Action 5 of the European Union's Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 asks that Member States map and assess the state of ecosystems and their services in their national territory. Policymakers and stakeholders of these countries frequently ask why this work is necessary. This article shows that this question can be broken down into a number of specific questions which, in turn, bring specific requests for knowledge and guidance to the surface. This paper develops a typology of questions and identifies the following five categories: knowledge requests, policy support questions, questions on resources and responsibilities, application questions and technical and methodological guidance questions. Next, this typology of questions is framed in an adaptive policy cycle and coupled to a set of available solutions.

Sites that are important for biodiversity conservation can also provide significant benefits (i.e. ecosystem services) to people. Decision-makers need to know how change to a site, whether development or restoration, would affect the delivery of services and the distribution of any benefits among stakeholders. However, there are relatively few empirical studies that present this information. One reason is the lack of appropriate methods and tools for ecosystem service assessment that do not require substantial resources or specialist technical knowledge, or rely heavily upon existing data. Here we address this gap by describing the Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based Assessment (TESSA). It could guide local non-specialists through a selection of relatively accessible methods for identifying which ecosystem services may be important at a site, and for evaluating the magnitude of benefits that people obtain from them currently, compared with those expected under alternative land-uses. The toolkit recommends use of existing data where appropriate and places emphasis on enabling users to collect new field data at relatively low cost and effort. By using TESSA, the users could also gain valuable information about the alternative land-uses; and data collected in the field could be incorporated into regular monitoring programmes.

The potential for conservation of individual species has been greatly advanced by the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) development of objective, repeatable, and transparent criteria for assessing extinction risk that explicitly separate risk assessment from priority setting. At the IV World Conservation Congress in 2008, the process began to develop and implement comparable global standards for ecosystems. A working group established by the IUCN has begun formulating a system of quantitative categories and criteria, analogous to those used for species, for assigning levels of threat to ecosystems at local, regional, and global levels. A final system will require definitions of ecosystems; quantification of ecosystem status; identification of the stages of degradation and loss of ecosystems; proxy measures of risk (criteria); classification thresholds for these criteria; and standardized methods for performing assessments. The system will need to reflect the degree and rate of change in an ecosystem's extent, composition, structure, and function, and have its conceptual roots in ecological theory and empirical research. On the basis of these requirements and the hypothesis that ecosystem risk is a function of the risk of its component species, we propose a set of four criteria: recent declines in distribution or ecological function, historical total loss in distribution or ecological function, small distribution combined with decline, or very small distribution. Most work has focused on terrestrial ecosystems, but comparable thresholds and criteria for freshwater and marine ecosystems are also needed. These are the first steps in an international consultation process that will lead to a unified proposal to be presented at the next World Conservation Congress in 2012.Establecimiento de Criterios para la Lista Roja de UICN de Ecosistemas AmenazadosResumenEl potencial para la conservación de muchas especies ha avanzado enormemente porque la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) ha desarrollado criterios objetivos, repetibles y transparentes para evaluar el riesgo de extinción que explícitamente separa la evaluación de riesgo de la definición de prioridades. En el IV Congreso Mundial de Conservación en 2008, el proceso comenzó a desarrollar e implementar estándares globales comparables para ecosistemas. Un grupo de trabajo establecido por la UICN ha formulado un sistema inicial de categorías y criterios cuantitativos, análogos a los utilizados para especies, para asignar niveles de amenaza a ecosistemas a niveles local, regional y global. Un sistema final requerirá de definiciones de ecosistemas; cuantificación del estatus de ecosistemas; identificación de las etapas de degradación y pérdida de los ecosistemas; medidas de riesgo (criterios) alternativas; umbrales de clasificación para esos criterios y métodos estandarizados para la realización de evaluaciones. El sistema deberá reflejar el nivel y tasa de cambio en la extensión, composición, estructura y funcio...

planted annually, primarily in monoculture systems (TASS, 2002). Furthermore, about 5.5 million stocker Agriculture in the Texas High Plains depends heavily on irrigation cattle (about 25% of U.S. total; TASS, 2002; USDA with water withdrawn from the Ogallala aquifer at nonsustainable rates. Our hypothesis was that integrating crop and livestock systems Natl. Agric. Stat. Serv., 2003) are shipped into the High would reduce irrigation water use, maintain profitability, and diversify profitability, and impact on water use of (i) a cotton mono-Texas Tech Univ., Lubbock, TX 79409-2122; R. Kellison, Silver Creek culture system managed by best management practices Farm, Lockney, TX 79241; E. Segarra, Dep. of Agric. and Appl. Econ., Texas Tech Univ., Lubbock, TX 79409; T. Wheeler, Texas A&M for the area and (ii) an integrated cotton-forage-livestock Agric. Exp. Stn., Lubbock, TX 79403; P. Dotray, Dep. of Plant and system. This long-term project continues, but results of Soil Sci., Texas Tech Univ., Lubbock, TX 79409-2122 and Texas Coopthe first 5 yr are presented here. erative Extension, Lubbock, TX 79403; J.C. Conkwright, High Plains Underground Water Conservation District No. 1, Lubbock, TX 79411-2499; and V. Acosta-Martinez, USDA-ARS, Lubbock, TX 79415.

Global statistical standards are being developed