Ecosystem services Ecosystem services are simply the benefits ecosystems provide to human wellbeing. The choice of the word services becomes clearer when the direct contribution of water to us is considered, for example. The concept of ecosystems providing us with services was catalysed in the early 2000s when the UN-led Millennium Ecosystem Assessment defined a number of services that ranged, among others, from food, timber, fuel and fibre through air quality and waste processing, to cultural value and amenity. These services may be categorized into three broad groups: provisioning, regulating and cultural ecosystem services. Respective examples are the provision of food, the control of climate or disease, and the recreational benefit of ecosystems. Key insights for ecosystem services The assessment of ecosystem services is a complex matter – as is meaningfully communicating findings to scientists, politicians and land users alike.4 Various decisions about land use lead to differing trade-offs, as one or other ecosystem service responds differently, and as interactions between different services emerge. Potential conflicts can occur between economic interests and ecological, social and cultural values. Less intensive management of a production system can improve biodiversity, for example, but can lead to reduced yield and income. Yet one thing is clear, we cannot choose between preserving ecosystem services or exploiting the land: both are possible – and vital. While there have been modelling uncertainties in the monetary calculations of this priceless value found in and among the ecosystem services, scientists such as Schmidt et al5 help in the quantification and transferability of this value of ecosystem services. And where trade-offs for the benefits of conserved ecosystems cannot be balanced locally, PES is the option. Effective engagement with land users, policymakers and other stakeholders How can assessments of ecosystem services be delivered in a way that makes enough sense to decision-makers, so that land use and preservation can indeed go hand in hand? One of the outputs of GLUES has been research published in Ecology and Society 5 to help answer this question. The key to success in making assessments relevant to decision-makers is simply to focus, at the outset, on the land-use problems they are most concerned with. This means engagement with local stakeholders, building trust, and identifying the economic, cultural and other drivers that have the greatest influence on land-use practices and policies. In the example of the SuMaRiO project, trade-offs against ecosystem services were caused by cotton production being irrigated with an overreliance on the sole source of water running down from Tian Shan mountains. While the scientific knowledge about the Tarim basin in China was “special”, says project lead Prof. Markus Disse, there had been a gap in “putting the pieces together”. SuMaRiO helped with this, to deliver some practical advice to politicians for a five-year plan for the basin, to address sensitive tensions between water distribution, agricultural production, and conservation of forests and biodiversity. The project also developed a detailed decision- support tool based on hydrological models of the basin, enabling people to predict the consequences for ecosystem services of land and water use through clear rating indicators. Recommendations for ecosystem services If land is managed sustainably, ecosystems can be flexible enough to meet the changing demands of societies. Sustainable use of ecosystems, including agricultural production systems, can help with mitigating or adapting to climatic, environmental and socioeconomic changes. 4 Förster J, Assessing ecosystem services for informing land-use decisions: a problem-oriented approach, Ecology and Society, doi: 10.5751/ES-07804-200331. 5 Schmidt S et al, Uncertainty of monetary valued ecosystem services – value transfer functions for global mapping, PLoS ONE, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148524. Forest above rice terraces guarantees continuous water supply and high biodiversity. The village pictured among the terraces here is Banga’an, in a UNESCO world heritage site in the Philippines. Photograph: Josef Settele Research insight: LEGATO Science to enable ecological rice cultivation to compete with intensive methods and provide ecosystem services The conditions under which ecological rice cultivation can be economically profitable are diverse. In the case of Luzon, the northern island of the Philippines and home to a UNESCO world heritage site, tourism puts pressure on the cost of living. Ecological approaches to pest control in the rice terraces, and not relying on pesticides, are typical for this region. Engagement with farmers who work with this sort of land is worthwhile, helping them to resist the temptation of using pesticides. This takes some persuasion but there are mutual benefits – for the farmers themselves as well as for the broader ecosystem services, says Prof. Josef Settele, who headed the LEGATO project. The three important strands of ecosystem services in the LEGATO project were provisioning (nutrient cycling and crop production), regulating (biocontrol and pollination) and cultural services (cultural identity and aesthetics). Taking an ecological- engineering approach in these rice agroecosystems – by planting flower strips to benefit pest-regulating arthropods – answers all three by preserving and supporting the biodiversity as well as managing the yields. The LEGATO project was led by the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ.