Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTzilivakis, John
dc.contributor.authorWarner, Douglas
dc.contributor.authorGreen, Andrew
dc.contributor.authorLewis, Kathleen
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-16T12:30:09Z
dc.date.available2019-01-16T12:30:09Z
dc.date.issued2019-02-01
dc.identifier.citationTzilivakis , J , Warner , D , Green , A & Lewis , K 2019 , ' Spatial analysis of the benefits and burdens of ecological focus areas for water-related ecosystem services vulnerable to climate change in Europe ' , Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change , vol. 24 , no. 2 , pp. 205-233 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-018-9807-y
dc.identifier.issn1381-2386
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-1672-5968/work/62748110
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0001-7666-5584/work/62748162
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0003-4511-6712/work/62748548
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-9136-9713/work/62749610
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2299/20965
dc.description.abstractThere are many concerns regarding the effects of climate change including threats to ecosystem services. Rural land use can influence these services and there is scope for associated policies to steer decisions towards maximising benefits and minimising burdens. In Europe, for example, ecological focus areas (EFAs), introduced in the last reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, can have impacts on ecosystem services which vary with location, including potential trade-offs between benefits and burdens in some regions. This study combines the outputs from two continental-scale projects to provide a new perspective on the potential impact of EFAs for water-related ecosystem services under threat from climate change. An ecosystem service impact indicator framework was applied in conjunction with a climate change vulnerability assessment. This resulted in vulnerability and area weighted performance scores for dilution, filtration, water provision, and flood regulation services for 10 EFAs in 1256 regions. Best, average and worst case scenario maps were created that highlight the relative benefits and burdens of EFAs. Six EFAs have been identified which have not been activated in nine European Member States but which have potential to provide benefits. Eleven Member States have been identified which have regions where 3 EFAs should be avoided due to potential burdens. This analysis facilitates broad spatial targeting on a continental-scale of specific EFAs which may help maintain (and ideally increase) ecosystem service capacity and resilience in vulnerable regions.en
dc.format.extent29
dc.format.extent2961221
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofMitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change
dc.subjectClimate change
dc.subjectEcological focus areas
dc.subjectEcosystem services
dc.subjectWater
dc.subjectGlobal and Planetary Change
dc.subjectEcology
dc.titleSpatial analysis of the benefits and burdens of ecological focus areas for water-related ecosystem services vulnerable to climate change in Europeen
dc.contributor.institutionDepartment of Biological and Environmental Sciences
dc.contributor.institutionAgriculture and Environment Research Unit
dc.contributor.institutionAgriculture, Food and Veterinary Sciences
dc.contributor.institutionGeography, Environment and Agriculture
dc.contributor.institutionSchool of Life and Medical Sciences
dc.contributor.institutionAgriculture and Environmental Management Research
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
dc.identifier.urlhttp://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044768541&partnerID=8YFLogxK
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1007/s11027-018-9807-y
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
herts.preservation.rarelyaccessedtrue


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record