1. A METHOD FOR ASSESSING MULTIPLES ECOSYSTEM SERVICES FROM GRASSLANDS BASED ON VEGETATION CHARACTERISTIC: AN EXAMPLE FROM NORWEGIAN SEMI-NATURAL GRASSLANDS Simon Taugourdeau 1,2 Line Johansen 1, Sølvi Wehn 1 1 NIBIO - Norwegian institute of bioeconomy Research, Stjordal Norway 2 CIRAD UMR SELMET, Montpellier France

2. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES –Ecosystem services are the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems (Millenium ecosystem assessment). –Evaluate and compare ecosystem services between land use. 2 Introduction

3. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES-VEGETATION –Ecosystem services relies on the ecosystem functioning. –The vegetation is one of the principal components of the grassland ecosystem. –Many studies show links between some variables of vegetation and ecosystem functions and services (de Belo et al., 2010). –Vegetation could be used to evaluate ecosystem services. 3 Introduction

4. 3 SEMI-NATURAL GRASSLANDS IN NORWAY –Traditionally management: no fertilizers or pesticides, not ploughed and only extensive grazing or mowing. –High biodiversity:741 red listed species in 2010 in Norway. Introduction

5. SEMI-NATURAL GRASSLANDS & LAND-USE CHANGE –Intensification. –Land abandonmentEncroachment. 5 Introduction

6. AIMS – Develop ecosystem services (ES) indicators based on vegetation characteristics. –Compare ecosystem services provided by semi-natural grasslands between grazed and abandoned land use. 66 Introduction

7. METHODOLOGY –Five services: Forage quality and quantity, genetic resources diversity, pollination and aesthetic appreciation. –Selection of vegetation variables based on a review of the literature. 7 Materials and methods

8. VEGETATION VARIABLE SELECTION 8

9. METHODOLOGY –Five services: Forage quality and quantity, genetic resources diversity, pollination and aesthetic appreciation. –Selection of vegetation variables based on a review of the literature. –Calculation of vegetation variables from botanical surveys. 9 Materials and methods

10. DATA USED- STUDY SITES –Two regions in central Norway –14 study sites – 7 in each region –Grazed versus abandoned 10 Materials and methods

11. DATA USED:SURVEY &TRAIT DATABASE –Surveys: plant species and % of vegetation layers –Plant traits (Database TRY) (Kattge et al., 2012) –Pollinators (Database BRC) (http://www.brc.ac.uk/) 11 Materials and methods

12. METHODOLOGY –Five services: Forage quality and quantity, genetic resources diversity, pollination and aesthetic appreciation. –Selection of vegetation variables based on a review of the literature. –Calculation of vegetation variables from botanical surveys. –Utilization of DEXI® to aggregate the vegetation variables to develop indicators. 12 Materials and methods

13. 13 Transformation into Categories (low, medium, high) INDICATORS CREATION Thresholds: Expertise Quantiles Materials and methods

14. 14 Aggregation -> scores from 1 to 5 INDICATORS CREATION: DEXI® Aggregation Weight on Expertise Materials and methods

15. 15 Materials and methods PARAMETERS IN DEXI®

16. 16 Results PROTOTYPE: TRADEOFFS BETWEEN SERVICES: Abandonnent

17. 17 Results Genetic resourcesPollinationAesthetic appreciationForage quantityForage quality PROTOTYPE: LAND USE COMPARISON ns ***ns.

18. ECOYSTEM SERVICES INDICATORS –First step on the development of ecosystem services indicators –More ecosystem services (Carbone sequestration, fertility, biodiversity…) –Develop similar tools for other parts of the world. –Need more knowledge on ES/vegetation links –Validation on ecosystem services data. 18 Discussions

19. TOOLS – Simple indicators to develop and use. –Dexi® : Problem with transformation of the variables/thresholds –New Tools in Development (TATALE) 19 Discussions

20. THANKS TO FARMERS, SYNNØVE N. GRENNE, SIGRUN AUNE, PER VESTERBUKT, PÅL THORVALDSEN, KNUT ANDERS HOVSTAD, LIV GURI VELLE Financed by: The Research Council of Norway simon.taugourdeau@cirad.fr Thank you for attention