@misc{FrankReichsteinBahnetal.2015,
  author    = {Frank, Dorothe A. and Reichstein, Markus and Bahn, Michael and Thonicke, Kirsten and Frank, David and Mahecha, Miguel D. and Smith, Pete and Van der Velde, Marijn and Vicca, Sara and Babst, Flurin and Beer, Christian and Buchmann, Nina and Canadell, Josep G. and Ciais, Philippe and Cramer, Wolfgang and Ibrom, Andreas and Miglietta, Franco and Poulter, Ben and Rammig, Anja and Seneviratne, Sonia I. and Walz, Ariane and Wattenbach, Martin and Zavala, Miguel A. and Zscheischler, Jakob},
  title     = {Effects of climate extremes on the terrestrial carbon cycle: concepts, processes and potential future impacts},
  series = {Global change biology},
  volume    = {21},
  journal   = {Global change biology},
  number    = {8},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {1354-1013},
  doi       = {10.1111/gcb.12916},
  pages     = {2861 -- 2880},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Extreme droughts, heat waves, frosts, precipitation, wind storms and other climate extremes may impact the structure, composition and functioning of terrestrial ecosystems, and thus carbon cycling and its feedbacks to the climate system. Yet, the interconnected avenues through which climate extremes drive ecological and physiological processes and alter the carbon balance are poorly understood. Here, we review the literature on carbon cycle relevant responses of ecosystems to extreme climatic events. Given that impacts of climate extremes are considered disturbances, we assume the respective general disturbance-induced mechanisms and processes to also operate in an extreme context. The paucity of well-defined studies currently renders a quantitative meta-analysis impossible, but permits us to develop a deductive framework for identifying the main mechanisms (and coupling thereof) through which climate extremes may act on the carbon cycle. We find that ecosystem responses can exceed the duration of the climate impacts via lagged effects on the carbon cycle. The expected regional impacts of future climate extremes will depend on changes in the probability and severity of their occurrence, on the compound effects and timing of different climate extremes, and on the vulnerability of each land-cover type modulated by management. Although processes and sensitivities differ among biomes, based on expert opinion, we expect forests to exhibit the largest net effect of extremes due to their large carbon pools and fluxes, potentially large indirect and lagged impacts, and long recovery time to regain previous stocks. At the global scale, we presume that droughts have the strongest and most widespread effects on terrestrial carbon cycling. Comparing impacts of climate extremes identified via remote sensing vs. ground-based observational case studies reveals that many regions in the (sub-)tropics are understudied. Hence, regional investigations are needed to allow a global upscaling of the impacts of climate extremes on global carbon-climate feedbacks.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{SchmidtSachseWalz2016,
  author    = {Schmidt, Katja and Sachse, Rene and Walz, Ariane},
  title     = {Current role of social benefits in ecosystem service assessments},
  series = {Landscape and urban planning : an international journal of landscape ecology, planning and design},
  volume    = {149},
  journal   = {Landscape and urban planning : an international journal of landscape ecology, planning and design},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0169-2046},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.01.005},
  pages     = {49 -- 64},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Ecosystem services have a significant impact on human wellbeing. While ecosystem services are frequently represented by monetary values, social values and underlying social benefits remain underexplored. The purpose of this study is to assess whether and how social benefits have been explicitly addressed within socio-economic and socio-cultural ecosystem services research, ultimately allowing a better understanding between ecosystem services and human well-being. In this paper, we reviewed 115 international primary valuation studies and tested four hypotheses associated to the identification of social benefits of ecosystem services using logistic regressions. Tested hypotheses were that (1) social benefits are mostly derived in studies that assess cultural ecosystem services as opposed to other ecosystem service types, (2) there is a pattern of social benefits and certain cultural ecosystem services assessed simultaneously, (3) monetary valuation techniques go beyond expressing monetary values and convey social benefits, and (4) directly addressing stakeholde\&\#341;s views the consideration of social benefits in ecosystem service assessments. Our analysis revealed that (1) a variety of social benefits are valued in studies that assess either of the four ecosystem service types, (2) certain social benefits are likely to co-occur in combination with certain cultural ecosystem services, (3) of the studies that employed monetary valuation techniques, simulated market approaches overlapped most frequently with the assessment of social benefits and (4) studies that directly incorporate stakeholder's views were more likely to also assess social benefits.},
  language  = {en}
}