CASE STUDIES: STEP 4

The tables presented in this chapter were derived by combining the importance rankings of all habitat x ecosystem service combinations relevant for a certain case study with the rankings of potential impacts. The underlying tables are provided in Section 2.3 (importance rankings, same for all case studies) and Chapter 4 (impact tables, differing between case studies), respectively. The importance x impact matrix shown in Section 2.5 has been applied to identify habitat x ecosystem service combinations with different levels of concern. Only those combinations for which medium or high concern has been found were addressed in more detail. Giving priority to the most critical areas was considered a reasonable approach. No SPU examples are given in the last column if, for all habitat types of a certain ecosystem services, only low or negligible concern was obtained. If medium or high concern has been revealed, SPUs involved in delivery of the critical ecosystem services were assigned.

A master table is presented at the end of the chapter (Section 5.5) which integrates maximum concerns derived from the four case studies.