Exploring the link between supply and demand of cultural ecosystem services – towards an integrated vulnerability assessment

Abstract

Vulnerability studies need to consider changes in the ecological and the social system as well as their interactions. Yet, the link between ecosystem services and the wellbeing of different social groups represents a deficit in research. The presented case study attempts to create a deepened understanding of the social-ecological system as a basis for vulnerability assessment. For this purpose, participatory mapping of cultural ecosystem services (CES) and perceived vulnerability in the urban region of Rostock (Germany) were conducted. A comprehensive approach was developed including the spatial distribution of CES in the urban region, the interrelations between the supply and demand of CES (considering different social factors and the spatial link), as well as an exemplary vulnerability assessment. The case study showed that an application of the participatory mapping approach is valuable in a wide urban region. The evaluation of the link between population wellbeing and CES suggested no differences according to social factors. Concerning the spatial link, different critical distances for individual CES were found. An integrated map of supply and demand was developed showing the supply of districts with CES area, number, and diversity. The final exemplary vulnerability assessment visualized potential changes in CES supply areas and affected districts in the urban region.

Does the Ecosystem Service Concept Reach its Limits in Urban Environments?

“…In this context, participatory approaches are recommended, for example to incorporate local knowledge and stakeholder preferences in ecosystem service assessments (Brown et al, 2012;Fagerholm et al, 2012). Particularly, cultural ecosystem services move more and more into the focus of research, introducing the notion of stakeholder participation in ecosystem service studies (Beichler, 2015;Kabisch, 2015;Voigt et al, 2014). Assessing the relative importance of ecosystem services in terms of human well-being is of particular interest in urban environments.…”

“…Participatory assessment approaches could start with a categorical choice assessing specific areas (cf. section 4.1), on site surveys , or participatory mapping approaches (Beichler 2015). Considering the latter, participants directly identify and delineate areas that provide ecosystem services on a map, whereby valuable data even for large urban regions can be derived, which enables to understand what is perceived as important ecosystem service providing unit (Beichler, 2015;Hagemeier-Klose et al, 2014).…”

“…section 4.1), on site surveys , or participatory mapping approaches (Beichler 2015). Considering the latter, participants directly identify and delineate areas that provide ecosystem services on a map, whereby valuable data even for large urban regions can be derived, which enables to understand what is perceived as important ecosystem service providing unit (Beichler, 2015;Hagemeier-Klose et al, 2014). In this regard, researchers need to deal with results in which urban built-up areas might be considered as an ecosystem by the participants with a high ecosystem service supply.…”

Ecosystem services: building informed policies to orient landscape dynamics

“…At the same time, stakeholder engagement is also considered as a key issue in decision-making, for example, in adaptive management (Folke et al 2005). In the contributions of this Special Issue, it emerges that preferences and values expressed in ES assessments can be considered in decision-making processes (Beichler 2015;Greenhalgh & Hart 2015) when evaluating tradeoffs between planning options. Moreover, the legal framework in which ES are investigated, as well as the target and the domain of their assessment, are in strict connection with the domain of decision-making processes, which usually do not coincide as they are based on administrative boundaries.…”

“…This approach reflects on natural resource management considering not only environmental protection, conservation and restoration per se, but demonstrating benefits and values of nature/ecosystems to human well-being through ES (Badola et al 2015;Beichler 2015;Hohenthal et al 2015). On the other hand, the ES concept can be adopted to inform decision-making as an approach to reformulate the way decisions are formulated, elaborated and taken (Bark et al 2015;Beichler 2015;Greenhalgh & Hart 2015;Logsdon et al 2015;Rosenthal et al 2015). The ES approach is adopted to reshape the various phases of a decision-making process and to inform about new contents (such as relationships between ecosystem functions, ES capacity, flow, benefits and values) relevant for the formulation of decisions.…”