Operationalising ecosystem service co-production: A decision-oriented approach for integrated ecosystem assessments

Abstract

Ecosystem Services (ES), or Nature’s Contributions to People (NCP), are increasingly understood as products of interactions between natural and anthropogenic inputs. However, co-production remains unevenly implemented in ecosystem assessments. Rather than seeking to measure or causally decompose co-production across all contexts, this study develops a decision-oriented process for determining when and where explicit co-production assessment is warranted and for guiding the selection of appropriate assessment approaches for realised ES flows. It combines a structured narrative synthesis of conceptual and methodological literature with an expert-elicited Ecosystem Type (ET) × ES co-production relevance matrix and five European case-study examples across different ET and decision contexts. Sixteen experts assessed the relevance of anthropogenic inputs for realised ES flows across 231 ET × ES combinations in different European contexts, using scores to derive relevance verdicts, with confidence, expertise and inter-expert agreement used to assign five trust tiers. The results showed that, across the assessed ET × ES combinations, anthropogenic inputs received a Not relevant verdict in relatively few cases, but a detailed assessment of natural and anthropogenic contributions was not warranted for all ET × ES combinations. Most ET × ES combinations received an Intermediate relevance verdict, while relevance was highest in Urban, Cropland and Woodland and Forest ETs and for cultural services and ecosystem and species appreciation. Lower relevance was found for Open Ocean, Shelf and Sparsely Vegetated ETs and for broad-scale atmospheric regulating ES. The case study examples illustrated how natural and anthropogenic capitals enter the ES flow assessment chain at different stages, from ecosystem condition and potential/capacity to mobilisation, realised flows, benefits, values and distribution. These findings support a proportional approach, i.e. explicit co-production assessment should be prioritised where anthropogenic inputs materially shape ES flows (e.g. urban and cropland ETs), where attribution to ecosystem potential alone would be misleading and where decision-making needs justify the analytical effort within complex integrated ecosystem assessments.