Spatial dynamics of ecosystem service flows: A comprehensive approach to quantifying actual services

By Kenneth J. Bagstad, G. Johnson, B. Voigt, F. Villa. 2013

592 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f768d0c5f0b2797211d66796c9bc42ee6b51c2a3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. Mark J. Whittingham
2. K. Evans
3. Jonathan Storkey
4. Julia P. G. Jones
5. C. Stevens
6. Sven Wunder
7. Lindsay C. Stringer
8. A. Dougill

In Global and Planetary Change

1. Benjamin Burkhard
2. Julia P. G. Jones
3. M. Reed
4. Ying Hou
5. Marion Kandziora
6. B. Locatelli
7. Felix Müller
8. T. Kroeger

Citations in the corpus

• Stocks and flows of natural and human-derived capital in ecosystem services (2016, background): “148 It is generally accepted now that to accurately characterise and quantify a particular service, the 149 beneficiaries need to be precisely defined (Bagstad et al. 2013).”
• Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands-concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification (2014, background): “Flows of ecosystem goods and services from SPUs to SBAs can take place via service connecting areas (SCAs; Syrbe & Walz 2012) or certain ‘carriers’ (Bagstad et al. 2013b).”
• The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation (2015, background): “, 2011), ARIES (Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services; Bagstad et al., 2012), or the proprietary NAISTM (Natural Assets Information System; based on Troy and Wilson, 2006) generate spatially-explicit, Geographic Information System-based estimates of ecosystem service flows.”
• A place-based approach to payments for ecosystem services (2017, methodology): “A variety of modelling approaches have been used to assess and visualise: flows of ecosystem services to beneficiaries (Bagstad et al., 2013); supply and societal demand for ecosystem services (Burkhard et al., 2012); uncertainties in ecosystem service stocks and services (Crossman et al., 2013);…”
• Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services in Costa Rica (2013, background): “Attention has been recently given to the scale of ES provision, the location of beneficiaries, and the flows of ES from ecosystems to humans, which are particularly relevant for spatially-confined ES (Locatelli et al. 2011b; Bagstad et al. 2013; Luck et al. 2012; Schröter et al. 2012).”