Ecological Indicators 37 (2014) 229–240 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecological Indicators jou rn al hom epage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolind Assessment framework for landscape services in European cultural landscapes: An Austrian Hungarian case study Anna Hermann a,∗ , Michael Kuttner a , Christa Hainz-Renetzeder a , Éva Konkoly-Gyuró b , Ágnes Tirászi b , Christiane Brandenburg c , Brigitte Allex c , Karen Ziener c , Thomas Wrbka a a University of Vienna, Department of Nature Conservation, Vegetation Ecology and Landscape Ecology, Rennweg 14, 1030 Vienna, Austria b University of Western Hungary, Institute of Forest Resource Management and Rural Development, Cházár András tér 1, H-9400 Sopron, Hungary c University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Department of Landscape, Spatial and Infrastructure Sciences, Institute of Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning, Peter Jordan-Straße 82, 1190 Vienna, Austria a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 21 May 2012 Received in revised form 13 November 2012 Accepted 18 January 2013 Keywords: Landscape services Ecosystem services Assessment framework Mapping Capacity Matrix Spatial reference framework a b s t r a c t European cultural landscapes are characterised by a high level of anthropogenic fragmentation which is known as a major reason for the loss of biodiversity in industrialised countries. To receive support for adequate choices in sustainable landscape planning, information on the spatial distributions of land- scape functions and services is needed. Therefore, the objective of this study was to develop an integrative assessment framework to evaluate a wide range of landscape services at different spatial scales. The pro- posed methodology was applied within the cross-border region of Austria and Hungary. Embedded in a spatial reference framework we assessed and visualised five main landscape services within the investi- gation area: regulation, habitat, provision, information and carrier. Considering location and spatial extent three different levels of service assessment were distinguished: (1) the Landform Approach was based on seven different Landform Types within the study area. All services were directly observable either by the use of Corine land cover or by clearly identifiable spatial indicators. (2) The Broader Habitat Approach focused on the assessment of services at the landscape element scale within randomly selected landscape sample sites. It was based on the use of an expert driven capacity matrix, which values were revised by semi-quantitative data gained from field work. (3) The information services occurring at a broader scale were assessed at the Landscape Character Type scale within the Socio-cultural Approach. Additional indi- cators mainly based on geo-data were defined. Finally, all services were extrapolated to the Landform Types revealing the actual landscape service provision within the study area. The results presented hot and cold spots of service provision at different spatial scales as well as the trade-offs between the different services. The landscape service maps might provide regional stakeholders with valuable information on service supply and can therefore be used as knowledge basis in cross-border landscape planning decision processes. Making landscape services spatially explicit and combining empirical data with spatial infor- mation presents an innovative approach to landscape research in the field of assessing and visualising landscape services. This would enable the development of a decision support tool, which can be used for the systematic evaluation of goal attainments and conflict detection. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction European cultural landscapes are known to provide a wide range of functions and services that are useful for humans. However, the supply of ecosystem services and biodiversity is threatened, mainly caused by a high level of habitat loss and fragmentation (MEA, Abbreviations: LFT, LandformType; LCT, Landscape Character Type; BHT, Broader Habitat Type; BHS, Broader Habitat(type) value; LESV, Landscape Element Service value. ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +43 1 4277 54382; fax: +43 1 4277 9575. E-mail address: anna.hermann@univie.ac.at (A. Hermann). 2005). One reason for the loss of ecosystems in cultural landscapes is the lack of integrating ecosystem service values in regional spa- tial planning projects. The ecosystem service concept is therefore aiming at supporting the development of policies and instruments by integrating ecological, socio-cultural and economical perspec- tives to provide insights into human impacts on ecosystems and the welfare effects of management policies (TEEB, 2010). This sci- entific concept has experienced increasing attention in the last decades as it provides the means of documenting the importance and benefits of ecosystems and landscape for human society. One of the most relevant publications is the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA, 2005) which provides the basic framework for assessing the interactions between ecosystems and humans and 1470-160X/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.01.019