INTRO: This abstract is well-aligned with the subject of the symposium (management of multiple ecosystem services).
MERITS: This is one of only a few field studies that have simultaneously tested the effects of a management intervention on multiple ecosystem services, which is an important contribution.
CRITIQUE: It is not clear from the abstract whether this talk will focus on results from the authors' empirical field research, or whether it will focus on trends in the literature. Empirical field research would be especially welcome, and the authors suggest that this may be what they will focus on ("measured effects"), but this could be clarified and strengthened in the abstract, perhaps with reference to one or two key results from the authors' research (especially effects on crop yield, if available). It is also unclear whether the authors will focus on empirical research that distinguishes between local and landscape effects, or whether they are simply acknowledging this distinction.
DISCUSSION: I would also encourage the authors to think about how their research could be used by decision makers, and what other evidence decision makers would need to see before they could make an informed decision. Crop yield is referred to in the abstract, and results that connect a management action (e.g., wildflower strips), through biodiversity (e.g., pollinators and natural enemies as ecosystem service providers), to an ecosystem service that decision makers care about (e.g., crop production) seem particularly important. It seems that the authors' research may be able to provide evidence for this causal chain. However, are there other ecosystem services that wildflower strips would also affect? Are there other management practice that would be better or cheaper than wildflower strips for pollination, pest regulation, and crop production? These might be important questions for future research, and I think these are the questions that will tie together the talks in this symposium. What evidence do decision makers need, and what are the alternative management options?
- - -
INTRO: This manuscript addresses issues related to the mapping of multiple ecosystem services fostered in agri-environmental interventions. It discusses how "bundles" of ecosystem services can be produced under one type of intervention, and raises considerations on the opportunities and constraints of different management practices for these bundles.
MERITS: The topic addressed in this manuscript is of high relevance to the thematic focus of the Symposium in which it will be presented. Particularly, it identifies and discusses interventions that can promote multiple ecosystem services. By integrating conservation research with a focus on a range of ecosystem services that are normally studied in isolation, it raises considerations on aspects of ecosystem management that are relevant to both science and policy.
CRITIQUE: A sentence on what research methods have been used, and how data has been analysed, is missing. These details should be included, therefore "minor revision" has been recommended in the Methods section.
The abstract outlines the following key question "whether multiple services can be provided with one type of agri-environmental intervention and how potential effects translate into crop yield". However, the concluding part of the abstract does not address the implications for crop yields, while it stresses more broadly that agri-environment interventions can promote multiple ecosystems and benefits may be maximized in combination with landscape wide measures. Links between aim and findings could be strengthened.
The last sentence of the abstract refers to implications for "policy", but the links between the first part of the abstract and the policy implications could be made clearer: how is the empirical data on pollination and pest predation used to generate policy-relevant evidence?
DISCUSSION: The research presented is well aligned with the Symposium in which it will be presented, and more widely with the theme of ECCB 2018 on planetary wellbeing. It discusses trade-offs and synergies between conservation interventions, with a particular focus on measuring the effects of such interventions on multiple ecosystem services.
As suggested above, this abstract could be improved by adding details on the methods being used in the research, and by strengthening the flow and conceptual links between the introduction, key research question, and findings.
