Landscapes generate a wide range of valuable ecosystem services, yet land use decisions often ignore the value of these services. Using the example of the UK, we show the significance of land use change not only for agricultural production but also for emissions and sequestration of greenhouse gases, open-access recreational visits, urban green space and wild species diversity. We use spatially explicit models in conjunction with valuation methods to estimate comparable economic values for these services, taking account of climate change impacts. We show that, while decisions which focus solely upon agriculture reduce overall ecosystem service values, highly significant value increases can be obtained from targeted planning incorporating all potential services and their values, and that this approach also conserves wild species diversity.One Sentence Summary: Valuation of ecosystem services within land-use planning creates significant gains relative to current, market-dominated, decision making. Main Text:The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (1) provided important evidence of the ongoing global degradation of ecosystem services and highlighted the need to incorporate their value into the economic analyses which underpin real-world decision-making. Previous studies have shown that the overall values of unconverted natural habitats can exceed the private benefits following conversion (2, 3), that knowledge of landscape heterogeneity and ecological processes can support cost effective land planning (4-7), that trade-offs in land-use decisions affect values from ecosystem services and biodiversity at local level (8, 9), and that current land use is vulnerable to the impacts of global change (10, 11). In the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA) (12), a comprehensive assessment of the UK's ecosystems was linked to a systematic, environmental and economic analysis of the benefits they generate. Here we show how taking account of multiple objectives in a changing environment (including, but not restricted to, climate change) fundamentally alters decisions regarding optimal land use. The NEA analyses are based upon highly detailed, spatially-referenced environmental data covering all of Great Britain. These data supported the design and parameterization of models of both the drivers and consequences of land use decisions, incorporating the complexity of the natural environment and its variation across space and time (13). Model outputs provide inputs to economic analyses which assess the value of both marketed and non-marketed goods (Table 1).The NEA specifically addressed the consequences of land use change driven by either just agricultural or a wider set of values, all within the context of ongoing climate change. To assess this, raw data on land use and its determinants were drawn from multiple sources to compile a 40 year dataset, spatially disaggregated at a resolution of 2km grid squares (400ha) or finer across all of Great Britain, forming more than ½ million sets of spatially referenced, time specific...
An increasing number of people are concerned about eating meat, despite enjoying doing so. In the present research, we examined whether the desire to resolve this ambivalence about eating meat leads to a reduction in meat consumption. Our model of ambivalence-motivated meat reduction proposes that the pervasive nature of evaluative conflict motivates meat avoidance, and we highlight two potential mechanisms involved: the anticipation of ambivalence reduction through behavioral change, and information seeking for contents that facilitate meat reduction. Study 1 drew on a cross-sectional 6-day food diary with 7485 observations in a quota sample to investigate why meat-related ambivalence arises and to demonstrate the correlation of ambivalence with meat reduction. Two experiments investigated the causal direction of this association by showing that ambivalence-induced discomfort motivated participants to eat less meat when they introspected on their preexisting incongruent evaluations (Study 2 and 3), which was mediated by the aforementioned mechanisms involved (Study 3; preregistered). The studies utilized diverse samples from Germany, England, and the US (total N = 1192) and support the proposed model by indicating that behavioral change is an important coping strategy to resolve ambivalent discomfort in the context of meat consumption. Our model of ambivalence-motivated meat reduction contributes to theorizing on the consequences of ambivalence and the psychology of (not) eating meat.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.