ARTCULO I :

Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice

ABSTRAC
The promise that ecosystem service assessments will contribute to better decision-making is not
yet proven. We analyse how knowledge on ecosystem services is actually used to inform land and
water management in 22 case studies covering different social-ecological systems in European
and Latin American countries. None of the case studies reported instrumental use of knowledge in
a sense that ecosystem service knowledge would have served as an impartial arbiter between
policy options. Yet, in most cases, there was some evidence of conceptual learning as a result of
close interaction between researchers, practitioners and stakeholders. We observed several
factors that constrained knowledge uptake, including competing interests and political agendas,
scientific disputes, professional norms and competencies, and lack of vertical and horizontal
integration. Ecosystem knowledge played a small role particularly in those planning and policy-
making situations where it challenged established interests and the current distribution of benefits
from ecosystems. The factors that facilitated knowledge use included application of transparent
participatory methods, social capital, policy champions and clear synergies between ecosystem
services and human well-being. The results are aligned with previous studies which have
emphasized the importance of building local capacity, ownership and trust for the long-term
success of ecosystem service research (1)

Artculo II

Ecosystem services in cities: Towards the international legal protection of ecosystem

services in urban environments

ABSTRAC
Biodiversity provides many ecosystem services in cities that are beneficial to human well-being
including adaptation to the effects of climate change and positive effects of nature on human health.
Rapid urbanization however is causing an adverse impact on biodiversity and the ecosystem
services they provide. Protecting and restoring urban biodiversity and ecosystem services can
increase human well-being of the rapidly increasing urban population. Today, however, the
international biodiversity conservation practice mainly focuses on rural areas, and not on urban
conservation and restoration. Within city scale, there are several opportunities to green urban living,
such as green infrastructure and urban parks and nature reserves. This paper investigates the
current scientific practices for promoting and protecting ecosystem services in urban areas.
Secondly, the authors review and assess the legally binding instruments on biodiversity at the
international and EU level in order to see if there are sufficient existing mechanisms for protection
of ecosystem services in urban areas. Thirdly, the paper elaborates on the Aichi Targets in order
to explore whether or not these targets are enough to facilitate the protection and enhancement of
ecosystem services in urban areas as swiftly as they are needed. (2)
Artculo III
Future impacts of changing land-use and climate on ecosystem services of mountain
grassland and their resilience
Abstrac
Although the ecosystem services provided by mountain grasslands have been demonstrated to be
highly vulnerable to environmental and management changes in the past, it remains unclear how
they will be affected in the face of a combination of further land-use/cover changes and accelerating
climate change. Moreover, the resilience of ecosystem services has not been sufficiently analysed
under future scenarios. This study aimed to assess future impacts on multiple mountain grassland
ecosystem services and their resilience. For a study area in the Central Alps (Stubai Valley,
Austria), six ecosystem services were quantified using plant trait-based models for current and
future conditions (in 2050 and 2100) considering three socio-economic scenarios. Under all
scenarios, the greatest changes in ecosystem services were related to the natural reforestation of
abandoned grassland, causing a shift from grassland to forest services. Although the high
resilience potential of most ecosystem services will be maintained in the future, climate change
seems to have negative impacts, especially on the resilience of forage production. Thus, decision
makers and farmers will be faced with the higher vulnerability of ecosystem services of mountain
grassland. Future policies should consider both socio-economic and environmental dynamics to
manage valuable ecosystem services.(3)

Referencias Bibliogrficas
1. Saarikoski H, Primmer E, Saarela S-R, Antunes P, Aszals R, Bar F, et al. Institutional
challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. Ecosyst Serv [Internet]. 11 de
septiembre de 2017 [citado 3 de octubre de 2017]; Disponible en:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041617300141

2. Sirakaya A, Cliquet A, Harris J. Ecosystem services in cities: Towards the international legal
protection of ecosystem services in urban environments. Ecosyst Serv [Internet]. 18 de enero
de 2017 [citado 3 de octubre de 2017]; Disponible en:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041617300128

3. Schirpke U, Kohler M, Leitinger G, Fontana V, Tasser E, Tappeiner U. Future impacts of

changing land-use and climate on ecosystem services of mountain grassland and their
resilience. Ecosyst Serv. 1 de agosto de 2017;26(Part A):79-94.