4.5 Article

Hydrologic ecosystem services: linking ecohydrologic processes to human well-being in water research and watershed management

Journal

WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-WATER
Volume 2, Issue 4, Pages 345-358

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/wat2.1081

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. UMN Institute on the Environment
  2. Pentair Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ecosystem services, the benefits ecosystems provide to people, and hydrologic services, the subset of terrestrial ecosystem services related to water, appear with increasing frequency in water resources research and watershed management. Linking biophysical function to human well-being is central to the theory of ecosystem services, so distinctive characteristics of research on hydrologic services arise from addressing the way people are affected by ecohydrologic processes. However, based on a rapid scoping of 381 peer-reviewed studies of hydrologic services, I identified only a small fraction that appear to effectively make the link from biophysical processes to people. In their abstracts, many of the reviewed articles use the language of hydrologic services but appear to be essentially disciplinary studies, accounting for either biophysical functioning or specific beneficiaries in their analysis, but not both. In addition to guiding research, the direct link from biophysical processes to human well-being makes hydrologic services an appealing foundation for watershed management. The hydrologic services framework has been used to assess conservation benefits, evaluate management practices, prioritize siting, account for externalities, and perform trade-off or cost-benefit analysis. Hydrologic services hold potential for novel research and effective watershed management, but challenges remain in executing interdisciplinary research and in addressing the idiosyncratic demands of local management. (C) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available