References

sergeogr

Известия Российской академии наук. Серия географическая

Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya

2587-55662658-6975

10.31857/S2587556622040069

sergeogr-1591

Research Article

Природопользование и геоэкология

Natural Recourse Use and Geoecology

Оценка экосистемных услуг на муниципальном уровне и ее возможная интеграция в территориальное планирование

Assessment of Ecosystem Services at the Municipal Level and Its Possible Integration into Spatial Planning

Климанова

О. А.

Klimanova

O. A.

Географический факультет МГУ им. М.В. Ломоносова.

Москва.

Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University.

Moscow.

klimanova@geogr.msu.ru

Букварёва

Е. Н.

Bukvareva

E. N.

Москва.

Moscow.

bukvareva@gmail.com

Илларионова

О. А.

Illarionova

O. A.

Географический факультет МГУ им. М.В. Ломоносова.

Москва.

Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University.

Moscow.

heatherpaw@gmail.com

Колбовский

Е. Ю.

Kolbowsky

E. Yu.

Географический факультет МГУ им. М.В. Ломоносова.

Москва.

Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University.

Moscow.

kolbowsky@mail.ru

Московский государственный университет имени М.В. ЛомоносоваРоссияMoscow State UniversityRussian Federation

Центр охраны дикой природыРоссияBiodiversity Conservation CenterRussian Federation

2022

17092022

864605620

2022

Климанова О.А., Букварёва Е.Н., Илларионова О.А., Колбовский Е.Ю.

Klimanova O.A., Bukvareva E.N., Illarionova O.A., Kolbowsky E.Y.

Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://izvestia.igras.ru/jour/article/view/1591

В рамках проекта “Экономика экосистем и биоразнообразия – Россия” уже разработаны методические подходы и отчасти создана информационная база для оценки экосистемных услуг на уровне субъектов РФ, однако их большая площадь и географическая неоднородность определяют необходимость таких работ и для муниципального уровня. В статье рассматриваются методика и результаты оценки экосистемных услуг на примере четырех сельских муниципальных районов с разными природными условиями и типами хозяйства (Кизнерский район Удмуртской Республики, Елизовский район Камчатского края, Майкопский район Республики Адыгея и Бобровский район Воронежской области). Алгоритм оценки ориентирован на использование общедоступных геопространственных данных, муниципальной статистики, литературных и фондовых данных. Процедура оценки включает: 1) анализ и картографирование основных типов экосистем; 2) расчет потенциального объема продукционных, средорегулирующих и рекреационных услуг в естественно-научных показателях; 3) расчет используемого объема этих услуг; 4) анализ соотношения между ними. Во всех районах отмечено недоиспользование тех или иных видов продукционных услуг, однако в каждом из них причины этого различны. Ряд услуг требует и корректировки методики подсчета. По объему услуги накопления стока наземными экосистемами максимальные показатели отмечены в Елизовском и Майкопском районах, однако в последнем уже отмечены и признаки ее дефицита. Расчет используемого объема рекреационных услуг в наименьшей степени может быть унифицирован и при существующей информационной базе для каждого муниципального района не может быть осуществлен. По результатам работы выявлены методические сложности при переходе с регионального на муниципальный уровень расчетов, определены сложности и перспективы интеграции ценности экосистемных услуг в документы стратегического и территориального планирования, предложены приоритеты оценки экосистемных услуг для территорий разного типа.

Within the framework of the TEEB-Russia project methodological approaches have already been developed and, partly, an information base has been created for assessing ecosystem services at the Russian federal subjects’ level, but the large federal subjects’ area and their geographical heterogeneity determine the need for such work at the municipal level. The article discusses the methodology and results of the assessment of ecosystem services on the example of 4 rural municipal districts with different natural conditions and types of economy (Kiznersky district of the Udmurt Republic, Yelizovsky district of Kamchatka krai, Maykopsky district of the Republic of Adygea, and Bobrovsky district of Voronezh oblast). The evaluation algorithm is focused on the use of publicly available geospatial data, open thematic data, municipal statistics, as well as literary and stock data. The evaluation procedure includes: (1) analysis and mapping of the main types of ecosystems; (2) calculation of the proposed (potential) volume of productive, environmental and recreational services in natural science indicators; (3) calculation of the volume of these services used (depends on the population and consumption pattern); (4) analysis of the relationship between them. The low exploitation rate of certain types of production services was noted in all districts, however, the reasons for this situation are different in each of them, and a number of services require adjustment of the calculation methodology. In terms of the volume of runoff accumulation services by terrestrial ecosystems, the maximum indicators were noted in the Yelizovsky and Maykopsky districts, however, signs of its deficiency have already been noted in the latter. The calculation of the volume of recreational services used can be unified to the least extent and cannot be carried out with the existing information base for each municipal district. Based on the results of the work, methodological difficulties were identified in the transition from the regional level of calculation to the municipal level of calculation, difficulties and prospects for integrating the value of ecosystem services into strategic and territorial planning documents were identified, priorities for assessing ecosystem services for different types of territories were proposed.

экосистемные услугипотенциальный и используемый объемтерриториальное планированиемуниципальный районРоссия

ecosystem servicessupplied volumeconsumed volumeassessmentplanningregionmunicipal district

Часть исследований выполнена в рамках ГЗ “Анализ региональных геоэкологических проблем в условиях глобальных изменений окружающей среды” кафедры физической географии мира и геоэкологии географического факультета МГУ имени М.В. Ломоносова. Авторы выражают благодарность администрациям пилотных регионов, оказавшим содействие в проведении интервью и обеспечении информацией.

Part of the research was carried out within the framework of the State Program “Analysis of regional environmental problems in the context of global environmental changes” of the Chair of World Physical Geography and Environmental Studies, Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University. The authors express their gratitude to the administrations of Kiznersky, Elizovsky, and Maikopsky districts who assisted in conducting interviews and providing information.

References1

Барталев С.А., Егоров В.А., Жарко В.О., Лупян Е.А., Плотников Д.Е., Хвостиков С.А., Шабанов Н.В. Спутниковое картографирование растительного покрова России. М.: ИКИ РАН, 2016. 208 с.

Bagstad K.J., Semmens D.J., Winthrop R. A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation. Ecosyst. Serv., 2013, vol. 5, pp. 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.07.004

Бобылев C.H., Захаров В.М. Экосистемные услуги и экономика. М.: Институт устойчивого развития/Центр экологической политики России, 2009. 72 с.

Bartalev S.A., Egorov V.A., Zharko V.O., Lupyan E.A., Plotnikov D.E., Hvostikov S.A., Shabanov N.V. Sputnikovoe kartografirovanie rastitel’nogo pokrova Rossii [Remote Sensing Mapping of Vegetation Cover of Russia]. Moscow: IKI RAN, 2016. 208 p.

Большаков Б.М. Состояние и перспективы использования недревесных ресурсов леса: Сб. статей Междунар. науч.-практ. конф. (Кострома, 10–11 сентября, 2014 г.). Пушкино: ВНИИЛМ, 2014. С. 7–11.

Bateman I.J., Harwood A.R., Termansen M. Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: Land use in the United Kingdom. Sci., 2013, vol. 341, pp. 45– 50. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1234379

Егоров В.А., Барталев С.А., Колбудаев П.А., Плотников Д.Е., Хвостиков С.А. Карта растительного покрова России, полученная по данным спутниковой системы Proba-V // Современные проблемы дистанционного зондирования Земли из космоса. 2018. Т. 15. № 2. С. 282–286.

Bobylev C.H., Zakharov V.M. Ekosistemnye uslugi i ekonomika [Ecosystem Services and Economy]. Moscow: Inst. Ustoichivogo Razvitiya. Tsentr Ekol. Politiki Rossii, 2009. 72 p.

Климанова О.А., Колбовский Е.Ю., Илларионова О.А., Землянский Д.Ю. Концепция экологической емкости: современное содержание и алгоритм оценки для разных типов туристских территорий // Вестн. Санкт-Петербург. ун-та. Науки о Земле. 2021. Т. 66. № 4. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu07.2021.409

Bol’shakov B.M. Status and prospects for the use of nontimber forest resources. In Sb. statei Mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf., Kostroma, 10–11 sentyabrya 2014 [Proc. Int. Sci. Conf., Kostroma, September 10–11, 2014]. Pushkino: VNIILM, 2014, pp. 7–11. (In Russ.).

Национальный атлас России. М., 2007. Т. 2. С. 331.

Bouwma I., Schleyer C., Primmer E., Winkler K.J., Berry P., Young J., Carmen E., Špulerová J., Bezák P., Preda E., Vadineanui A. Adoption of the ecosystem services concept in EU policies. Ecosyst. Serv., 2018, vol. 29, pp. 213–222.

Радченко Л.М. Оценка состояния растительности: луга и тундры. Екатеринбург: Изд-во Урал. ун-та, 2016. 86 с.

Braat L.C., de Groot R. The ecosystem services agenda: bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy. Ecosyst. Serv., 2012, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 4–15.

Солдатова И.Э., Солдатов Э.Д., Хаирбеков С.У. Состояние и рациональное использование горных лугопастбищных угодий Северного Кавказа // Горное сельское хозяйство. 2017. № 3. С. 44–49.

Bukvareva E., Zamolodchikov D., Narykov A. Supplied, demanded and consumed ecosystem services: Prospects for national assessment in Russia. Ecol. Indicators, 2017, vol. 78, pp. 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.03.034

Тишков А.А. Биосферные функции природных экосистем России. М.: Наука, 2005. 309 с.

Bukvareva E., Zamolodchikov D., Grunewald K. National assessment of ecosystem services in Russia: Methodology and main problems. Sci. Total Env., 2019, vol. 655, pp. 1181–1196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.286

Экосистемные услуги России: Прототип национального доклада. Т. 1. Услуги наземных экосистем / ред.-сост. Е.Н. Букварёва, Д.Г. Замолодчиков. М.: Изд-во Центра охраны дикой природы, 2016. 148 с.

Bukvareva E.N., Grunewald K., Bastian O. The current state of knowledge of ecosystems and ecosystem services in Russia: A status report. Ambio, 2015, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 491–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0674-4

Экосистемные услуги России: Прототип национального доклада. Т. 2. Биоразнообразие и экосистемные услуги: принципы учета в Российской Федерации / сост. Е.Н. Букварёва / ред. Е.Н. Букварева, Т.В. Свиридова. М.: Изд-во Центра охраны дикой природы, 2020. 220 с.

Burkhard B., Kroll F., Müller F. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol. Indicators, 2012, vol. 21, pp. 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.019

Bagstad K.J., Semmens D.J., Waage S., Winthrop R. A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation // Ecosys. Services. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.07.004

Daily G.C., Polasky S., Shallenberger R. Ecosystem services in decision making: Time to deliver. Front. Ecol. Environ., 2009, vol. 105, no. 28, pp. 9455–9456. https://doi.org/10.1890/080025

Bateman I.J., Harwood A.R., Mace G.M. et al. Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: Land use in the United Kingdom // Science. 2013. Vol. 341 (6141). P. 45–50. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1234379

De Groot R.S., Alkemade R., Braat L., Hein L., Willemen L. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol. Complexity, 2010, vol. 7, pp. 260–272.

Bouwma I., Schleyer C., Primmer E. et al. Adoption of the ecosystem services concept in EU policies // Ecosys. Services. 2018. Vol. 29. P. 213–222.

Egoh B., Reyers B., van Jaarsveld A.S. Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management. Agriculture, Ecosyst. Environ., 2008, vol. 127, pp. 135–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2008.03.013

Braat L.C., de Groot R. The ecosystem services agenda: bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy // Ecosys. Services. 2012. Vol. 1 (1). P. 4–15.

Egorov V.A., Bartalev S.A., Kolbudaev P.A., Plotnikov D.E., Khvostikov S.A. Vegetation map of Russia obtained from the data of the Proba-V satellite system. Sovremennye Probl. Distantsionnogo Zondirovaniya Zemli iz Kosmosa, 2018, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 282–286. (In Russ.).

Bukvareva E., Zamolodchikov D., Kraev G. et al. Supplied, demanded and consumed ecosystem services: Prospects for national assessment in Russia // Ecol. Indicators. 2017. Vol. 78. P. 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.03.034

Ekosistemnye uslugi Rossii: Prototip natsional’nogo doklada [Ecosystem Services of Russia: Prototype of National Report]. Vol. 1: Uslugi nazemnykh ekosistem [Terrestrial Ecosystems Services]. Bukvaryova D.G., Zamolodchikov E.N., Eds. Moscow: Tsentr Okhrany Dikoi Prirody, 2016. 148 p.

Bukvareva E., Zamolodchikov D., Grunewald K. National assessment of ecosystem services in Russia: Methodology and main problems // Sci. of the Total Environ. 2019. Vol. 655. P. 1181–1196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.286

Ekosistemnye uslugi Rossii: Prototip natsional’nogo doklada [Ecosystem Services of Russia: Prototype of National Report]. Vol. 2: Bioraznoobrazie i ekosistemnye uslugi: printsipy ucheta v Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Accounting Principles in Russia]. Bukvareva E.N., Sviridova T.V., Eds. Moscow: Tsentr Okhrany Dikoi Prirody, 2020. 220 p.

Bukvareva E.N., Grunewald K., Bobylev S. et al. The current state of knowledge of ecosystems and ecosystem services in Russia: A status report // Ambio. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0674-4

Farber S.C., Costanza R., Wilson M.A. Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecol. Econ., 2002, vol. 41, pp. 375–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00088-5

Burkhard B., Kroll F., Nedkov S., Müller F. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets // Ecol. Indicators. 2012. Vol. 21. P. 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.019

Frank S., Fürst C., Makeschin F.A. Contribution towards a transfer of the ecosystem service concept to landscape planning using landscape metrics. Ecol. Indicators, 2012, vol. 21, pp. 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.027

Daily G.C., Polasky S., Goldstein J. et al. Ecosystem services in decision making: Time to deliver // Frontiers in Ecol. and the Environ. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1890/080025

Haines-Young R., Potschin M.B. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the Application of the Revised Structure. Nottingham: Centre for Environmental Management, 2018.

Hansen M.C., Potapov P.V., Moore R. et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science, 2013, vol. 342, no. 6160, pp. 850–853.

Egoh B., Reyers B., Rouget M. et al. Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management // Agriculture, Ecosys. and Environ. 2008. Vol. 127. P. 135–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2008.03.013

IPBES. Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Brondizio E.S., Settele J., Díaz S., Ngo H.T., Eds. Bonn: IPBES, 2019. 300 p.

Farber S.C., Costanza R., Wilson M.A. Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services // Ecol. Econ. 2002. Vol. 41. P. 375–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00088-5

Klimanova O.A., Kolbovskii E.Yu., Illarionova O.A., Zemlyanskii D.Yu. The concept of ecological capacity: the modern idea and algorithm of touristic territories assessment. Vestn. SPbGU. Nauki o Zemle, 2021, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 806–830. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu07.2021.409

Frank S., Fürst C., Koschke L., Makeschin F. A contribution towards a transfer of the ecosystem service concept to landscape planning using landscape metrics // Ecol. Indicators. 2012. Vol. 21. P. 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.027

Maes J., Egoh B., Bidoglio G. Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst. Serv., 2012, vol. 201, no. 21, pp. 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.06.004

Haines-Young R., Potschin M.B. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the Application of the Revised Structure, 2018.

Malinga R., Gordon L.J., Lindborg R. Mapping ecosystem services across scales and continents–A review. Ecosyst. Serv., 2015, vol. 13, pp. 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.01.006

Hansen M.C., Potapov P.V., Moore R. et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change // Science. 2013. Vol. 342. № 6160. P. 850–853.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis. Washington DC, US: Island Press, 2005. 137 p.

IPBES. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services / E.S. Brondizio, J. Settele, S. Díaz, H.T. Ngo (Eds.). Bonn: IPBES, 2019. 300 p.

Natsional’nyi atlas Rossii [National Atlas of Russia]. Moscow: Roskartografia, 2007. 331 p.

Maes J., Egoh B., Willemen L. et al. Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union // Ecosys. Services. 2012. Vol. 201. № 21. P. 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.06.004

Nowak D.J., Hirabayashi S., Doyle M. Air pollution removal by urban forests in Canada and its effect on air quality and human health. Urban For. Urban Green., 2018, vol. 29, pp. 40–48.

Malinga R., Gordon L.J., Jewitt G., Lindborg R. Mapping ecosystem services across scales and continents // Ecosys. Services. 2015. Vol. 13. P. 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.01.006

Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation. Version 2 (RUSLE2) (for the model with release date of May 20, 2008) Science Documentation. Washington DC, US: USDA-Agricultural Research Service, 2013. 330 p.

MEA. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington DC: Island Press, 2005. 137 p.

Radchenko L.M. Otsenka sostoyaniya rastitel'nosti: luga i tundry [Vegetation assessment: meadows and tundra]. Ekaterinburg: Izd-vo Ural. Univ., 2016. 86 p.

Nowak D.J. Hirabayashi S., Doyle M. et al. Air pollution removal by urban forests in Canada and its effect on air quality and human health // Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2018. Vol. 29. P. 40–48.

Soldatova I.E., Soldatov E.D., Hairbekov S.U. State and rational use of mountain meadows-pasture lands of the North Caucasu. Gornoe sel'skoe khozyaistvo, 2017, no. 3, pp. 44–49.

Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation Version 2 (RUSLE2) (for the model with release date of May 20, 2008) Science Documentation. USDA-Agricultural Research Service. Washington, D.C., 2013. 330 p.

Saarikoski H., Primmer E., Young J. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosyst. Serv., 2018, vol. 29, pp. 579–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019

Saarikoski H., Primmer E., Saarela S.R. et al. Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice // Ecosys. Services. 2018. Vol. 29. P. 579–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019

Sherrouse B.C., Clement J.M., Semmens D.J. A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services. Appl. Geogr., 2011, vol. 31, pp. 748–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.08.002

Sherrouse B.C., Clement J.M., Semmens D.J. A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services // Applied Geogr. 2011. Vol. 31. P. 748–760.

Spangenberg J.H., Settele J. Precisely incorrect? Monetising the value of ecosystem services. Ecol. Complexity, 2010, vol. 7, pp. 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.04.007

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.08.002

Syrbe R.-U., Schorcht M., Grunewald K., Meinel G. Indicators for a nationwide monitoring of ecosystem services in Germany exemplified by the mitigation of soil erosion by water // Ecol. Indicators. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.05.035

Spangenberg J.H., Settele J. Precisely incorrect? Monetising the value of ecosystem services // Ecol. Complexity. 2010. Vol. 7. P. 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.04.007

Kumar P. TEEB: Foundations, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations. London, UK: Earthscan, 2012. 456 p.

Syrbe R-U., Schorcht M., Grunewald K., Meinel G. Indicators for a nationwide monitoring of ecosystem services in Germany exemplified by the mitigation of soil erosion by water // Ecol. Indicators. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.05.035

D’yakonov K.N., Khoroshev A.V. Teoriya i metodologiya landshaftnogo planirovaniya [Theory and Methodology of Landscape Planning]. Moscow: KMK Publ., 2019. 444 p.

TEEB. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations. London: Earthscan, 2010.

Tishkov A.A. Biosfernye funktsii prirodnykh ekosistem Rossii [Biosphere Functions of the Natural Ecosystems of Russia]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2005. 309 p.

Turnpenny J., Russel D., Jordan A. The challenge of embedding an ecosystem services approach: patterns of knowledge utilisation in public policy appraisal // Environ. Plan. C: Government Policy. 2014. Vol. 32 (2). P. 247–262.

Turnpenny J., Russel D., Jordan A. The challenge of embedding an ecosystem services approach: patterns of knowledge utilisation in public policy appraisal. Environ. Plann. C: Government Policy, 2014, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 247–262.

Verhagen W., Verburg P., Schulp N., Stürck J. Mapping ecosystem services. In J. Bouma & P. Ecosystem Services: From Concept to Practice / Van Beukering (Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2015. P. 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107477612.006

Verhagen W., Verburg P., Schulp N., Stürck, J. Mapping ecosystem services. In Ecosystem Services: From Concept to Practice. Bouma J., Van Beukering P., Eds. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2015, pp. 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107477612.006

Vrebos D., Staes J., Vandenbroucke T. et al. Mapping ecosystem service flows with land cover scoring maps for data-scarce regions // Ecosys. Services. 2015. Vol. 13. P. 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.11.005

Vrebos D., Staes J., Meire P. Mapping ecosystem service f lows with land cover scoring maps for data-scarce regions. Ecosyst. Serv., 2015, vol. 13, pp. 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.11.005

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.