Israel National Ecosystem Assessment


Geographical coverage

Geographical scale of the assessment National
Country or countries covered Israel
Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name

Asia (Middle East / Eastern Mediterranean)

Conceptual framework, methodology and scope

Assessment objectives

The creation of a tool for managers and policymakers that will aid in the assimilation of considerations of ecosystem services' value and the biodiversity involved in their provision in planning processes and the management of the country's ecosystems.

Mandate for the assessment

Hamaarag is a consortium of Israel's major land management organizations: The Ministry of Environmental Protection, the Israel Nature and Parks Authority, and KKL - Israel's forestry service.

Conceptual framework and/or methodology used for the assessment

Other (please specify)

URL or copy of conceptual framework developed or adapted

System(s) assessed

  • Marine
  • Coastal
  • Inland water
  • Forest and woodland
  • Cultivated/Agricultural land
  • Dryland
  • Urban

Species groups assessed

Ecosystem services/functions assessed


  • Food
  • Water
  • Genetic resources
  • Medicinal resources


  • Climate regulation
  • Moderation of extreme events
  • Regulation of water flows
  • Regulation of water quality
  • Erosion prevention
  • Pollination
  • Pest and disease control

Supporting Services/Functions

  • Habitat maintenance
  • Nutrient cycling
  • Soil formation and fertility
  • Primary production

Cultural Services

  • Recreation and tourism
  • Spiritual
  • inspiration and cognitive development

Scope of assessment includes

Drivers of change in systems and services


Impacts of change in services on human well-being


Options for responding/interventions to the trends observed


Explicit consideration of the role of biodiversity in the systems and services covered by the assessment


Timing of the assessment

Year assessment started


Year assessment finished


If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish


Periodicity of assessment


Assessment outputs



Communication materials (e.g. brochure, presentations, posters, audio-visual media)

Journal publications

Training materials

Other documents/outputs

Tools and processes

Tools and approaches used in the assessment

  • Geospatial analysis
  • Scenarios
  • Economic valuation
  • Social (non-monetary) valuation

Process used for stakeholder engagement in the assessment process and which component

We are currently in the process of forming a diverse Client Board that will formally approve the assessment plan; members will be able to provide input on prioritization of different services/chapters, funding for added focus on particular issues, and data for the assessment.

Key stakeholder groups engaged

Government (local and national), business, private sector and environmental/conservation NGOs.

The number of people directly involved in the assessment process


Incorporation of scientific and other types of knowledge

  • Scientific information only
  • Resource experts (e.g. foresters etc)

Supporting documentation for specific approaches, methodology or criteria developed and/or used to integrate knowledge systems into the assessment

Assessment reports peer reviewed



Accessibility of data used in assessment

Policy impact

Impacts the assessment has had on policy and/or decision making, as evidenced through policy references and actions

Independent or other review on policy impact of the assessment


Lessons learnt for future assessments from these reviews

Capacity building

Capacity building needs identified during the assessment

Actions taken by the assessment to build capacity

Network and sharing experiences, Access to funding, Sharing of data/repatriation of data, Workshops, Developing/promoting and providing access to support tools, Communication and awareness raising

How have gaps in capacity been communicated to the different stakeholders

Knowledge generation

Gaps in knowledge identified from the assessment

How gaps in knowledge have been communicated to the different stakeholders

Additional relevant information