Cultural ecosystem services (ES) are consistently recognized but not yet adequately defined or integrated within the ES framework. A substantial body of models, methods, and data relevant to cultural services has been developed within the social and behavioral sciences before and outside of the ES approach. A selective review of work in landscape aesthetics, cultural heritage, outdoor recreation, and spiritual significance demonstrates opportunities for operationally defining cultural services in terms of socioecological models, consistent with the larger set of ES. Such models explicitly link ecological structures and functions with cultural values and benefits, facilitating communication between scientists and stakeholders and enabling economic, multicriterion, deliberative evaluation and other methods that can clarify tradeoffs and synergies involving cultural ES. Based on this approach, a common representation is offered that frames cultural services, along with all ES, by the relative contribution of relevant ecological structures and functions and by applicable social evaluation approaches. This perspective provides a foundation for merging ecological and social science epistemologies to define and integrate cultural services better within the broader ES framework.natural capital | scenic beauty | cultural landscapes | tourism | spiritual value

Livestock farming is an essential activity in many rural areas, where it contributes to the maintenance of soil fertility and farmland biodiversity, as well as to a set of social public goods including food security, rural vitality and culture. However, livestock sustainability assessments tend to focus primarily on environmental and economic dimensions; therefore, these valuations might be limited because they do not consider the complete set of associated goods and services (GS). Hence, a need exists to recognise the multiple contributions provided by livestock to human well-being and society. The objective of this study was to analyse the provision of multiple GS derived from livestock across regions in France and empirically demonstrate sets of GS that repeatedly appeared together. We designated these multiple GS provided by livestock as contributions to productive, environmental, rural vitality and cultural benefits that human populations derive directly or indirectly from livestock agroecosystems. First, we combined expert knowledge with results of a literature review to define a bundle of GS provided by livestock. We then described indicators that quantified each good or service and screened national databases to determine the availability of supporting data. Finally, we assessed the GS and their relationships (synergies or trade-offs) on a nation-wide gradient in France at the department level (Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics 3). Four main categories of GS were considered: provisioning (e.g. food quantity and quality), environmental quality (e.g. biodiversity, landscape heterogeneity, water quality), rural vitality (e.g. employment, rural dynamism) and culture (e.g. gastronomy and landscape heritage). Four major types of GS bundles were identified, which suggested strong contrasts among French rural areas in terms of the nature of the GS that occurred together and their levels of provision. GS bundles in France had a non-random spatial distribution. This study represents an initial step towards developing a methodology to consider GS bundles provided by livestock. Nonetheless, further research is needed to understand socio-economic, environmental, political and geographic determinants of the composition of GS bundles.

L'élevage joue un rôle essentiel dans les territoires ruraux au sein desquels il assure de nombreux services économiques, environnementaux et sociaux. Appréhender la multiplicité des services rendus par l'élevage à la société représente donc un enjeu essentiel mais aussi un champ nouveau pour la recherche agronomique. L'objectif de cette étude est de réaliser une première quantification des services rendus par l'élevage en considérant les dimensions économiques, environnementales et sociales. Sur la base de réunions d'experts et de la revue de la littérature, nous avons d'abord proposé une qualification des services rendus par l'élevage pour définir le bouquet de services rendus par l'élevage en France. Nous avons ensuite sélectionné des indicateurs pour quantifier des bouquets de services départementaux à partir des bases de données mobilisables à l'échelle de la France. Nous avons analysé les services et leurs interrelations (synergies ou antagonismes) par une typologie de bouquets de services au niveau départemental. L'analyse met en évidence quatre catégories principales de services : approvisionnement (e.g. quantité et qualité d'aliments), qualité environnementale (e.g. biodiversité, hétérogénéité des paysages), vitalité territoriale (e.g. dynamisme rural et emploi) et identité culturelle (e.g. gastronomie, identité des terroirs). Quatre grands types de bouquets de service ont été mis en évidence présentant des niveaux contrastés d'expression des services. L'analyse de leur distribution géographique a montré une répartition non-aléatoire des types de bouquets. Une perspective de ce travail consistera à étudier les principaux leviers socio-économiques, politiques, écologiques et géographiques impliqués dans la fourniture de services pour informer les décideurs politiques et la société.Comment évaluer les services rendus par l'élevage ? Une première approche méthodologique sur le cas de la France / 37 INRA Productions Animales, 2015, numéro 1 Résumé Abstract How to assess the multiple services provided by livestock? A preliminary methodology applied on the French case-studyLivestock plays a major role in rural areas, where it provides economic, environmental and social services. There is a pressing need to assess the multiple positive contributions provided by livestock to society. This would be useful for society in general but constitutes a new scientific topic as well. The objective of this study was to develop a framework for the assessment of the social, economical and ecological services provided by livestock in France. Combining expert knowledge and literature review, we first defined the set of services provided by livestock. We then selected indicators to quantify the services considered at the department level considering the available databases on the French case-study. We finally assessed services and their relationships (synergies or tradeoffs) on a gradient of French departments. Four main classes of services were revealed: provisioning (e.g. food quantity and quality), environmental quality (e.g...

Ex-ante impact assessment of agricultural, environmental, and rural policies has become an integral part of political decision-making processes in the European Union. While a variety of agri-environmental modelling tools exists, ex-ante policy assessment tools capturing the institutional dimension are rare and need to be improved. In this paper, we introduce a standardized procedure for ex-ante modelling institutional aspects for policy implementation: the 'Procedure for Institutional Compatibility Assessment' (PICA). PICA has been designed as an explorative and flexible, yet formalized methodology that enables policy-makers to identify, at an early stage, potential institutional incompatibilities. After relating PICA to relevant approaches for policy assessment, we elaborate on its four distinct steps, use a core element of the EU Nitrate Directive to illustrate its function, and then provide model validation by means of a test case.

Distribution électronique Cairn.info pour Armand Colin. © Armand Colin. Tous droits réservés pour tous pays.La reproduction ou représentation de cet article, notamment par photocopie, n'est autorisée que dans les limites des conditions générales d'utilisation du site ou, le cas échéant, des conditions générales de la licence souscrite par votre établissement. Toute autre reproduction ou représentation, en tout ou partie, sous quelque forme et de quelque manière que ce soit, est interdite sauf accord préalable et écrit de l'éditeur, en dehors des cas prévus par la législation en vigueur en France. Il est précisé que son stockage dans une base de données est également interdit.

Since the mid-1990s, the concept of ecosystem services has become increasingly popular in academic circles and among decision-makers. Because of its inclusive character, this concept has given rise to different interpretations in economics. Since its inception, it has been associated with the development of market-based instruments (MBIs) in conservation policies. From this perspective, the sustainable provision of ecosystem services is hindered by market failures (e.g., public good attributes, externalities) and prices that do not capture the full value of the natural assets. MBIs are therefore recommended. According to their promoters, they provide powerful incentives to conserve the environment while at the same time offering new sources of income to support rural livelihoods. Our paper contends that OPEN ACCESS Sustainability 2015, 7 11596 different economic narratives, and associated representations of the market failure at stake with the provision of ecosystem services, may support different policy instruments that are all coined as MBIs.As an illustration, we analyze the economic discourse underlying payments for ecosystem services and eco-labels, and we underline the variety of institutional forms to which they give rise in order to emphasize the differences between discourse and practice.

No abstract

[fre] Cet article discute de la notion de « service environnemental » en rapport avec la multifonctionnalité de l'agriculture et des campagnes. Les auteurs présentent les trois principales conceptions de cette notion dans la littérature économique : selon l'économie écologique, l'économie de l'environnement et l'économie des services. Ensuite ils proposent un cadre d'analyse des services environnementaux à partir de l'économie des services. Enfin, la partie empirique repose sur un inventaire de ces services dans trois territoires ruraux. [eng] ENG: Services! rural areas! environment! publics goods! local authorities!