Katalin Petz

Mapping ecosystem functions and services in Eastern Europe using global-scale data sets

To assess future interactions between the environment and human well-being, spatially explicit ecosystem service models are needed. Currently available models mainly focus on provisioning services and do not distinguish changes in the functioning of the ecosystem (Ecosystem Functions – ESFs) and human use of such functions (Ecosystem Services – ESSs). This limits the insight on the impact of global change on human well-being. We present a set of models for assessing ESFs and ESSs. We mapped a diverse set of provisioning, regulating and cultural services, focusing on services that depend on the landscape structure. Services were mapped using global-scale data sets. We evaluated the models for a sample area comprising Eastern Europe. ESFs are mainly available in natural areas, while hotspots of ESS supply are found in areas with heterogeneous land cover. Here, natural land cover where ESFs are available is mixed with areas where the ESSs are utilized. We conclude that spatial patterns of several ESFs and ESSs can be mapped at global scale using existing global-scale data sets. As land-cover change has different impacts on different aspects of the interaction between humans and the environment, it is essential to clearly distinguish between ESFs and ESSs in integrated assessment studies.

Managing the current and future supply of ecosystem services in the Hungarian and Romanian Tisza River Basin

Ecosystem services that sustain human well-being depend on the continued functioning of ecosystems, proper management and supporting institutions. However, the interaction between these factors and ecosystem services is poorly understood. Therefore, we assessed how ecosystem services are represented in policy measures, recognized by local population and affected by weather extremes. We studied the Hungarian and Romanian parts of the flood-exposed Tisza River Basin, where all these factors are relevant for regional land and water management. Our qualitative assessment shows that, although the two regions share similar environmental conditions, the different social and institutional settings of the two countries cause a divergence in ecosystem services. Locally produced provisioning services are better recognized in Romania, while regulating (particularly water-regulation) and cultural services are better recognized in Hungary. Food supply is most affected by climate-related weather extremes and most strongly controlled by policy measures in both countries. However, especially in Romania, policy measures support medicinal and genetic resources, and some regulating (e.g. pest regulation) and cultural services, only weakly or indirectly. We conclude that the analysis of ecosystem services in relation to climate-related weather extremes, policy measures and people’s recognition can contribute to a better management of the Tisza River Basin. We suggest that a better incorporation of ecosystem services in policy and management strategies could enhance and diversify the ecosystem service supply. A further quantification of ecosystem services can, therefore, provide a base for targeted and integrated planning and improved regional policy making.