystem Services, 17, 87–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verburg, P. H., Schulp, C. J. E., Witte, N., & Veldkamp, A. (2006). Downscaling of land use change scenarios to assess the dynamics of European landscapes. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 114, 39–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viaggi, D. (2015). Special section: Exploring the contribution of landscape management to the rural economy. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58, 2082–2087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vira, B., & Adams, W. M. (2009). Ecosystem services and conservation strategy: Beware the silver bullet. Conservation Letters, 2, 158–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, K. J. (2007). Classification of ecosystem services: Problems and solutions. Biological Conservation, 139, 235–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, J.-L. (2007). Implementation of land and ecosystem accounts at the European Environment Agency. Ecological Economics, 61, 695–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegner, G., & Pascual, U. (2011). Cost-benefit analysis in the context of ecosystem services for human well-being: A multidisciplinary critique. Global Environmental Change, 21, 492–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiggering, H., Dalchow, C., Glemnitz, M., Helming, K., Müller, K., Schultz, A., Stachow, U., & Zander, P. (2006). Indicators for multifunctional land use—Linking socio-economic requirements with landscape potentials. Ecological Indicators, 6, 238–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willemen, L., Hein, L., van Mensvoort, M. E. F., & Verburg, P. H. (2010). Space for people, plants, and livestock? Quantifying interactions among multiple landscape functions in a Dutch rural region. Ecological Indicators, 10, 62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M. A., & Carpenter, S. R. (1999). Economic valuation of freshwater ecosystem services in the United States: 1971–1997. Ecological Applications, 9, 772–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • WRI. (2005). Managing ecosystems to fight poverty. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xenopoulos, M. A., Lodge, D. M., Alcamo, J., Märker, M., Schulze, K., & Van Vuuren, D. P. (2005). Scenarios of freshwater fish extinctions from climate change and water withdrawal. Global Change Biology, 11, 1557–1564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiang, W.-N., & Clarke, K. C. (2003). The use of scenarios in land-use planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 30, 885–909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahm, F., Viaux, P., Vilain, L., Girardin, P., & Mouchet, C. (2008). Assessing farm sustainability with the IDEA method – from the concept of agriculture sustainability to case studies on farms. Sustainable Development, 16, 271–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerger, A., Warren, G., Hill, P., Robertson, D., Weidemann, A., & Lawton, K. (2011). Multi-criteria assessment for linking regional conservation planning and farm-scale actions. Environmental Modelling and Software, 26, 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Parthena Chatzinikolaou & Davide Viaggi

  2. Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Meri Raggi

Authors
  1. Parthena Chatzinikolaou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Davide Viaggi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Meri Raggi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Parthena Chatzinikolaou .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain

    Julio Berbel

  2. Department of Agricultural Economics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Thomas Bournaris

  3. Department of Agricultural Economics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Basil Manos

  4. Decision Support Systems Laboratory, Technical University of Crete, Chania, Greece

    Nikolaos Matsatsinis

  5. Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Davide Viaggi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Chatzinikolaou, P., Viaggi, D., Raggi, M. (2018). Review of Multicriteria Methodologies and Tools for the Evaluation of the Provision of Ecosystem Services. In: Berbel, J., Bournaris, T., Manos, B., Matsatsinis, N., Viaggi, D. (eds) Multicriteria Analysis in Agriculture. Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76929-5_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation