Ecosystem condition is the overall quality of an ecosystem unit, in terms of its biological, physical and chemical characteristics underpinning its capacity to generate ecosystem services. Changes in ecosystem condition affect the delivery of services and therefore human well-being. Despite increasing research in this field, the relations between biodiversity, ecosystem condition and services are still not well understood. This study examined scientific articles and reports to analyse the development of ecosystem condition mapping and assessments in Europe since the year 2000. The aim was to provide an overview of the current state of research and to highlight some challenges for ecosystem condition and ecosystem services research. The review analysed the ecosystems under study, scales, methods, indicators, and the ecosystem services assessed. Based on this review, some gaps were identified, especially in the methods used for condition assessment, the coverage of ecosystems, and the applicability of indicators in policy. It is necessary to develop integrative methods to determine ecosystems condition and its influence on the ecosystem service provision, in order to produce robust information. The results of this review can be harnessed by people who need an overview about existing ecosystem condition studies, such as scientists, land managers or decision makers.

Ecosystems provide multiple services that are necessary to maintain human life. Agroecosystems are very productive suppliers of biomass-related provisioning ecosystem services, e.g. food, fibre, and energy. At the same time, they are highly dependent on good ecosystem condition and regulating ecosystem services such as soil fertility, water supply or soil erosion regulation. Assessments of this interplay of ecosystem condition and services are needed to understand the relationships in highly managed systems. Therefore, the aim of this study is twofold: First, to test the concept and indicators proposed by the European Union Working Group on Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) for assessing agroecosystem condition at a regional level. Second, to identify the relationships between ecosystem condition and the delivery of ecosystem services. For this purpose, we applied an operational framework for integrated mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services. We used the proposed indicators to assess the condition of agroecosystems in Northern Germany and regulating ecosystem service control of erosion rates. We used existing data from official databases to calculate the different indicators and created maps of environmental pressures, ecosystem condition and ecosystem service indicators for the Federal State of Lower Saxony. Furthermore, we identified areas within the state where pressures are high, conditions are unfavourable, and more sustainable management practices are needed. Despite the limitations of the indicators and data availability, our results show positive, negative, and no significant correlations between the different pressures and condition indicators, and the control of erosion rates. The idea behind the MAES framework is to indicate the general condition of an ecosystem. However, we observed that not all proposed indicators can explain to what extent ecosystems can provide specific ecosystem services. Further research on other ecosystem services provided by agroecosystems would help to identify synergies and trade-offs. Moreover, the definition of a reference condition, although complicated for anthropogenically highly modified agroecosystems, would provide a benchmark to compare information on the condition of the ecosystems, leading to better land use policy and management decisions.

No abstract

24Ecosystems provide multiple services that are necessary to maintain human life and 25 activities. Agroecosystems are very productive suppliers of biomass-related provisioning 26 ecosystem services, e.g. food, fibre and energy. At the same time, they are highly dependent 27 on respective ecosystem condition and regulating ecosystem services such as soil fertility, 28 water supply or soil erosion regulation. Assessments of this interplay of ecosystem conditions 29 and services are very important to understand the relationships in highly managed systems.30 Therefore, the aim of this study is twofold: First, to test the concept and indicators proposed 31 by the European Union Working Group on Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their 32 Services (MAES) for the assessment of agroecosystem condition at a regional level. Second, 33 to identify the relationships between ecosystem condition and the delivery of ecosystem 34 services. For this purpose, we applied an operational framework for integrated mapping and 35 assessment of ecosystems and their services. We used the proposed indicators to assess the 36 condition of agroecosystems in Northern Germany and the provision of the regulating 37 ecosystem service control of erosion rates. We used existing data that are available from 38 official databases for the calculation of the different indicators. We show maps of 39 environmental pressures, ecosystem condition and ecosystem service indicators for the 40 Federal State of Lower Saxony. Furthermore, we identified areas within the state where 3 41 pressures are high, conditions are limited, and more sustainable management practices are 42 needed. 43 Despite the limitations of the indicators and data availability, our results show positive, 44 negative and no significant correlations between the different pressures and condition 45 indicators, and the control of erosion rates. Although the idea behind the MAES framework is 46 to show the general condition of an ecosystem, when looking at the relationships between 47 condition and ecosystem services, we identified that not all the indicators -as they are 48 proposed-are suitable to explain to what extent ecosystems are able to provide certain 49 ecosystem services. Further research on other ecosystem services provided by agroecosystems 50 would facilitate the identification of synergies and trade-offs. Moreover, the definition of a 51 reference condition, although complicated for anthropogenically highly modified 52 agroecosystems, would provide a benchmark to compare information on the condition of the 53 ecosystems, leading to better land use policy and management decisions 54

Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) has been widely applied on the European Union (EU) mainland, whereas the EU Overseas entities still bear potential for implementation. This paper presents novel applications of the MAES procedure in the EU Outermost Regions and Overseas Countries and Territories ("EU Overseas"). Eight case studies from different geographical areas were analysed through a comparative assessment by applying an established framework following key steps in the MAES process, in order to stipulate lessons learned and recommendations for MAES in the EU Overseas. These key steps include the identification of policy questions, stakeholder networks and involvement, application of MAES methods, dissemination and communication and implementation. The case studies were conducted and analysed under the umbrella of the EU MOVE pilot project, including the Azores, the Canary Islands, Saint Martin, French Guiana, Martinique, Reunion Island and the Falkland Islands. Each case study represented different governance, policy and decision-making frameworks towards biodiversity and environmental protection. Case studies predominantly addressed the policy domains of Nature and Biodiversity Conservation and Marine and Maritime Policy. Ecosystem Services (ES) were assessed across a wide range of themes, biomes and scales, focusing on terrestrial, coastal and marine ecosystems. Results show that the implementation of the case studies was accompanied by extensive communication and dissemination activities. First success stories were visible, where the MAES exercise led to meaningful uptake of the ES concept to policies and decision-making. Yet, there is still work to be done - major bottlenecks were identified related to the MAES implementation centring around financial resources, training and technical expertise. Addressing these aspects can contribute to an enhanced implementation of MAES in the EU Overseas in the future.