Beschreibung:
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>
<jats:list>
<jats:list-item><jats:p>Restoration ecology that maximizes ecosystem services (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content>) requires planning at large spatial scales, which are often the most meaningful for ecosystem functioning and <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content> supply. As economic resources to undertake ecological restoration at large scales are scarce, prioritizing sites to enhance multiple <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content> supply is critical.</jats:p></jats:list-item>
<jats:list-item><jats:p>We present the Relative Aggregated Value of Ecosystem Services (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RAVES</jats:styled-content>) index, to prioritize sites for ecological restoration based on the assessment of multiple <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content>. We tested the spatial heterogeneity of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content> to identify the relevant scale to managing <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content> and to apply the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RAVES</jats:styled-content> index using a local case study. We also used the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RAVES</jats:styled-content> index to compare three alternative restoration scenarios to enhance <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content> based on the availability of socio‐economic resources.</jats:p></jats:list-item>
<jats:list-item><jats:p>The highest <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RAVES</jats:styled-content> values were found in areas with natural vegetation and in gorges with riparian forests. The lowest values were found in crop fields, steep slopes and river stretches without riparian forest. The multiscale spatial analysis indicated that most <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content> showed significant heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales, especially at broad (20–30 km) and very broad (40–50 km) scales. For spatial scales smaller than 2 km, only biological control showed significant heterogeneity.</jats:p></jats:list-item>
<jats:list-item><jats:p>The optimal socio‐economic conditions to enhance <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content> supply were met when both private and public land, together with economic funds, were available to implement ecological restoration. As most areas with low <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RAVES</jats:styled-content> were in private lands, even with limited funds restoration of private lands would result in a large increase in <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RAVES</jats:styled-content>.</jats:p></jats:list-item>
<jats:list-item><jats:p><jats:italic>Synthesis and applications</jats:italic>. The Relative Aggregated Value of Ecosystem Services (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RAVES</jats:styled-content>) index is a practical tool to hierarchically prioritize sites for ecological restoration across large spatial scales. The <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RAVES</jats:styled-content> index integrates both ecological information and societal values by weighting ecosystem services (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content>) via a multicriteria analysis and can be used in scenario analysis to identify optimal management scenarios. We highlight the importance of analysing the spatial heterogeneity of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content> to identify the most relevant scale to applying the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RAVES</jats:styled-content> index and to managing <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ES</jats:styled-content> via ecological restoration.</jats:p></jats:list-item>
</jats:list>
</jats:p>