• Albert, C., Bonn, A., Burkhard, B., Daube, S., Dietrich, K., Engels, B., Frommer, J., Götzl, M., Grêt-Regamey, A., Job-Hoben, B., Koellner, T., Marzelli, S., Moning, C., Müller, F., Rabe, S. E., Ring, I., Schwaiger, E., Schweppe-Kraft, B., & Wüstemann, H. (2016). Towards a national set of ecosystem service indicators: Insights from Germany.Ecological Indicators, 61, 38–48.

  Google Scholar 

• Barton, D. N., & Harrison, P. (Eds.). (2017).Integrated valuation of ecosystem services. Guidelines and experiences. EU FP7 OpenNESS Project Deliverable, European Commission FP7.https://oppla.eu/sites/default/files/uploads/openness-d3344integratedassessmentvaluationofesfinal2.pdf. Accessed 4 Apr 2019.

• Becerra-Jurado, G., Philipsen, C., & Kleeschulte, S. (2016).Mapping and assessing ecosystems and their services in Luxembourg – Assessment results. Luxembourg: Le Gouvernment du Grand -Duché de Luxemburg.https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.1.4924.5841.

  Book  Google Scholar 

• Bezák, P., & Bezáková, M. (2014). Landscape capacity for ecosystem services provision based on expert knowledge and public perception (case study from the North West Slovakia).Ekologia Bratislava, 33(4), 344–353.https://doi.org/10.2478/eko-2014-0031.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Bezák, P., Mederly, P., Izakovičová, Z., Špulerová, J., & Schleyer, C. H. (2017). Divergence and conflicts in landscape planning across spatial scales in Slovakia: Opportunity for an ecosystem services-based approach?International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 13(2), 119–135.https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2017.1305992.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Boumans, R., Roman, J., Altman, I., & Kaufman, L. (2015). The Multiscale Integrated Model of Ecosystem Services (MIMES): Simulating the interactions of coupled human and natural systems.Ecosystem Services, 12, 30–41.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.01.004.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Brezovská, K., & Holécy, J. (2009). Ocenenie rekreačnej funkcie lesov Vysokých Tatier metódou cestovných nákladov.Acta Facultatis Forestalis Zvolen, LI(1), 151–162.https://lf.tuzvo.sk/sites/default/files/aff_09_suppl_1.pdf. Accessed 4 Apr 2019.

  Google Scholar 

• Bujnovský, R. (2011). Hodnota poľnohospodárskej pôdy a jej ekologických funkcií.Životné prostredie, 45(1), 35–37.http://147.213.211.222/sites/default/files/2011_1_035_037_bujnovsky.pdf

• Bujnovský, R. (2018). Estimation of benefits from the actual use of inland water ecosystem services in the Slovak Republic.Ekológia, 37(3), 201–218.https://doi.org/10.2478/eko-2018-0017.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Bujnovský, R., Balkovič, J., Barančíková, G., Makovníková, J., & Vilček, J. (2009).Hodnotenie a oceňovanie ekologických funkcií poľnohospodárskych pôd Slovenska. Slovakia: VÚPOP.

  Google Scholar 

• Bukvareva, T., et al. (2017). Supplied, demanded and consumed ecosystem services: Prospects for national assessment in Russia.Ecological Indicators, 78(1), 351–360.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.03.034.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Muller, F., & Windhorst, W. (2009). Landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services – A concept for land-cover based assessments.Landscape Online, 15, 1–22.https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.200915.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Burkhard, B., Kandziora, M., Hou, Y., & Müller, F. (2014). Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands – Concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification.Landscape Online, 34(1), 1–32.https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.201434.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Čaboun, V., Moravčík, M., & Tutka, J. (2008).Výskum, klasifikácia a uplatňovanie funkcií lesov v krajine. Lesy a lesníctvo – riziká, výzvy, riešenia. Slovakia: National Forest Centre.

  Google Scholar 

• Čaboun, V., Tutka, J., Moravčík, M., Kovalčík, M., Sarvašová, Z., Schwarz, M., & Zemko, M. (2010).Uplatňovanie funkcií lesa v krajine. Slovakia: National Forest Centre.

  Google Scholar 

• Čaboun, V., Kovalčík, M., & Sarvašová, Z. (2014). Concept of the integrative aspects of the forest ecosystem services with case study on recreation services assessment in Slovakia.Ecological Processes, 15(3), 1–6.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-014-0015-8.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Castro, A. J., Verburg, P. H., Martín-López, B., Garcia-Llorente, M., Cabello, J., Vaughn, C. C., & López, E. (2014). Ecosystem service trade-offs from supply to social demand: A landscape-scale spatial analysis.Landscape and Urban Planning, 132, 102–110.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.08.009.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• CBS et al. (2015).Ecosystem goods and services in the Netherlands.https://www.clo.nl/en/indicators/en1572-ecosystem-goods-and-services-in-the-netherlands. Accessed 2 Mar 2019.

• Černecký, J., Gajdoš, P., Špulerová, J., Halada, Ľ., Mederly, P., Ulrych, L., Ďuricová, V., Švajda, J., Černecká, Ľ., Andráš, P., & Rybanič, R. (2020). Ecosystems in Slovakia.Journal of Maps, 16, 28–35.https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2019.1689858.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Chan, K., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., et al. (2016). Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment.PNAS, 113, 1462–1465.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.152502113.

  Article CAS PubMed  Google Scholar 

• Costanza, R., & Daly, H. (1992). Natural capital and sustainable development.Conservation Biology, 6, 37–46.

  Google Scholar 

• Costanza, R., dArge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., Oneill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P., & van den Belt, M. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital.Nature, 387(6630), 253–260.

  CAS  Google Scholar 

• Costanza, R., De Groot, R., Sutton, P. C., Van Der Ploeg, S., Anderson, S., Kubiszewski, I., Farber, S., & Turner, R. K. (2014). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services.Global Environmental Change, 26, 152–158.

  Google Scholar 

• Costanza, R., De Groot, R., Braat, L., Kubiszewski, I., Fioramonti, L., Sutton, P., Farber, S., & Grasso, M. (2017). Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?Ecosystem Services, 28, 1–16.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.008.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Daily, G. (2000). The value of nature and the nature of value.Science, 289(5478), 395–396.

  CAS PubMed  Google Scholar 

• De Groot, R. S., Wilson, M. A., & Boumans, R. M. (2002). A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services.Ecological Economics, 41(3), 393–408.

  Google Scholar 

• De Groot, R. S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., & Willemen, L. (2010). Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making.Ecological Complexity, 7, 260–272.

  Google Scholar 

• Depellegrin, D., Pereira, P., Misiunė, I., & Egarter-Vigl, L. (2016). Mapping ecosystem services potential in Lithuania.International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 23(5), 441–455.https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2016.1146176.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Dick, J., Turkelboom, F., Woods, H., et al. (2018). Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies.Ecosystem Services, 29, 552–565.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.015.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Dudley, N., & Stolton, S. (2008).The protected areas benefits assessment tool: A methodology. Gland: WWF International. Available at:d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/ downloads/pa_bat_web_1355739158.pdf. Accessed 13 Apr 2019.

  Google Scholar 

• Džatko, M. (2002).Hodnotenie produkčného potenciálu poľnohospodárskych pôd a pôdno-ekologických regiónov Slovenska. Slovakia: Research Institute of Soil Science and Soil Protection.

  Google Scholar 

• Ehrlich, P. R., & Ehrlich, A. H. (1981).Extinction: The causes and consequences of the disappearance of species. New York: Random House.

  Google Scholar 

• Eliáš, P. (1983). Ecological and social functions of vegetation.Ekológia, 2, 93–104.

  Google Scholar 

• Eliáš, P. (2010). Od funkcií vegetácie k ekosystémovým službám.Životné prostredie, 44(2), 59–64.

  Google Scholar 

• European Commission (2011).European Commission COM/2011/0244. Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Sommittee and the Sommittee of the regions.

  Google Scholar 

• European Commission. (2014).System of environmental-economic accounting 2012 experimental ecosystem accounting. New York: European Commission Organisation for Economic Co-operation.

  Google Scholar 

• Fleischer, P., Pichler, V., Fleischer, P., Holko, L., et al. (2017). Forest ecosystem services affected by natural disturbances, climate and land-use changes in the Tatra Mountains.Climate Research, 73(1–2), 57–71.https://doi.org/10.3354/cr01461.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Frélichová, J., Vačkář, D., Pártl, A., Loučková, B., Harmáčková, Z. V., & Lorencová, E. (2014). Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic.Ecosystem Services, 8, 110–117.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.03.001.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Fűzyová, Ľ., Lániková, D., & Novorolský, M. (2009). Economic valuation of Tatras national park and regional environmental policy.Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 18(5), 811–818.

  Google Scholar 

• Getzner, M. (2009).Economic and cultural values related to protected areas. Part A: Valuation of ecosystem services in Tatra (PL) and Slovensky Raj (SK) national parks. Final report.http://www.minzp.sk/files/sekcia-ochranyprirodyakrajiny/ps-543/final-report-part-b-pl-sk_getzner_201003.pdf. Accessed 04 April 2019.

• Giarratano, M. C., et al. (2018).Comitato Capitale Naturale. Roma: Secondo Rapporto sullo Stato del Capitale Naturale in Italia.https://www.minambiente.it/comunicati/il-secondo-rapporto-sullo-stato-del-capitale-naturale-italia. Accessed 6 Apr 2019.

  Google Scholar 

• Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Barton, D. (2013). Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning.Ecological Economics, 86, 235–245. ISSN 0921-8009.

  Google Scholar 

• Gómez-Baggethun, E., & De Groot, R. (2010). Chapter 5: Natural capital and ecosystem services: The ecological foundation of human society. In R. M. Harrison & R. E. Hester (Eds.),Ecosystem services (pp. 105–121).https://doi.org/10.1039/9781849731058-00105.

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Gómez-Baggethun, E., De Groot, R., Lomas, P. L., & Montes, C. (2010). The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes.Ecological Economics, 69(6), 1209–1218.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.007.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Gómez-Baggethun, E., et al. (2014).State-of-the-art report on integrated valuation of ecosystem services. EU FP7 OpenNESS project deliverable 4.1., European Commission FP7.http://www.openness-project.eu/sites/default/files/Deliverable%204%201_Integrated-Valuation-Of-Ecosystem-Services.pdf. Accessed 6 Apr 2019.

• Grunewald, K., Herold, H., Marzelli, S., Meinell, G., Richter, B., Sybre, R. U., & Walz, U. (2016). Concept of national indicators for ecosystem services in Germany further development, types of classes and sheet of indicators.In Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung, 48, 141–152.

  Google Scholar 

• Haines-Young, R., & Potschin, M. (2013).CICES V4.3-Revised report prepared following consultation on CICES Version 4, August–December 2012. Nottingham: Centre for Environmental Management, University of Nottingham.https://cices.eu/content/uploads/sites/8/2018/01/Guidance-V51-01012018.pdf. Accessed 6 Apr 2019.

  Google Scholar 

• Haines-Young, R., & Potschin, R. M. (2018).Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and guidance on the application of the revised structure. Nottingham: Barton in Fabis.https://cices.eu/content/uploads/sites/8/2018/01/Guidance-V51-01012018.pdf. Accessed 2 Apr 2019.

  Google Scholar 

• Hronec, O., Bedrna, Z., & Vilček, J. (2005).Environmentálna pedológia. Slovakia: Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra.

  Google Scholar 

• IPBES. (2018).Summary for policymakers of the regional assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Europe and Central Asia of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.https://www.ipbes.net/assessment-reports/eca. Accessed 6 Apr 2019.

• Ivanić, K.-Z., Štefan, A., Porej, D., & Stolton, S. (2017). Using a participatory assessment of ecosystem services in the Dinaric Arc of Europe to support protected area management.Parks, 23, 61–74.https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2017.PARKS-23-1K-ZI.en.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Izakovičová, Z., Bezák, P., Mederly, P., & Špulerová, J. (2017). Uplatňovanie konceptu ekosystémových služieb v plánovacej a riadiacej praxi v Slovenskej republike – výsledky projektu OpenNESS na prípadovej štúdii Trnava.Životné prostredie, 51(4), 198–204.

  Google Scholar 

• Jacobs, S., Dendoncker, N., & Keune, H. (2014).Ecosystem services: Global issues, local practices. Boston: Elsevier.

  Google Scholar 

• Janák, M., Černecký, J., & Saxa, A. (Eds.). (2015).Monitoring of animal species of Community interest in the Slovak Republic, Results and assessment in the period of 2013–2015. Banská Bystrica: State nature conservancy of the Slovak Republic.

  Google Scholar 

• Jäppinen, J. P., & Heliölä, J. (Eds.). (2015).Towards a sustainable and genuinely green economy. The value and social significance of ecosystem services in Finland (TEEB for Finland). Synthesis and roadmap. Helsinki: The Finnish Ministry of Environment, Helsinki.

  Google Scholar 

• Jax, K., Barton, D. N., Chan, K. M. A., De Groot, R., Doyle, U., Eser, U., Görg, C. H., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Griewald, J., Haber, W., Haines-Young, R., Heink, U., Jahn, T., Joosten, H., Kerschbaumer, L., Korn, H., Luck, G. W., Matzdorf, B., & Wichmann, S. (2013). Ecosystem services and ethics.Ecological Economics, 93, 260–268.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.06.008.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Jurík, Ľ., Halászová, K., & Sedmáková, M. (2017). Ekosystémové služby zdrojov vody pre krajinu.Životné prostredie, 51(4), 221–226.

  Google Scholar 

• Jurko, A. (1990).Ekologické a socio-ekonomické hodnotenie vegetácie. Bratislava: Píroda.

  Google Scholar 

• Kanianska, R. (2014).Ekosystémové služby a ich oceňovanie. In Stav a trendy integrovaného manažmentu životného prostredia. Slovakia, Zvolen: Technical University of Zvolen.

  Google Scholar 

• Kanianska, R., Jaďuďová, J., Makovníková, J., Kizeková, M., & Tomaškin, J. (2016).Ekosystémové služby. Banská Bystrica: Belianum.

  Google Scholar 

• Kizeková, M., Čunderlík, J., Dugátová, Z., Makovníková, J., Kanianska, R., Jaďuďová, J., Jančová, Ľ., & Pálka, B. (2016).Agroekosystémové služby a súčasný stav trávnych porastov v Slovenskej republike. Slovakia/Banská Bystrica: NPPC VÚTPHP Banská Bystrica, NPPC SSCRI Bratislava, UMB Banská Bystrica.

  Google Scholar 

• Kizeková, M., Čunderlík, J., Dugátová, Z., Jančová, Ľ., Kanianska, R., & Makovníková, J. (2018).Klasifikácia ekosystémových služieb trávnych porastov a ich hodnotenie.http://www.agroporadenstvo.sk/index.php?start&t=rastlinna-vyroba-rastlinna-vyroba&t2=&article=1118. Accessed 4 Apr 2019.

• Kluvánková, T., & Brnkaľáková, S. (2017). Globálne problémy a lokálne riešenia v udržateľnom manažmente ekosystémových služieb a krajiny.Životné prostredie, 51(4), 195–197.

  Google Scholar 

• Kluvánková-Oravská, T., & Chobotová, V. (2010). Inštitúcie a ekosystémové služby v demokratickej a trhovej spoločnosti.Životné prostredie, 44(2), 84–88.

  Google Scholar 

• Kluvánková-Oravská, T., Ditmarová, Ľ., & Blaženec, M. (2013).Ecosystem services: Interdisciplinary research challenges. Paper presented at ecosystem services: Adaptive EU policies for future EU regions, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, 30 September–1 October 2013.

  Google Scholar 

• Konôpka, J. (2010). Od reprodukcie k multifunkčnému využívaniu lesných ekosystémov.Lesnícky časopis – Forestry Journal, 56(1), 81–92.

  Google Scholar 

• Konôpka, J. (2012). Manažment hydrických funkcií lesov.Lesnícky časopis – Forestry Journal, 58(2), 129–135.

  Google Scholar 

• Kovalčík, M., & Tutka, J. (2008).Hodnotenie rekreačnej funkcie lesov SR preferenčnými metódami – výsledky testovacej štúdie. Paper presented at Aktuálne otázky ekonomiky LH SR, National Forest Centre, Zvolen, 2008.

  Google Scholar 

• Lieskovský, J., Bezák, P., Špulerová, J., Lieskovský, T., Koleda, P., Dobrovodská, M., Buergi, M., & Gimmi, U. (2015). The abandonment of traditional agricultural landscape in Slovakia – Analysis of extent and driving forces.Journal of Rural Studies, 37, 75–84.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.12.007.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Lotan, A., Kost, R., Mandelik, Y., Peled, Y., Chakuki, D., Shamir, S. Z., & Ram, Y. (2018). National scale mapping of ecosystem services in Israel – Genetic resources, pollination and cultural services.One Ecosystem, 3, e25494.https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.3.e25494.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Makovníková, J., Kobza, J., Pálka, B., Mališ, J., Kanianska, R., & Kizeková, M. (2016). An approach to mapping the potential of cultural agroecosystem services.Soil and Water Research, 11(1), 44–52.https://doi.org/10.17221/109/2015-SWR.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Makovníková, J., Pálka, B., Širáň, M., Kanianska, R., Kizeková, M., & Jaďuďová, J. (2017).Modelovanie a hodnotenie agroekosystémových služieb. Banská Bystrica: Matej Bel University.

  Google Scholar 

• Mederly, P., Bezák, P., Lieskovský, J., Halabuk, A., Izakovičová, Z., & Dobrucká, A. (2017). Vybrané metódy hodnotenia ekosystémových služieb – projekt Open- NESS a prípadová štúdia Trnava.Životné Prostredie, 51, 205–212.

  Google Scholar 

• Midriak, R., et al. (1981).Diferencované obhospodarovanie lesa podľa integrovaných funkcií (Lesnícke štúdie 31). Zvolen: VÚLH & Bratislava: Príroda.

  Google Scholar 

• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005).Ecosystems and human well-being: Wetlands and water synthesis. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

  Google Scholar 

• MoE SR. (2014).Aktualizovaná národná stratégia ochrany biodiverzity do roku 2020.http://www.minzp.sk/sekcie/temy-oblasti/ochrana-prirody-krajiny/medzinarodne-dohovory/dohovor-biodiverzite/aktualizovana-narodna-strategia-ochrany-biodiverzity-do-roku-2020/. Accessed 6 Apr 2019.

• Mulligan, M. (2013). WaterWorld: A self-parameterising, physically based model for application in data-poor but problem-rich environments globally.Hydrology Research, 44, 748.https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2012.217.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Mulligan, M. (2015) Trading off agriculture with nature’s other benefits, spatially In Zolin, C. A and Rodrigues, R., de, A. R. (eds) Impact of climate change on water resources in agriculture. CRC Press. ISBN 9781498706148.

  Google Scholar 

• NEPA. (2017).Assessment of ecosystems and ecosystem Services in Romania. Romania: NEPA, NINA, ROSA, WWF Romania.

  Google Scholar 

• Neugarten, R. A., Langhammer, P. F., Osipova, E., Bagstad, K. J., Bhagabati, N., Butchart, S. H. M., Dudley, N., Elliott, V., Gerber, L. R., Gutierrez Arrellano, C., Ivanić, K.-Z., Kettunen, M., Mandle, L., Merriman, J. C., Mulligan, M., Peh, K. S.-H., Raudsepp-Hearne, C., Semmens, D. J., Stolton, S., & Willcock, S. (2018).Tools for measuring, modelling, and valuing ecosystem services: Guidance for key biodiversity areas, natural world heritage sites and protected areas. Gland: IUCN.

  Google Scholar 

• Norgaard, R. B. (2000). Ecological economics.BioScience, 50(4), 291.https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2000)050[0291:EE]2.3.CO;2.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Papánek, F. (1978).Teória a prax funkčne integrovaného lesného hospodárstva. Bratislava: Príroda.

  Google Scholar 

• Parker, N., Naumann, E.-K., Medcalf, K., Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M., Kretsch, C., Parker, J., & Burkhard, B. (2016).Irish wildlife manuals, national ecosystem and ecosystem service mapping pilot for a suite of prioritised services – Appendices. Ireland: National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs.

  Google Scholar 

• Peh, K. S.-H., Balmford, A. P., Bradbury, R. B., Brown, C., Butchart, S. H. M., Hughes, F. M. R., MacDonald, M. A., Stattersfield, A. J., Thomas, D. H. L., Trevelyan, R. J., Walpole, M., & Merriman, J. C. (2017).Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based Assessment (TESSA), version 2.0. Cambridge.

  Google Scholar 

• Považan, R., Getzner, M., & Švajda, J. (2014a). Value of ecosystem services in mountain national park. Case study of Veľká Fatra National Park (Slovakia).Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 23(5), 1699–1710.

  Google Scholar 

• Považan, R., Getzner, M., & Kadlečík, J. (2014b). Hodnotenie ekosystémových služieb v chránených územiach Karpát so zameraním na Slovensko – Príručka pre rýchle hodnotenie.Quaestiones rerum naturalium, 1(2), 7–44.

  Google Scholar 

• Považan, R., Getzner, M., & Švajda, J. (2015). On the valuation of ecosystem services in Muránska Planina National Park (Slovakia).Eco. Mont. Journal on Protected Mountain Areas Research and Management, 7(2), 61–69.https://doi.org/10.1553/eco.mont-7-2s61.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Rabe, S.-E., Koellner, T., Marzelli, S., & Schumacher, P. (2016). Gret-Regamey, A. (2016). National ecosystem services mapping at multiple scales – The German exemplar.Ecological Indicators, 70, 357–372.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.05.043.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Reháčková, T., & Pauditšová, E. (2006).Vegetácia v urbánnom prostredí. Bratislava: Cicero.

  Google Scholar 

• Šálka, J., & Dobšinská, Z. (2013).Policy analysis for assuring forest ecosystem externalities. Zvolen: Technical University in Zvolen.

  Google Scholar 

• Šálka, J., Dobšinská, Z., & Štěrbová, M. (2017).Analýza verejnej politiky na zabezpečenie ekosystémových služieb lesa. Zvolen: Technical University in Zvolen.

  Google Scholar 

• Santos-Martín, F., García Llorente, M., Quintas-Soriano, C., Zorrilla-Miras, P., Martín-López, B., Loureiro, M., Benayas, J., & Montes, M. (2016).Spanish National Ecosystem Assessment: Socio-economic valuation of ecosystem services in Spain.Synthesis of the key findings. Madrid: Biodiversity Foundation of the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment.

  Google Scholar 

• Santos-Martín, F., Kelemen, E., García-Llorente, M., Jacobs, S., Oteros-Rozas, E., Barton, D. N., Palomo, P., Hevia, V., & Martín-López, B. (2017). Socio-cultural valuation approaches. In B. Burkhard & J. Maes (Eds.),Mapping ecosystem services (pp. 104–114). Sofia: Pensoft Publishers.

  Google Scholar 

• Sarvašová, Z., & Šálka, J. (2012).Integrácia úžitkov verejnoprospešných funkcií do trhového mechanizmu – teórie a zahraničné skúsenosti. Zvolen: Technical University in Zvolen.

  Google Scholar 

• Sarvašová, Z., Kovalčík, M., Dobšinská, Z., Šálka, J., & Jarský, V. (2014). Ecosystem services – Examples of their valuation methods in Czech Republic and Slovakia.Change and Adaptation in Socio-Ecological Systems, 1(1).https://doi.org/10.2478/cass-2014-0008.

• Schneider, J., Holušová, K., & Karber, V. (2016).Proceedings from the role of forest functions within ecosystem services international scientific conference (p. 2016). Brno: Mendel University in Brno.

  Google Scholar 

• Schröter, M., Albert, C. H., Marques, A., Tobon, W., Lavorel, S., Maes, J., Brown, C., Klotz, S., & Bonn, A. (2016). National Ecosystem Assessments in Europe: A review.BioScience, 66(10), 813–828.https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw101.

  Article PubMed PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

• Šefferová Stanová, V., & Galvánková, J. (Eds.). (2015).Monitoring of plants and habitats of community interest in the Slovak Republic, results and assessment in the period of 2013–2015. Banská Bystrica: State Nature Conservancy of the Slovak Republic.

  Google Scholar 

• Sharp, R., Tallis, H.T., Ricketts, T., Guerry, A.D., Wood, S.A., Chaplin-Kramer, R., Nelson, E., Ennaanay, D., Wolny, S., Olwero, N., Vigerstol, K., Pennington, D., Mendoza, G., Aukema, J., Foster, J., Forrest, J., Cameron, D., Arkema, K., Lonsdorf, E., Kennedy, C., Verutes, G., Kim, C.K., Guannel, G., Papenfus, M., Toft, J., Marsik, M., Bernhardt, J., Griffin, R., Glowinski, K., Chaumont, N., Perelman, A., Lacayo, M. Mandle, L., Hamel, P., Vogl, A.L., Rogers, L., Bierbower, W., Denu, D., & Douglass, J. (2018).InVEST Version 3.4.4 user’s guide. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, and World Wildlife Fund.https://naturalcapitalproject.stanford.edu/. Accessed 10 Apr 2019.

• Sherrouse, B. C., Clement, J. M., & Semmens, D. J. (2011). A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services.Applied Geography, 31, 748–760.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.08.002.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Spangenberg, J. H., & Settele, J. (2010). Precisely incorrect? Monetising the value of ecosystem services.Ecological Complexity, 7(3), 327–337.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.04.007.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Špulerová, J. (2006). Funkcie nelesnej drevinovej vegetácie v krajine.Životné prostredie, 40(1), 37–40.

  Google Scholar 

• Špulerová, J., Dobrovodská, M., Štefunková, D., Bača, A., & Lieskovský, J. (2014).Biodiversity of traditional agricultural landscapes in Slovakia and their threats. Biocultural Landscapes. Dordrecht: Springer.

  Google Scholar 

• Špulerová, J., Hrnčiarová, T., Piscová, V., Vlachovičová, M., Kalivoda, H., Kanka, R., Dobrovodská, M., Kenderessy, P., Miklósová, V., Drábová, M., & Belčáková, I. (2016). Sustainable tourism development in a selected area of the Low Tatras National Park – landscape planning versus urban planning. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences, 11(2), 485–496.

  Google Scholar 

• Špulerová, J., Štefunková, D., Dobrovodská, M., et al. (2017).Historické štruktúry poľnohospodárskej krajiny Slovenska. Bratislava: VEDA.

  Google Scholar 

• Špulerová, J., Petrovič, F., Mederly, P., Mojses, M., & Izakovičová, Z. (2018). Contribution of traditional farming to ecosystem services provision: Case studies from Slovakia.Land, 7(2), 74.https://doi.org/10.3390/land7020074.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Štěrbová, M. (2017). Prístupy a metódy hodnotenia ekosystémových služieb lesa.Životné prostredie, 51(4), 213–220.

  Google Scholar 

• Stevens, M., Demolder, H., Jacobs, S., Michels, H., Schneiders, A., Simoens, I., Spanhove, T., Van Gossum, P., Van Reeth, W., & Peymen, J. (2015).Flanders regional ecosystem assessment – State and trends synthesis report.https://pureportal.inbo.be/portal/files/9004761/Stevens_etal_2015_FlandersRegionalEcosystemAssessment_State_Trends.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2019.

• Supuka, J., et al. (1991).Ekologické princípy tvorby a ochrany zelene. Bratislava: Veda.

  Google Scholar 

• Supuka, J., Jančura, P., Pavlík, J., Kattoš, K., & Marenčák, M. (2000).Ekológia urbanizovaného prostredia. Zvolen: Technical University in Zvolen.

  Google Scholar 

• Švajda, J. (2009). Contribution for improvement of visitor monitoring in the Tatra National Park.Eco. Mont-Journal on Protected Mountain Areas Research, 1, 13–18.https://doi.org/10.1553/ecomont2s13.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• TEEB – The Economics of the Ecosystem and Biodiversity. (2010).Mainstreaming the economics of nature. A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. Geneva: United Nations Environment Programme.

  Google Scholar 

• Turanovičová, M., & Rózová, Z. (2017). Metodické východiská hodnotenia kultúrnych ekosystémových služieb v urbanizovanom prostredí.Životné prostredie, 51(4), 232–239.

  Google Scholar 

• Turner, K. G., Vestergaard Odgaard, M., Bøcher, P. K., Dalgaard, T., & Svenning, J. C. H. (2014). Bundling ecosystem services in Denmark: Trade-offs and synergies in a cultural landscape.Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, 89–104.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.02.007.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Tutka, J., Vilček, J., & Kovalčík, M. (2009). Oceňovanie verejnoprospešných funkcií lesných a poľnohospodárskych ekosystémov a služieb odvetví. InAbstracts of Aktuálne otázky ekonomiky lesného hospodárstva Slovenskej republiky. Technical University in Zvolen.

  Google Scholar 

• UK NEA. (2011).The UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Synthesis of the key findings. Cambridge: UNEP-WCMC.

  Google Scholar 

• Vačkář, D., Grammatikopoulou, I., Daněk, J., & Lorencová, E. (2018). Methodological aspects of ecosystem service valuation at the national level.One Ecosystem, 3, e25508.https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.3.e25508.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Value of Nature to Canadians Study Taskforce. (2017).Completing and using ecosystem service assessment for decision-making: An interdisciplinary toolkit for managers and analysts. Ottawa: Federal, Provincial, and Territorial Governments of Canada. https://biodivcanada.chm-cbd.net/documents/ecosystem-services-toolkit?lang=En& n=B443A05E-1.Accessed 10 Apr 2019.

  Google Scholar 

• Verweij, P., Janssen, S., Braat, L., Van Eupen, M., Pérez Soba, M., Winograd, M., De Winter, W., & Cormont, A. (2016). QUICKScan as a quick and participatory methodology for problem identification and scoping in policy processes.Environmental Science and Policy, 66, 47–61.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.010.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Vilček, J. (2011). Potenciály a parametre kvality poľnohospodárskych pôd Slovenska.Geografický časopis, 63(2), 133–154.

  Google Scholar 

• Vilček, J. (2014). Mapovanie a hodnotenie environmentálnych funkcií poľnohospodárskych pôd Slovenska.Geografický časopis, 66(3), 287–304.

  Google Scholar 

• Vilček, J., & Koco, Š. (2018). Integrated index of agricultural soil quality in Slovakia.Journal of Maps, 14(2), 68–76 (2018).https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2018.1428233.

• Villa, F., Ceroni, M., Bagstad, K., Johnson, G., & Krivov, S. (2009).ARIES (Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services ): A new tool for ecosystem services assessment, planning, and valuation. Burlington: Ecoinformatics Collaboratory, Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont.www.ariesonline.org/docs/Villa%20et%20al.%20 2009.Pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2019.

  Google Scholar 

• Vološčuk, I. (2013).Teoretické princípy ekologických procesov, funkcií a služieb ekosystémov. Banská Bystrica: Belianum.

  Google Scholar 

• Wijnja, H., Van Uden, G., & Delbaere, B. (Eds.). (2016).Ecosystem Services in operation: Case studies. European Commission FP7, OpenNESS Project. https://issuu.com/ecnc.org/docs/openness_casestudies_brochure. Accessed 20 Mar 2019.

  Google Scholar 

• Zulian, G., et al. (2013).ESTIMAP: Ecosystem services mapping at European scale. Belgium: Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Joint Research Centre, European Commission.

  Google Scholar 

• Zulian, G., Stange, E., Woods, H., Carvalho, L., Dick, J., Andrews, C. H., Baró, F., Vizcaino, P., Barton, D. N., Nowel, M., Rush, G. M., Autunes, P., Fernandes, J., Ferraz, D., Ferreira Dos Santos, R., Aszalós, R., Aranay, I., Crúcz, B., Priess, J. A., Hoyer, C. H., Bürger-Patricio, G., Lapola, D., Mederly, P., Halabuk, A., Bezák, P., Kopperoinen, L., & Viinikka, A. (2018). Practical application of spatial ecosystem service models to aid decision support.Ecosystem Services, 29(C), 465–480.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.005.

  Article PubMed PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references